4 ms·
If it weren’t for his extremism, none of this would be happening. Maybe stop looking for reasons to hate on him simply because it’s popular to do so? His work
by sneak 3y ago
If it weren’t for his extremism, none of this would be happening.
Maybe stop looking for reasons to hate on him simply because it’s popular to do so? His works speak for themselves.
- kspacewalk2 3y agoI don't hate him, I simply find his views on most (?) topics reprehensible, naive and/or delusional. I think he's doing great harm to his businesses by oversharing them. I particularly despise his pathetic bothsidesing of the war in which fascists are invading and murdering my relatives in my country of birth.
- TMWNN 3y ago> I particularly despise his pathetic bothsidesing of the war in which fascists are invading and murdering my relatives in my country of birth. As a Ukrainian you ought to be on your knees thanking God that Musk was born. Starlink is that vital to Ukraine, and he had zero obligation to provide it (let alone for free) when the Ukrainian government asked for his help early in the war. The US-funded Starlink subscriptions and Starshield have only increased the value Musk's enterprise provides to Ukraine, of course, but it all began for free. Let me repeat: Zero obligation. Musk is not Ukrainian. The United States is, contrary to what many subreddits' denizens seem to believe, not actually at war with Russia. Ukraine is not a member of NATO or EU. He can say whatever he wants whenever he wants about anything thanks to freedoms that exist in the US but not in Russia (or Ukraine), and Musk is a lot more entitled to do so than you or me or every bleater on Reddit whose collective actions have saved fewer Ukrainian lives than the results of Musk's capital and innovation and risk-taking.
- panick21_ 3y agoName any private individual who has done more for the defense of Ukraine then Musk. Suggesting that a civil war will end in a cease fire along battle lines is a very common way for civil wars to end. Even if during those wars both sides absolutely are convinced that they will have total victory.
- greedo 3y agoA civil war. Right. Completely displaying your ignorance of the region's history.
- panick21_ 3y agoThe history where for the last 400 years the were part of the same country and share close history for 2000 years and only a tiny amount of time they were fully separated. They speak essentially the same language (often the very same) and use the same national origin story and the Russian Orthodox Church was literally representing people from both sides of the border. There are tons of families and other connections over the boarder as well. During that time of separation the actual elites of the country treated the boarder between the two countries as essentially meaningless. The same group of oligarch took over in both countries for the most part and treaty the sovereignty and democracy as a joke. I think its totally fair to call it a civil war. You could call it other things as well that wouldn't be incorrect either. For historical context, the Austro-Prussian War is often called the German Civil War, or in German 'Deutsche Krieg' or 'Deutsche Bruderkrieg'. And those two countries were no where near as close historically as Russia/Ukraine. Its more like if England and Scotland fought each other, but they are both Anglican and English people believed they origin of the Angles/Saxons was in the Scottish highlands. After 250 years of British history, calling that a civil war would be totally reasonable.
- greedo 3y agoRussian and Ukrainian have similar roots, but are not "essentially the same language." The "national origin story" (unless you mean the 1917 Revolution) is nothing like how the two countries were created. Mexico and the US have "tons of families and other connections over the (sic) boarder as well." The reason the elites treated the border between Ukraine and the Russian Federation as meaningless was because ex-Soviet cronies were running Ukraine to plunder its assets. Until the Maiden Revolution, these cronies were basically stooges controlled by Moscow. The current conflict (2014 to now) is nothing like a civil war. Moscow uses some proxy forces from the Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts, but the majority of forces are from the Russian Federation. They control everything, supply all the equipment and determine goals and objectives. If you were to remove the Russian forces from these two oblasts (as well as Crimea and Zaporizhzhia) these proxy forces would collapse immediately. Oh and regarding England and Scotland, well, many Scots would like to leave the UK. That wouldn't be a civil war either, but an independence movement. A civil war would be the more like the Hundred Years war...
- thinkcontext 3y agoIt is true his work speaks for itself. It is also his views speak for themselves which include a repugnant homophobic conspiracy theory about the attack on Paul Pelosi and a covid one about Lebron James' son.