When the world's richest man announced a plan to buy Twitter, one of the most influential social media platforms in the world, the left broke down in hysteria. While the most common explanation for their breakdown was that Twitter was often used to silence conservative voices and censor any dissent to the deep state regime, it turns out that the panicking is likely due to something much more sinister. According to News Punch, Musk, who founded Tesla and SpaceX and serves as the CEO for both of those companies, has come to believe that as many as 90 percent of the 'users' on the platform are not real, but rather artificial intelligence-generated bots that are used by the globalist elite to drive their narratives and create mass psychosis. The outlet reports: Based on his assessment, Musk alleges that up to 90 percent of Twitter’s entire user base is fake. This situation has obvious implications for the valuation of the company. If most of the users are fake, advertisers will be far less interested in spending money to place ads on the platform. But the implications of the bot count don’t stop there and reveal much about the true, inner workings of Big Tech. Because Musk’s assessment reveals that Twitter’s fake accounts are not just about ad revenue. The vast majority of Twitter’s “daily users,” it appears, are automated spam bots that the Big Tech giant uses to induce mass formation psychosis and other forms of social conditioning. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is likely behind the AI bot front on Twitter. Now that we know Twitter is controlled by spam bots, its not a stretch to assume the same spam bots are also likely present on Reddit, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and TikTok. “After all, it’s no secret that the powers that be are conducting military-grade psy-ops on the public,” noted Vince Quill. “All of us have at one point or another encountered bots, sometimes it was obvious, other times not so much, but 90% of the users being bots is just beyond the pale.”

My problem with your title here is you're reinforcing the idea that it's a "slur" like name-calling.

We're talking about talking your kids into genitally mutilating themselves. Grooming them into it isn't a slur, it's an accurate description.

They're banning them because they're true.

They want to groom your children into cutting off their genitals without the hassle of people trying to stop them.

They want to groom your children into an ideology that has a 40% suicide rate because of a mentality similar to people who like killing other people.

Leftwing politics is outright based on research into women's psychology.

That's why he ends up being correct so often.

Yes, but eventually someone is behind this.

The thing with impossible's arguments is that politics is specifically catering to women, the left wing political platform is based on research on women's psychology and how to campaign based on that.

Men's existential dread is that they'll never have sex. When this goes well, it motivates them to gather resources, be likeable respected and charming, and make a move on girls.

When it goes badly men engage in reckless dangerous behavior, or rape.

Women's existential dread is that they'll be abandoned. When this goes well they reinforce prosocial communities, dress up to look good, and encourage positive emotional bonds.

When this goes bad, they neuter you (cut off your balls) so you can't leave.

The mother is getting her daughter to cut off her sex organs so she'll remain forever a child and never leave.

It's always been weird that the "defund the police" narrative-writers did such a 180 on a dime and started pushing a narrative needing cops to be bloodthirsty throw-yourself-into-gunfire types.

Hypicrosy is the name of their game, not surprising they're hypocritical, it's just this particular hypocrisy that seems weird.

You accepted this kind of thinking from feminists as mainstream discourse.

Now there's 1 person doing the opposite and suddenly you realize it's a bad idea?

"Back in 1823, white people had slaves..."

Yeah but today black people have slaves and they're organ harvesting off them. Literally today. Not some hand-waving yeare ago. Today.

(Suddenly doesn't care about slavery and handwaves onto another topic...)

Didn't veritas just get dem politician in south carolina talking about running as liberals in the republican primary?

In 2017, the country had the seventh highest suicide rate in the OECD, at 14.9 per 100,000 persons

Oh, wow, that sounds bad, wonder what the US is though?

The annual U.S. suicide rate...in 2018, 14.2 people per 100,000 died by suicide

At the same time "women" is a keyword used to push an agenda.

It's unclear how much "the women" narrative is actually what women on their own. I worked in tech and you only needed like 2 or 3 people to claim that "the programmers" all wanted to stop doing their nice routine job and throw some new nutso framework into the project that the majority often had no interest in adopting. It's the same thing with the political narrative.

Every single right enjoyed by anyone was fought for by straight white males.

This is the reality.

Everything we have, men made it happen.
Women almost never change anything, they simply show up after men get it and say they should have it to.

Self-projection, women who never had to take real risk for anything complaining about men who actually died when their desire for rights didn't go their way. And sometimes even when it did.

In some ways I wonder if it's best to just let them throw all their stuff out as they want. Like how DARE caused more kids to do more drugs.

But is a normal man more likely to be assaulted walking a city at night than a normal woman is? I'm not convinced of that. The stats are largely skewed by young men voluntarily engaging in dangerous shit that leads to them getting attacked.

Hmm, that's funny.

When a woman gets herself drunk every weekend and one weekend she gets raped, we're supposed to think it's not her fault and there was nothing she could do.

But when a needs money for food and rent, and feels his only worthwhile option is joining a gang, suddenly it's "voluntarily engaging".

Men in the ghetto join gangs because of the same social dynamics that cause men in better areas of town to be almost all of the police, army, and pizza drivers (an occupation more hazardous than being a cop) - women and society push any dangerous or risky work onto men.

The majority of that violence was gang-related.

Source needed, because this sounds a lot like feminist fantasy.

I know that men are the ones pushed into more dangerous jobs, if we were just talking deaths rather than specifically murders. Which genders is most represented in these fields?
https://www.invictuslawpc.com/most-dangerous-jobs-osha/

And yet, it is still one of the most popular sites on the internet, especially amongst the demographic I “belong to” (white, male, under 30)…

Bizarrely, reddit competes with mainstream media for being the place that most openly hates that demographic as well. It's a very self-hating place.

You're far more likely to be murdered as a man.

No, seriously, on every you're safer as a woman.

The reason the narrative is pushed is only because people care about "woman in danger" whereas they don't care nearly much about "man murdered".

why aren't there anti-wokes with left-wing politics

There are, they just don't have any voice, I looked through the reveddit version of reddit pages on propaganda subreddits like news a year or two ago and you could see all the reasonable stuff being deleted.

It's made sure that these people aren't allowed to speak.

These are always self-projection.

They are always describing themselves.

Sigh, yeah, true. I think they're both true at the same time. What I'm saying provides their motivation, what you're saying in blackmailing people provides personal results.

Women's biological existential dread - is that everyone will leave them.

She tries to stop her husband from leaving her by insane "sexual harassment" rules at work that mean he can't meet a woman there, even if it means basically turning women into landmines that no man wants to interact with.

She also tries to stop her husband from leaving her for a younger woman by tricking younger women into self-sabotaging themselves - the constant telling women that men flirting with them is "harrassment" is just part of this cycle. Younger girls haven't sorted out which guys they want flirting with them and which they don't, older women sabotage them into believing all flirting is bad.

If younger women are all gay her husband can't leave her for them. The next source of abandonment is her kids, having kids of their own - well if she turns her own kids gay they can't have kids. Problem solves.

Trans is the next step, obviously, where her competitors for attention irreversible cut off their own genitals. No romantic competition can be had now, eh? Her husband definitely isn't going to leave her for a "girl" who's really a boy. And her kids aren't going to abandon her for a romantic interest - no genitals, no romantic interest possible.

I don't think homelessness is a problem you can ever solve, because it's not as simplistic as just some poor guy down on his luck like the left wants to portray it.

I talked to someone who worked for orgs that dealt with the homeless and they thought those were like 10% of the homeless population - people who through a few bad decisions and bad luck ended up homeless, that could get back on their feet with help.

The other 90% - not so much.

Honestly, there's clearly 2 groups of people on the left. There are hopeful optimists who really mean well but end up supporting bad policies because they can't actually see the results.

Then I think there's truly evil people who delight in the idea of creating a whole group of broken, destroyed people they can feel superior to. This mentality is what drives their push to make people homeless, the trans thing - visibly manipulated and broken people they know they're better than - and back when liberals were the pro-slavery party the desire to keep black people being slaves so they'd always have someone "below" them in the hierarchy.

It is the same thing

Gamergate was about fighting abusive, lying, narcissistic women. Amber Heard is the same thing.

I remember the anti-gamergater on my feed (a guy pathetically) going on about how it eas nobodies business who that girl waa cheating with. Like, outright insanity.

It's not ancedotal, it reflects current political priorities.