Leaving META and X

June 14th, No Kings Protest, Image by Jim Jordan

While attending a July 10^th meeting of the local democratic party it was announced that they were, at long last, on BlueSky, and at that time a comment was put forth that even in the current climate, they would be remaining on X, and META platforms.^[1] At that time I put forth a comment that Grok (An AI chatbot designed by Elon Musk, and built into X’s platform which was designed to be “anti-woke”) had been “improved” on July 4th by Musk, and has since been spewing antisemitism, pro-genocide, and pro-Hitler statements. Further, I noted, that to remain under the current conditions would be (at the least)

passively supporting fascism—to which the response was "it’s where all the people are."^[2]

I've found myself considering this exchange on and off since the meeting, and ultimately determined to put my thoughts to metaphorical paper for any who might have been caught off guard by my statement and my ensuing dissatisfaction with the parties choice to remain. You see, in philosophy, neutrality is

choosing not to take a side (typically because there is a benefit), and neutrality always suggests tolerance, regardless of how deplorable a perspective or situation might be. To that end, neutrality, is an unethical stance because it always directly (or indirectly) favors those doing harm, while supporting and maintaining states of injustice. And we know this, even Theodore Roosevelt, famously quoting Dante Alighieri once stated “Dante reserved a special place of infamy in the inferno for those base angels who dared side neither with evil nor with good.”

“Dante reserved a special place of infamy in the inferno for those base angels who dared side neither with evil nor with good.” —Theodore Roosevelt  

Which is, of course, the choice before you when deciding what online plaforms to support with your presence. So, let's dig into some specifics of the harm of staying on these specific platforms.^[3]

• Staying is choosing to remain in an environment where those ideologies are not only present and normalized—but automated, and continuing to use platforms that openly disseminate hate speech, especially of such a violent and ideologically dangerous nature, contributes to the success of not only the platform, but the speech. Because every user is a point of data. A metric. A legitimizing presence. One that says to advertisers that the people have spoken, and are unbothered by this type of language. Your very presence lends attention, traffic, and by extension, credibility, to fascist rhetoric. That's why saying that X is “where the people are” is not a morally neutral statement; because while it may be a digital reality, it is also an excuse. One that allows you to avoid accountability, and one that allows these platforms to normalize harmful content.
  

• Pro-Nazi speech is not merely offensive, but historically rooted in ideologies that led to genocide and war. Platforms that give space to such ideologies, even if via AI, aren’t just “flawed"—they’re dangerous. We have a moral obligation to disengage and deprive that system of power.
  

• If opposing fascism were easy or convenient, it wouldn’t require courage. Leaving a digital platform might mean losing visibility or reach—but that’s part of what makes resistance meaningful. Social change requires personal cost. By leaving, you signal not just to the platform, but to the world, that such content crosses a line that you will not tolerate. Fascist ideologies depend on silence and passivity—and your exit is a form of protest that does matter.

• META has been repeatedly caught violating user privacy—tracking user behavior even when they are not actively using the platform, collecting data from private messages and interactions, and selling advertising based on these invasions. Using META means willingly submitting to one of the most powerful surveillance engines in the world in exchange for convenience. There is no one who is a passive user because your very existence on the platform helps META refine tools that have been used to exploit consumers and even interfere with elections.

  
  

• META has been outright resistant to enforcing community standards equally, allowing for harassment and hate speech directed toward marginalized groups, harshly moderating or even shadow banning targeted individuals. Continuing to use META platforms implicitly accepts the way they dodge ethical responsibility.
  

• The algorithms of X and META prioritize engagement over safety and truth, promoting divisive, sensational, and harmful content such as hate speech, harassment, bullying, incitement to violence, political polarization and extremism, and misinformation about vaccines, public health, and elections above all other types of engagement. META is not neutral; it actively amplifies content that harms real communities. Studies have repeatedly linked META platforms to increased anxiety and depression. They are designed to foster addition, social comparison, and algorithmic validation.

Leaving X and META is not only a powerful act of protest that deprives facist authoritarian regimes a system of power—it is an act of reclaiming your mental health and attention from a system built to steal it from you. It is a conscious rejection of a system that thrives on surveillance, manipulation, and harm. It’s not about digital purity—it’s about drawing a line between convenience and conscience. It isn't simply a personal choice, but an act of ethical refusal that signals to the world that this type of rhetoric has real social and economic costs. But refusing to switch platforms because it’s inconvenient, uncomfortable, or ‘that’s where all the people are' is not a reason—it's complicity.

End Notes, Leaving META and X

^[1] "X," formerly known as "Twitter" prior to its acquisition by Elon Musk, and META, owned by Mark Zuckerburg, which includes Facebook, Threads, and Instagram.

^[2] I hate that this is a necessary statement, but in the age of AI, it is. I am a (traditionally) published author and simply put, I love em dashes. That does not mean this was written by AI—all the typos and grammatical errors ought to be a clue that a perfectly adequate human quote this all on their lonesome. AI is a scourge on humanity, and I hate it even more now that it's ruined em dashes for all of us who just love English lit a little too much.

^[3] No social media is good, but some are certainly better; those that prioritize community guidelines and ethical governance such as Bluesky, Discord, Mastodon, private newsletters, and local networks). Just not Substack. Substack is also Nazis.