Remix.run Logo
terminalshort 2 hours ago

You are using a lot of obfuscated and loaded language. What, specifically, are the "excesses of the ultra-wealthy" that need to be reigned in? What do you mean by "personally intervened in U.S. congressional relations"?

femiagbabiaka 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I'm commenting on one such excess. Here is another: https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/31/elon-musk-2026-elec.... The Nazification of X and federal subsidies for Elon's companies are another. There are many more examples.

s/relations/elections/ -- because Elon et. al don't just intervene in the elections of the country they live in, but actually any country he's interested in -- and uses the U.S. as a bludgeon in that effort, see U.S.-U.K. and U.S.-South Africa relations

terminalshort 2 hours ago | parent [-]

How is Elon's editorial control of X something the government needs to (or even should have the power to) "reign in?" How is that not freedom of the press just like the owner of the New York Times having editorial control over his newspaper? Same goes for his donation to the PAC. What is the nefarious activity they are engaged in? Why are they not allowed to exercise their freedom of the press in the same way as any other company?

amarcheschi an hour ago | parent | next [-]

He allowed child porn to proliferate for days on the platform

femiagbabiaka an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

1. X is not, and has never been, "the press". 2. If you were to have categorized them this way previously, botting and pay-for-reach have made it definitely not that way now. 3. It is bad when any individual can shift the politics of the entire globe simply because they have enough money. Feel free to insert your most hated left-wing billionaire instead of Elon, I still believe the same thing.

terminalshort an hour ago | parent [-]

Yes, it absolutely is the press. Any publication of any information is the press. I don't have any hated left wing billionaires, just ones I disagree with. But let's take the bogeyman himself, (((George Soros)))!!!!. I think he should have every right to continue to use his personal wealth to advance his political agenda, including every piece of it that I despise. I believe this because it is his fundamental right as a citizen of the republic. I think every left wing organization that I find odious should be able to raise money and show ads on TV and on the internet to publicize their political opinions. I think that if there were a communist billionaire he should be able to start newspapers, TV and radio stations, social media companies, or any other form of communication and use them to spread his message that the US should be a communist state and support communist candidates for office.

femiagbabiaka an hour ago | parent [-]

> I believe this because it is his fundamental right as a citizen of the republic.

This is kind of exactly my point though. Citizen of what republic? Soros and Elon are both wealthier than most states and affect politics globally. They literally cannot be prosecuted, they are barely accountable to any legal bodies.

terminalshort an hour ago | parent [-]

Citizens of this one. And they can be prosecuted. You just are not comfortable with the fact that they haven't really committed any crimes. Epstein was a billionaire too.

esseph an hour ago | parent | next [-]

It's far easier for a billionaire to get away with a crime than to prosecute it. You would think that would be common sense, but I guess not.

How many crimes do you think Putin has done? I mean Trump has 33 or 34 felonies on record, does it matter? What about Saudi princes?

whattheheckheck 28 minutes ago | parent [-]

Tech bros just love to play devils advocate because they get paid off with 3 to 10x median wage by them to enable the Billionaires crimes

whattheheckheck 29 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

By who? Another Billionaires personal attorney and acting attorney general Pam bondi?

Teever an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

What's wrong with a sovereign nation taking steps to reduce or eliminate the influence of a non-citizen who they feel is acting against the best interests of that nation?

If a nuclear capable country like France decides that someone like Elon Musk is acting against the best interests of their country they can ask him nicely to stop and if he continues they can use force to reduce the perceived threat.

This all seems completely in line with the day-to-day norms of contemporary society as well as historical norms.

terminalshort an hour ago | parent [-]

He is a citizen of the US and has full political rights. There is only one legal distinction between a foreign born citizen and a natural born citizen and that is that he can't serve as president. France is absolutely capable of using force against Elon Musk up to and including their nuclear arsenal. However, they would need to decide whether it is worse for their interests to tolerate Elon or to detonate a nuke on US soil, and that's a pretty easy choice.

whattheheckheck 25 minutes ago | parent [-]

States can extradite and extract anyone they want to now (if they can get away it) if they break their laws. Look no further than Maduro and the usa