Thread by @PnictogenHorses

"always two there are. a master and an apprentice."

that sounds like a goofy line from a #StarWars movie. and it is! it's from "The Phantom Menace", which is probably the most entertaining of the Star Wars prequel films, and it refers to Darth Maul, the fallen Sith Lord.

(1/x)

there's one Sith Lord dead, which means he must have a companion—but was Maul the superior member of the team, or was he the sidekick?

this simple form of organization—a pair of persons, one subordinate to the other—is characteristic of relationships devoid of *trust*.

(2/x)

I understand that relationships cemented by mutual *hatreds* are a feature of "Homestuck", whose author correctly intuited that such relations were a sort of logical dual to relationships based upon mutual love and support.

the world is *full* of "toxic relationships".

(3/x)

"toxic", in the sense that each of the two partners is *hurting* the other in some way—causing them pain and then exploiting the results. I'm not here to cast moral aspersions on such relationships, only to point out that they're commonplace in modern human society.

(4/x)

the *leader* in such an unequal relationship is likely to regard an evenly matched partner as a *rival*, someone aiming to climb upwards over the corpse of their boss, so partnerships of this nature tend to be "metastable": they persist for a while but will tend to decay.

(5/x)

larger partnerships are even less likely: a trio of three self-interested cutthroats is likely to become a duo quickly, if two members decide they can gang up on the third. so pairs are the most likely grouping of "Dark Side" paladins, e.g. @sullydish and @charlesmurray.

(6/x)

this has always been an enormous problem for the #conservative coalition, which consists mostly of a lot of disparate fringe groups and individuals who all *despise* each other quietly but who regard each other as temporarily useful in a coalition. it's a chancy situation.

(7/x)

this is one reason that #conservatives have tried to converge around single banners and single leaders, no matter how ridiculous they are—Donald Trump, @RonDeSantisFL, and @elonmusk have benefited from being seen as uniters. adherence to a single Führer brings *stability*.

(8/x)

@RonaldReagan was a *perfect* stooge for cementing together the similar 1980s reactionary @GOP counterrevolution: even if he wasn't literally gone in the head (yet), he was basically a *mouthpiece*, someone whose ideas were already controlled. and he was used to acting.

(9/x)

but Donald Trump and @elonmusk have both shown us a big problem with Great Man™-style leadership: if it should happen that the Great Man™ is actually a bumbling dunderhead who can't be reliably controlled or programmed, the fragile right-wing coalition is destabilized.

(10/x)

there's already a fault line forming because of the enmity between Donald Trump, the old @GOP saviour, and @RonDeSantisFL who is preaching a new #conservative gospel (at least in those areas controlled by the the @FloridaGOP.) this partly explains @elonmusk's popularity.

(11/x)

he's been a *single* figure, with a unique personal brand—and he's been able to pose not merely as a genius politician or businessman, but as a genius of *everything*.

@elonmusk has been THE miracle-worker for @mtaibbi and a whole bunch of other racɪsts and crooks.

(12/x)

...and now we get to find out what happens to the @GOP / #conservative coalition when @elonmusk starts trying to *fuse silicon*.

it's the last stage of ordinary life for a massive star.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon-b…

and it doesn't last very long.

~Mona

about a day, in fact.

~Mona Drafter of Pnictogen