“Jewish communities”
Does he mean all, some, or just two? I suppose that’s up to you. And that’s the problem.
Musk, regardless of intent, (and I don’t believe he’s remotely antisemitic) dangerously used ambiguous language with high potential to enable harmful antisemitic ideologies while maintaining plausible deniability. (For more info, Google it.)
His chronic reckless permissiveness in managing X is scary to me. In my opinion, he’s not suitable to lead Twitter, which is an established private-sector phenomenon built by far more qualified entrepreneurs who approach the product with a deep and abiding respect for the awesome power and energy of human language, with all its joys, triumphs, and very real dangers.
The right to free speech is sacrosanct, but also complex. To be an absolutist is to be a fool. Musk is no fool — he’s a genius in most areas, but in mitigating the subtleties of harmful rhetoric he strikes me as deeply mediocre, and way out of his depth, and what’s annoying is he’s likely smart enough to know all this. (Although his advocates for his X leadership are likely not.)
It galls me that he keeps going, I’ve lost some respect for his character, prior to this he was a hero to me. (Again, I respect his values and ethics overall and don’t think he’s antisemitic.) Perhaps he will regain the respect back over time. I’ve long learned never to bet against Elon Musk and in the balance he’s good for humanity.
But language, above all else, is my humble area of expertise, and because I see the use of language as the driving force determining the fate of the world, Musk’s bumbling insistence on overpowering a realm he shows little aptitude for feels like a betrayal that hits home.
I just can’t get past it. In recent years, it feels to me like Trump and many others have begun perfecting the art of weaponizing rhetoric while adeptly maintaining plausible deniability.
The adept intentionality is what makes the behavior vile. Unlike Trump, Musk is NOT intentionally weaponizing his rhetoric, and that’s an important distinction.
Nonetheless, the deployment of rhetorical ambiguity when discussing highly-charged issues is itself is also a danger, especially when it comes from influential public figures, and Musk seems clueless to that to the point of negligence.
In addressing the greater problem, the best way to reduce weaponization and deception, or just plain incompetence, as exemplified in Musk’s amplification of the antisemitic post, is to encourage clear language that lacks ambiguity. Make tools that make this easy to do.
I daresay that ambiguous language, that which is open to interpretation, simplification, generalization, and catastrophic misconstruing — is the last refuge of evil, and we’d do well to stamp it out with any legal means available. We have the technological means and it’s high time we make it more available. Not legally mandatory, of course, but available. The market will decide if it’s mandatory.