In the months leading up to the 2016 election and in its aftermath, I was an active participant on Twitter (under a different account), striving to counter the misinformation propagated by Trump and his supporters. I would have taken it as a compliment had Trump blocked me, as he did with others I knew; I was committed to the cause.

My friend faced a similar fate when both Susan Sarandon and John Cusack blocked him simply for presenting factual information and highlighting that their candidate choices stemmed from privilege, which also colored their dismissive attitudes toward those who disagreed.

It seems rather easy to get blocked by a public figure, especially considering their often delicate egos.

When it comes to political matters and the intricacies of governance, many celebrities are typically — though not exclusively — lacking in depth of knowledge. Their privileges can create blind spots that those of us who aren't earning millions per film may not have the luxury to ignore.

I guess I’ll have to make do with being blocked by a lesser-known influencer instead.

Just last week, Naval Ravikant decided to block me.

What?

Most people outside Silicon Valley might not recognize Naval Ravikant. He hosts a podcast, co-founded AngelList, and has amassed considerable wealth through various investments in the tech sector. As he mentioned on The Tim Ferriss Show, he's heavily involved in cryptocurrency. His episode titled Naval Ravikant on Happiness, Reducing Anxiety, Crypto Stablecoins, and Crypto Strategy (#473) is genuinely insightful regarding anxiety management.

Since Biden took office, I rarely frequent Twitter and have ceased calling out absurd tweets brimming with misinformation, as it feels like a full-time job.

However, I do log in occasionally to promote my own writing.

So, when I came across a retweet from Ravikant that I found to be irresponsible and ill-informed, I felt compelled to respond.

Here’s the tweet he shared:

Here’s my reply:

A few hours later, I received a notification: “You’re blocked.”

I was not even sarcastic in my tweet. Sensitive much?

My argument was clear and not disrespectful or offensive. It was direct and articulate, which likely led to my being blocked.

Naval seems to struggle with being outsmarted.

It is deeply irresponsible to equate abortion rights with the vaccination debate, especially when the latter saves countless lives. I expected better from someone as intelligent as Ravikant, who should not resort to such a simplistic viewpoint.

However, I’m not surprised it came from a man.

I actually admire Ravikant and have referenced him in my writing. He’s undoubtedly bright, but I'm astonished that he would take the time to block me when I have less than 600 followers and am relatively unknown.

Naval’s Twitter presence is quite revealing. He follows no one, which speaks volumes about his self-perception.

His tweets often come across as cryptic and at times nonsensical. I've contemplated creating a parody account, mimicking his style, as it would be enjoyable to craft enigmatic tweets that sound clever yet lack substance — similar to what the @LosFelizDaycare account does so well, humorously critiquing uptight, "woke" individuals in Los Angeles, where I reside.

Their tweets genuinely make me laugh because the truth often yields the best comedy.

I believe Ravikant attempts to emulate Musk's Twitter success, though not quite as effectively. I’ve shared a few of his more positive tweets that resonate with me, but many are obscure and overly complex. Nevertheless, people continue to share his content.

The tweet I referenced earlier reached his 1.3 million followers and, as of now, has amassed over 3.5K likes. That’s a significant amount of misguided information circulating online.

The abortion and vaccination discussions are fundamentally different.

First and foremost, abortion remains a constitutional right.

The choices surrounding vaccinations and abortions differ significantly.

Women still have a constitutional right to seek an abortion, while there is no legal right for an unvaccinated child to attend school. The U.S. Supreme Court has affirmed that schools can mandate vaccinations.

Yet, abortion laws are being systematically dismantled state by state.

Moreover, a woman's choice to carry a pregnancy to term or opt for an abortion does not jeopardize public health.

We also don’t hear about surges in unwanted abortions. When a woman chooses to terminate her pregnancy, it does not trigger a widespread issue of unwanted abortions in society.

(This point is what led to my blocking by Naval.) It is straightforward.

I’m puzzled about Ravikant's beliefs and why he would amplify such a frivolous argument. He rarely takes a definitive stance. Does he oppose government-mandated vaccinations? Is he anti-abortion? Is he a libertarian, and if so, why mix a woman's right to choose with vaccination issues? Libertarians advocate for personal choice. Is he a libertarian who only supports men's freedom of choice, or one who backs anti-vaccination views while disregarding a woman’s right to make a personal decision that doesn’t harm public health?

Who knows?

Naval claims to avoid politics because it’s a “zero-sum game,” which he refuses to engage with. However, his anti-government rhetoric and the tweet he shared are, in my opinion, inherently political.

I faced a similar dilemma when I began following Nick Szabo, whom Ravikant regards as exceptionally bright. I disagree with his political views. Many speculate that Szabo is the creator of Bitcoin and authored the Bitcoin Whitepaper. Both men have amassed wealth from Bitcoin and crypto investments.

Ravikant appeared alongside Szabo on The Tim Ferriss Show in a podcast discussing Bitcoin titled The Quiet Master of Cryptocurrency — Nick Szabo (#244). Szabo, appearing somewhat reclusive, seemed disinterested in the discussion, as evidenced by a photo on Tim’s blog where his face is obscured.

This was my introduction to Ethereum (ETH) and why I decided to invest.

After following Szabo on Twitter, I was surprised to see he supports Trump and shares a plethora of questionable and factually inaccurate information with his followers. Tim Ferriss awkwardly attempted to navigate Szabo's political leanings by asking, “Nick, you’re more of a libertarian…” right? Szabo did not respond. No, he actively supports Trump, according to his Twitter activity.

Ravikant claims to rise above politics, deeming it a “zero-sum game,” yet his anti-government stance and retweets (like the one I questioned) are undeniably political. He is deceiving himself if he believes he can distance himself from politics.

He stirs political debates and then blocks anyone who highlights the flaws in his thinking when he shares tweets that lack wit, insight, or factual accuracy upon close examination.

But he isn’t open to discussing specifics; he seeks followers who align with his views. So, he blocked me. If Naval were more self-assured, he would welcome challenges from women in straightforward tweets. I’ve listened to a few of Tim’s podcasts featuring Naval, and he exudes an attitude of indifference towards others’ opinions.

Yet, I suspect he cares deeply.

Join my email list here.

Jessica is a writer, an online entrepreneur, and a recovering Type A personality. She resides in Los Angeles with her extroverted daughter, two dogs, and two cats.