Elon Musk is the world’s richest man. And he is using that wealth for political ends. Musk spent more than $290 million on the 2024 presidential election. So far, he is the biggest known spender on this year’s midterm elections, with about $276 million funneled to conservative political groups and Republican campaigns.
In addition to his work as a technologist and politico, Musk is also a prominent, and powerful, white supremacist.
Musk, as I noted in a column earlier this year, traffics in lurid, eliminationist fantasies aimed at immigrants and racial minorities. As the most-followed man on his social media website, X, Musk amplifies far-right accounts, spreads racist propaganda and endorses calls for violence against those deemed “invaders.” He supports “remigration” — the forcible removal of nonwhite citizens to their supposed countries of origin — and fears the demographic collapse of “Western,” meaning white, civilization.
I have quoted from Musk’s invective before, but it bears repeating.
“White people are a rapidly diminishing minority of the global population,” Musk wrote in September 2025.
“Low birth rate,” he later said, “is the number one threat to the West followed closely by migration. There will be no West if this continues.”
A century ago, a similar demographic panic among white American elites led one man, Lothrop Stoddard, to warn of a “rising tide of color against white world-supremacy,” in a book that was a huge best seller. Musk is working, if you can call it that, in the same tradition of white supremacist hysteria.
Recently, a number of Democratic candidates for office — most prominently Abdul El-Sayed of Michigan — have been asked to answer for the words of Hasan Piker, a streamer and political entertainer who has campaigned for progressive and left-wing Democrats, including El-Sayed. The reason they have been asked to answer for him is that Piker holds a number of views that are well outside the mainstream of American politics. But aside from words of support and a few appearances with a few candidates, Piker is a fairly minor force on the political landscape.
Compare that with Musk, who, again, has spent more than half a billion dollars trying to elect Republicans and who spent several months as the de facto leader of the executive branch, directing his cadre of young programmers — some barely out of their teens — to systematically shut down programs and agencies that he disliked, such as the U.S. Agency for International Development.
And yet, despite Musk’s power and actual, material impact on American elections, hardly anyone seems interested enough to ask Republicans to comment on the views and preoccupations of their largest, most important donor. House Speaker Mike Johnson can do the rounds on the nation’s news programs without fielding a single question on Musk and his influence. Trump can host endless news conferences without being asked about the violent, extremist views of one of his closest political allies. Senator John Thune, the majority leader, can go days — if not weeks — without hearing Musk’s name from a journalist.
I have no particular explanation for the lack of interest in confronting Republican politicians with the views of their most important donor. But given those views, I think Republicans should have to answer for them. Do they agree that the chief threat to “the West” is declining white birthrates? Did they see the movie “Citizen Vigilante,” heavily promoted by Musk, and do they believe that the spectacular violence visited on immigrants depicted in the film might be necessary in the real world? Do they support the “remigration” of nonwhites from the United States to their home countries or God knows where else?
As for Democrats, they should see that Musk is a rich political target. In addition to his racist views, he is responsible for the degradation and destruction of large parts of the federal bureaucracy, directly harming the millions of Americans who rely on agencies like the Social Security Administration and the Department of Veterans Affairs. Moreover, Musk is both deeply entwined with the federal government as a vitally important contractor and a notoriously unreliable figure who has acted, in foreign policy, against the interests of the United States. His interventions against Ukraine in its defensive war against Russian aggression are prime evidence that we rely on both Musk and his companies at our own peril.
If Democrats win Congress this November, they should use their investigative powers to scrutinize Musk’s companies, question his relationships to foreign governments and ensure his compliance with federal law. And a future Democratic White House should use the result of that investigation to re-evaluate the government’s ties to Musk, up to and including removing his security clearances, canceling his contracts, divesting from his companies, leveraging federal antitrust law to break up enterprises such as SpaceX and even placing some key functions under direct federal control.
The immediate reason to do this is the degree to which Musk has abused his power and influence to spread misery, transform the federal government and support far-right political movements. The broader reason is simply that no one man should have all this power.
What I Wrote
My column this week was on the growing odds that Senate Democrats win a majority this November and what they should do if it materializes.
One takeaway for Democrats is that they must not fall for the fantasy that there is a constructive relationship to have with either Trump or the Republican Party over the next two years. In the face of investigations and legislative scrutiny, Trump is quite likely to escalate his assault on the rule of law. Democrats will need to make the most of whatever majority they have, wielding the full suite of Congress’s powers to constrain the president and restore constitutional government.
Now Reading
This is a 1988 paper on Abraham Lincoln and federalism by the historian Michael Les Benedict that I found very interesting and useful.
Ned Richardson-Little on the far right in Germany for Dissent.
Alice Driver on the return of child labor in the United States for The New York Review of Books.
Ruby Cramer on the Cornell sexual assault case for The New Yorker.
Adam Serwer on Texas’ war on free speech for The Atlantic.
Photo of the Week
The view of the James River from Belle Isle in Richmond, Va. As I write this, I am in London, and one fun part about visiting is seeing the various Virginia namesakes, including Richmond upon Thames.
Now Eating: Sautéed Green Beans and Scallions
This is a very simple side dish, but it is delicious and probably my favorite way to prepare fresh green beans. In addition to the lemon juice, you should also toss the beans in a bit of soy sauce and sesame oil. I would also recommend using a neutral oil rather than butter or olive oil — you want the heat high enough to sear the green beans, and at those temperatures butter will burn while olive oil will get bitter. Top with toasted sesame seeds as well. Recipe comes from NYT Cooking.
Ingredients
-
1 tablespoon extra-virgin olive oil or unsalted butter
-
½ pound green beans, stem ends trimmed
-
Salt
-
2 bunches scallions (about ½ pound or 16 scallions), stem ends trimmed, halved crosswise
-
½ lemon (optional)
Directions
Heat a large skillet over medium until very hot. Add the oil, then spread the green beans out in an even layer. Season generously with salt and cover with a lid or baking sheet. Cook, stirring halfway through, until bright green but still crisp, about 4 minutes.
Add the scallions, season with salt, toss to combine and spread into an even layer. Cover and cook, stirring every 2 minutes, until both vegetables are tender and browned and the green beans are beginning to wrinkle, 4 to 6 minutes. Some charring is welcome but if you see any burning, resist adding water and instead reduce the heat.
Remove from heat and season to taste with salt. If using the lemon, zest and juice it over the green beans.
The post Elon Musk Is Beyond the Pale appeared first on New York Times.
