Why the left fears Musk

Elon Musk's $43-billion offer to buy Twitter made headlines all over the world.

So how did liberals react?

The meltdown began with Twitter employees throwing tantrums like school kids.  It continued through the week, with MSNBC warning viewers that Musk's Twitter takeover would have "massive, life and globe-altering consequences."  That carried through the weekend, with Saturday Night Live resorting to racism, claiming that Musk was making the offer so he could loosen Twitter's free speech rules because "That's how badly white guys want to use the N-word."

The question remains: why are liberals almost mortally afraid of unrestricted freedoms of expression?

Why does the thought of President Trump returning to Twitter cause liberals to throw a conniption fit?

Do they not know that being subjected to opposing ideas is fundamental and essential to growth?

In science, the invitation of critics to review studies and papers is an essential step to verifying the effectiveness of research and the validity of theories.

When you write an article or a book or make a film, you always get it reviewed by another to ensure that it sounds exactly the way it did when the idea was in your head.

Quite often, you may have failed to express yourself well.  Without criticism, you will never know this.

In product development, testing is a crucial phase of getting it right.  When a tester within the team has completed his testing, he invites potential end-users to provide a fresh perspective.

Quite often, upon working on the same product for ages, we take things for granted, but an outsider tells us something fresh.

There is an old proverb in India that says: "May your worst constricted critic be your neighbor" because the neighbor will always cause you to improve and alert you to peril with opposing ideas.

If you plan to quit your job and join a rock band, this neighbor may remind you that you could never sing or play a musical instrument.  Hence, he recommends that you experiment with rock music over the weekend or opt for a leave of absence instead of quitting your job.  He reminds you that it is tough finding a new job owing to the economy.

When your experiment as a rock musician is a failure because, despite your passion, you lack the talent, you return back to your daytime job, feeling that "at least I tried."

If you had silenced all critics, you would have been unemployed and eventually struggling.

Why is it that liberals are against these opposing points of view?

They frequently characterize their opposition as brain-dead, bigoted, backward, and MAGA-cap–wearing village bumpkins.  They also claim that morality lies solely with them and that the majority agrees with them.

Why, then, do they not allow total freedom of expression, so that they can comprehensively decimate their opponents in a debate and immediately render them irrelevant?

Many people would rather enter competitions where victory is guaranteed.

What is driving this seemingly irrational fear?

The reason obviously is that their ideas are not only deeply deficient and obscure but extremely dangerous.

Despite what they claim, their goal is not to improve lives but to ensure domination and monopoly, which leads to power and personal enrichment.

From BLM to climate change to COVID-19 lockdowns to transgenderism, they demand total surrender. 

Their motto is "support us, or do it our way, or you are a (fill in the pejorative epithet)."

The other risk they fear from total freedom is that their tribe of brainwashed disciples may be influenced if exposed to new ideas.  They may even abandon them.

The chain is only as strong as its weakest link.  If Twitter falls to Musk, the rest will be irrelevant.

Hence, control of social media is essential.

They will therefore do their best to stop Musk's takeover.  Musk may not even be a change agent, but the symbolism of him taking over simply cannot be allowed because he challenges the monopoly.

This is identical to the feeling of revulsion in Washington whenever President Trump's name is mentioned.

Trump caused peace, prosperity, and stability.  If Washington really cared about regular people, they would have supported him.  But no, by entering Washington via the very top, Trump had challenged their monopoly.  They placed impediments all through his tenure and rigged the 2020 elections in myriad ways — e.g., Zuckerbucks infiltrating sacrosanct local election offices; the allowing of mail-in ballots; and the relentless, baseless media propaganda, which included suppression of the news.

They have a puppet installed at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

For daring to challenge their monopoly, Musk could be subjected to the same kind of treatment doled out to Trump.  Perhaps Musk will be investigated, and baseless allegations of racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. may be brought on.  The left's propaganda wing, the mainstream media, are eager participants.

Musk has myriad business interests.  He knows the risk an angry government could present, yet he has jumped in to take over Twitter.  For this he deserves compliments.

Much as they did with Trump, the Washington establishment would want to make an example of Musk as a warning signal to other investors: "don't even think about it, or there will be hell to pay."

If Musk actually does manage a takeover, his challenges will begin.  Corporate management, and the various other regulating bodies within and beyond Twitter, will place myriad impediments before Musk to block or retard the speed of changes.  The struggle will be much like Trump's relentless brawls to survive in saboteur-ridden Washington.

The only satisfaction some may derive is watching liberals react as they lose control of their bastion.

Image: Twitter screen shot.

If you experience technical problems, please write to helpdesk@americanthinker.com