Twitter, Safety, and Counter-Revolution

So, the second thing that Elon Musk did with Twitter -- after appointing himself "Chief Twit" -- was to arrive at Twitter HQ with a "let that sink in" troll. And then a couple of folks pretended they were being laid off with a LIGMA meme and they trolled the media.

But whatabout Twitter and "safety?"

The now-fired Vijaya Gadde, head of legal policy, trust, and safety, was in charge of "safety." Larry O'Connor is all riled up about that.

Let's be clear: Twitter is not an airline. There is no way to use their product that would result in personal injury. "Safety" is an odd and duplicitous term when employed in the context of providing policies for a website where millions of people trade paragraphs with each other and the world.

There's no such thing as "unsafe Tweeting."

Ah, but there is. Let's do an Ike and make the whole thing bigger. "Safety" is a consequence of women in the public square, on my interpretation of sociologist Georg Simmel. He understood that the public square had been created by men for men, but that women entering the public square would adapt it to suit "a more feminine sensibility." Men in the public square "debate" the issues, and may the best man win. In a highly refined and evolved debate, men exchange theories and arguments. In a bar, workingmen exchange insults. But for women, the exchange of insults is unsafe, because women want to be safe, and safe especially from crude lower-class men with foul mouths. That's why I say that:

Men have a Culture of Insult; women have a Culture of Complaint.

So the whole question of "safety" is a girl thing. As I say: "women expect to be protected." And women don't just expect to be "safe" from physical violence, but from verbal violence. That's why "safetyism" has become such an issue at the university. Of course, it has, because women are coming to dominate the administration of universities, and that means replacing the old culture of insult, of the free exchange of ideas, with the women's culture of complaint, whenever some man's colorful one-liner makes her feel unsafe.

By the way, when Gadde "cries" about Musk taking over Twitter, we sexists call it "women's tears win."

But will Musk's Free Bird make a difference? I'd say: not much. Because, after all, the fact that South Asian Americans like Gadde and Agrawal made Twitter into a ruling-class echo chamber is because that's the "safest" thing to do when a regime mafioso from the White House is breathing down your neck, muttering about "nice little job you got there…"

But what do we do?

The answer, writes Francis P. Sempa, is a "counter-revolution" against a "culture of wokeness [in] American society that today permeates our major education and cultural institutions," a culture through which all young people are forced to run the gauntlet of woke school, woke university, and woke professional accreditation.

But "counter-revolution" for what? That's where the "politics is downstream from culture" thing comes in.

In other words, what should be the culture that our fearless political leaders suck up in their mother's milk and that regime mafiosi dispense from the White House?

I say we have to experience modern society using a Three Layers theory. Curtis Yarvin says think: Educated Gentry, Commoners, and Gentry Clients. My reductive Three Peoples theory says think: Creatives, Responsibles, and Subordinates.

Do you see how these views just accept people as they are? Unlike the lefty Allyship narrative that experiences modern society as World War Woke of Allies fighting for Oppressed Peoples against the White Oppressors.

In other words, in lefty world the only people that matter are the educated Gentry, and everybody else better get in line, peasant.

I Have a Dream, that one day this nation will acknowledge that everyone has a right to live in their own benighted way. Educated Gentry have a right to live as noble activists smearing paintings to save the world; ordinary Commoners have a right to live an ordinary life in the suburbs, obeying the law, going to work, and following the rules; Subordinates have a right to sign up for benefits from their political masters, and live as the modern equivalent of serfs.

Dreams aside, I would like politicians, when they are out trolling for votes and lying their heads off -- as politicians have ever done -- to think, as they gaze out over the adoring throng: what are educated Gentry going to think about my speech; what are ordinary Commoners going to think; and what are the Subordinate masses going to think?

If politicians and swank blue-check tweeters started thinking like that, because all little kiddies were taught that in school, we wouldn't need a counter-revolution.

Christopher Chantrill @chrischantrill runs the go-to site on US government finances, Also get his American Manifesto and his Road to the Middle Class.

Image: Steve Jurvetson

If you experience technical problems, please write to