Post

I remember when Musk bought Twitter for agitprop purposes how even people on here insisted I was "overthinking it" and "it's not like he's playing 4D chess" as if billionaires hijacking media for propaganda takes any brains and hasn't been happening for centuries

43 reposts323 likes

another one I heard a lot (and just did again) is that musk couldn't possibly have wanted to leverage twitter for agitprop purposes because he at one point he belatedly realized he was wildly overpaying for it which still makes no sense to me

He only hesitated about overpaying because he didn’t have the money… Then he got the money from a bunch of Saudi & Russian oligarchs. The world’s oligarchs are in cahoots. Buying all US media is completely worth their money so they can completely control the narrative & get away with everything.

He didn't EARN that money, so why would he care if he lost it? Why don't people understand this about Elon? His net worth is based entirely on, propped up by, and expanded further, via lies he tells about phantom products. He can always lie more. He can't always sell more cars or whatever.

I don't disagree, but didn't he try to get out of the Twitter deal? It seemed more like rich bro posturing turning into a forced transaction, which he then realized was a great propaganda machine.

people also say this to me often, but him belatedly realizing he was wildly overpaying has no bearing on his intention (before and after) to leverage twitter as a right wing agitprop machine

Theres a decent argument wetlands are culturally "evil" because prehistoric kings hated trying to administer them, so they both commissioned propaganda and rewarded slander. Swamps in MTG give death mana because King Gilgamusk knows every turtle hunt is time away from growing sweet taxable grain.