Anti-Social Media

More than a few friends periodically ask me, “Why do you keep posting on Twitter?  Isn't it crazy there?"  I always answer that, yes, Twitter is incredibly crazy – indeed, ever since Elon Musk took over and opened the door wide with a welcome mat for racists, anti-Semites, fascists and lunatic conspiratorialists, it’s become even crazier and nastier.  But I stay because…Anatevka’s our home.  Wait, sorry, wrong musical.  I stay because the election is too important not to put on a protective helmet and respond to lies, lies, more lies, disinformation and hate.
 
All that holds true, though I’m not sure that TwiXter hasn’t morphed into something else that might not be worth – well, I won’t say “the time,” but – as much time.  What it’s become is whack-a-mole.
 
The lies, disinformation and crazy theories have become so pervasive that there’s no way to respond to even an angel’s breath of them.  The one you do respond to is only one of probably hundreds or thousands saying the same thing.  And that one may have two or three lunatic screeds within it to refute – an even bigger challenge for responding since TwiXtter only allows 288 characters in a tweet.  (You can, of course, respond with more than one tweet, but there’s no guarantee each will be seen by the people following the initial discussion, and so they only react to the one they see.)  Further, a rational response of reality to a conspiratorialist will generally be dismissed simply for the fact that you made it.  Disagreement with a conspiracy theory is often “proof enough” that you’re compromised or an agent of the devil or whatever.
 
That’s why I often don’t even try to debate, since arguing with facts and reality don’t matter.  So, instead I have written a default reply that I just copy-paste in.  It reads –
 
“This below is from someone who supports a man convicted of 34 felonies, found liable for rape, guilty of business fraud, says he wants to be a dictator, wants to rewrite some of the Constitution, echoes HITLER’s words, says he wants to build internment camps & has early dementia.”

And yes, that’s just under the 288 character limit.  I made sure of it.
 
Thank goodness, too, that God created the “Block” button.  It’s made life so much better.  Alas, it’s not a panacea.
 
Another main reason I participate on TwiXter, though, isn’t just to debate disinformation and hate from “the other side” – but to shore up support of those who agree with me or maybe need talking down from the ledge.
 
Unfortunately, the lunacy has now begun to permeate though the edges of one's own side, as well.  And that, perhaps more than the hate and racism, is what is making it almost not worth spending as much time in the morass.  When your “friends” are driving you nuts, and arguing with you if you don't support them in everything and are telling you off, that’s when you think maybe you should make sure you always know where the nearest exit is.
 
The great thing about the Democratic Party is that it’s, as the expression goes, “a big tent.”  Filled with many views.  The hurdle the Democratic Party has to deal with is that it’s a big tent – filled with many views.  The party has long been known for eating its young.  As humorist Will Rogers famously said back in the 1930s, almost 100 years ago, “I’m not a member of any organized political party.  I’m a Democrat.”
 
And I’m okay with that.  The different views are what give Democrats their vibrancy and strength.  But in recent days, starting months ago, the “What I heard is's …” have grown louder – never mind almost no one on TwiXter is in any position to “hear” anything from a direct, informed source, but are just passing along a rumor based on a rumor.  And the fear of “what if Trump wins…” has begun to color views, to the point that disagreement is less tolerated.  And surface-level conspiracies have begun to creep in.  (Rational, but unsupportable ones, not "JFK is coming back to life.")  A “We should boycott...” attitude also now permeates over anything you don’t like, for many.  “That reporter is really a Trumper” because the reporter asks hard questions to a Democrat is something that has begun to crop up all over, as well.
 
Just yesterday, I saw a few more cries for MSNBC to drop Jen Psaki.  Apparently she’s been more critical of President Biden than many people think is appropriate, since she worked for him.  I replied to one by saying, “Personally, I admire any reporter seriously trying to be objective and honest even against their friends, whether I agree with their opinion or not. It’s their job.”
 
Just yesterday, too, TwiXter was bombarded with Democrats red-hot outraged at Adam Schiff for calling on President Biden to leave the race.  While I certainly understand people being upset, I can make a great case for him staying in the race or leaving.  What I don’t like much is when politicians make the case publicly for dropping out, since they have direct access to the real power brokers that the rest of the public doesn’t have.  But being upset at Schiff’s decision (or supporting it) is one thing.  It’s another to see the tsunami of questions on social media about if he’s been bought off, is his campaign in trouble, is he out of money, “I heard on the street that…” (yes, someone actually said that) and how, oh my God, this is trouble for California.  I left as many  replies as I could saying that -- “Steve Garvey outraised Adam Schiff this last quarter by $1 million.  Overall, however, Schiff has outraised Garvey by almost $30 million.  He has $3 million more cash on hand than Garvey.  And a poll just showed that Rep. Schiff was leading former first-baseman Garvey by 25 points!  No, Adam Schiff is not in trouble or bought off.”  But there are only so many times you can keep posting that.
 
Just yesterday, again -- and yes, this is all just yesterday -- perhaps my favorite exchange of the day came from someone trying to drag me into an argument because she disagreed with something I wrote and, in doing so, made a claim of fact that, in fact, had no basis as “fact.”  So, how do I respond?, I wondered.  I checked her bio, laughed, and wrote back – “I see in your bio that you have disdain for the left and antipathy for the right. Fair enough, but that's not an arena I care to participate in, so someone else is going to have to jump in and debate with you.  Not me.”
 
And that’s why God also created the “Mute” button.

And none of these "yesterday" tales were were from the other side of the aisle.
 
So – we’ll see.  I’ll continue posting on TwiXter to provide links to my articles here.  And I’ll continue posting thoughts about news stories.  And I’ll let my eyes drift over other posts to see if there’s anything I strongly agree with and want to lend support – or anything (especially from a MAGOP official) that’s a blatant, egregious lie or disinformation that I want to refute.  Or…who knows?, perhaps continue replying to a range of topics (being careful not to get dragged into whack-a-mole) – as long as I follow what may possibly be a new rule:  don’t read replies.  Or at the very least, debate them.
 
There’s still too much of importance with the election to depart TwiXter,  But I never much cared for playing whack-a-mole in a game box, so I can’t see any reason to start playing it online.