3 ms·
People keep saying this yet don't see the irony in it. You're openly admitting that censorship is necessary to keep your desired candidate and less censorship
by plgonzalezrx8 4y ago
People keep saying this yet don't see the irony in it.
You're openly admitting that censorship is necessary to keep your desired candidate and less censorship will hinder the political efforts of a "specific" party.
- 6stringmerc 4y agoThere is no guarantee of less beyond the word of funding secured $420 a share level. If anything it could be less, but worse depending who holds the power. It’s a fiasco no matter what hence the discussion around the inevitable “next” platform.
- drekk 4y agoYou're responding to someone who didn't mention censorship or any political party. It comes across as extremely defensive. Having unaccountable billionaires control the public discourse by digitizing the 21st century commons is shitty. It's just more centralization like the kind already seen for news networks, print media, and radio. "The United States is also a one-party state but, with typical American extravagance, they have two of them." - Julius Nyerere
- plgonzalezrx8 4y agoThen can you please explain to me what is so scary of him owning twitter during 2024 elections?