I’m not convinced that the dems are capable of soul searching, even if they lose both houses. I don’t see them budging one inch from their hyperbolic accusations that paint the right as deplorables and possible domestic terrorists. The amount of hate may be insurmountable.
Let’s hope the Dems are capable of change, but from what I’ve seen I, too, am not convinced. Being a research and clinical psychologist and an anthropologist, the roots of their madness goes far beyond political. My hypothesis is that they are driven by deep and personal cognitive and emotional issues that are way to scary for them to face.
I’ve seen way to much personal anger/rage directed at people they don’t know and institutions to believe their anger is against societal injustice. Sadly, I think the culture they were raised in within their families and the culture that has been growing since the counter-culture revolution of the late ‘60’s has fostered this dysfunction.
The saddest thing of all is how many folks who want to live simple straightforward and relatively non-political lives have been hurt.
> Let’s hope the Dems are capable of change, but from what I’ve seen I, too, am not convinced.
As a collective, no. Individuals will always be reachable, but it can't be like it is now for a critical mass to be reached. Social media has introduced a new element in allowing people to create their own bubbles, both right and left. Until the long-term impacts of the social media revolution play out, I think it's going to get worse before it gets better.
> My hypothesis is that they are driven by deep and personal cognitive and emotional issues that are way to scary for them to face.
While almost certainly true, one of the things that tempered this used to be in-person interactions, especially meeting cool people you liked and getting to know them and then one day discovering they had (gasp!) different opinions than you about politics, and diving into that. Just the fact you knew cool people who didn't match your stereotypes helped open minds and create ideological tolerance, and the online environment does not allow for that. If you don't go into an online environment with an open mind, the chances of your mind being opened inside a self-created bubble is unlikely.
I just read an article that said the left I.e. progressives have been working to change our republic, society and culture for over a 100 years, both in the political, philosophical and educational institutions of our country. Woodrow Wilson was a progressive president in the early 1900’s and I believe he’s the one that kicked it off. John Dewey, philosopher, spread his influence in the early 1930’s. Dewey’s thinking had a major impact on our educational system. Google these 2 men and the history of progressivism to get more detail. Just remember, tho, that if you use the Google search engine, you might not get accurate information or a lot of the correct info may be buried in their algorithms.
Yep, and don't forget the Frankfurt School zealots such as Antonio Gramschi and Herbert Marcuse. Pete "Buttplug" Buttigieg's father is a founding member of the International Gramschi Society...
They'd literally have to lose both houses by numbers so large it would shake them to their souls. So no, they will not doing any soul searching if they lose the house by 40 seats. They'd have to lose it by 100 seats. It would have to be a loss never before even imagined. Something far beyond what any of the polls indicate. That, plus three times the governorships or state legislatures they fear losing, and then, yeah, they might change their tune. But this isn't Bill Clinton's Democratic party that veered hard to the middle after a midterm spanking. They lose 38 seats and the Senate by 2 seats and they will only be hell bent on punishing the stupid public for voting wrong.
I think you’re spot on. “They will only be hell bent on punishing the stupid public for voting wrong”. That’s pretty chilling when you stop to think on it.
Well you're right which is why you haven't seen ANYTHING yet on violence from the left. Affirmative action going down too, Clarence Thomas hates it. Its gonna get sooooo, ugly. Luke warm civil war getting hot.
"If Democrats lose both houses of Congress, they will be forced to do some soul-searching."
I only wish this were true. Both parties have seemingly lost the ability to self reflect and soul search. The Democrats should have had a deeply introspective moment after Trump was elected in 2016. They should have been asking themselves what issues and people they were they so out of touch with that Trump's election would have even remotely been possible. Humbled, they would have listened, adjusted and given Trump a fair chance. None of this happened. From November 9, 2016 on, the Democrats did everything within their power and beyond to illegitimize and nullify Trump's presidency. They had done nothing wrong; only Trump voters had in voting for Trump and other Republicans. They would offer no quarter in giving Trump a modicum of acknowledgement for any positive policy or outcome. Accepting election results means giving the victor a fair trial at governing. None was given to Trump whatsoever, and I believe that this escalated the intransigence on the Republican side as well. I would love to see a debate or news article where, before speaking anything positive about your political party, a politician had to acknowledge one issue or area that their party does not excel in and also concede an issue where the other party may have a point. It has gotten beyond ridiculous that saying or acknowledging you have anything in common with anyone in another party is verboten. Most recently, the House progressives' retraction of the idea of even possibly negotiating with Russia on anything because a Republican may think it's a good idea as well.
Completely agree. The Democrats are now more like a cult than a political party. As you point out, they have had plenty of opportunity for self-reflection; instead they have doubled down on crazy ideologies.
Republicans are also due for some introspection. How did they let craziness take hold with minimal resistance? But first things first, the Democrats must be defeated.
Saying biological men are women is crazy. Saying Fetterman is anything but a fraud, who lived off his parents till he was 50 and went to Harvard but is still a tough guy is crazy, saying stopping fracking will result in cheaper energy is crazy, saying defund police in Philly (where we average 5 shootings a day tyvm) is crazy, etc.
Jude said Republicans are do for some introspection "how did they let craziness take hold with minimum resistance " .........I dont think so. Craziness is what you said. Voting for Trump is not crazy......its the only sane thing to do
Excellent points. I would just add that the notion that the voters are the customers of elected politicians is almost certainly false. When they party's get a solid loss handed to them they never engage in soul searching about how they lost their way, because they way is serving other interests first, voters second. If the voters don't like it, just wait till the next try to serve your real customers, because tossing number 1 priority to serve number 2 just won't do.
An example of what you are pointing out is the reaction of the progressive caucus on the dems losing many seats in the house in 2020. Their position became "we didn't go far enough left. We need even more progressivism", and then launched into pushing even harder on green new deal programs. Of course on the other side there are activists wanting to "kick out all the RINOs". To quote Ron White - "you can fix an lot of things but you can't fix stupid."
Well, I would lump the RINOs into the "the voters are not their customers" group. I am pretty down on anyone favoring more big government corruption, although to be fair many R's are as bad as D's for that.
Otherwise you are quire right, usually the answer from soul searching is "double down doing what we are currently doing! This time though, make sure no one will compete for votes!"
Every 100 years or so, a sort irrational belief in the ability of technocrats and bureaucrats to engineer utopia becomes in vogue. They generally get in power and then leave behind a trail of destruction and misery.
These people cannot be reasoned with. They can only be endured until their failures get so large the media can't cover for them any more.
The media as it stands will need to collapse, or be acquired (not unlike Twitter) so that every mainstream outlet and many more vertical outlets are forced to be more like traditional news organs, and thus more factual and less ideological and narrative-driven. Lunatic politics will need to be relegated to The View and HuffPo.
Which of course is why they are so anxious to control "disinformation". Transparency (such as one might expect with accurate reportage) will ultimately be fatal--and certain fatal in bad times that people experience directly.
This reminds me of the exchange this week between Chuck Todd and John Sununu: Todd: Election deniers! Sununu: You guys are living in a bubble. That's not people are thinking and talking about. Todd: But But Election deniers! Sununu: Inflation and economy. Todd: But But But ELECTION DENIERS! Sununu: You're not listening to what people are saying. You aren't relevant.
That's today's media - think how I want you to think and shut up.
Another excellent piece. I don't think the Dems will ever soul-search, though, and the harmless lefties they've sucked in (like my 80 year old mom who is not on Twitter but buys what NPR spouts like it's the Bible) will just be left twisting in the wind with absolutely no idea what happened or why.
The choice anyone or party has in politics in a democracy is to talk about:
A) the issues facing the voters or
B) insulting the other side such as calling them racist, white supremecist, xenophobic, violent extremist, deplorables who are hell-bent on destroying our democracy.
The Dems have dropped A) long ago and survive entirely on B). They will lose, but don’t expect change until their narrative is exposed as intellectually and morally bankrupt. With major media outlets like MSNBC and CNN, that realization is impossible because everyone working there has staked their jobs, If not their career, to advancing B) and ignoring A).
This cannot be said enough. I do not understand the Max Boots, et al, of the world. I'm not blind. When something happens to or in the vicinity of a Republican, and the person who is doing it is clearly crazy (and by definition they almost always are) I'm not blaming Democrats for their rhetoric (which is often contemptible)--I'm blaming the crazy person who did it.
When Republicans engage in overly violent or martial rhetoric, it makes me a little queasy, and I wish they wouldn't, but I'm not going to pretend they are unique or are singularly worse than the Democrats (or even some independents who wish bad things on both parties). But any pundit (especially those who pretend to have the wisdom of having been on "both sides") who cannot see how both parties do, and always have (and did when it was the Whigs squaring off against the Federalists) use hard and biting rhetoric that suggests a call to action, sometimes a "by any means necessary" action ... either they are hopelessly ignorant, behaving as members of a cult, or are not acting in good faith.
That said I wish the Republicans would reply universally: "You might not like what I said or the way I said it, but look: if we were in charge in these areas and our policies were in place, nothing would have happened because this guy would have been in jail already." Because that's the point. Policing language or pointing fingers with maximum moral rectitude is not the point. The point is having policies and procedures and the necessary resources in place so that the streets aren't overburdened with mentally ill or violent people who would take a questionable turn of phrase by a politician as an invitation to commit violence, and then act on that.
I do not understand people who read these kinds of connect-the-dots criticisms, while poo-poohing all the easily connected dots on the other side, and conclude the problem is all one group of BAD PEOPLE who MUST BE STOPPED (no inciting rhetoric implied there, right?) and can draw no larger conclusion about the present human condition in our country, or the current limitation of present day crime policies.
I think it's an extension of their pervasive victim mentality. Policies and results of policies mean nothing to them; they don't see any connection. Anything and everything that happens is some evildoer's fault. There are only victimizers and victims in their worldview. They don't see cause and effect at all. Add in the hubristic conviction that their ideas are always and everywhere correct, and you have the recipe for the disaster our society has become.
"On the Right, they’re trying to point out that the media ignores acts of violence against Conservatives like Bret Kavanaugh, Lee Zeldin, or Steve Scalise. And where is the lie? We know they ignored those threats. "
Ignored isn't exactly what happens. It's a matter of which narrative the event gets shoehorned into in the media.
1. Acts of violence against progressives get pushed into the "violent right wing rhetoric caused this" narrative.
2. Acts of violence against conservatives get pushed into the "this shows the need for more gun control" narrative.
The coverage half life is far shorter for acts against conservatives though.
The tantrums have begun. I love Musk telling them $20/month to have their blue check. I once had the misfortune of being around a screenwriter who was throwing a tantrum because he could not get a blue check. He went out to his circle to find anyone and everyone who could get him higher up in Twitter to get his blue check. What cracks me up is they are mad about potentially having to pay for their "I'm special" badge and then will have to deal with "normies" having one too if they can pay the monthly nut for it.
It's a brilliant move by Musk. It's stripping the elitist "I'm important" status symbol away from people and allowing everyone the "privilege".
While his tweeting about conspiracy theories on the Pelosi thing was kind of dumb, hopefully he takes a bit more time before rushing to judgment -- I think what you wrote here is about that -- how people rush to judgment to be "first" on Twitter to shape conversations to their political arguments and that is what we need less of.
I've seen a lot of "I'm gonna take my ball and go home" folks on Twitter lately which in contrast to a lunatic like Reiner who believes he's on the front line on Normandy beach behind his keyboard is both sad and hilarious. And I love Rob Reiner's work. LOVE. But this character he's playing on the algorithm is just sad to witness.
I'm glad Musk owns it. I hope he annoys the crap out of his detractors. I'm completely fine if Twitter turns into Myspace and becomes irrelevant. If the lesson we're about to learn is "less social media is better for our lives and sanity" then Elon Musk deserves a Nobel Prize for buying that echo chamber. Twitter has destroyed so much in the past years. It deserves what it has coming to it. And so do all the other outlets like Facebook and Tik Tok. A reckoning for those apps that have destroyed our ability to get along, to laugh and to live our lives off screen is a long time coming.
It should turn out like Myspace. Twitter has nothing of value nothing. Does it make products? No Does it do anything besides be a soap box for whinny entitled people who think they can make a career from the platform? Not really. What a waste of money than again Musk still has billions and billions of dollars this is pocket money to him.
Very important piece, Sasha. Like usual. Those of us that have risk in our lives do not use Twitter much; unfortunately the app is used to transmit information from within other links so we have accounts. The majority of the Twitter faithful are people who have little risk and the economic policies of the Marxists haven't hurt them at all. $2--->$6 gas doesn't affect them at all. Milk, butter, and eggs doubling in price matters not. The have no risk except to offend each other which is pretty pathetic.
Please highlight the idiocy of Max Boot all day, every day :-D
I’m not convinced that the dems are capable of soul searching, even if they lose both houses. I don’t see them budging one inch from their hyperbolic accusations that paint the right as deplorables and possible domestic terrorists. The amount of hate may be insurmountable.
Let’s hope the Dems are capable of change, but from what I’ve seen I, too, am not convinced. Being a research and clinical psychologist and an anthropologist, the roots of their madness goes far beyond political. My hypothesis is that they are driven by deep and personal cognitive and emotional issues that are way to scary for them to face.
I’ve seen way to much personal anger/rage directed at people they don’t know and institutions to believe their anger is against societal injustice. Sadly, I think the culture they were raised in within their families and the culture that has been growing since the counter-culture revolution of the late ‘60’s has fostered this dysfunction.
The saddest thing of all is how many folks who want to live simple straightforward and relatively non-political lives have been hurt.
> Let’s hope the Dems are capable of change, but from what I’ve seen I, too, am not convinced.
As a collective, no. Individuals will always be reachable, but it can't be like it is now for a critical mass to be reached. Social media has introduced a new element in allowing people to create their own bubbles, both right and left. Until the long-term impacts of the social media revolution play out, I think it's going to get worse before it gets better.
> My hypothesis is that they are driven by deep and personal cognitive and emotional issues that are way to scary for them to face.
While almost certainly true, one of the things that tempered this used to be in-person interactions, especially meeting cool people you liked and getting to know them and then one day discovering they had (gasp!) different opinions than you about politics, and diving into that. Just the fact you knew cool people who didn't match your stereotypes helped open minds and create ideological tolerance, and the online environment does not allow for that. If you don't go into an online environment with an open mind, the chances of your mind being opened inside a self-created bubble is unlikely.
Can you explain more on the roots? I love that stuff, Jonathan haidt is the only one doing work on it as a social scientist.
I just read an article that said the left I.e. progressives have been working to change our republic, society and culture for over a 100 years, both in the political, philosophical and educational institutions of our country. Woodrow Wilson was a progressive president in the early 1900’s and I believe he’s the one that kicked it off. John Dewey, philosopher, spread his influence in the early 1930’s. Dewey’s thinking had a major impact on our educational system. Google these 2 men and the history of progressivism to get more detail. Just remember, tho, that if you use the Google search engine, you might not get accurate information or a lot of the correct info may be buried in their algorithms.
Yep, and don't forget the Frankfurt School zealots such as Antonio Gramschi and Herbert Marcuse. Pete "Buttplug" Buttigieg's father is a founding member of the International Gramschi Society...
They'd literally have to lose both houses by numbers so large it would shake them to their souls. So no, they will not doing any soul searching if they lose the house by 40 seats. They'd have to lose it by 100 seats. It would have to be a loss never before even imagined. Something far beyond what any of the polls indicate. That, plus three times the governorships or state legislatures they fear losing, and then, yeah, they might change their tune. But this isn't Bill Clinton's Democratic party that veered hard to the middle after a midterm spanking. They lose 38 seats and the Senate by 2 seats and they will only be hell bent on punishing the stupid public for voting wrong.
I think you’re spot on. “They will only be hell bent on punishing the stupid public for voting wrong”. That’s pretty chilling when you stop to think on it.
Chilling indeed.
Well you're right which is why you haven't seen ANYTHING yet on violence from the left. Affirmative action going down too, Clarence Thomas hates it. Its gonna get sooooo, ugly. Luke warm civil war getting hot.
Everyone hates affirmative action :-D. I say, bring on the ugly. Let's get it over with because I am tired of our society bowing to cowards.
I agree 100%, we had to fight to form a republic in the first place.
Sadly, I agree, about the lukewarm civil war.
"If Democrats lose both houses of Congress, they will be forced to do some soul-searching."
I only wish this were true. Both parties have seemingly lost the ability to self reflect and soul search. The Democrats should have had a deeply introspective moment after Trump was elected in 2016. They should have been asking themselves what issues and people they were they so out of touch with that Trump's election would have even remotely been possible. Humbled, they would have listened, adjusted and given Trump a fair chance. None of this happened. From November 9, 2016 on, the Democrats did everything within their power and beyond to illegitimize and nullify Trump's presidency. They had done nothing wrong; only Trump voters had in voting for Trump and other Republicans. They would offer no quarter in giving Trump a modicum of acknowledgement for any positive policy or outcome. Accepting election results means giving the victor a fair trial at governing. None was given to Trump whatsoever, and I believe that this escalated the intransigence on the Republican side as well. I would love to see a debate or news article where, before speaking anything positive about your political party, a politician had to acknowledge one issue or area that their party does not excel in and also concede an issue where the other party may have a point. It has gotten beyond ridiculous that saying or acknowledging you have anything in common with anyone in another party is verboten. Most recently, the House progressives' retraction of the idea of even possibly negotiating with Russia on anything because a Republican may think it's a good idea as well.
Completely agree. The Democrats are now more like a cult than a political party. As you point out, they have had plenty of opportunity for self-reflection; instead they have doubled down on crazy ideologies.
Republicans are also due for some introspection. How did they let craziness take hold with minimal resistance? But first things first, the Democrats must be defeated.
Personally, I gotta check ya there. What craziness has taken hold with minimal resistance.
Saying biological men are women is crazy. Saying Fetterman is anything but a fraud, who lived off his parents till he was 50 and went to Harvard but is still a tough guy is crazy, saying stopping fracking will result in cheaper energy is crazy, saying defund police in Philly (where we average 5 shootings a day tyvm) is crazy, etc.
Jude said Republicans are do for some introspection "how did they let craziness take hold with minimum resistance " .........I dont think so. Craziness is what you said. Voting for Trump is not crazy......its the only sane thing to do
Seriously? Universities, schools, media, big tech, government, etc etc
Spot on, Jude.
Excellent points. I would just add that the notion that the voters are the customers of elected politicians is almost certainly false. When they party's get a solid loss handed to them they never engage in soul searching about how they lost their way, because they way is serving other interests first, voters second. If the voters don't like it, just wait till the next try to serve your real customers, because tossing number 1 priority to serve number 2 just won't do.
An example of what you are pointing out is the reaction of the progressive caucus on the dems losing many seats in the house in 2020. Their position became "we didn't go far enough left. We need even more progressivism", and then launched into pushing even harder on green new deal programs. Of course on the other side there are activists wanting to "kick out all the RINOs". To quote Ron White - "you can fix an lot of things but you can't fix stupid."
Well, I would lump the RINOs into the "the voters are not their customers" group. I am pretty down on anyone favoring more big government corruption, although to be fair many R's are as bad as D's for that.
Otherwise you are quire right, usually the answer from soul searching is "double down doing what we are currently doing! This time though, make sure no one will compete for votes!"
Yes, right. Because they truly believe they know better than us and that they just lost on messaging or the right cheated.
"they know better than us and that they just lost on messaging"
The Technocrat's Mantra there :)
Another excellent point!
Can Elon Musk Save the Democrats from themselves?
No.
Every 100 years or so, a sort irrational belief in the ability of technocrats and bureaucrats to engineer utopia becomes in vogue. They generally get in power and then leave behind a trail of destruction and misery.
These people cannot be reasoned with. They can only be endured until their failures get so large the media can't cover for them any more.
The media as it stands will need to collapse, or be acquired (not unlike Twitter) so that every mainstream outlet and many more vertical outlets are forced to be more like traditional news organs, and thus more factual and less ideological and narrative-driven. Lunatic politics will need to be relegated to The View and HuffPo.
Which of course is why they are so anxious to control "disinformation". Transparency (such as one might expect with accurate reportage) will ultimately be fatal--and certain fatal in bad times that people experience directly.
Because it never gets stale:
“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”
― George Orwell, 1984
This reminds me of the exchange this week between Chuck Todd and John Sununu: Todd: Election deniers! Sununu: You guys are living in a bubble. That's not people are thinking and talking about. Todd: But But Election deniers! Sununu: Inflation and economy. Todd: But But But ELECTION DENIERS! Sununu: You're not listening to what people are saying. You aren't relevant.
That's today's media - think how I want you to think and shut up.
Another excellent piece. I don't think the Dems will ever soul-search, though, and the harmless lefties they've sucked in (like my 80 year old mom who is not on Twitter but buys what NPR spouts like it's the Bible) will just be left twisting in the wind with absolutely no idea what happened or why.
Sasha, you nailed it!
The choice anyone or party has in politics in a democracy is to talk about:
A) the issues facing the voters or
B) insulting the other side such as calling them racist, white supremecist, xenophobic, violent extremist, deplorables who are hell-bent on destroying our democracy.
The Dems have dropped A) long ago and survive entirely on B). They will lose, but don’t expect change until their narrative is exposed as intellectually and morally bankrupt. With major media outlets like MSNBC and CNN, that realization is impossible because everyone working there has staked their jobs, If not their career, to advancing B) and ignoring A).
Damn Sasha. You keep hitting home runs.
This cannot be said enough. I do not understand the Max Boots, et al, of the world. I'm not blind. When something happens to or in the vicinity of a Republican, and the person who is doing it is clearly crazy (and by definition they almost always are) I'm not blaming Democrats for their rhetoric (which is often contemptible)--I'm blaming the crazy person who did it.
When Republicans engage in overly violent or martial rhetoric, it makes me a little queasy, and I wish they wouldn't, but I'm not going to pretend they are unique or are singularly worse than the Democrats (or even some independents who wish bad things on both parties). But any pundit (especially those who pretend to have the wisdom of having been on "both sides") who cannot see how both parties do, and always have (and did when it was the Whigs squaring off against the Federalists) use hard and biting rhetoric that suggests a call to action, sometimes a "by any means necessary" action ... either they are hopelessly ignorant, behaving as members of a cult, or are not acting in good faith.
That said I wish the Republicans would reply universally: "You might not like what I said or the way I said it, but look: if we were in charge in these areas and our policies were in place, nothing would have happened because this guy would have been in jail already." Because that's the point. Policing language or pointing fingers with maximum moral rectitude is not the point. The point is having policies and procedures and the necessary resources in place so that the streets aren't overburdened with mentally ill or violent people who would take a questionable turn of phrase by a politician as an invitation to commit violence, and then act on that.
I do not understand people who read these kinds of connect-the-dots criticisms, while poo-poohing all the easily connected dots on the other side, and conclude the problem is all one group of BAD PEOPLE who MUST BE STOPPED (no inciting rhetoric implied there, right?) and can draw no larger conclusion about the present human condition in our country, or the current limitation of present day crime policies.
I think it's an extension of their pervasive victim mentality. Policies and results of policies mean nothing to them; they don't see any connection. Anything and everything that happens is some evildoer's fault. There are only victimizers and victims in their worldview. They don't see cause and effect at all. Add in the hubristic conviction that their ideas are always and everywhere correct, and you have the recipe for the disaster our society has become.
"On the Right, they’re trying to point out that the media ignores acts of violence against Conservatives like Bret Kavanaugh, Lee Zeldin, or Steve Scalise. And where is the lie? We know they ignored those threats. "
Ignored isn't exactly what happens. It's a matter of which narrative the event gets shoehorned into in the media.
1. Acts of violence against progressives get pushed into the "violent right wing rhetoric caused this" narrative.
2. Acts of violence against conservatives get pushed into the "this shows the need for more gun control" narrative.
The coverage half life is far shorter for acts against conservatives though.
The tantrums have begun. I love Musk telling them $20/month to have their blue check. I once had the misfortune of being around a screenwriter who was throwing a tantrum because he could not get a blue check. He went out to his circle to find anyone and everyone who could get him higher up in Twitter to get his blue check. What cracks me up is they are mad about potentially having to pay for their "I'm special" badge and then will have to deal with "normies" having one too if they can pay the monthly nut for it.
It's a brilliant move by Musk. It's stripping the elitist "I'm important" status symbol away from people and allowing everyone the "privilege".
While his tweeting about conspiracy theories on the Pelosi thing was kind of dumb, hopefully he takes a bit more time before rushing to judgment -- I think what you wrote here is about that -- how people rush to judgment to be "first" on Twitter to shape conversations to their political arguments and that is what we need less of.
I've seen a lot of "I'm gonna take my ball and go home" folks on Twitter lately which in contrast to a lunatic like Reiner who believes he's on the front line on Normandy beach behind his keyboard is both sad and hilarious. And I love Rob Reiner's work. LOVE. But this character he's playing on the algorithm is just sad to witness.
I'm glad Musk owns it. I hope he annoys the crap out of his detractors. I'm completely fine if Twitter turns into Myspace and becomes irrelevant. If the lesson we're about to learn is "less social media is better for our lives and sanity" then Elon Musk deserves a Nobel Prize for buying that echo chamber. Twitter has destroyed so much in the past years. It deserves what it has coming to it. And so do all the other outlets like Facebook and Tik Tok. A reckoning for those apps that have destroyed our ability to get along, to laugh and to live our lives off screen is a long time coming.
It should turn out like Myspace. Twitter has nothing of value nothing. Does it make products? No Does it do anything besides be a soap box for whinny entitled people who think they can make a career from the platform? Not really. What a waste of money than again Musk still has billions and billions of dollars this is pocket money to him.
Thanks for your writing, Sasha
Fantastic work! Your words resonate across America.
Very important piece, Sasha. Like usual. Those of us that have risk in our lives do not use Twitter much; unfortunately the app is used to transmit information from within other links so we have accounts. The majority of the Twitter faithful are people who have little risk and the economic policies of the Marxists haven't hurt them at all. $2--->$6 gas doesn't affect them at all. Milk, butter, and eggs doubling in price matters not. The have no risk except to offend each other which is pretty pathetic.
Please highlight the idiocy of Max Boot all day, every day :-D
The Music you choose never disappoints! Thank you! 🎶🎸🎵
Take Patti Smith's words out of your mouth. She doesn't agree with any of your lies.
Conservatives are the new punks. 😀 Most free people I know.
Just like the Vietnam protestors became hardliner conservatives the punks of the 90s and 00s settled down had families.