@Fidgetcetera no please do

mark zuckerberg is a rich person who actively propagates and profits from surveillance capitalism and right-wing propaganda

the part where he’s more unsettling or bad, because his face makes slightly uncanny expressions, because you suspect he might not have empathy? that’s YOUR ABLEISM making him seem more inhuman than, say, justin trudeau or any other charming, attractive, allistic-presenting imperialist villain

@pan This toot got deep into my head space. I think maybe part of it is that we want to call these people evil but we (Americans especially) are deeply uncomfortable with saying that they are too wealthy. That they individually wield too much power over others so instead we make fun of their expressions or the way they speak or their weight. Anything to attack the individual without calling into question the legitimacy of capitalism.

@vector in a broader sense, it’s also about the pathologisation of evil tho. it’s not like he’s just any rich guy and he’s only bad because he’s rich (altho i do agree that hoarding wealth is inethical). he collaborated with fascists to help them consolidate/gain power

when you call a fascist a “sociopath” you’re NOT just attacking one person. it normalises further ostracism of disabled ppl everywhere, and lets the fascist off the hook

@pan I see what you're saying. Zuckerberg has made money in a less ethical way than others, but what I was trying to say is that the system we live in is one that has a hard time criticizing how you make your money. The ethical dimension of our actions is not really priced into the market.

Zuckerberg wasn't trying to help fascists. He was just trying to make money, and capitalism doesn't make you pay a price for helping fascists.

@vector i get what you're saying and i agree with you, altho with respect, you and i can't really know what zuckerberg wants

@pan Super valid point. Also, I very much agree that above and beyond stuff like people making fun of Trump's tighty whities when he was playing tennis, attacking public figures for mental health when you have a problem with their behavior is very problematic.

That shouldn't have to be a controversial statement cause the Goldwater Rule has been around for decades, but here we are.

@vector with that said, ty for the reply and for taking me seriously

@pan I actually just suspect he has mild Asperger's / on the spectrum somewhere. He is notoriously awkward, and I think he probably felt very uncomfortable in that courtroom especially. Facebook still runs on the like single php doc he wrote it on too, apparently.

@haze231 my point isn't really about whether or not he's autistic, and it's kind of that it doesn't matter because those kinds of things shouldn't be on trial when we judge these prominent figures who act oppressively.

it hurts all autistic people for some villain to be ridiculed for being autistic, or even for such a personal & complicated thing to become public speculation at all. armchair diagnosis is harmful and naive for those reasons

@pan I agree, people saying Zuckerberg is evil or a psycho, sociopath, what have you based on the way he acts is not what the discussion about the case should be, if not unnecessary conjecture. Also, if anyone actually believes mark was the main 'villain' in what happened, well that's just being naive...

@pan emphasis on "main" , lol.

Jesus, now I'm wondering if I'm being watched *right now*

I can feel the information war coming, except it already feels like its been happening forever. Now it's just more personal....

@pan youre right, as far as I know mark has never been diagnosed, it was just speculation.

Gotta say that man fascinates me. If I was in his shoes, like something I wrote up in college to pass the time came to define social networking and literally change the world. So powerful that governments use it to leverage one another. And then have to testify in front of the entire world about the privacy of /hundreds of millions/ of people.

@pan I could never foresee having so much... Responsibility.