Of Oligarchs and Edge Lords
Ah, Elon Musk, the heralded messiah of modernity, the architect of audacious aspirations, the libertarian champion of “absolute free speech”—or so he would have us believe. With the rhetorical aplomb of a snake-oil salesman hawking immortality tonics at a turn-of-the-century carnival, Musk has positioned himself as the torchbearer of unbridled expression. Yet, beneath the gilded veneer of his promises lies the unmistakable stench of hypocrisy, a pungent bouquet befitting an oligarch masquerading as a revolutionary.
Musk’s acquisition of Xhitter, that wretched hive of scum and vitriol, was trumpeted as a clarion call for freedom. “Let speech be free,” he bellowed, as though casting off the chains of tyranny. Yet, in true oligarchic fashion, his version of freedom is a gilded cage, where the bars are algorithms, and the lock is the capricious whims of its newfound overlord. Musk’s Xhitter, one quickly learns, is less a bastion of liberty and more a fiefdom where dissenting voices may roam—provided they do not step on the toes of His Excellency’s personal sensitivities or business interests.
Consider, for a moment, the peculiar duality of Musk’s “free speech absolutism.” The man who decries censorship with the fervor of a street preacher railing against sin also wields the ban hammer with the grace of a medieval inquisitor. Accounts criticizing Tesla’s labor practices? Mysteriously throttled. Journalists exposing SpaceX’s environmental impact? Shadowbanned into oblivion. And let us not forget the great “Substack Fiasco,” wherein Musk, protector of expression, moved swiftly to suppress links to competing platforms.
Ah, but we mustn’t judge him too harshly! After all, it takes a certain genius to simultaneously condemn the Orwellian tendencies of Big Tech while building his own algorithmic Ministry of Truth. Musk’s proclamations of “absolute free speech” are not unlike the promises of a benevolent dictator: enticing in theory, but inevitably corrupted by the intoxicating nectar of power.
One must admire the audacity of Musk’s theatrics. Here is a man who casts himself as the modern Voltaire, bravely defending the right to speak—so long as the speaking does not inconvenience his shareholders. He decries censorship while silencing critics, mocks government oversight while pocketing government subsidies, and tweets about democratic ideals while consolidating control over the public square. It is a masterclass in the art of oligarchic hypocrisy, an ode to the eternal truth that those who shout the loudest about freedom are often its staunchest oppressors.
But Musk is not alone in this theater of contradictions. Enter Jeff Bezos, the patron saint of one-day shipping and the self-styled steward of journalistic integrity. Bezos, in his magnanimity, acquired The Washington Post, that venerable bastion of democracy, ostensibly to safeguard the fourth estate. Yet, as with Musk, one cannot ignore the shadow of corporate interest lurking behind the curtain of his public-spirited rhetoric. Under Bezos’s ownership, The Washington Post has undoubtedly NOT retained its journalistic prowess. How often do its investigative lenses linger on Amazon’s labor abuses, its anti-union crusades, or its environmental footprint? Rarely, if ever, does the Post’s editorial board bite the hand that feeds it, revealing once again how oligarchs cloak their self-interest in the guise of public service.
The parallels between Musk and Bezos are striking. Both men wield their platforms—one digital, the other journalistic—not as neutral arenas for free expression but as instruments of influence and control. Bezos’s stewardship of The Washington Post ensures that the narrative surrounding Amazon is carefully curated, while Musk’s Xhitter operates as a personal propaganda machine. In their hands, the ideals of free speech and press freedom are reduced to mere marketing slogans, deployed strategically to shield their empires from scrutiny.
Musk’s acolytes, of course, will rush to his defense, proclaiming that his actions are but necessary evils in the grand pursuit of innovation. Bezos’s defenders will echo similar sentiments, extolling his contributions to journalism while ignoring the inherent conflict of interest. To them, I say this: if free speech and a free press are to be the hills on which we plant our flags, let them not be in the shadow of men who trade in influence as readily as others trade in commodities. For Musk and Bezos alike, these principles are not sacrosanct but expendable, tools to be wielded in the pursuit of power.
In truth, the reigns of Musk over Xhitter and Bezos over The Washington Post are not revolutions but mirrors held up to society’s gullibility. We, the hapless masses, have once again mistaken wealth for wisdom, charisma for competence, and audacity for authenticity. We have ceded the public square and the press to oligarchs who preach freedom while tightening their grip on the levers of control.
So let us call Musk’s “absolute free speech” and Bezos’s “commitment to journalism” what they truly are: farces, charades, carnival acts designed to distract us while the power structures remain firmly intact. And when the dust settles, when the Xhits fade into the digital ether and the headlines grow stale, we will be left with the sobering realization that we placed our faith in men who value their empires above all else.
In these two titans, we see the quintessential modern oligarchs: men who speak of freedom while building gilded prisons, who promise the stars while selling us shadows. And we, ever the willing fools, lap it up as though it were ambrosia. Cheers to the charade, for it is as enduring as humanity’s penchant for self-delusion.
-Yuval-
© 2025 Yuval. Unauthorized use or duplication of this material without express and written permission from the author is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Yuval with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.