Thread by @mattyglesias

It has come to my attention that some folks feel:

(1) That this is a question &
(2) That I should “answer Elon’s question”

My reply:

(1) That’s not a question!
(2) Every time Twitter is asked by a government to censor something they have a choice about whether to comply

It is certainly possible that if Twitter took an anti-censorship stance in response to government requests to do censorship that the censoring government would retaliate by banning Twitter or in some other way. It’s also possible that the censoring government would back down.

Elon Musk is a much more accomplished businessman than I am, and he surely knows better than I do that “invariably back down when faced with threats” is a questionable negotiating strategy.

But beyond that, the whole issue here is I poked fun at his claim to be an “absolutist.”

If Elon wants to say “it turns out that standing up against censorship comes with downsides and trade offs and I don’t think it’s categorically worth doing” that seems like a plausible business claim.

But then you’re not an absolutist.

Lots of people are not “free speech absolutists.” You might instead be a “profit-seeking businessman” or a “pragmatist who looks to a balance of considerations.”

But if you proclaim yourself to be an absolutist and then do a lot of censorship, people will poke fun at you.

That is my complete answer: I have no answer whatsoever to the question “how should @elonmusk run Twitter.”

It’s his company and he can do whatever he wants with it.

But I will continue to make fun of the absolutist thing as long as he deserves it, as is my right.