So far, Elon Musk has embedded himself in a bubble of radical leftists, trying to apply his learned centrism to his new software program. The result, unfortunately, has mimicked what others said that I used to disagree with: that merely surrounding yourself with a bubble of leftists is enough to make you become more leftist. In Elon Musk's case, that seems to be what's happening. Here, I collected thoughts I wrote just for the occasion of this post, plus pull from some of the recent conversations I had responding to Elon dabbling into this topic, since this seems like the best time to do it; since it is of this format, I get somewhat repetitive, since I'm rushing this post out, so sorry for that, but not each repeated element is entirely equal; there is a bit more each time:

First, Elon Musk started asking for suggestions and formative opinions from people (and bots) on Twitter before he unbanned half the mindshare of the public from Twitter, that is, before unsuspending the individualists, conservatives, and Republicans that were massbanned on Twitter back during the Trump Presidency era. This automatically had the effect of pushing more radical leftist ideology from the opinions of the already radicallized Twitter posters, with merely the most leftist of the tepid scared conservatives, individualists and Republicans sometimes chiming in with very little of their true ideas, and those tended to be muddy minded people anyway since they were not true individualists and conservatives in the real sense (since they were never banned). This will reinforce the leftist bubbles that are Twitter and Elon Musk's views of Twitter.

Second, the rules at Twitter were written by radical leftists for radical leftists, and only radical leftists work at Twitter interpreting those using their own radical leftist viewpoints of reality.

The Twitter rules were written by leftists for leftists and benefit leftists (especially when they have any input to their interpretation). To end that prejudice, you'd have to get rid of those rules and completely make new rules.

Being fair admits that liberals are illogical and not conformist with physics, and therefore will have worse outcomes in an even field without censorship or thugs. But in the opinion of a leftist, it is the opposite! You have to hear the words coming out of their mouth or keyboard to believe they actually say those things, but they do! One actually said this, which is the opposite of the truth: Because they are FAR more abusive and spread FAR more DEMONSTRABLE falsehoods. [pp] Maybe not in all history, but in the last few years. [pp] Right and Left are not symmetrical. You are observing an asymmetry that results from the application of one standard to an asymmetrical situation. Another said this, which is also opposite of the truth: It's just my general observation that conservatives are just so so much meaner... their language is so hateful (when my experience is the opposite: it is the leftists who have the most hate and hate speech, and I only hear love from conservatives. See below where I talk more about leftists probably unconsciously hating themselves.) And finally, another opposite statement from leftists: You basically refuse to consider that reality could have a liberal bias, as it were, therefore conservatives make more false statements, therefore they're penalized more. Only in a restricted system that enforces mobbist ideas could the truth not be revealed, and only lies be reinforced. As said: A single ideology dominates and silences the rest, branding everything it disapproves of as violence and a threat to democracy. Criticism of wokeness is stochastic terrorism. Only one narrative is allowed to prevail and it is promoted by the media. All dissent is quashed..

In response to a suggestion from someone that said I think the Right needs to start funding more artists, filmmakers and writers instead of politicians and super-PACs.:

Individualists don't want to promote collectivist ideas, so don't seek collectivist funding for equal collective ideas into one channel (artist, etc.), since they don't know any individualists collectivists (since that's grift and fake), and don't create collectivist ideas. I.e., the nature of pioneers and individualists is conflicted by the nature of meek collectivists with single mind. Funding sources tend to be herds where the artist sees no difference between their mind and the mind of their funders. Perfect soil for prostitutes & slaves, too. Individualists do not agree with others that might have funding sources. Also, bullies tend to be thieves and collect some war chests, and tend to be on the side of collective actions that benefit them.

You would think this means individualists always loose. Not so:
If the rules are written by collectivists, such as on Twitter, then the collectivists always win.
If the rules are written by individualists, based on physics and nature, that is truth, and the individualists win.

Truth always gives the advantage to the individualists, and mobism, murder, theft, and communists/Democrats always gives the advantage to the collectivists. There is no such thing as fair rules that allow equal survival of both the individualists and collectivists, of the pioneers vs meek, of the inventors vs the mob, of the conservatives vs leftists, of the rural vs urban, of the founding reason for Republicans vs the Democrats.

In response to a question from someone that said Raise your hand if you think ElonMusk@Twitter.Com should provide previously suspended Twitter users with all internal discussions pertaining to the decision to permanently ban their account along with the exact reasoning upon their reinstatement to Twitter., I said:

Yes, but leftists hate good people, hate life, and hate the miracle of existence, so they are self consistent: promote terrorists, destroy USA is their motto, so they ban anybody good (independent rural farm family), & never ban terrorists (PLA, Iran mullahs, Russians, Antifa). So it is doubtful they need or needed internal discussions to do their evil; they already knew. Looks like Elon already fell down their rabbit hole, calling the word deserve incitement even though it is a discussion of what laws should be.

It could be that leftists hate themselves, so whenever people from the Right (as if it is a monolithic thing, which it is not) point at the truth, the leftists suddenly get confronted with their rabid hate of themselves and respond to the statement by the Right person as if the realizations the leftist is having of themselves is something the Right did to them. Yes, this is almost like the tendency of communists and leftists to blame us for what they do, but I think this also is something a bit different: their realizations of their own failings, not just shielding against accusations of the evils they intend to commit.

Third, Elon Musk wants to grant amnesty to those who had done nothing wrong; amnesty is for those who had done something wrong, such as amnesty for a crime committed or other bad thing (illegal aliens, IRS, etc.). What the individualists and conservatives did was not some crime or bad thing; in fact, most individualists are better than radical leftists, so it was actually the opposite. To call it amnesty reveals that Elon Musk is thinking more like a radical leftist than a logical human being.

It's not amnesty to restore accounts that did nothing wrong but targeted by libtards because they were too good for Twitter employees.

The people wrongly permanently suspended should be apologized to, not forgiven for something they never did wrong.

Fourth, in an exchange, Elon Musk said this:

  1. Alejandra Caraballo ( Nov 24 6:03pm:

    Trans people deserve to die is a legal statement and any account suspended for saying that could be brought back under the general amnesty. This is like opening the gates to hell in terms of hate speech.

  2. Elon Musk ( Nov 25 2:06pm:

    Incitement to violence will result in account suspension.

    Currently suspended accounts will be enabled slowly next week after manual review to determine whether they have potentially broken the law or engaged in spam.

    Twitter will be a forum for the peaceful exchange of views.

  3. Marshall Kirkpatrick ( Nov 25 2:09pm:

    Does the statement trans people deserve to die constitute Incitement to violence according to whatever standard is being applied? Not a hypothetical question. Whatever standard there is, it should prohibit that statement.

  4. Elon Musk ( Nov 25 2:17pm:


That is a super extreme leftist interpretation. Deserve is an opinion, not incitement of anything! Words mean something, and that leftist interpretation is not what they mean at all!!!!! This is distinct from whether or not the rules should be against opinions. But if you don't even use the words of English correctly in how you interpret your own far leftist rules, then your own rules are completely meaningless, and the same old leftist garbage saying they get to use subjectivity to ban all good people will just be done again!

The Twitter rules were written by leftists for leftists and benefit leftists (especially when they have any input to their interpretation). To end that prejudice, you'd have to get rid of those rules and completely make new rules, and get rid of all the leftists and bring in all sensible minded people (individualists).

Elon Musk using incorrect language for rules interpretation on Twitter! Who would have guessed? That was the bubble theory put forth by many people. Go hang out with leftists, and you become leftist yourself!

Deserve does not equal incitement, but in the minds of leftards, it does. This is extreme thought police type of stuff!

Whether or not those thoughts should be banned, those opinions should be banned, or incitement should be banned are their own considerations, but note that they aren't even using the words of English correctly!

Also, I will note that the main thing I have seen posted about child mutilators is that they are the ones that should be held responsible, not the children themselves, and that the death penalty is a good sentence for a child mutilator. That is a sensible discussion of what laws should be. Does Elon Musk seek to ban the protection of children, or discussions thereof? With the wishy washy leftist thinking style, we are left to be scared if they really want to protect child mutilators. They already seem non-serious about stopping the mass murder of our people by fentanyl drug dealers, often without the knowledge of those killed, and Democrats already made sure 3 trillion dollars ended up in the hands of the worst murderers and terrorists connected to Iran! This seems like the evil direction they are going, and Elon Musk seems to be taking their side on basic issues that support the underpinnings of the messy thought that supports their insane evil.

Finally, one of my non-discussion tweets:

Twitter seems boring now that we have this cleaning phase. Every conversation is a ping pong between liar leftists and subdued conservatives trying to teach people how evil the leftists were and are. It's like janitorial work reading this clean up.

If this seems like boring cleanup work to the old and wise among us, it is because it is, but I think no less necessary than the interesting fun stuff. But I warn you that you should have realistic expectations; Elon Musk apparently has succumbed to the bubble of leftism, and will not restore Twitter to what USENET once was.