Removed by mod

Sorry, English is not my first language. What I meant is that some may see him as wacky and irreverent.

What I see is Elon haters clinging to this salute as if it’s the one silver bullet that will somehow make him lose Trump’s or the Republicans’ support. But their insistence on this is like preaching to the choir, as right-wingers simply don’t care—some even like Elon more for being gutsy.

If that’s all they’ve got on Elon, then he’s sure to keep his job at DOGE. And Trump is laughing all the way to the bank, as the anti-Elon sentiment shields him from criticism, as social media’s attention is mostly spent on Elon instead of Trump.

People voted for this “dismantling”. If you ask, Trump voters seem pretty satisfied on this regard.

Elon and Trump’s actions are indeed more nationalist, but we should not confuse it with nazism, that had nationalism as one of its traits but was much more than that. The genocidal part is what makes them evil, not the nationalism part.

If we take seriously the notion that nationalism = nazism, then China would qualify.

People will see what they want to see. Even if Elon discovered the cure to all types of cancer, people would still nitpick anything about him to justify their hate.

He bent his whole body to give a salute. It was quite off-center and awkward, not really like the nazi salute as seen on historical videos of Hitler, which is a much more deliberate and aligned hand motion in relation to the body. If Elon time traveled to Hitler rallies and did this salute, he’d be reprimanded for doing it all wrong.

Yeah, because if he’s indeed a nazi, he’s pretty incompetent at converting people into nazism. Some politicians such as Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris have done a hand gesture that resembles the nazi salute in their political rallies, but nobody at the time screamed they were dog whistling nazi symbology. Raising one’s hand to salute the audience is just a natural gesture, not some intricate gesture that’s exclusive to a bonafide nazi apologist.

The problem was when lefties were in charge of Twitter’s moderation team. They were trigger-happy in banning anyone who didn’t agree with their self-proclaimed “social consensus.” In this last U.S. election cycle, we found out this consensus was a lie. Examples:

User1: “I’m against illegal immigration. Deport the illegals now!”

Mod: “Racist!! You’re permanently banned!”

User2: “We gotta have stricter laws for legal refugees. They don’t respect our local customs and bring social issues (i.e., higher crime rates) that burden the taxpayer.”

Mod: “Nazi!! You’re permanently banned!”

User3: “I’m against hormonal therapies and sex-change surgeries on kids. We gotta have legislation that forbids it and makes doctors accountable.”

Mod: “Transphobe!! You’re permanently banned!”

They maliciously extrapolate dissenting opinions to paint them as something bad. People have the right to be dissatisfied with current policies and advocate for change. That shouldn’t be a bannable offense.

Twitter 1.0 outright banned right-leaning users. Silencing dissenting voices from online political discourse isn’t considered “gaming the system”?

Does anyone remember when Twitter 1.0 censored stories about the Hunter Biden Laptop? On my book, that’s manipulation.

X has been accused of manipulating its systems to give far-right posts and politicians greater visibility over other political groups.

Before Elon bought Twitter, the system did the exact same thing, but with left-leaning posts. Back then, the French prosecutors didn’t seem to care. Now that the political tide is changing, they suddenly care?