4 ms·

I agree with you in that money and power corrupt. I think some people want to believe it just “reveals character” as a defence mechanism, as in, that could neve

I agree with you in that money and power corrupt. I think some people want to believe it just “reveals character” as a defence mechanism, as in, that could never happen to them, they’re a good person, and they’d still be good even with wealth. If it happened to Elon Musk then he must’ve been bad from the start. But: > if people are able to operate largely without consequence, then they might act in antisocial ways - like musk, in this particular example Not trying to defend the guy, but come on - he bought a company, took it private, and he is now free to ruin it as he sees fit. That’s not antisocial behaviour. He’s just making the decisions he thinks are best for Twitter (even if I disagree with them). And we have to consider the fact that when a celebrity does something, it is blown to a much bigger proportion by the media. Some random small business owner blocking third parties? Nobody cares, most apps aren’t even that open to begin with. Elon Musk does it? “What an antisocial monster corrupted by power and money” Meanwhile, murderers face real consequences for their behaviour, and you see it happening anyway, so your thesis that bad behaviour only happens because people are unaccountable is demonstrably false.

readonthegoapp 4y ago
> Not trying to defend the guy, but come on - he bought a company, took it private, and he is now free to ruin it as he sees fit. if you can legally do something, then it's ok to do it? or you should do it? your argument seems pretty amoral - like, you don't expect musk to even have a sense of right and wrong, much less try to act in a manner which many/most would consider decently. > And we have to consider the fact that when a celebrity does something, it is blown to a much bigger proportion by the media. i could see this argument, but musk's actions are having serious consequences on thousands++ of people, at least -- thus, i would argue it is and should be a big deal. that he is a celebrity is irrelevant, imo. > your thesis that bad behaviour only happens because people are unaccountable is demonstrably false. only? no. but is bad / antisocial behaviour much more likely when expected to be relatively free of consequences? i'd almost bet my life on it. maybe there's some wrinkle i haven't thought of yet, but it doesn't seem like rocket science.

readonthegoapp 4y ago

> Not trying to defend the guy, but come on - he bought a company, took it private, and he is now free to ruin it as he sees fit. if you can legally do something, then it's ok to do it? or you should do it? your argument seems pretty amoral - like, you don't expect musk to even have a sense of right and wrong, much less try to act in a manner which many/most would consider decently. > And we have to consider the fact that when a celebrity does something, it is blown to a much bigger proportion by the media. i could see this argument, but musk's actions are having serious consequences on thousands++ of people, at least -- thus, i would argue it is and should be a big deal. that he is a celebrity is irrelevant, imo. > your thesis that bad behaviour only happens because people are unaccountable is demonstrably false. only? no. but is bad / antisocial behaviour much more likely when expected to be relatively free of consequences? i'd almost bet my life on it. maybe there's some wrinkle i haven't thought of yet, but it doesn't seem like rocket science.