Excellent as always! The number of comments I've seen admitting he has conflicts of interest but shrugging it off is astounding. No serious person can be against corruption and excuse blatant conflict of interest at the same time. The propaganda is strong.
I agree with much of what you're saying, and I agree that with many political operatives (like RFK JR, for sure), this whole mess is about grift and profit. But I'm not sure that's exactly the case for Musk. I just finished reading the Walter Isaacson Musk biography, and there's a common theme throughout Musk's work that he's willing to take huge risks, accept some people will be harmed, demand insane levels of commitment, and many of the things you mentioned, but money isn't really the end goal. (He's also been taking his son X to work since he was born - weird, I agree, but not new).
With Musk, I wonder if the ultimate motive is more about his desire for power and less about money. I know money buys power, but Musk, Thiel, and others in the techno-futuristic crew, also seem to be really focused on their vision of advancing humanity. In Musk's case, he seems to have a singular focus on multi-planetary human civilization, and everything he does ultimately works toward that goal. While we may not see his thread that way, he views all of his companies as paving the path in various ways to humans living on Mars.
I think this is the central driving force --> The technocrats view regulation and liberal (little l) government as being a major hindrance to that advancement; it's slowing down what they view as progress. Progress is being slowed by the regulation itself as well as the less intelligent (in their view) people getting in their way (i.e. they are smarter and know better what humanity needs than the rest of us). Thiel has made this argument specifically about women, who tend to vote liberal, being a particular hindrance to his view of progress once they got the right to vote.
So, maybe it's not so much that they want money for money sake, but that they want to destroy regulation and take power because they view themselves as the only ones capable of "saving and advancing humanity" (on the path they envision). And they've been clear that some collateral damage (i.e. lots of people harmed in the process) is part of the cost of doing business.
I'm not suggesting that makes any of the craziness acceptable or excused, just that I wonder if how we think about it changes how we respond to it? That's an open question; I really don't have the answer. But I do think it's much deeper than just lining their pockets with cash and being at the top of the "richest person on the planet" list.
I wish all my MAGA family would read this and not just roll their eyes, thinking it doesn't impact them.
Thanks for this. My partner and I were just talking last night about the his newest contract and how it was one little headline.
Signed up for the newsletters on propublica and the lever - and will call my reps, I know they can’t wait to hear from me again lol.
Excellent as always! The number of comments I've seen admitting he has conflicts of interest but shrugging it off is astounding. No serious person can be against corruption and excuse blatant conflict of interest at the same time. The propaganda is strong.
always great content, Emily. Thank you!
I agree with much of what you're saying, and I agree that with many political operatives (like RFK JR, for sure), this whole mess is about grift and profit. But I'm not sure that's exactly the case for Musk. I just finished reading the Walter Isaacson Musk biography, and there's a common theme throughout Musk's work that he's willing to take huge risks, accept some people will be harmed, demand insane levels of commitment, and many of the things you mentioned, but money isn't really the end goal. (He's also been taking his son X to work since he was born - weird, I agree, but not new).
With Musk, I wonder if the ultimate motive is more about his desire for power and less about money. I know money buys power, but Musk, Thiel, and others in the techno-futuristic crew, also seem to be really focused on their vision of advancing humanity. In Musk's case, he seems to have a singular focus on multi-planetary human civilization, and everything he does ultimately works toward that goal. While we may not see his thread that way, he views all of his companies as paving the path in various ways to humans living on Mars.
I think this is the central driving force --> The technocrats view regulation and liberal (little l) government as being a major hindrance to that advancement; it's slowing down what they view as progress. Progress is being slowed by the regulation itself as well as the less intelligent (in their view) people getting in their way (i.e. they are smarter and know better what humanity needs than the rest of us). Thiel has made this argument specifically about women, who tend to vote liberal, being a particular hindrance to his view of progress once they got the right to vote.
So, maybe it's not so much that they want money for money sake, but that they want to destroy regulation and take power because they view themselves as the only ones capable of "saving and advancing humanity" (on the path they envision). And they've been clear that some collateral damage (i.e. lots of people harmed in the process) is part of the cost of doing business.
I'm not suggesting that makes any of the craziness acceptable or excused, just that I wonder if how we think about it changes how we respond to it? That's an open question; I really don't have the answer. But I do think it's much deeper than just lining their pockets with cash and being at the top of the "richest person on the planet" list.
Thank you for writing this!!