> I've seen no evidence Elon is willing to burn Twitter to the ground to make a political point. to the contrary

Not burn to the ground, simply build something with a lower monetary value today, if he thinks it can lower tribalism. Consider something like linux. It's precicely the fact that it's not monetised that ensures the near monopoly in the server OS space.

> Any site that has attempted unmoderated free speech descends into a cesspit of Nazis and racists where everyone else leaves.

My take is that anything that is within the law should be allowed to be posted, but extremist propaganda (especialy when fueled by hate), whether it's from the left or right, should be supressed hard unless the reader explicitly disables such suppression.

Btw, one sign that someone is close to one of the extremes is that the person stops recognizing that there IS indeed dangerous extremism on both sides.

> "Blackness" is an invented concept for various people who were robbed of their heritage, culture and language through chattel slavery.

I'm not American. I live in a place with a different history and context. Generally, though, it seems that most "normal" people seem to assign identity to themselves and other based on how they appear, and that this happens at an early age.

Precisely how this forms categories tends to vary with time and space, like for almost all other categories. Even basic things as the number of the colors in the rainbow varies between cultures. For instance, in Islam, the rainbow only has four colors. The truth is that colors form a one-dimensional spectrum, while ethnicity forms a multi-dimensional spectrum.

> "Whiteness" as a concept is defined by two properties: 1) The proximity to power and 2) Not being black.

For me, this is not a useful way. When I meet people from around the world, I associate them by origin to some extent, but at a much granular level, even within countries. Hamburg is different from Munich, Manchester different from Brighton, Chongqing is different from Shangahai, And Dehli is different from Bengaluru. Africa is similar. Egypt has a distinct identity, especially in the big cities up north. Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Libya each have theirs. Together these countries have a lot in common, and also a lot in common with Southern Europe. Nigeria or Mozambique are both quite different from North Africa, but also very different from each other, and so on.

When you meet people from most of these places, they will have a word to label "people of European descent". For instance, in Thailand, the term is "Farrang". When these people speak English, they may use terms such as White, Black or Asian, but in their minds (as in mine) they will keep the same meanings as they assign at home.

Someone of the Chinese elite in Singapore definitely don't think of themselves as "White", nor are they "Black". If their status is high enough, they may not even allow their daughters to marry someone of European descent.

> You are correct in that part of this is "punching up" vs "punching down" but you should also know that this idea of equivalent concepts is used by white supremacists.

It absolutely is. This way of thinking is precisely what leads to much of the most extreme racial hatred. Hitler saw the Jews as oppressors. The Hutus saw the Tutsies as oppressors, just to name a couple.

You mention the Paradox of Tolerance. I definitely do not think we should tolerate racial/ethnic hatred, whether it comes from someone with ancestors from Europe, Africa, the Middle East, India or China. "Punching up" should not be a valid excuse. The only way we can coexist in a multi ethnic and multi cultural society is by demanding tolerance of everyone, and be intolerant of those who do not.

I believe that we actually do not have a choice about this, if the culture we live in is to survive. If we tolerate racial prejudice, I belive there will eventually be some kind of physical conflict likely to end up with a really bad outcome, either genocide or ethnic cleansing/balkanization.

In fact, I think it may be impossible to sustain a multi ethnic/multi cultural society forever. A culture of tolerance may keep tribal conflicts at bay, but unless we can merge into One People (through cross-marriage), there will be a day in the future where some even or charismatic person will cause a massive conflict.

> Kanye is actually pushing white supremacist views.

I recommend seeing the podcast with Lex. Kanye seems quite confused, but if anything, it seems he identifies with the "gang" (his term), and that he simply has come into conflicts with some number of people that happen to be Jewish. He does NOT seem like a puppet of Maga republicans as far as I can tell. He simply seems to think there is a conflict between people like him (basically "gang members" in the music industry) and "Jews".

> Anti-semitism (hatred of Jewish people) isn't the same as anti-Zionism

Obviously not, but I didn't mean only anti-Zionism. Not all arabs, especially in and around Palestine are making that distinction. In fact, the books "The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion" and "Mein Kampf" are both popular books in Palestine and to some extent other Arab countries. The hatred does NOT seem to be limited to Israel and Zionists.

In Northern Europe, using the word "Jew" in as a derogatory term was strictly taboo 30 years ago. Now, however, after considerable immigration form Arab countries and Pakistan, the term has come back. Mostly in immigrant communities, but it is also starting to come back in working class locals that go to the same schools as the muslim immigrants. You do NOT want to walk around dressed like a orthodox Jew in the rougher neighborhoods of Northern Europe.