via dossier.today:
Elon Musk’s “Twitter 2.0” is off to a rocky start.
On the bright side, one largely does not have to worry about being thrown off the platform for criticizing the Rainbow Jihad, Big Pharma, and a variety of institutional cancers to our way of life. The golden cage for anti establishment commentary is becoming a little more malleable, at least for now.
Moreover, Twitter was in desperate need of an ideas guy to bring some new innovation (and resulting revenue) to a brand that has remained stuck in neutral for quite some time.
Under its new leadership, Twitter began with lots of promise. Mr. Musk repeatedly stressed that he was committed to free speech and open conversation, though his actions are causing concern among critics who see its trajectory moving in an opposite direction.
While Elon is indeed the world’s wealthiest man, he isn’t exactly in a position to have “f–k you money” veto power over the global forces for censorship and oppression. If he gets too much on the wrong side of either of the world’s two major superpowers, Musk could find himself in a position where his entire fortune is under assault.
The WEF Wants Equitable ‘Democratization’ of Stock Markets
“Talent and intellect are equally distributed, opportunity is not…”
This is the claim made by the World Economic Forum in a recent video describing their intention to create a more “democratized” stock market.
Obviously, the truth is the opposite; talent and intellect are not equally distributed, but every person is given the opportunity to take a shot and attempt to succeed. Any democratized economic policy would seek to change all of that.
The WEF program seems to run parallel to the ESG related woke ideology that has been spreading like a cancer into major corporations and western governments. While promoting fairness in investing, the WEF addresses theory while ignoring practice. How would such fairness be achieved? What is the WEF definition of fairness?