For Elon so hated his daughter that he moved to destroy the world

[solarbird]

A terribly, horrifically common reality is that a lot of parents – not most, but a lot – would rather have a dead son than a live daughter.

There are also a few who would rather have a dead daughter than a live son, but in my extensive experience, they’re a much, much smaller number.

It’s mostly about misogyny, of course. These are parents who value sons more than they value daughters, and do so on a deep and intense level.

And Elon Musk hates his daughter so much, so very, very, very much, that he decided to become a fascist just to destroy her and everyone like her. I mean, that really is the takeaway here, in this article:

“Essentially… my son is dead,” said Musk. “Killed by the woke mind virus. So I vowed to destroy the woke mind virus after that. And we’re making some progress.”

— Elon Musk to The Independent (UK)

That’s also why he bought Twitter, and how he’s using it.

Now he’s sharing deepfakes of Vice-President Harris, fake videos wherein a fake voice has her falsely calling herself “the ultimate diversity hire.” I won’t link to the original source because fuck the NY Times, but here’s a pastebin of the story.

I’ve been saying it for well over a year; this is why he bought Twitter and why he proceed to not just recruit but pay literal fascists and white nationalists to post to it. It’s why he promotes them, constantly.

This is what he is doing with “X” right now. He has rebuilt it into an engine for fascism, a disinformation fountain dedicated to the promotion of anti-queer activism and Orbanesque “illiberal democracy” with a goal of permanent oligarchic power and along the way destroying anyone to the left of Vladimir Putin.

This is what you support when you support any of his businesses.

He can do it because he’s a billionaire, a multi-billionaire, and because this is how much he hates his daughter.

A normal father’s hate for his child is merely a tragedy.

A billionaire’s hate turns it into a crime against civilisation.

Billionaires are a mistake. Billionaires are a policy failure.

And billionaires should not exist.

99 days remain.

Posted via Solarbird{y|z|yz}, Collected.

Comments

[armiphlage]

I'm not against the existence of billionaires who made their wealth actually creating, without destruction.

For example, authors Stephen King and Danielle Steel are each worth over half a billion each, and (although I think she's personally reprehensible) J.K. Rowling is worth over a billion. Although many trees died making them their wealth, the trees are sitting on people's bookshelves sequestering carbon. No people were harmed, aside from overworked editors. And JK is using her personal fame to case harm with her blathering - she'd still be doing that without the billion dollars.

My concern is that the easiest way to become a billionaire is to destroy multiple billions of OTHER people's wealth. Someone can buy a factory on credit, close it and put thousands out of worth (burning up their savings) to sell the equipment and land, and get rich in a day; we celebrate such people as much (if not more) than those who spent a lifetime building a factory that provided jobs and created things that people need. We make destruction profitable.

[solarbird]

Yeah, but she's an absolute fucktonne more effective with the billion dollars than without it, and yes, she absolutely does use that money for her agenda.

She funds people. Bad people.

She is not an argument for billionaires.

[librarygeek]

Note: I have a transgender son, and I helped them get the legal name change back in 2019.

I can't express it well, but reading that interview and Vivian Wilson's Thread© response to it started me thinking that it's not "just" misogyny (vomiting I'll at that) but also EM's obsession with reproducing and "lower birthrates will cause human extinction".

Vivian will not cooperate with her sire's plan and THAT infuriates him.

[solarbird]

True, but I'm speaking directly to the difference in "dead son over live daughter" vs "dead daughter over live son." They're both very real but in my experience, at least, the "dead son over live daughter" is way more common. And that specific difference is, I'm pretty sure, one of misogyny.

[jessie_c]

Of course such parents will never, ever allow themselves to understand that they never had a son to begin with. They just can't, because to do so means that they have empathy and actually care for their child.

[solarbird]

Of course. Be what I want you to be, or do not be at all.