Uber-wealthy should not be treated as elected leaders

When people are given financial power, we must refute it when these figures threaten the population.


Many people believe that the government plays too large of a role when it comes to making decisions about privacy and freedoms. However, is an overstep from a financial figure any better than an overstep from a political one?
The answer is no. In fact, it might even be worse. While politics are often corrupted by money and power-hungry politicians, at least there is a semblance of democracy.
Many people feel as though mega billionaires have come into their wealth through exploitation and manipulation. Whether you agree with that or not, there is no democracy involved in who becomes uber-wealthy.
So why do we permit these people to involve themselves in making decisions for the population? It may seem normalized, but Elon Musk buying Twitter represents the control he has over speech and society.
Many times it has been demonstrated that Musk releasing statements on his predictions in the stock market can influence the behavior of stock buyers.
According to a CNBC, Musk has been shown to influence the stock market and consumers’ expectations of stocks based on his tweets. Voicing his opinion has inflated stock prices and changed consumers’ behaviors. This power is given to him by the masses by belief in his ability as a businessman.
While this may be well deserved, it is important to recognize that while he manipulates consumers’ perceptions of stocks, he makes a profit. This behavior has been demonstrated multiple times.
Musk has expressed that he intends to make Twitter a platform that promotes free speech that is in line with the law, nothing beyond that. While the federal government cannot interfere with free speech, private companies like Twitter can.
Many other social media platforms, like Meta, are currently working on enforcing stricter policies involving speech on their platforms.
This helps promote what social media is meant for, connecting with friends and family, as well as people with similar interests. Musk’s move to make Twitter a safe haven for hateful speech and interaction is to no one’s benefit.
Musk has taken it upon himself to interfere with the public’s freedoms to fit his viewpoint of what should be right. No one has elected Musk into this position.
Musk has obtained this power by manipulating countries’ governments and stock markets, as acknowledged by Times magazine when he won person of the year.
Time Magazine described Musk as someone who “bends governments and industry to the force of his ambition.” It is simply inappropriate for someone who has not been elected by the people to insert themselves into government in order to benefit themselves. That is what this country has allowed Musk to do, manipulate people and overstep into government.