Unmask Elon Musk's contradictory stance on free speech
In a world where the grand maestros of public sentiment often operate from behind the curtain, one figure emerges, wielding his brush with audacious flair: Elon Musk. The billionaire tech impresario, renowned for his role in ventures like SpaceX and Tesla, has painted a self-portrait as a champion of free speech. However, a closer examination of his canvas reveals a different tableau, one of a virtuoso manipulator who uses his influence to color public discourse to his advantage.
Elon Musk, the self-proclaimed First Amendment absolutist, has been vocal about his stance on free speech, especially on platforms like Twitter. He has repeatedly accused the government of violating the First Amendment by allegedly colluding with Twitter to censor political opponents. For instance, in one tweet, Musk boldly declared, "The actions of the government are in violation of the First Amendment." In another, he proclaimed, "Free speech is essential to a functioning democracy." Yet, in a recent court case involving Twitter, Musk's own lawyers argued the opposite, stating that Twitter has the right to moderate content on its platform. This glaring contradiction between Musk's public statements and his legal stance raises questions about his authenticity as a free speech advocate.
In the ongoing court case involving Twitter, the details are particularly illuminating. Donald Trump, along with Linda Cuadros, Wayne Alan Root, and others, have lodged a complaint asserting that Twitter, now under the helm of Elon Musk, infringed upon their First Amendment rights by censoring their posts. However, the defense put forth by Musk's legal team, lead by, Ari Holtzblatt - a lawyer who has previously represented Musk's interests across multiple companies, posits that Twitter, being a private entity, reserves the right to moderate content on its platform.
This line of defense starkly contradicts Musk's public declarations as a staunch advocate of the First Amendment. It's important to note that this defense strategy was not the only option available to Musk. He could have chosen to solely argue that since he now owns Twitter and has reinstated Trump, the issue is moot. However, he opted for a more general defense, asserting that Twitter could never be considered a state actor under any circumstances.
The irony of this situation is lost on the public. When CNN tweeted about the court case, many dismissed the news simply because it came from CNN. However, the source material was not CNN, but the brief filed by Twitter. This dismissal of the news due to its messenger is a stark example of the lack of critical thinking that pervades our society. It's crucial to analyze the source material, regardless of who reports it.
In this scenario, the source material uncovers a stark disparity between Musk's public image and his legal tactics. What's even more disconcerting is the public's refusal to acknowledge this legitimate criticism and news, regardless of its origin. This goes beyond a mere lack of critical thinking; it's akin to transforming human beings into mindless, drooling, rabid zombies. We're witnessing cognitive dissonance on an unprecedented scale, especially in a nation as vast and influential as the United States.
The venue for this case is the United States District Court of the Northern District of California, an area known for being under control of a vindictive vicious liberal government Mafia. It's unlikely that Trump, a controversial figure, would win a case in this venue, regardless of the merit of his arguments. With that in mind, it's truly fascinating the way Musk has chosen to defend a case that we all know his company going to win.
While it's true that Trump initiated this lawsuit before Musk's acquisition of Twitter, Musk, as the current owner, had the option to settle with Trump or limit his defense strategy. However, he chose to argue that Twitter, as a private entity, has the right to regulate content on its platform. This legal stance is a stark contradiction to Musk's public proclamations of being a First Amendment absolutist. It's a clear indication of Musk's true stance on free speech, and it's not just a casual comment or a tweet – it's a position taken in a court of law, which speaks volumes about its authenticity.
Elon Musk's manipulation of public sentiment is a masterstroke in narrative control. He has successfully projected himself as a champion of the non-left, the non-corporate, the anti-establishment. Yet, his actions tell a different tale.
Usually, the mindless political zombies are those who blindly follow the corporate Republican and Democratic narratives. However, in this instance, even those leaning towards liberty have lost their way.
Phil Labonte, the lead vocalist for the heavy metal band All That Remains, known for his humble, courageous, and insightful commentary, also missed the mark in his response to this issue. He quote-tweeted the CNN article, stating, "The literal FBI was one of their lawyers." It's unclear who Labonte was referring to here. The lead lawyer in this case is Ari Holtzblatt, a lawyer associated with Tesla, and by extension, Musk. Regardless of who the FBI lawyer is, the fact remains that Twitter's legal team now works under Musk's direction.
Labonte wasn't the only one who was misled. The comments under the CNN tweet are filled with individuals who have been swayed by Musk's narrative. Musk's influence is growing, and it's clear that his acquisition of Twitter was a strategic move to control the narrative and create his own following. If career politicians like Joe Biden can have a mindless horde, why can't Elon Musk?
One can imagine Musk, lying on his bed (on the side without a hole, that was reserved for his ex, Grimes), scrolling through his phone, and reveling in the masterpiece he has created.
The legendary West Coast hip-hop artist, Ras Kass, once savagely said, "I date fat girls that weigh 215 with low self-esteem, cause it's easier to get the pussy'." How did Musk manage to secure the loyalty of the politically knowledgeable, anti-establishment groups? Elon is Rass Kass and they are his prey.
We are witnessing a Picasso of psychology at work. Musk's contradictory stance on free speech, his intricate relationship with Trump, and his strategic legal decisions all point to a master manipulator who uses his influence to shape public discourse to his advantage. As the public, we must remain vigilant and critical, not allowing ourselves to be swayed by the puppet masters of public opinion.
