Until this month, I’m not sure I had heard of Charlie Kirk. Now the entire world has.
First of all, to any MAGA people reading this: No one on the progressive side wanted to see this man dead. That actions of the alleged murderer were his alone and don’t represent the views of practically anyone on the Left. So stop pretending otherwise. You’re not helping. The gunman’s motives are poorly understood and much more evidence must be collected in order to understand his political ideology. I’m not even sure he has a coherent philosophy. So attempts to reduce this to some vast left-wing political conspiracy is a ridiculous cognitive shortcut.
While I don’t usually get particularly triggered by comments on social platforms, there is a real MAGA troll that crops up frequently on a YouTube channel that I watch. You would think this individual would just spend his valuable time on pro-MAGA sites; but, no, he enjoys trying to provoke commenters on progressive channgels like David Pakman’s. Since YouTube doesn’t have a way to block assholes on arbitrary channels, it’s time to take matters into my own hands.
This isn’t the first time, but I hope it will be the last.
Facebook, for me has long been a source of enjoyment and connection. But it also leaves me feeling cringey. So what changed?
What changed is that Facebook has gone full-on MAGA and I’m not OK with that:
“Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg met with President-elect Donald Trump on Friday [January 10, 2025] at Mar-a-Lago, two sources familiar tell CNN. Meta declined to comment on the meeting between Zuckerberg and Trump.” - Source
Meta said today [January 7, 2025] it will end its fact-checking program in exchange for X-style community notes as part of a slate of changes targeting ‘censorship’ and embracing ‘free expression’. - Source,
We all know how this has gone at “X”, where self-proclaimed “free speech absolutist” has actively shaped pro-Republican messaging on the platform.
“Joel Kaplan, a prominent Republican, replaced Meta’s policy chief Nick Clegg last week. (He said Meta’s third-party fact-checkers have demonstrated ’too much political bias’ in a Fox News interview this morning [January 7, 2025.)” - Source
“CEO Mark Zuckerberg dined at Mar-a-Lago on Thanksgiving eve. [November 27, 2024]” - Source
“The company [Meta/Facebook] pledged a $1 million donation to Trump’s inauguration.” - Source
“On Monday, it [Meta] added three people to its board, including close Trump ally Dana White.” - Source
I didn’t know who Dana White was but he appears to be the president and CEO of Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) and the owner of Power Slap, which is a “slap fighting” promotion, whatever that is. The bottom line is that he sounds like he’s rich and into violence, just the type of person that would appeal to Tr*mp.
So thanks for the memories, Facebook. But for me this is the end of the road.
I would like to propose a constitutional amendment that prohibits Sen. Ted Cruz (F-TX)1 from speaking or tweeting for seven days after a national tragedy. I’d also be fine with an amendment that prohibits him from speaking ever.
The “F” designation stands for Fascist. The party to which Cruz nominally belongs is more aligned with WW2-era Axis dictatorships than those of a legitimate free civil democracy. ↩︎
Some interesting writing on Putin in Der Spiegel on Vladimir Putin. An interview with political scientist Ivan Krastev on Putin’s motivators and his psychological state and worldviews.
“In 2008, during the war against Georgia, he [Putin] met with Alexei Venediktov, the editor-in-chief of the Ekho Moskvy radio station, which was one of the last critical media outlets in the country until it was shut down last week. Putin asked if Venediktov knew what he, Putin, had done in his previous job. Mr. President, Venediktov replied, we all know where you come from. Do you know, Putin said, what we did with traitors in my previous job? Yes, we know, said Venediktov. And do you know why I am speaking with you? Because you are an enemy and not a traitor!”
Блокировка уходящего президента США в “Твиттере” и “Фейсбуке” привела к необычной ситуации: теоретически Трамп еще может начать ядерную войну, но не может написать твит.
“Blocking the outgoing U.S. President from Twitter and Facebook has led to an unusual situation: theoretically Trump can still start a nuclear war, but cannot write a Tweet.”
In only a week, he won’t be able to do either. But while celebrating the deplatforming of this vicious clown, I have a tinge of worry about why it means for the future of democracy. It nearly goes without saying that social networks have become nearly the de facto equals of representative government in the U.S.
That “reality bubbles” contribute heavily to increasing political polarization is well-known. Customized media diets at scale and social media feeds that are tailored to individual proclivities progressively narrow our understanding of perspectives other than our own. Yet, the cures are difficult and uncertain. Often, though, we’re advised to consume media from the other side of the political divide.
A sentence from a recent piece in The Atlantic encapsulates why I think this is such a fraught idea:
