Starting a few days after the recent Election Nakba, my righteous friends began announcing their departure from X (Twitter) to Bluesky, a Democrat-only safe space with similar technical features. X is now too toxic, but the toxicity wasn’t a problem so long as Democrats were securely in power.
A similar situation seems to have been going on among the Palestinians. “Gaza’s top Islamic scholar issues fatwa criticising 7 October attack” (BBC, November 8, 2024):
The most prominent Islamic scholar in Gaza has issued a rare, powerful fatwa condemning Hamas’s 7 October 2023 attack on Israel, which triggered the devastating war in the Palestinian territory.
Professor Dr Salman al-Dayah, a former dean of the Faculty of Sharia and Law at the Hamas-affiliated Islamic University of Gaza, is one of the region’s most respected religious authorities, so his legal opinion carries significant weight among Gaza’s two million population, which is predominantly Sunni Muslim.
Dr Dayah’s fatwa, which was published in a detailed six-page document, criticises Hamas for what he calls “violating Islamic principles governing jihad”.
His fatwa highlights that, according to Islamic law, a military raid should not trigger a response that exceeds the intended benefits of the action.
The October 7, 2023 attacks could have been a fine example of jihad, in other words, but only if military victory had been achieved. Only after 13 months of fighting could an Islamic determination of whether the attack was justified be made because a key element of justified/not-justified is the extent to which the jihadis are victorious.
From an MIT professor, November 16, 2024, on Facebook:
Searching for “leaving bluesky toxic” on X, I found the following screenshot, purportedly from Bluesky:
(The account seems to have been deleted. As noted in Why do the non-Deplorables deplore the Trump shooting? I think that “Lillian” exhibits a logical thought process, unlike the Democrats who said that Trump was a “threat to democracy” and then expressed “get well soon” sentiments after he was shot. If the above is authentic, the only way to maintain an account on Bluesky is to buy into this illogical thought pattern (Trump’s continued existence is a dire threat and also Trump’s life must be preserved for as long as possible).)
My search uncovered some additional elevated intellectual discourse among the elites on Bluesky:
I can’t figure out why X is intolerable to the righteous. As far as I can tell, X’s algorithms create virtual echo chambers for liberals and conservatives. The X servers learn that conservative responses to liberal posts, e.g., from the New York Times or a Democrat politician, are unlikely to be welcomed by the people who enjoy the original post and, therefore, a conservative response gets just a handful of views. A response by the same user to a conservative post, however, might get thousands of views. Each X user, therefore, was already in an algorithmic bubble.
Separately, because people do sometimes disagree with what I post on Facebook and X, I have decided to leave both platforms. I have created a social media site that will be restricted to users who share my point of view. It’s called DoucheSky (TM).
https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/25/media/elon-musk-msnbc-spinoff-cable/index.html
“His fatwa highlights that, according to Islamic law, a military raid should not trigger a response that exceeds the intended benefits of the action.”
I loved it! “intended benefits of the action.” I’m sure the Nazis felt the same way in 1945.
Anon: that’s a great point. The German invasion of Poland was planned with the idea that the British and French would ignore it, as they’d ignored all previous violations of the Treaty of Versailles. By 1945 it was possible to see that the invasion was a mistake.
I understand why Democrats and liberals might feel fearful or anxious about Trump’s return to the White House—their news source is from “Civil War.” [1]
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TN0pDnUtSDY