A thoughtful piece, appreciate that. I agree the motivation comes from what both Musk and Trump think are best for humanity and for the US. The question is, what’s the alternative? Is it global American domination? We’ve seen horrendous results the last 30 years for that philosophy. We’ve had plenty of awful wars, mass migration, massive US budget escalation (so much for the peace dividend), and a gutting of much of middle America in concert with increased centralized power at home. Sketch out a viable alternative for us, in your mind. Maybe the administration will listen too.
If you think Trump and Elon and are buddies with Putin, then you probably also think the stripper really likes you or the car salesman gives two shits about you. They have to play nice to get him to stop fighting because we ultimately aren’t going to war with Russia over Ukraine. You say there may be a larger war later. That may be the case but Trump is betting we have a better chance at not having a war with Russia if we get the fighting with Ukraine to stop first and then working on incrementally improving relations so Russia doesn’t try to take more in a few years and start WW3.
America under the child sniffing pedo Pete has tried to on several occasions.
As did the Uk's inglorious leaders when they authorised Stormshadow attacks into Russia and orchestrated the suicide bomb on the Kersch bridge.
Provocation after provocation by the Western leaders, who then shit themselves when Russia unveiled it's Oreshnik missiles, against which the West has zero defence.
This is spot on. I’ve wondered out loud for weeks already even how long the alliance with Trump will last. (I give it 6 months at most.)
Musk isn’t the saviour people want him to be. Just because someone says some things you agree with doesn’t make them right about everything or someone you should listen to uncritically.
I think many people have forgot the importance of evaluating policies individually. Of evaluating the things people say individually. Of being ok with accepting some things and rejecting others.
The world needs balance. Legacy media is gone from that - they lost the ability to provide balance when they became so biased themselves. But most citizen journalists (I’ll exclude you Gummi - as I’ve always known you to do your best to stay evidence based and to be willing to go where the facts lead you,) but most citizen journalists aren’t aware of their own bias and they lack the skills to actually research and cut through the noise and propaganda. We are surrounded by propaganda right now to the point where it’s hard to know what is true unless you saw the original event. This poses a huge problem - and musk contributes to this with his posting patterns on “X”. Trump does too with posting on truth social rather than holding a press conference.
People shouldn’t be hearing about ideas on social media. It’s ridiculous.
Thanks for the even keel take Gummi. I've long thought Elon was best understood as a rich autistic kid with noble intentions, which made him somewhat endearing, but I've been struggling to make sense of what he's been up to since the inauguration. Everything's been moving at such a pace that it's been difficult to parse, especially given how busy I've been IRL.
Seriously, I think this isn't as well crafted an argument as Elon's arguments...which isn't sophisticated either because he is mostly just Tweeting to influence people, not breaking it down. Yes, I still call it Tweeting.
Of course, Elon is after his own interest like everybody. Most of the narratives he so successfully gets people to follow are not "true stories". Trump, Kanye, Musk, most political creatures all possess the persuasive ability to get people to buy their narratives. Hypnosis of a sort.
However, the foreign policy ideas you criticize are actually pretty obviously correct. We will never remove all conflict, what we can do is stop funding (via printing) world wars and continuing wars that would have ended.
It's obviously good that we build trade relationships with other countries. It's also obviously good that we don't "police the world". That IS the very "influence" you criticize the other countries for wanting to do. Why impoverish ourselves in an effort to hold others back? If we have a better free society, then allow it to just win. You can win, and, more importantly, influence through cooperation and mutual gain too. This is the fundamental understanding that underpins human societies: economics.
PS: I mostly agree with the whole premise of this piece. I think I distrust Musk more than you do.
Really, I think your criticisms in this piece aren't very strong enough, and just not good at all on the foreign policy recommendations. To me, they sound like the typical shallow, usually conservative, neocon arguments we have heard for forever to justify US military Industrial complex expansion: US must police the world, we are the good guys so the ends justify the means, if we don't control the nukes everyone will just use them. That type of propaganda is one sided arguing, not rational, and in some cases gas lighting (e.g. the US is the only country to ever use Nukes against another country). I would like to see some nuanced differentiation from that...unless maybe that IS your actual thinking, in which case I am probavly wasting my time offering my thoughts.
The greatest threat to peace IS @NATO. The Soviet Union no longer exists.
Yes, for their to BE a @NATO, they must have an adversary - real or make-believe.
They have chosen Russia as their make-believe enemy.
We must abolish @NATO.
Russia is not an aggressor in the world. This title goes to America with it's foreign policy of endless war, death and destruction (including, being the instigator of the Ukraine conflict) - The Global Hegemon.
Hopefully, we will see change with this administration.
Which leads us to yes, a Multi-Polar world. No one crowned the U.S. King of the World.
I also think this thought: "Russia and China, unbound by restraint, don’t halt at influence. They stretch it into dominance, pressing borders and wills until push back flares." is more accurate as:
- "letting them run wild with half-baked takes" is an essential part of free speech. I think you have a good point here, but only from another angle. Elon, with his full-throated free speech as proprietor, has made the environment feel inhospitable. This has taken a toll in the marketplace of ideas due to the exodus of the left. The left should have been made to feel at home, especially in the context of his intense political alignment. Community Notes is also hampered due to the ideological shift as it makes it more difficult to garner opposing consensus. His "picking of the playlist", which I agree with, is only really a problem due to the mass exodus, and the decreased likelihood of those on the left to pay for premium, and the visibility it garners.
- The "hasn't equally addressed Russia’s aggression" line is one I've had a hard time grasping. Russia is, essentially, a dictatorship. His, Trump's, and my focus is on conversation with people in Western democracies, which are actually responsive to public sentiment. What is the point of criticizing Russia all the time? It is pure virtual signaling. They are our adversary, and Putin isn't going to be moved by any of it. To caveat every criticism of US or Ukrainian policy with that is useless. It is akin to having to say, "I'm against white supremacy" every time you criticize DEI.
A thoughtful piece, appreciate that. I agree the motivation comes from what both Musk and Trump think are best for humanity and for the US. The question is, what’s the alternative? Is it global American domination? We’ve seen horrendous results the last 30 years for that philosophy. We’ve had plenty of awful wars, mass migration, massive US budget escalation (so much for the peace dividend), and a gutting of much of middle America in concert with increased centralized power at home. Sketch out a viable alternative for us, in your mind. Maybe the administration will listen too.
If you think Trump and Elon and are buddies with Putin, then you probably also think the stripper really likes you or the car salesman gives two shits about you. They have to play nice to get him to stop fighting because we ultimately aren’t going to war with Russia over Ukraine. You say there may be a larger war later. That may be the case but Trump is betting we have a better chance at not having a war with Russia if we get the fighting with Ukraine to stop first and then working on incrementally improving relations so Russia doesn’t try to take more in a few years and start WW3.
Russia wasn't likely to start WW3.
However.....
America under the child sniffing pedo Pete has tried to on several occasions.
As did the Uk's inglorious leaders when they authorised Stormshadow attacks into Russia and orchestrated the suicide bomb on the Kersch bridge.
Provocation after provocation by the Western leaders, who then shit themselves when Russia unveiled it's Oreshnik missiles, against which the West has zero defence.
This is spot on. I’ve wondered out loud for weeks already even how long the alliance with Trump will last. (I give it 6 months at most.)
Musk isn’t the saviour people want him to be. Just because someone says some things you agree with doesn’t make them right about everything or someone you should listen to uncritically.
I think many people have forgot the importance of evaluating policies individually. Of evaluating the things people say individually. Of being ok with accepting some things and rejecting others.
The world needs balance. Legacy media is gone from that - they lost the ability to provide balance when they became so biased themselves. But most citizen journalists (I’ll exclude you Gummi - as I’ve always known you to do your best to stay evidence based and to be willing to go where the facts lead you,) but most citizen journalists aren’t aware of their own bias and they lack the skills to actually research and cut through the noise and propaganda. We are surrounded by propaganda right now to the point where it’s hard to know what is true unless you saw the original event. This poses a huge problem - and musk contributes to this with his posting patterns on “X”. Trump does too with posting on truth social rather than holding a press conference.
People shouldn’t be hearing about ideas on social media. It’s ridiculous.
Well they can't hear about them in the media, as
1. They always lie.
2. We know they always lie.
Thanks for the even keel take Gummi. I've long thought Elon was best understood as a rich autistic kid with noble intentions, which made him somewhat endearing, but I've been struggling to make sense of what he's been up to since the inauguration. Everything's been moving at such a pace that it's been difficult to parse, especially given how busy I've been IRL.
Now do the United States.
Seriously, I think this isn't as well crafted an argument as Elon's arguments...which isn't sophisticated either because he is mostly just Tweeting to influence people, not breaking it down. Yes, I still call it Tweeting.
Of course, Elon is after his own interest like everybody. Most of the narratives he so successfully gets people to follow are not "true stories". Trump, Kanye, Musk, most political creatures all possess the persuasive ability to get people to buy their narratives. Hypnosis of a sort.
However, the foreign policy ideas you criticize are actually pretty obviously correct. We will never remove all conflict, what we can do is stop funding (via printing) world wars and continuing wars that would have ended.
It's obviously good that we build trade relationships with other countries. It's also obviously good that we don't "police the world". That IS the very "influence" you criticize the other countries for wanting to do. Why impoverish ourselves in an effort to hold others back? If we have a better free society, then allow it to just win. You can win, and, more importantly, influence through cooperation and mutual gain too. This is the fundamental understanding that underpins human societies: economics.
PS: I mostly agree with the whole premise of this piece. I think I distrust Musk more than you do.
Really, I think your criticisms in this piece aren't very strong enough, and just not good at all on the foreign policy recommendations. To me, they sound like the typical shallow, usually conservative, neocon arguments we have heard for forever to justify US military Industrial complex expansion: US must police the world, we are the good guys so the ends justify the means, if we don't control the nukes everyone will just use them. That type of propaganda is one sided arguing, not rational, and in some cases gas lighting (e.g. the US is the only country to ever use Nukes against another country). I would like to see some nuanced differentiation from that...unless maybe that IS your actual thinking, in which case I am probavly wasting my time offering my thoughts.
Appreciate your writing!
We’ve already had evil this last administration. I’ll take a little Asperger’s mixed with hyperbolic optimism for awhile thank you!
The greatest threat to peace IS @NATO. The Soviet Union no longer exists.
Yes, for their to BE a @NATO, they must have an adversary - real or make-believe.
They have chosen Russia as their make-believe enemy.
We must abolish @NATO.
Russia is not an aggressor in the world. This title goes to America with it's foreign policy of endless war, death and destruction (including, being the instigator of the Ukraine conflict) - The Global Hegemon.
Hopefully, we will see change with this administration.
Which leads us to yes, a Multi-Polar world. No one crowned the U.S. King of the World.
The irony of using Grok to proofread this enough times that its writing style is recognizable is poignant.
I share your concerns about Elon, but counter with Sowell.
"There are no solutions, only tradeoffs."
What alternative do you suggest?
I also think this thought: "Russia and China, unbound by restraint, don’t halt at influence. They stretch it into dominance, pressing borders and wills until push back flares." is more accurate as:
"Russia, China and the United States,"...
Nice piece! I wanted to share my thoughts on a couple things in your "contradictions" section:
- I think the context that China is the world leader in nuclear and is rapidly moving towards renewables calls that one into question: https://sustainabilitymag.com/articles/how-china-will-lead-the-green-energy-expansion
- "letting them run wild with half-baked takes" is an essential part of free speech. I think you have a good point here, but only from another angle. Elon, with his full-throated free speech as proprietor, has made the environment feel inhospitable. This has taken a toll in the marketplace of ideas due to the exodus of the left. The left should have been made to feel at home, especially in the context of his intense political alignment. Community Notes is also hampered due to the ideological shift as it makes it more difficult to garner opposing consensus. His "picking of the playlist", which I agree with, is only really a problem due to the mass exodus, and the decreased likelihood of those on the left to pay for premium, and the visibility it garners.
- The "hasn't equally addressed Russia’s aggression" line is one I've had a hard time grasping. Russia is, essentially, a dictatorship. His, Trump's, and my focus is on conversation with people in Western democracies, which are actually responsive to public sentiment. What is the point of criticizing Russia all the time? It is pure virtual signaling. They are our adversary, and Putin isn't going to be moved by any of it. To caveat every criticism of US or Ukrainian policy with that is useless. It is akin to having to say, "I'm against white supremacy" every time you criticize DEI.
Would love to see you debate someone like, say, Victor Davis Hanson. Or even a Scott Adams.