Why not Y?

 I left Twitter before the name change; those I followed did not like the change of management. How do I reconcile my premise that CEOs have no control over their company with my departure? To me, it makes sense that a brainless corporation would rebrand itself and change its CEO at the same time; both are smokescreens for the substantive changes it is making. What of the X in other companies ElonTrump has benefitted from? Again, that is more misdirection; the company wants us to believe Musk has control over the company. I suspect the substantive change it is covering up is its promotion of Trump, despite his ouster. Trump represents Republicans, and Republicans represent consumers. Before I joined, and maybe a little after, Twitter allowed underrepresented to release emotions in overrepresented, thus allowing the overrepresented to engage in more rational morality, self-interested or otherwise. An example of self-interested moral reasoning that de-repression of emotion can allow is that closing swimming pools to hurt the underprivileged hurts the privileged too. An example of other-interested moral reasoning that de-repression of emotion can allow is that theorizing about race is hurtful and unnecessary. Twitter became increasingly supportive of consumerism, not by selling us stuff, but by repressing our emotions, thus preventing us from reasoning. Prevention of reasoning can go in two ways, habituation or impulsiveness. Consumers are impulsive, and workers are habitual. Republicans like consumption, and socialists like labor. Democrats like neither of those things; they want voters to be deliberative. Unfortunately, corporations have so much control over the separation of powers, that Democrats cannot do anything surprising, so deliberation is boring; vote blue, no matter who. Corporations dislike change, because it threatens their existence. With each change, one large corporation disappears, and many small corporations take its place in the economy, if not in the industry. I measure the size of a corporation by how much power it has, not by some pretend bottom line. Just as an animal's life is not limited to its own skin, a company's actual bottom line is not restricted to its own books; it extends out into the whole economy. Thus, oil companies are the biggest, and to blame for Democrats not suggesting to eliminate one of them.

Memes

 I should probably research its origins, but I learned of memes from the Galactic Center science fiction series. Consider the meme that it is self evident how emergent properties of individuals affect the emergent properties of their collectives. This underpins the long history of socialism failing. They take as received wisdom that collectives are good, and explain their failures by denying that any bad collectives are not collectives at all. The absurdity of their axiom that individual greed explains corporate irresponsibility opens them up to stress created by the neoliberal hypothesis that greed is good. In fact, greed does not matter. All that matters is which companies do more harm than good. The reason the considered meme is so persistent is because it helps out so many other memes. By blaming the individual, corporations create stress that prevents individuals from thinking straight. The primary advantage of the scientific method meme is not finding the truth; the primary benefit is reducing stress. Reduced stress is not only directly an example of the goal of society, taking care of individuals; it is also a way to allow individuals to think of ways society can take care of them. During my embarrassing divorce, my lawyer kept saying “if wishes were horses, beggars would ride.” That went over my head, because I was stressed, and it increased my stress because I think it would be good for beggars to ride. Now, I’ve converted the beggars riding meme into “if wishes were beta, dirtbags would send.” That makes more sense to me, because dirtbags do indeed send; dirtbags are vagrant rock climbers, sending is completing a climb, and beta is how to climb. Anyway, we could replace bad positive feedback to stress caused by and benefiting oil companies. Replace it with good positive feedback from fewer oil companies leading to less stress leading to more ideas. We can’t lead with individuals consuming less because that would increase stress, and individual stress is already maxed out.