The Ethics of Staying on Twitter

When Elon Musk announced his intention to purchase Twitter, I knew then and there that staying on Twitter is counter to the values I hold. I cannot in good conscience provide revenue to any company owned by Elon Musk.

After some flitting around looking for an alternative, I found a Mastodon instance that is morally and ethically compatible for me.

That’s the journey I took to satisfy my conscience. And many have made the same choice.

When we make a moral choice, it is hard to stay open minded about people that do not make the same choice. This is what forms the foundation of societies that have codified moral choices into laws. We arrest, prosecute and punish people for those moral choices we have deemed unacceptable.

This shared sense of what makes up a moral society makes it a quick behavioural shortcut to castigate people that do not make the same decisions as us. And so, we are witness to people describing Twitter users as fascist enablers, or fascists themselves. (It is a sign of our weakening social cohesion how quickly people label fascist those behaviours they disagree with.

I do share this sense of contradiction where the Tweeps I left behind on Twitter that share my sense of morality do not share that belief that staying on Twitter is wrong. But I can’t jump to the conclusion that they are ‘facist’, ‘fascist enablers’ or fascist adjacent’ because of this one choice. That’s a leap too far to me. I see the path that leads to that argument, but like any narrowly focused argument, it ignores contrary evidence. In short, they are good people.

But I am left wondering on how they reconcile those values they hold. How they overlook the damaging and dangerous personality that owns and controls Twitter now.

That it is plausible that Elon Musk influenced the recent violence in Brazil drives this sense of contradiction into over-drive, and I can’t help myself from experiencing turmoil in my mind as I try to understand how people can stay on Twitter.

If any of my Tweeps find this post, I would love to learn your thoughts on this. How do you reconcile staying on a platform owned and managed by a unstable and dangerous demagogue? Or do you not see him as unstable and dangerous?

That’s the nub of analyzing moral choices. There are underpinning assumptions that have to be examined.

I examine, and I wonder. And I remain perplexed.