'Alt-Saviour' Elon Musk Hints At Buying Substack
Any Other Dude, And Such A Suggestion Would Be Considered MONOPOLISTIC
‘Alt-Saviour’ Elon Musk Hints At Buying Substack
Any Other Dude, And Such A Suggestion Would Be Considered MONOPOLISTIC
- A Radical Dispatch
Not content with buying Twitter - which is the world’s most powerful communications weapon - after our interventions on Substack left him little choice but to facilitate the controlled exposition of the fact that it is indeed the world’s most powerful communications weapon:
Elon Musk has now hinted at buying Substack.
Business Insider reports 28th December 2022:
This comes as one Twitter user called ‘Wall Street Silver’ made the suggestion, seemingly out of nowhere.
And though we do openly accept that Musk has done some good with his acquisition of Twitter:
Readers will observe that - unlike twitter - there is nothing currently wrong with Substack.
Indeed, Substack was one of the very few publishing platforms that remained sane and free during the Covid mandate tyranny. It served as a refuge for many voices, including this author, who were cancelled for questioning Covid hysteria.
So if it ain’t broke, why fix it?
Why indeed. Any serious move in this direction must be resisted.
Because a multibillionaire defence contractor who already owns the world’s most advanced space weapons program, the most advanced electronic transport business, and the most powerful communications weapon, seeking to consolidate his power by acquiring one of the last remaining free spaces for journalistic integrity, is obviously bad for human civilisation. That he solicits Caesarian cheers while doing so only further highlights the clear and present danger.
Suddenly, those who were - correctly - shouting loudly against Big Tech concentration of power, find themselves shouting loudly for...Big Tech concentration of power.
How do they find themselves becoming so easily hoodwinked?
This is classic dialectics. And the masses are easily fooled:
Consolidating power to control a centralised internet is akin to possessing Sauron’s One Ring to Rule Them All. When permanently wielding so much power is up for grabs, and when history will never again revisit this period wherein permanently wielding so much power is up for grabs, humanity’s path forward will be plagued with unprecedented levels of deception.
It would be naive to assume anything else.
At this historic juncture, decentralisation of everything is the only route forward that can protect humanity from those who would seek to unify the Rings of Power in the name of permanent benevolent dictatorship, or Technocracy. The consequences here are so permanently far reaching that to call it ‘a hill to die on’ would be an understatement. The very future of what it means to remain human is at risk.
In JRR Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings, and though he would never dare become the Ring bearer himself, Samwise The Brave understood precisely what was at stake. This is why he always remained loyally by Frodo’s side, never failing to remind him when he became weak. For even Frodo, in the end, could not muster the will to surrender the One Ring into the abyss. The struggle that ensued is how the psychotic Gollum ended up biting Frodo’s finger off to get the Ring for himself, just before plummeting into the fire and destroying both himself and the One Ring in a frenzied fit of jealous rage.
Moral of the story? It is better to destroy it all before handing it all to anyone. But such a thing would take men of courage and substance, not sycophants of power.
"Three Rings for the Elven-kings under the sky,
Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie."
—J.R.R. Tolkien's epigraph to The Lord of the Rings
