Censorship: Twitter Takeover Totally Panics Political Regime of LeftLibDemSocMediaTechPol

[grarpamp]

Tearing Down The Silicon Valley Wall

Authored by Victor Davis Hanson,

Elon Musk has finally managed to buy Twitter. And the moment he did,
the enraged Left flipped out.

Abruptly leftists began trashing their favorite electronic
communications platform as the domain of the nation's elite,
professional classes. Had they just discovered that they had been
racists and privileged users all this time?

And what happened to the Left's former worship of Musk as the man who
revolutionized the clean, green automobile industry with his Tesla
electric car company?

Or Musk the space revolutionary and hip star trekker, who with his own
money helped ensure the United States remains preeminent in space
exploration?

Or Musk, the patriot who is providing free next-generation internet
service to the underdog Ukrainians fighting Russians for their lives?

No matter. The Left reviles Musk because he has announced that Twitter
will be the one social-media platform whose business is not to censor
or massage free speech in an otherwise monopolist, intolerant, and
hard-Left Silicon Valley.

Who knows, Musk might even allow former president Donald Trump to
communicate on Twitter - in the fashion that the terrorist Taliban,
Iranian theocrats, and violent Antifa protesters all take for granted
in their daily access to Twitter.

But how did the once free-speech, anti-trust, let-it-all-hang out Left
become a Victorian busybody, a censorious Soviet, and an old-fashioned
robber-baron monopoly?

When it discovered that few Americans wanted left-wing, socialist
politics it turned elsewhere. It found power instead through control
of American institutions, from academia and Wall Street to traditional
and social media.

When Musk merely talked about buying Twitter, the Left shrieked that
an outlier multibillionaire owning a media - and especially a social
media - venue was unfair. The buyout was supposedly "dangerous" and "a
threat to democracy."

But the more the Left screamed, the less people listened.

After all, left-wing Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook has roughly 15 times
more market capitalization than Twitter. It has an audience of 2
billion users - over seven times larger than Twitter's 271 million.

Zuckerberg's monopoly on global social media and his enormous wealth
were stealthily put in service to the Democratic Party in the 2020
election. He reportedly infused nearly $420 million of his media money
into warping the vote in key precincts, by augmenting and absorbing
the work of state registrars to empower likely left-wing voters.

Amazon's Jeff Bezos, the second wealthiest man in the world, owns the
influential Washington Post.

It has moved markedly to the activist Left under his patronage.

Multibillionaire Lisa Jobs, widow of the late Apple founder Steve
Jobs, owns The Atlantic.

It has become an increasingly hard-Left political magazine.

So in Orwellian fashion, apparently most media-owning, left-wing
billionaires are good? But one social media-owning, non-left-wing
billionaire is bad?

How exactly might a Musk-owned Twitter alter an election?

By emulating the former directors of Twitter and the rest of Silicon
Valley social media who canceled not just conservatives, but any new
communication they felt harmful to the 2020 Biden campaign?

>From the outset, it was clear that Hunter Biden's lost laptop
incriminated his dad, Democratic nominee Joe Biden.

Biden was referenced by his own quid pro quo, grifting son variously
as "the Big Guy" and "Mr. Ten Percent" - a full partner in peddling
Beltway influence to rich foreign actors.

Yet in lockstep, social media banned most coverage of the pre-election
laptop story.

It instead spread its standby false narrative of "Russian
disinformation." We now know the laptop was always authentic. The
crude efforts to suppress mention of it were classic politicized news
suppression.

Still, the Left may well have some reason to be terrified of Elon Musk.

Should he liberate Twitter from left-wing scolds and groupthinkers,
would other renegade new companies and old standbys follow his lead?

Is Musk's $46-billion acquisition the internet equivalent of Germans
in November 1989 with sledgehammers smashing down the Berlin Wall?

Does Musk sense that the looming November midterm elections may result
in one of the rare landslide verdicts in American history?

Does he assume the public prefers a muckraker who demands free speech
rather than corporate insider cronies censoring expression they don't
find useful?

Polls show that the American people have had their fill of 14 months
of self-inflicted, ideology-driven disasters. And why not, given the
nonexistent border, spiking crime, inflation, unaffordable gasoline,
and neo-Confederate racial fixations?

Are the recent Netflix implosion, the CNN+ disaster, the Disney
debacle, the Virginia statewide and San Francisco school board
elections, the polls showing massive defections of Latinos from the
Left, and the grass-roots pushback against government-imposed mask
wearing, and explicit transgender education in the k-3 grades--also
symptoms of a reckoning on the horizon?

The country is ready for a revolution. And Musk believes he can lead
it with his Silicon-Valley sledgehammer.

So, as the Left says, "Bring it on."