Sep 10Liked by Claire Berlinski

I find the the antisemitic posts you referenced repulsive and ignorant. I am a casual twitter, now X, user and have never come across anything like that. Today I spent about thirty minutes scrolling down and found plenty of political posts, dog and cat posts, but nothing like the ones you referenced. I wonder if algorithm limits the people seeing those type posts to those that have demonstrated an interest one way or the other? I would reluctantly err on the side of freedom of expression no matter how repulsive and ignorant they may be.

I find the apparent rise of antisemitism baffling. I grew up in a religiously mixed post war neighborhood at a time when children were left to their own devices to play. We played the childhood games together, tag, hide and seek, explored the woods, and road our bikes, the girls played hopscotch, sometimes the boys would join in. Protestants, Jews, and Catholics we were aware of our religions, but they were irrelevant to us. I guess we were blessed to live in a time and place that our parents did not teach us to hate.

Expand full comment
Sep 6Liked by Claire Berlinski

TO the anti-censorship confuseniks who seem so keen to bring our learned host's uterus into this discussion as they bark rudely up the ADL tree (hint: almost nothing in Claire's article depends on whether you approve of the ADL's policy direction or not, it's about Yaccarino's knowing facilitation of Musk's knowing promotion of antisemites and their wares, with #BanTheADL as the incidental springboard):

A nice thing - maybe the best - about an open society is that you can *choose how you associate, and who you associate with*. I can join a group with a code of conduct. You can join a group with a different code of conduct. Or one with an anti-code of conduct, that explicititly disavows restrictions of conduct. Within the broader law (which is important), we're all good. I don't have to join your stinking group, and you don't have to join mine.

Some here applaud Musk for radically diluting Twitter's already flimsy content moderation. (Seems to me this isn't actually less "censorship", it's now "censorship" at the Whim of the Thin-Skinned Man-Child, but it's probably fair to say that it's less obviously ideologically-aligned in nature, which could be what makes it attractive.) Yet to be honest, it seems this Isn't Going Too Well for X/Twitter. Users and advertisers are voting with their eyeballs and $$.

Suppose this keeps happening; suppose (as it seems), they are heading over to platforms that have mainstream, anti-hate content policies. What do you conclude then?

Are they just *wrong*? The censors are always the bad guys, right? So if people flock to "censored" platforms are they deluded? Suffering from false consciousness, inspired by the evil manipulation of the ADL (maybe)?

Should right-thinking folk bully or buy up those platforms to remove their "censorship"? Should we drum up investment from freedom-loving Saudi princes to help put things right? Maybe we should have stop-and-search a bit like they do in Russia, where the police can interrogate you as to why you don't have the Telegram app on your phone? I mean, how serious *are* you about forcing people to expose themselves to this stuff? ("Today, children, we are learning to tolerate hate speech for the good of Democracy. We'll start with the Protocols, page 1...")

State censorship is just that. A private platform's clearly stated content policy is a Totally DIfferent Thing, whatever its global agoral ambitions. Claire was absolutely clear on this in her article. Democracy is not undermined if there's a big club that doesn't permit the Paedophile Information Exchange to use it to advocate a return to classical view of friendships with young boys. Democracy would only be undermined if you couldn't start your own club with different rules.

So if you don't like one platform's policy, you join a different one (there are plenty, really!). If you don't like the policy of the biggest platform in your manor, you don't get to pick the plurality - them's the democratic breaks. And NONE OF THIS IS ABOUT CENSORS. Musk is free to trash the platform he bought, Linda is free to work for him or not, and we are free to draw our own conclusions from her enabling of tedious would-be blackshirts. And yes, it seems you are free to pay for the right to post confused responses in this thread. The wonders!!

I like open societies, and I like to think the citizens of same will mostly show their distaste for Musk's hateful antics by finding alternatives to X. He can chose how he responds. If the platform fails, or he chooses chase out the hateful idiots after all, neither democracy nor freedom of speech will suffer. Each of us gets to choose whether hate-speech is a price we want to pay or not.

(Before you get started, I don't personally have a uterus.)

Expand full comment


I took some time to research the ADL.

Once again your passion overwhelmed your judgment.

Just like with your anti Trump articles, you present an emotional, strident case with little regard for facts.

The other day, you made a heart rendering plea for more subscribers because your numbers fell.

Suggest that you lost subscribers the old fashioned way - you drove subscribers away with near deranged screeds.

I subscribe for facts with reasoned opinion.

Near hysterical rantings are unpleasant to read.

And your calls for censorship are just plain wrong.

Expand full comment

Here’s Christopher Rufo on being smeared by the ADL,

“The ADL, like the SPLC, uses the frame of identity and public goodwill to defame opponents of left-wing ideologies as a whole. The organization falsely marked me an "extremist" for the very obvious and factually accurate claims that queer theorists seek to disrupt "heteronormativity" and that DEI bureaucrats seek to replace words such as "man," "woman," "mom," and "dad" with vague, genderless terms such as "parent," "caregiver," "partner," and "adult."

This has nothing to do with fighting anti-semitism. The people who publish these baseless hit pieces are left-wing bullies, plain and simple. Their opinions on such matters should be assessed in the same category as Media Matters and other partisan oppo organizations.

And here is the tweet from ADL in which they smeared Rufo.

“Christopher F. Rufo is an anti LGBTQ+ extremist working for the Manhattan Institute. Previously known for fear mongering around critical race theory, Rufo has now turned his focus to the alleged “dangers” of “gender ideology”- a baseless, decades old conspiracy theory alleging that the progressive movement seeks to destroy traditional families and conservative values by expanding the rights of women and LGBTQ+ people. Rufo’s endeavors include a “Parents Guide to Radical Gender Theory” in which he promotes demonstrably false conspiracy theories including that progressives want to eliminate the words “man,” “woman,” “mom,” and “dad” and that “radical gender theory” wants to replace parents with a state backed sexual ideology.”

Claire would love to see the ADL and other similar organizations play a role in mediating what opinions are permitted to appear on social media platforms. That’s nuts. Siding with the censors always is. The censors are always the bad guys. It’s strange that a journalist like Claire doesn’t understand that.

In its current incarnation, the ADL is a far bigger threat to freedom of expression than Elon Musk’s Twitter could ever be.

Highlighting the rantings of crazed bigots because she’s pissed that Musk interfered with her personal business model is disingenuous at best.

Expand full comment

Claire is being hysterical. Antisemitic speech is repulsive but it should not be banned. No speech should be banned; not by law but also not by a platform that aspires to be part of the global public square. Putting up with hate speech is a price well-worth paying for a very light touch when it comes to censorship on social media platforms.

Like another formerly revered institution, the Southern Policy Law Center, (and like the ACLU) the Anti Defamation League has been captured by woke progressives who have eviscerated it founding mission. They have turned the organization (which I was once a member of) into a caricature of its former self. ADL now aspires to be part of the new government-censorship complex which mediates what the public can read and talk about. ADL’s aspirations in this area go well beyond policing antisemitism. Like Claire, herself, the ADL is in favor of suppressing any speech that it finds extremely politically objectionable. The ADL’s behavior is deplorable, far more than the behavior of the millions of “deplorables” that Hillary Clinton mocked and far more than the religion-clingers and gun-slingers that Obama expressed pity for.

Claire would probably like to see Tucker Carlson deplatformed because she finds his views heinous. The fact that tens of millions of Americans find his views compelling holds no water with her at all. In her view, the unwashed hordes need minders who can spoon feed the morons what they need to know and what they are forbidden from hearing and knowing.

Claire preferred the old days at Twitter, in part because as she has admitted, it facilitated promotion of her Substack account. That’s reason enough for her but it’s not her only reason. Like her fellow knowledge class lackeys, she is offended that those who hold diametrically opposed positions to hers get to speak at all.

Remarkably, Claire was aghast when Elon Musk revealed that under the former Twitter regime, American law enforcement and intelligence agencies routinely intimidated social media platforms into censoring content that those agencies found objectionable, even if the material being censored was true. By the way, that censored material had little to nothing to do with hate speech. It had a lot to do with COVID and with the misdeeds of Hunter Biden.

Claire’s concern about antisemitism is a fig leaf. It’s free speech that she doesn’t like, at least if that speech falls far outside of the parameters of what she considers reasonable. It’s obvious that Claire simply approves of censorship. In this case, it’s not Elon Musk who needs to be excoriated, it’s her.

Elon Musk may not be a hero but he’s done something valuable and important. , The social media site he now owns is far better than its previous incarnation. Maybe there’s more hate speech but more importantly there’s far more tolerance for all forms of political speech. Accusations that he is antisemitic reveals far more about the those hurling the accusations than it says about him.

One more thing comes to mind; somewhere or other I saw a comment that the new logo for the old Twitter, an X, was reminiscent of a swastika. It takes a remarkably fecund imagination to come up with that idiocy. Maybe we should just ban the letter “X” from the English language. We can’t put up with being reminded of Nazis every time we hear the words “Extra-Extra read all about it.”

Expand full comment
Sep 5Liked by Claire Berlinski

Elon Musk revealed his... nature a long time ago; years and decades for those people who saw and recognized the signs. His recent skein of chevron-bearing triumphalism is only more naked.

The media should cease doing Musk's heavy-lifting in his rebranding effort. Musk prefers to change the site's name to "X"...? Than [the media should] let him have at it and leave off the "formerly known as Twitter." They only provide him free publicity and, in the process, aid and abet his effort. And what does he offer in return? Oh yeah, he fails to pay his bills.

It is interesting but no surprise that Elon Musk, Mr Free Speech himself, chooses to ban the ADL and moots suing the organization for defamation for ... um, collecting the facts and then bringing those facts public. X: Home of Free Speech. The irony would be rich were it not so sad and shameful.

Expand full comment
Sep 5Liked by Claire Berlinski

Thank you Claire. This is exactly the kind of free journalism we need!

Expand full comment
Sep 4Liked by Claire Berlinski

I wonder if anyone will be bold enough to call Musk a "hero" in the comments to this article.

Or would it be a bit too revealing this time.

Expand full comment
Sep 4Liked by Claire Berlinski

If the Jews really did control the government, Elon Musk’s made a pretty damn penny off them. Every project he’s run has been subsidized to the hilt, except Failing X. Sad! You’d think he’d show a little more gratitude. But of course he doesn’t believe this mess. He’s a pandering populist like Fake Vivek Ramaswamy. He’s trying bail out his bad investment using the same tool he always has, stirring up bro crap-posters into a frenzy with social media. But that isn’t going to work now. He’s not promoting a racket like Dogecoin or GameStop. His incel edgelord fanbois don’t have the capital to save a massively bloated tech whale that was already foundering before it was rebranded as StormFront 2.0.

As for Nazis in Florida wearing red, that works just as well for the Blut und Boden crowd. Besides, it’s too hot to wear black in Altamonte Springs, and sweat-stained khaki will just make them look like a bunch of laid off groundskeepers and fishing boat deck hands down there.

Expand full comment

There's something even sinister and anti-semitic about the X logo to me. I mean X is like a swastika isn't it? Silver with the black background, symmetrical no matter what way you look at it, it is a pro-death emblem of nihilism, like a digital dog whistle, signaling to anyone virtually who desires to be Free to hate people-- Join the club! X marks the spot. X for extermination. I wouldn't be surprised at this rate if, in glib rejection of woke Twitter, he renamed it X-terminator. I think he should be investigated for ties to the CCP. He has publicly excused Xi's claims on Taiwan. He also signed a pledge to uphold "Core Socialist Values." He bended to Erdogan's demands to shut Twitter down in Turkey. And he thinks Ukraine should surrender to Russia. He is basically every autocrat's useful idiot. He's like a Tucker Carlson but not just for the Kremlin, but in all around fashion. Do you in any way undermine human rights and reject democracy? Are you an enemy of America? Then Twitter or X has your back! At every turn he undermines American foreign policy interests. In an earlier post of yours about AI you said corporations are becoming bigger than states and pretending to act like them. I think that's exactly the danger Elon Musk poses. I think Musk's ultimate goal is to become big enough to subsume self-government in America with his wealth, influence and technology. And he wants to use countries like China to help him establish a corporatist state. China would be fine with it. So would Russia. Putin and Xi only want to divide the world into spheres of influence. Musk wants to amass corporate power to build a perverse utopia that aligns with his psychopathic distorted, perverse vision of accelerationist Steve Bannon, Curtis Yarvin, Blade Runner technofuedal unfreedom. Just like to the radical postmodern left everything that is socialist in practice is considered liberal in principle, Elon Musk is the polar reverse of this, where everything that is fascist in practice is liberal in principle. If she's a real cold warrior, and she really wants to remove every trace of the CCP from the homeland, I would advise Nikki haley as soon as she's inaugurated to investigate Elon Musk for ties to the CCP. Or he should testify before Congress. America has a right to know what the limits of his business in China are, and what his ambitions for using the state to govern AI are, and how both his ambitions for technological supremacy and his obscene defenses of China and Russia intertwine.

Expand full comment
Sep 4Liked by Claire Berlinski

Claire -- given the absolutely horrific material you documented (and what an ugly task -- you might consider a walk-through autoclave rather than merely a thorough shower?) I was convinced that your search for other reports must have overlooked SOME publications with national reach.

Alas. The /only/ recent article I managed to find is in Rolling Stone, from 1st September:


David French, writing in the New York Times yesterday, produced a column concerning the necessity to ban children's access to pornography -- material most often reached through smartphones.

But who is to save the rest of us, regardless of age, from this growing, vile contagion propagated by Elon Musk? Perhaps Mr. French may be interested in expanding his recommendations from twenty-four hours ago, or to consider adding a footnote which recognizes that pornography has senses beyond those he treated. We'll see.

Well done. Many thanks.

Expand full comment
Sep 4Liked by Claire Berlinski

Articles about this just popped up in Forbes and the New York Post. It looks like the Daily Beast wrote something about it a couple days ago.

Expand full comment
Sep 4Liked by Claire Berlinski

Thank you for for putting forward the effort to compile this post, Claire. I know it must have been a deeply unpleasant and demoralizing task. Sharing everywhere I can.

Expand full comment

Claire, I cannot imagine the effort of will you mustered to put this together. It's beyond disturbing; it makes me sick to my stomach. It's also a very necessary expose that deserves and I hope will receive widespread attention. The upsurge of antisemitism in America, the willingness of some people to traffic in the kind of filth that once was found in "Der Stürmer," says something very alarming about the state of this country's political culture.

Expand full comment
Sep 4·edited Sep 4Liked by Claire Berlinski

A thorough compilation of the disgusting crap Elon Musk seems to like and loves to broadcast across the globe. Now I feel the need to take a shower.

Expand full comment