Elon Musk and Twitter: Not A Dissident Ideal

The Twitter Share Purchase By Musk

The story:

Elon Musk to Join Twitter Board of Directors

Elon Musk, who recently became the single biggest shareholder of Twitter, will be joining the social media company’s board of directors, according to Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal and a regulatory filing.

[…]

In a regulatory filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), it was revealed that Musk will serve as a “Class II” director with a term that expires at its 2024 annual meeting.

Under the conditions of Musk’s appointment, he will not own or control more than 14.9 percent of Twitter shares, according to the filing.

Musk made headlines on Monday when regulatory filings revealed that he had taken a 9.2 percent stake in Twitter, becoming its biggest individual shareholder.

Musk bought 73.5 million shares of Twitter on March 14, according to a Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filing released on April 4.

Based on Twitter’s closing price on April 1, Musk’s stake was worth $2.89 billion.

I know a lot of our friends on the Right side of the political aisle have an affinity for Musk. But I do not share this optimism for him. I will be the first to admit that I hope I am wrong in that assumption.

In a prior article, I wrote about the issue with modern Americans worshipping businessmen. This is an important trend in the cycle of collapse. It’s imperative that you recognize it. Read it here: Who The Nation Admires.

It is a clear sign that America has entered a degenerative state, because we admire individuals that non-degenerative nations would only tolerate at best, and actively disdain at worst. Business tycoons fall under that category for most nations that we can study. Business leaders rarely have the qualities that virtuous, healthy societies admire (self-sacrifice, honor, loyalty to nation, anti-greed, et cetera).

While I’m thrilled that Twitter employees are in panic mode, even if only on a minor investment/board level, this is still not an ideal situation for a dissident. If we break this down to its actual component pieces, we can see that:

1. Twitter is a public square utility.
2. Twitter can do whatever they want even though they are a public square utility (such as censoring speech and banning political dissidents).
3. Twitter can be purchased by a single wealthy individual, who can then influence it at their own whims with no accountability or oversight.
4. Influential pubic square utilities can be purchased by single wealthy individuals.

If you fail to see the issue with this, I welcome you to review the actions of other wealthy isolated class members such as the Rothschilds, Gates, or Soros. The reason we have so many issues with our institutions is because of this exact effect—That one isolated class member can just purchase and influence a public utility such as a public defender, a mainstream media organization, a cultural institution, or even a speech platform. That, in itself, is the problem.

We should not celebrate when “our guys” (heavy emphasis on the quotations) do it, because eventually “our guys” won’t be the ones doing it or won’t be doing it in our interest any longer. This has played out hundreds of times in just the past fifty years. If Musk can “buy” Twitter, every other isolated class centralizer can buy every other public utility institution. This is how nations fall to a rule by few—Where the few are the wealthy elites who own the institutions.

What is occurring is exactly what I have complained about ad nauseam on this website. An isolated class member has bought out a cultural marker to influence it. These should be influenced by the people, not a few select centralizers. The financial arena continues to merge with the cultural arena, which means we inch closer to every arena being centralized together.

The cultural arena institutions like Twitter cannot remain decentralized and work opposing of one another and in the interest of the public if they are influenced by the isolated class instead. They are not in the hands of the people or a vanguard of the people, but a single isolated class member that remains at the whims of numerous other centralizer influences.

So, while it’s nice that perhaps this one time it may go somewhat in our direction, it still shows the problem at its core. We could never win or sustain like this. We could never blindly trust the isolated class to be vigilant and virtuous forever (the only ones who have the financial ability to do actions like this). Especially considering this isolated class is often the most soulless and greedy of the population, which allows them to get to their position in the first place.

The isolated class is the problem. That they exist and can influence everything, without accountability to a government or a people, is the root issue that has caused all the other issues. It’s what starts the snowball effect of the decline of the rule by many. They finance the bad actors, if not directly, then indirectly. Celebrating it happening is foolish, because it just means that it can happen with any other individual that is not on your side of the political aisle. A communist billionaire could buy out another public utility just as easily. And there are a lot more leftist, new world order type isolated class members than there are Musk “YangGang” billionaires.

Twitter is also a cesspool of hatred and leftist insanity. It’s not a worthwhile platform to revive. It should be left to die a slow death, as it was before this event. This threatens a revival, which detracts from the hundreds of amazing people that have been building and creating parallel alternatives for our people. It risks a shepherding of our people back into the confined gates of the centralizers. They want us where they have more leverage over us, and Twitter is exactly that. The people will never own this public utility under our current system. It’s merely shifted ownership from leftist isolated class loons to a separate isolated class loon.

I find very little about this story to be a positive development for a dissident. It’s just further evidence of the corruption of our system that worships the worthless dollar and the men that get the most worthless dollars.

If Musk really wanted to assist the “free speech” and nationalist movements, he would have invested those billions in Gab, Minds, privacy Crypto, and related parallel alternatives. Not investing in a declining, controlled hivemind that has already removed most of us. But he would never do that, because then the other isolated class members would target him directly. He knows that and we know that. So instead, he is reviving the sheep pen to get us all drawn back in, which will undoubtedly cause a decline in use with the decentralized (or at least not isolated class-owned) alternatives. The alternatives we actually need to win.

Be cautious with this news, is all I ask. Don’t get caught up in the hype without first really considering the consequences of these types of actions by the isolated class. Even those that seem like friends are not always so. The same goes for actions that initially seem like they are beneficial to us.

Read Next:

The Controlled Demolition Of Our Economy

Exploring Mousetopia: An Apocalypse From Abundance

Worthwhile Reading: The American Pravda Series

If you enjoyed this article, bookmark the website and check back often for new content. New articles most weekdays.

You can also keep up with my writing by joining my monthly newsletter.

Help fight the censorship – Share this article!