This piece makes four category errors: 1. It asks the question of what "I" should do, rather than what "we" should do 2. It focuses on persuasion, rather than the question of power 3. It treats ownership as incidental, rather than central 4. It assumes we're in a democracy, not a dictatorship
The article dismisses the personal costs of remaining on a toxic platform. Casually dismissing the psychological damage resulting from participation. I found even just passively consuming the hateful content to be harmful. I deleted everything and left, no regrets.
This. Online content moderators will tell you how traumatic it can be to consume hateful content, even with proper precautions and aftercare. Meta is currently being sued because its content moderators develop PTSD at alarming rates. Why would I want to subject myself to that experience for free?
Quick reminder. Democracies, don't have slavery. AmeriKKKa has never been one.
5. It was posted at The Argument
Usually one category error is enough to make the general premise questionable of a piece of writing. Four, though..?
You’re both wrong because you both think it matters. Staying on or staying off Twitter isn’t going to win the senate back and it’s embarrassing that people think it will
If you're at a bar that admits Nazis and gives them drinks, you're drinking at a Nazi bar. What would your grandparents say?
There is NO case for staying on twitter. NONE All you're doing is supporting fascists and fascist companies.
Not a category error, but it overlooks the fact that Elon controls the algorithm and thus the reach of any post that someone makes there. So, the user is inundated with Elon's propaganda (and likely believes that those views are more heavily weighted in society), and healthy perspectives are drowned
Twitter should be hacked offline - permanently.
I dunno if I’m naive for thinking persuasion is still possible, but I think it’s still possible to get Trump loyalists to convert…but really only helpful if they are powerful themselves
And I’m not sure that’s the kind of thing you can accomplish as a random person posting on twitter
Liberals like @jerusalem.bsky.social focus on questions of what individuals should do. But, it's strictly rational for a worker to not join a union, or a company to do business with Putin's regime. Similarly, it makes sense for an individual to stay on X--but not the pro-democracy public.
The piece argues that people should stay on X to persuade onlooker who are still on the platform away from the fascist arguments. But, in a collective action, the goal isn't persuasion. It's power. The goal should be to destroy X as a platform so long as Musk owns it.
The piece argues that Musk has let Nazi's back on the platform, which is treated as a breach of the cordon sanitaire that kept the platform free of Nazis. Again, that's not the problem: Trump himself is a neo-Nazi sympathizer. The platform is now a neo-Nazi propaganda network.
Finally, all of these misconceptions are compounded by a failure to understand the larger political context we're in. X is a propaganda network owned by a pro-regime oligarch in the midst of a nascent authoritarian regime. It's not a neutral site of contestation; it's part of the regime.
This. Arguing that we should be on Twitter is about as valid as arguing we should be on Truth Social at this point.
No one would argue that liberals had an obligation to try to persuade people on a platform owned by an active ally of MBS, or Putin, or Orban. And yet, that's exactly the argument @jerusalem.bsky.social is making in the case of X. It's wrong on basically every count.
That's exactly how I feel about this (I left twiitter in 2023, deleted everything), but I wouldn't have been able to state it as succintly, so thank you!
In conclusion: We—those of us who believe in democracy—shouldn’t be on X. We shouldn’t use it to persuade anyone. We should destroy it. Musk isn’t a bad referee—he’s a dictator. X isn’t a way to engage in democracy—it’s a way to promote dictatorship.
You catch the URL?
X appears to be engaging in as much shadowbanning in the Trump era as it was in the Biden era. Those promises didn't amount to much.
Right?! “Only doing it to fight MAGA” No, boycott X, Tesla and any Elon products! Damage done! No second chances for fascist! #musktakedown
It strikes me that this is like someone making a case for liberals or leftists to be Fox News viewers
She is making the "Germans could have persuaded enough Nazis to stop Hitler if only enough socialists had published in "der stuermer"-" argument. And all it does is helping fascism to be normalized.
He is pure evil deep in the hell , a fascist. apertheid, anti-science, whose only goal is make this country apertheid. Nobody should use this pure evil anything.
I can’t understand the Democratic leadership that remains only on x. What’s the point?
Also, denial. I think some of them refuse to acknowledge the reality of this political moment.
pandering to the center and right.
I don't think it's pandering. Democratic leadership are ideologically center and right.
Fair point
if you're on X you support fascism, hatred, and bigotry. Full stop.
what if I'm only there to post criticism of The Pig and Grimes's Ex?
are you asking if the money they generate from your web traffic is different from the money they generate from anyone else's Web traffic on that site?
fair
