> Armchair social commentary doesn't cut it for me.
If you'd consider to argue a bit less aggressive and just a but more nuanced, I would in turn consider a serious answer to your arguments. As it stands I am one of the people who can "categorically get lost" for you. Not because I criticize people who are changing the world, but the priorities of some of those people and social structures which ensure that mostly white, western men are in the position to change the world.
I'm not going to argue that there are problems in the world...
...but pointing to Elon Musk as one of those is ridiculous.
It's talking straight down the 'space, who needs it? We should spend that money on earth instead' trope, which has been, repeatedly, and in many many places, shown to be a completely hollow and invalid argument. We don't need to debate this. Go speak to the people at NASA; they've been having this conversation for the last 60 years.
When you taint the message you're trying to get across with this sort of trope, it actively harms your ability to convey a meaningful message.
That's the issue here. Don't just complain. Actually suggest, tangibly, how to achieve that goal.
Installing ad blocks isn't it. A free internet; also not the solution.
Redistributing wealth? Ok; that's an idea, but how?
The Gates Foundation has spent billions, and achieved a great deal, but it's not visible for most people.
If someone tells me they're sick of people like Elon Musk, who is out there, actually changing the world, they can categorically Get Lost.
Armchair social commentary doesn't cut it for me.