If the Twitter/X thing teaches you one thing, let it be this: Twitter was a neoliberal place. Then Elon Musk made it into X, a fascist place. Once again, neoliberalism laid the foundations of fascism. But that’s not the (whole) lesson… Neoliberal folks are still using X, calling it Twitter to make themselves feel better, and pining for the good old days. And there’s the real lesson: When neoliberalism turns into fascism, neoliberals will adapt to life under fascism. Right, class dismissed.

source

(We really need a better way to crosspost from mastodon…)

  • glimse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    126
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    8 months ago

    The conclusion is moot when the premise itself is wrong. Twitter was only “a neoliberal place” if you’re only looking at the neoliberal part of it. It’s like saying “YouTube is a site about sports highlights” because that’s all you watch.

    If you used Twitter and only saw neoliberal garbage, that’s on you for following neoliberals. It completely ignores the majority of communities.

    When I was active on there, if I saw a political tweet it was pro-socialist 95% of the time.

    • jollyrogue@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      8 months ago

      Aral is promoting the Fediverse.

      He’s also saying neoliberals/centrists are largely performative, and they are fine with fascism. It’s a variation of the Nazi bar story.

      There were always problems with Twitter’s moderation as it was lighter on the right than the left. The famous comment about not banning Republicans congresspeople comes to mind. It was never as right leaning as Facebook though.

      • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        There are plenty of ways one can promote the Fediverse without saying things that are factually wrong

      • glimse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        8 months ago

        I am a proponent of the fediverse as well but I do it without disparaging the people on X who are still there because the community they’ve been a part of for 2 decades is still there.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          16
          ·
          8 months ago

          without disparaging the people on X who are still there because the community they’ve been a part of for 2 decades is still there

          No, those weak-willed people are a big part of the problem and are therefore even more deserving of disparagement.

            • novibe@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              16
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              Yes. Real leftists have no loved ones.

              The only love we need is our love for Marx, may peace be upon him.

                • novibe@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  That’s how it works in anime right? We do a tournament and the survivor will be the strongest leftist. They’ll be able to defeat all fascists by themselves. Truly a masterful plan.

                  • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    8 months ago

                    That’d actually make a pretty sick anime imo

                    Like the antifa version of Hetalia: Axis Powers

                    Sure, you could argue that it innately defeats the entire point, but just toss in a team up at the end and it’s all cool

              • glimse@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                8 months ago

                That’s like saying “you don’t have to be in the guild, you can still private message people”

                There’s more to a community than just the people you’re close enough to have other forms of communication with. I don’t have the contact info for a lot of my acquaintances online outside of the specific platform I talk to them on

    • the post of tom joad@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      i think youre misunderstanding the point they’re trying to make, but then again they’re not expressly clear who they’re talking about either and “neoliberal” is a term that means different things based on how we’ve been using it etc etc.

      If the Twitter/X thing teaches you one thing, let it be this: Twitter was a neoliberal place. Then Elon Musk made it into X, a fascist place. Once again, neoliberalism laid the foundations of fascism.

      I suggest they’re referring to the ownership of Twitter, not twitters users here. Twitter was owned by neolibs (they assert) and sold to Elon. They’re saying Elon is making X more fascist, not speaking about the userbase.

      Neoliberal folks are still using X, calling it Twitter to make themselves feel better, and pining for the good old days.

      And there’s the real lesson: When neoliberalism turns into fascism, neoliberals will adapt to life under fascism. Right, class dismissed.

      Now he’s moved to the userbase, which is confusing and muddles things up a bit. but his point here is the neolibs are the ones who stayed on X even after fascist users started coming in due to a fascist ownership. They complain, but they get by, because (and this may now just be my projecting my own thoughts) neoliberals have 0 morals and 0 insight.

      You said you aren’t there anymore. I think this means you’re exempt.

      Anyway that’s what i got from it

      • glimse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        I stopped being active on Twitter long before the sale for unrelated reasons but I’ve popped on from time to time because I still have friends on there who don’t use other platforms.

        I take issue with the “everyone who stays is complicit” argument in the same way I have issues with the “everyone in Alabama is a racist magat” because it completely ignores why people actually stay - community and connections.

        Unless you can convince your entire circle to switch to a different platform all at once, the move is painful. I get it.

        • Luke@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          Those aren’t comparable situations IMO.

          People can’t just pack up and leave because they disagree with their neighbors in real life, that takes money which not many people have a surplus of, especially in Alabama. That’s not a choice.

          Using Twitter is completely different, it costs nothing financially to stop going go a website. Your point about the social aspect and need for community is not wrong, but also if one values their social connections with fascists and fascist-enablers… well… I think you see where I’m going with that. That is a choice.

    • AFaithfulNihilist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      The users on it might “do socialism” but the owners, curators, and managers just saw that as a product for them to sell ads next to. The socialism is sort of bait.

      Having a show featuring socialists or with socialist themes doesn’t make your network socialist.

      • glimse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        That’s a fine take and all but the screenshot in the post is about the users, not the owners.

        Using your analogy, the hosts of a socialist show are neoliberals because the network - the only network for over a decade - is neoliberal.

        • AFaithfulNihilist@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          8 months ago

          Yes, Jon Stewart is a neo-liberal. I didn’t really think that was seriously disputed.

          Anything approaching a socialist network was dismantled long ago. There is no left-wing establishment. They were priced out of existence intentionally and then targeted by brutal crackdowns, hostile regulation, buyouts and in some cases straight up outlawed.

          • glimse@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            I’m sorry but I’m not sure I understand how Jon Stewart and socialist networks relate to what I said.

            I’m saying that if your only option for a network is neoliberal and you have a (socialist) message you want to get out, using that network to do it does not make your a neoliberal.

            • AFaithfulNihilist@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              8 months ago

              If you have a socialist message that network is not going to let you get it out unless it thinks it’s going to be able to sell commercials alongside it.

              If at any point in time that network thinks that something you’re going to say is going to undermine its neoliberal position it will censor you and it has proven that time and time again.

              Your mistake is thinking that you get to use the network to do your message when in reality the network is going to use you to get its revenue.

              If one of the owner bros decides to give you a platform it’s because they are making money on it. Just like neoliberals give platforms to fascists. Neoliberals don’t really care about the ideology as long as it doesn’t threaten their revenue.

              • glimse@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                8 months ago

                … And? If they sell ads, does that make you a neoliberal?

                The analogy falls apart here because socialist message were not censored on Twitter.

                • AFaithfulNihilist@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  It’s hard to think that you’re being serious with this kind of reasoning.

                  You’re drawing some pretty spurious conclusions from what I’m saying.

                  They don’t have to censor every socialist message just the ones they think will undermine their position.

                  • glimse@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    8 months ago

                    It’s not a great analogy to compare tweets to television in the first place but I’m still not sure of a few things:

                    • Why bring up Jon Stewart and his political views?

                    • Why do you think I’m assuming you meant all socialist messages were censored?

                    • What kind of messages do you think were getting censored on Twitter?

                    • How does posting pro-socialist sentiments on a neoliberal website make you a neoliberal?

    • rickyrigatoni@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      Also the OOP’s line of logic seems to imply Elon bought Twitter because it was neoliberal?

      Elon has billions of dollars he could buy half the lemmy instances if he gave the admins the right check amount.

      • flerp@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        He bought it because even though he has more money than he could ever spend, all his small mind craves is other losers thinking he’s cool. He was granted extra money when he bought it by people who hated the fact Twitter was used to support revolution in the Middle East and wanted to ensure if that ever happened again, they would control the person who could shut it down.