Elon Musk is super evil!

 

This meme is true in part… but made untrue by what is behind its creator's motivation. While Musk didn't invent anything, he did grasp opportunities to make innovations go mainstream.

 Basically, the world's richest man took entrepreneurial risks that his bashers were too afraid to take themselves. And the irony is, if Musk was really evil or crooked, those bashers wouldn't dare to criticize him. 

I found the meme on top on Facebook, the real cesspool of our time, and with a real evil controlling company behind it that regulates what we are allowed to say online. Musk doesn't do that with his Twitter - I still refuse to call it X - and yet Musk is more evil than controlling Mark Zuckerberg?

Electrical vehicle technology and batteries existed since around the year 1900, yet no car manufacturer (except Chevrolet in the 1950s, and Toyota five decades later with its Prius) developed the technology somewhat seriously. They had all the resources to do so, but annual lucrative engine services were more important to their immoral company boards than our climate. That is, till Musk arrived at the car scene and literally forced all car manufacturers to go green, or to fall out of the race.

With cars' farts contributing so much to the destruction of our climate, Musk's efforts were a big push in the right direction. Why didn't Mercedes or Ford or VW with all their resources pushed the public to do the right thing and buy more environmentally-friendly vehicles? Why was one ex-South African necessary to upset the apple cart to get an entire industry to start going green at last? Musk drove himself to the brink of bankruptcy to accomplish what he knew was the right dream to hold onto, and he nearly failed. Starting a new car manufacturing company is one of the most difficult industries to break into. 

I find it revolting but not surprising that minimum-wage workers - being the ungrateful bunch of losers they are - refuse to give Musk any credit for what he did for our climate. But then those mentally impoverished hypocrites are quick to join a climate protest action to complain, complain, complain. Lesson is, losers bitch and moan, winners present solutions.

Musk's marketing was always brilliant, and that's what count. It doesn't help there's a brilliant piece of technology available, yet nobody knows about it. There's nothing new under the sun, any idea one comes up with now someone else had before. It's what one does with that idea that makes the world a better place, and Musk excels in just that.

Look at PayPal, that made e-commerce go mainstream. Musk deserves credit for that too, creating millions of jobs as a result, making it possible for digital creators to earn an income easier than to ask credit card details online.

The same applies to rockets, he didn't invent that either. Yet, he showed the world that private companies can put people into space several times cheaper than governments can, thus saving taxpayers' money while boosting the only thing that can save mankind: Scientific research. 

Every failed rocket cost Musk a billion dollars, and no insurance company backed him. SpaceX nearly folded in the beginning, after numerous failed rocket attempts. But Musk, being so evil, persisted. The peace and tranquility among clouds up there with imaginary gods resting their lazy asses off on it had to be disturbed, a rocket had to go burst them open. That's what evil people do, every religiot will tell you that. What if Musk damaged the dome over the flat earth and upset the Big Scary Godmonster? 

Musk is a visionary, and because of his charisma (that losers hate) and marketing skills to sell dreams, he changed the world for the better. We all know that, so why is this even a debate? Why portray him as evil, when it is very obviously not the case? 

Starlink, while polluting space, makes internet access available - and fairly affordable - to remote areas where it previously didn't exist. It quite literally saved lives, taking Ukraine for example. Imagine being in a cellar below your destroyed house, hearing Russian bombs rain down, not knowing what's going on in the dark, not knowing if your family a few inaccessible towns away are safe. But then having internet access thanks to Musk, and the ability to call for help thanks to that. How evil from Musk to make such tech available, right.

The more value one adds to society, the wealthier one becomes. Musk adds tremendous value to society, that's why he's so rich. If he was evil, the world would've been screwed. Fortunately for us, he's not.

He got involved with OpenAI at its inception, and he warned early that it poses a risk to mankind. He funded Neuralink, that will make it possible for blind people to see and paralyzed people to walk. How does that make Musk evil?

He bought Twitter out of the sole conviction to uphold a vital part of the US Constitution and our universal rights, the right to freedom of speech. Obviously it did not suit the corrupt elite, that will always try to censor society to only say things that suit that elite. They had their marketing teams hard at work to discredit Twitter as a cesspool and more. People calling out corrupt and dangerous chemical companies - for example - are allowed to say their say on Twitter, and there's some mighty elite behind those really evil companies feeling it at their wallets. Come check what agricultural chemicals did to the soil and groundwater in the Netherlands. But don't you dare say anything about that, or you will be labeled evil, and ignorant idiots will believe those corrupt pollutors.

Musk promotes cryptocurrency, Web 3.0, blockchain technology. That made him an enemy to powerful bankers, that utter scum that raped our wallets for centuries. Those bankers finance huge media conglomerates, that have to play along with bankers making Musk out as evil. When crypto goes mainstream, as is about to happen this decade, banks will lose their control over our money, their leverage to mentally enslave us will be taken away. So Musk must be evil for trying to free the peasants, right.

Very rarely do inventors become rich. Henry Ford and Thomas Edison did, but if you look at their histories, you'll find real evil people. Ford patented anything he could get his hands on, and sued everyone not playing by his rules. Edison stole inventions and pretended it to be his, something Musk never did. So what if Musk isn't an inventor, where did he ever advertise himself as one? He does excel in marketing and selling his visions to both investors and the public, and that's what count. 

Yes, Musk can be a prick sometimes, because he's human, and anyone in his position would act irritated and frustrated at times with losers. Jeff Bezos, with his already bald head, has bigger potential to become a Dr. Evil in space, and was a gigantic prick too that insisted on great customer service from his employees. But that got Amazon to do a lot of good for millions of people. 

Bill Gates, big philanthropist and biggest landowner in the US with the purpose of preserving nature, was a prick in his working days too. Yet, where would the world have been without his company? While Linux is a far better operating system kernel, it was Gates that made a weaker distro more user-friendly and more accessible to the masses. Is that why Gates is evil, or because he paid for vaccines that saved millions of lives?

The real evil people in the world are bankers and politicians and religious leaders, and they have the clout and power to portray rule-breakers like Musk (especially since he's an atheist) as evil. But those three groups of scum create nothing but scams and wars, and yet we call those that actually makes the world a better place evil, just because those three crime syndicates conditioned society to do so.