MovieChat Forums > Elon Musk Discussion > Journalist writes an open letter to the ...

Journalist writes an open letter to the world about our Elon Musk problem

posted a month ago by TMC-4 (19802)
55 replies | jump to latest

https://www.datalounge.com/thread/34642131-journalist-writes-an-open-letter-to-the-world-about-our-elon-musk-problem

Posts it on X.

Dear world,

We have an Elon Problem.

He’s very rich. And powerful. Unprecedented amounts of both are concentrated in his hands alone. He owns and controls a media empire of paid rightwing propagandists. And a battery car and remote driving company. And a brain implant company. And a satellite company. And a spaceship company. And an AI company. And an infrastructure company. Those pieces connect in alarming ways potentially.

He’s basically too rich and powerful to be subjected to normal oversight or even the rule of law possibly. He has politicians lining up to kiss his ass and curry his favor and get him to move to their state or mine their land. He really is kind of like an Avenger in the sense that he’s unconstrained by any one nation and is his own nation-state effectively and capable of great good or serious damage.

And according to him he’s on a crusade against what he sees as progressive forces aligned against him (and going to Mars) and he’s really mad at “woke.” He doesn’t always play well with others and doesn’t always take no for an answer. He has some deep emotional issues. He can be unpredictable and rash and has been known to hold some grudges. He has reportedly estranged some of his loved ones. He’s sired 11 kids but doesn’t seem to live with any of them. And he has basically declared a culture war on the mainstream press and the current political leadership in much of the world.

He’s presently taking over Western politics and trying to install as America’s president a man who attacked the US Capitol and was previously aided and abetted in taking power by a hostile foreign enemy of the world and dictator. That man Elon wants to put in the White House is also on trial for and has been convicted of various crimes. And his campaign is being propped up financially by Elon and a handful of other billionaires he will owe his power to should Elon’s push to help install him works.

Elon’s also embroiled in various lawsuits and legal battles with some of his competitors and those he believes are are trying to impede him in some way.

There’s one of two endings here: Elon gets everything he wants and rules the world and maybe he’s nice about it. Or he doesn’t and we remain not ruled by an oligarch-prince crusading against “woke” in a suicidal quest to Mars to save the world he’s taken over.

I wish none of this was true but it’s happening and too many people are ignoring it. Or jockeying for position in the New Elon World. I like current world and I’m happy to be sharing it with Elon and the many wonderful contributions he’s made to it. But I don’t think we should just give it to him or anyone else entirely.

Good luck. God bless.

https://twitter.com/zaleskiluke/status/1820890983178870928?s=61&t=q-xEOXEdcvyVCmaJFxg1-A

[–] Corbell (10995) a month ago

Elon Musk is doing more than anyone else in the world to advance the electric car.

Yet, lefties who supposedly are terrifed of Global Warming hate him.

This shows that political control is all they really care about. They know that their panic mongering over the environment is shit talk.

[–] SandyR (8406) a month ago

Yup.

[–] emori (3649) a month ago

lefties hate him because he is right wing nutso

[–] Corbell (10995) a month ago

So, in response to my point about the left's lack of concern about his efforts to advance electric cars,

you call him "nuts".

Emori. Do you realize how completely and utterly you failed there? Do you have even the slightest hint of self awareness?

[–] emori (3649) a month ago

You do understand that your Elon-The-Jesus is not the only one producing electric cars and there are many other firms and countries that make them?

Stop creating idols, people. If tomorrow Musk will take back his endorsement for Trump and will say he can't go back to White House - all his "fans" on this site will turn on him that moment and will trash talk him. Including you. LOL

I can't take you serious.

[–] Corbell (10995) a month ago

1. Yes, i am aware that other people are making electric cars. That does not challenge the fact that Musk is one person pushing the tech and the industry a LOT.

if you lefties were serious about your concern about global warming, you would give Musk great respect for that, enough to vastly outweight his "free speech" support.

2. If he changed his positions on issues that are important to me, that would change my opinion of him and how I view him? What a shock. Are you implying that your support of various public figures are NOT based on what they do but some sort of blind and undying loyalty? And you think that is a superior way of being? Please explain.

[–] emori (3649) a month ago

I am not leftie and I don't care about global warming. You people keep dividing everyone in two groups in every argument. Both of you are crazy.

Musk is not "free speech". He just allowed everyone to lie on his platform. And he still bans people.

[–] Corbell (10995) a month ago

1. You are clearly a lefty.

2. My point about lefties stand. Generally speaking, they pretend to care about global warming. IF that was true, they would love Elon Musk.

3. Musk is clearly "free speech" by today's standards. You saying "lies" is you advocating for censorship.

[–] emori (3649) a month ago

You people keep dividing everyone in two groups in every argument. It's stupid and shows how outdated that whole American system is. You are not allowing yourself to have your own thought. You are only allowed to think what your party leaders thinks.

And when you see someone have different opinion you put people on sides. You must be lefties, you must be rightie. You can't even comprehend that people can have opinions on things.

[–] Corbell (10995) a month ago

You say you don't care about global warming and I accept that. But generally speaking, you are still a lefty. You certainly are doing the lefty... game of pretending to not understand how general labels work or how groups work. This a retarded tactic that the left uses to avoid discussing real issues. It is only found on the left.

By doing it here, you are derailing the thread into an useless and retarded discussion on semantics and definitions, to evade my point, which on some level you know is correct.

Which is why you would rather talk about generalizations and groups and how you are soooooooo much more nuanced than me, because you don't use generalzations or some such silly shit.

[–] emori (3649) a month ago

I rest my case. You are too stubborn and stupid to understand.

[–] Corbell (10995) a month ago

My point remains. If the left carried about global warming half as much as they pretend to,

they would give Elon Musk credit for his role in pushing electric cars and not care about his support for Free Speech.

INSTEAD, by their hatred of him, we see that what they really care about is using power to suppress the right to speech of their enemies, and that "global warming" is just shit talk they use when it is useful.

[–] emori (3649) a month ago

Your thinking is too simple. That fact that you keep and keep pushing same little thing like you are some child that don't understand adult world and everything is simple in theirs.

By your childish logic China is making and selling electric cars. So everyone must bow to them for that and ignore all bad things they do because "they fight climate change since they make electric cars, ya'll. They are goooood".

LOL. That's how childish you sound. Musk is not pro-climate and shit. He is businessman and sells cars. He is not Saint Jesus.

[–] Corbell (10995) a month ago

The bad things that China does vastly outweigh the "good" they do. That makes sense.

What "bad things" does Musk do that outweights the supposedly good of electric cars?

It has to be big. After all, GLOBAL WARMING, is a really big issue and getting rid of internal combustion driven cars would be a huge boon, from the green weenie perspective.

[–] Melton (3443) a month ago

*crickets*

[–] Corbell (10995) a month ago

LOL. Yeah.

[–] Destinata (3043) a month ago

They loved Elon Musk for his electric vehicles until he bought Twitter and opened it up to free speech. That's their real problem. Like all the dictators of the world, they can't stand Twitter and want it censored until it marches in lockstep with their mindset.

As the old saying goes, a conservative is a liberal who's been mugged. The media and the governments of the world are trying to mug Musk, this time by muzzling him. He's actually more of an old-fashioned liberal who believes that the answer to speech you don't like is more speech. Modern liberals just come unglued about that.

[–] Corbell (10995) a month ago

Yep!

[–] DavidM (858) a month ago

He has always voted to the demócrats.

[–] Darren (1279) a month ago

Except he's not a right wing nutso. He's voted (and donated money) center left most of his life.

What you're doing is aping our dominant political elite -- which is leftist -- and labeling anything which breaks the approved narrative, and threatens the power of the established elite, as right wing. You're drinking the Kool Aid.

Stop letting other people do your thinking for you.

[–] TheCatman (92) a month ago

That may be partly correct, but it's not completely.

I thought he was a shock huckster before he bought Twitter.

I say that because electric cars cannot work. They take too long to charge, so people in cities cannot use them. probably a hundred million people who park on streets, in apartment lots, etc that have nowhere to plug a car into.

Meanwhile, gas stations can fill a tank in minutes. So, mass numbers of people can fill a tank and leave. So, city stations work efficiently and so so in a small space. Electric cars take too long to charge and so the more people who own them the less they will be able to charge them.

That, and his plans to dig underground tunnels, go to Mars, have mass brain implants, just cannot work. So, I thought he was promoting these ideas to sell stock, or whatever.

Many medical companies do that. We have cured some cancer...then people buy stock, and that story dies.

Anyway, he bought Twitter because he said he is for free speech. He followed through on that and people say whatever they want on X. That is good for society.

Yuppies and bourgeois (comfortable middle class liars) hate free speech because it disturbs the bubble of propriety they live in. So, once Musk started allowing free speech, suddenly he's no long "Tony Stark" but a bad guy.

Don't fall for it.

He's positive on this point.

[–] KCurmudgeon (257) a month ago

Yeah except it's NOT free speech. It's Elon-approved speech. There are many examples.

[–] itsbananas2024 (1063) a month ago

"There are many examples."

What are they? I'm not familiar of Elon Musk. I heard he's a bad guy though.

[–] TheCatman (92) a month ago

Yes, what are they?

I can imagine that totally illegal subjects are out and maybe personal attacks on him?

There are crazy people I've seen on forum who spam the same content over and over for years. That's not free speech but rather a kind of vandalism.

I'm not sure what you are talking about though.

[–] KCurmudgeon (257) a month ago

Here's a just couple, but I'm sure you'll cry "biased media" According to Melon Husk though free speech is completely free, so even if it criticizes him, it's free speech, right? I mean he seems OK with reinstating accounts of neo-Nazis and their ilk, so....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2024/08/07/musk-x-harris-bias/

https://newrepublic.com/post/177936/twitter-suspends-accounts-journalists-critical-elon-musk

[–] Destinata (3043) a month ago

Yeah, I cry biased media because there are lots of liberals on Twitter that are loud and proud and allowed to say what they want. If you don't want to hear it -- and I don't in large doses -- I can curate my feed to keep the libs out, for the most part. If I engage with liberals, the algorithm will give me more liberals in my feed.

Musk has given Kamala the same chance to be heard that he's given Trump. And oddly enough, she's not responded. If she doesn't want the exposure, she shouldn't whine about not getting it.

[–] Corbell (10995) a month ago

All that may be true, but lefties are committed to "green energy" and don't care about any of that.

What they supposedly care about is "green energy" and "global warming".

BUT, their hatred of Musk shows that controlling the ability of people to speak, is what they actually care about.

Oh, and any examples of Musk not being perfect on speech, does not mean that he is not massively better than the leftards that used to own twitter.

Lefties support censorship and oppression.

[–] TheCatman (92) a month ago

I'm what's called an "Old School Leftist" and that's about helping poor people, economic equality, etc.

The people you are talking about aren't Leftists, they are a type of conservative.

The definition of "conservative" is a person who believes in traditional ideas as being solutions for all issues. Censorship has always been a traditional solution for problems via ruling and comfortable classes.

Marx talked about the "Bourgeois" which is a middle to upper middle class group. They are marked by living in a bubble where they ignore realities of life. That serves a main function of soothing them into doing nothing about life's problems. Also, the Bourgeois lives on the edge of potential poverty, so they must ignore the existence of related troubles. In addition, they believe that one day they could be rich so they ignore the reality Epstein types who would never want anything to do with them.

So, Bourgeois don't see obese people are being crazy beings with self-destructive eating disorders, but rather big and beautiful or they pretend they don't even see a fat person. The same thing goes for black crime, the Bourgeois pretend that's not real....what black crime....or justify it as okay because of history, etc.

All of the PC and woke stuff is all conservative Bourgeois behavior going back hundreds of years.

Irrational environmentalism, pretending there's no racial issues, and so on is what English royalty used to do. They would remain rich and comfortable while advocating for issues and people they knew nothing about.

It's like modern celebs talking about pollution after getting off their private jet.

Meanwhile, real Leftists are for truth, free speech, truthful solutions, uncomfortable truths, and so on.

All of these terms are so screwed up that they are massively confusing for most people.

[–] Corbell (10995) a month ago

1. Conservatives are about conserving the fundemental PRINCIPLES of the culture. Conservatives during WWI, wanted to be isolationists, conservatives during the Cold War supported interventionism. Different situations needed different solutions, but the principles were the same.

2. "REAL LEFTIES" are at best a theoritical discussion topic. IN the real world, for a long time now, lefties have been against free speech, and the truth.

[–] TheCatman (92) a month ago

You are making up your own definitions which is useless.

The definition of conservatives is exactly what I said.

Look it up.

Lots of nefarious people use the opposite title of what they are.

Guys will say they are priests and they are predators.

North Korea says it's communists but it's really a kingdom run by a royal family.

Liberals who are not open to new ideas, honest discussion, push censorship, etc are conservatives.

Just because someone says they are something, it doesn't mean they are.

Actions are what tells you everything.

[–] Corbell (10995) a month ago

The actions I want to take are to "conserve" the enlightenment era principles of this nation and the culture and ideology built on them.

And in doing so, serve the interests of American citizens.

Those that aligned withe the Dems or the more radical say, blm and antifa factions, want to use censorship, violence and government force to terrorize or imprison their enemies so as to achieve control, and thus advance an agenda that seems very harmful to America and Amercians.

One can quibble about definitions, but that is the two main sides of hte political divide today.

And for the forseeable future.

[–] TheCatman (92) a month ago

The Enlightenment was a liberal movement.

In Political Science, the American Revolution is considered a "Proto-Communist" revolution. That's because it's sort of what Marx talked about much later.

If you read Thomas Jefferson's letters to associates such as, Ben Franklin and Thomas Paine, they believed that individuals could be great no matter where to whom they were born. Franklin called it the "Natural Born Genius" and so the plan was to have national healthcare, national healthcare, and things like that to have level playing field for poor and rich people.

They also got the idea of Freedom of Religion from the French philosopher Voltaire. He developed that idea for Prussia to destroy religion. That's because groups like Catholics and jews will create their own governments within a country. So, Ben Franklin when to France to talk to Voltaire to defeat religious group.

Voltaire's idea was that if all religions are equal they have no self-created struggle to build followers and power against the government. Also, no official religion means that none have say over life.

Also, there's something called a Death Tax which takes funds from rich families upon the death of the head of the family. Jefferson wanted this to be a total removal of wealth from the family. He didn't want "royal families" to crop up again in the US.

In addition, Jefferson wanted all be to be GIVEN land in the US. The Marxist idea here is that people should have control of the "Means of Production" and in the 1700s that meant farming, while in Marx time it meant factories, etc.

Jefferson wrote that even if land had to be removed from rich landowners this should be done.

You can look up Jefferson's letters online and read all of this stuff. If you like the subject, it's a great read. Ben Franklin wrote some really good stuff as well. Paine was also good but Jefferson and Franklin were awesome.

Voltaire is one of my favorites. I have read everything by him.

[–] Corbell (10995) a month ago

That was quite a post. I didn't see how any of it, was a response to my post, but I will look at your first few points and tell you what i think.

Your words "The Enlightenment was a liberal movement.

In Political Science, the American Revolution is considered a "Proto-Communist" revolution. That's because it's sort of what Marx talked about much later.

If you read Thomas Jefferson's letters to associates such as, Ben Franklin and Thomas Paine, they believed that individuals could be great no matter where to whom they were born."

1, Tracking current labels to poliical movements over 200 years ago, is a move designed to confuse the issue, not clarify it. Today, I am a conservative. That my positions may or may not have been "liberal" in 1770, is irrelevant.

2. Communism, marx, is fairly called DEMONIC. It has more blood on it's hands than NAZISM. To try to conflate the Founding Fathers of the most free and great nation in the world, is utter madness. I don't even care to hear your chain of logic explained. Please consider this point dismissed.

3. I take it that your talk of "being great no matter where they were born" is supposed to be a rebuttal of my desire to serve the interests of AMERICAN CITIZENS. If so, then that is... completely missing the point. It is not that I think others cannot be great, it is that as citizens of this nation, they deserve to have national policy to serve their interests. If that was not your meaning, then consider that dismissed too.

[–] SandyR (8406) a month ago

You're kind of correct here--The people waving rainbow flags today were the same people wearing Izod shirts in the 1980s and voting for Ronald Reagan.

[–] emori (3649) a month ago

Musk did no start free speech. People are being banned on twitter constantly. I know people whose accounts were banned because they fought with disinformation and lies from trumpists and russians.

Musk just stopped banning right wingers and terrorists. And allows them to lie.

[–] TheCatman (92) a month ago

You probably don't know what you're talking about.

I look at Reddit Politics once in awhile and probably most posters on there could be sued for libel. All they post are lies about politics like it's some kind of sport.

Free speech is great but you can't publish things to destroy the character of others without proof.

You are committing a crime with your post by the way. You can say "I THINK Musk is doing ABC" but you can't legally say he "IS" doing those things.

It's noteworthy, that I never liked Musk.

You need to learn about the world around you before talking about it.

[–] strntz (11813) a month ago

I say that because electric cars cannot work.

Those of us who own them disagree (and to be honest snicker at those who hate EVs). Doesn't work for *you*? Fine, they're not for everyone, but saying they "cannot" work is just silly. They work fine for a lot of people.

[–] TheCatman (92) a month ago

Did you even read what I wrote?

Your car works NOW because they are a minority in vehicles. However, if everyone owned you they would be impossible to charge.

They do not work for that reason.

[–] strntz (11813) a month ago

If everyone owned a gas car in 1910 they wouldn't work either - gas stations being few and far between with not nearly enough oil wells drilled or refineries built to fuel every car if every family owned one. So if every gas car was somehow taken off the road tomorrow and swapped with an EV, there would be an infrastructure problem yes. But that isn't possible.

Even if EVs are stupidly mandated, the transition date will still be 10-15 years hence and even at the cutoff of ICE sales, most gas cars will still be newish and have 10-20 life left to them. Those cars will still use gas and not electric power. As times change, the market demand drives the supply - both in charging ports and grid infrastructure.

As for me, my house has solar panels and two charge ports. In 5 years, I haven't spent a minute at a public fuel station of any kind except with my wife's car, and I now use *less* power off the grid with my Tesla than I did before. With thousands of panels being added every day, grid loading from EV cars being sold are greatly offset by the amount of solar panels being put on private homes, businesses, and public buildings.

[–] TheCatman (92) a month ago

Lol...read my post.

You can fill a tank of gas in like two minutes. So, a gas station that's fairly small can service hundreds of cars per day.

It takes 20 to 40 minutes to charge a Tesla.

Do the math and improve your reasoning abilities.

You got suckered into buying a novelty vehicle.

[–] strntz (11813) a month ago

No, not two minutes unless you can teleport your car to the pump. For me, it was 18 minutes - that's the diversion from my route on my way home to the gas station in my town about three miles from my home including the time to fill. That's the station I used because it's safe and close to home.

It takes me essentially *no* time to charge my Tesla. I plug in two-three times a week in my garage or in my driveway and it charges when I'm not using it, and I don't have to bring it anywhere to fuel it. In five years, I've saved 78 hours of not bringing my car to a gas pump, sometimes in foul weather.

Novelty vehicle? Well, it's novel compared to a car that actually ingests a liquid to ignite into a complicated, inefficient, and dirty process that makes heat as it's primary product, not torque. About 70 of its primary product (heat) gets wasted - the rest causes expansion of combustion gasses which move pistons. This engine requires constant maintenance and an exhaust system that requires a catalyst to mitigate the pollution it makes.

Suckered? What if I did, why does that bother you? But let's talk "suckered". My Tesla S is a far better car than the 535i I had before the Tesla. The Tesla is faster, rides better, handles better, and in 5 years has required nothing but a cabin air filter. Even the brakes are less than half gone. I no longer have to bring it to a public place to fuel it, and I don't have to worry about oil changes four times a year, transmissions, water pumps, timing belts, spark plugs, ignition coils, catalytic converters, etc.

My wife has a Ford Edge which has been a great car, but even though it's been as about as reliable as one can ask from a gas car, in 150K miles, it's ready for its fourth brake job, has had 30 oil changes (almost $2K right there), one set of plugs, two coolant swaps, and three transmission services. She really likes the Ford Mach E and that's probably what she'll get next spring.

[–] TheCatman (92) a month ago

So you count the travel time to a gas station as equal to filling up the car with gas...lol.

Do you have some form of mental illness?

[–] strntz (11813) a month ago

So you count the travel time to a gas station as equal to filling up the car with gas...lol.

Of course. I can't believe you actually said that.

[–] AmeriGirl26 (13726) a month ago

Can they write more of these? I love it when left-wing morons get triggered by free speech.

[–] Guitar King (4810) a month ago

Our Communist oppressors are very mad at Elon.

[–] vader (46) a month ago

Because free speech is a danger to democracy. Never forget that.

[–] liscarkat (17811) a month ago

That imbecile is not a journalist, he's a propagandist. The only people who have an "Elon problem" are people who can't stand the concept of free speech.

[–] emori (3649) a month ago

Lying is not a free speech. LOL.

[–] Darren (1279) a month ago

Yes, it is. It absolutely is.

LOL. (I wish there were a sarcasm emoji suitable for use in mocking you here -- ending a post with LOL doesn't make you look clever, it makes you look like a stupid, smugly arrogant child.)

If you are not free to say anything (short of incitement to violence) then you don't have free speech. Some people are going to use free speech to state awful things, hateful things, and false things. They have to be free to do it, or no one has free speech.

No one has to protect statements that are innocuous or positive or uncontroversial. It's only the hurtful, the controversial, the problematic, that gets challenged and needs protection. So you have to protect everything and live with the statements of bad actors who will abuse free speech. Because the only alternative is empowering some person or group to approve what people get to say, and it's not a question of if, but of when that person or group will begin abusing that power for its own agenda, and suppressing speech which merely threatens their power or position.

So yes, lying absolutely is free speech.

[–] emori (3649) a month ago

"an oligarch-prince" was a good one.

He was definitely bullied as a child and now he has this complex. When he desperately want's to be seen as cool guy and be accepted by "cool frat bros" as equal.

This is so pathetic and hilarious.

And he is such coward at the same time. He challenged Facebook guy for a cage fight. And when Facebook guy agreed - Musk chickend out and ran away, starting making excuses why he can't fight.

Didn't he interfered with Brazilian politics and started ordering them what to do in their country? Bulling some judge on Twitter. How did that ended up? Did he won and they did what he ordered them? Or they laughed at him and ignored?

Didn't he recently started bitch fight with Venezuela dictator? How did that ended up?

And he kept constantly starting bitch fights with Ukrainians, telling them to surrender to nazi russia and give them their territories. Because that what his pro-russian trumpo-bloggers tell him to think.

He keeps starting fights with other countries he can't win. Thinking that because he is rich celebrity and oligarch-prince - everyone will listen to him.

Because of that he turned himself into joke. He used to be this respected pioneer. Now he is "rich idiot".

[–] itsbananas2024 (1063) a month ago

Now I would love to see you get this outraged over Blackrock and Vanguard. Those are the real powerful and wealthy enemies.

You are misplacing your hatred on the wrong person.

[–] strntz (11813) a month ago

Freedom of speech is terrible when it allows speech from the right as well as the left. All leftist? Just fine for some.