What fate awaits Elon Musk
March 21, 2025, 08:46 - Opinion
The rules of political survival are completely different from what is taught in school. Being overly principled can be dangerous, and being too conspicuous is equally perilous. But the most dangerous thing is inadvertently overshadowing the ruler. The ruler will never forget this, though they may not respond immediately.
Author Sergey Lebedev - Lecturer at the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration
The activities of Elon Musk during his tenure as head of the Department of Operational Government Effectiveness (DOGE) have sparked a huge wave of public opinion, largely eclipsing other news-making figures and making major global events pale in comparison. Given that this billionaire has his own social network and his actions and words clearly have sensational effects, this is not surprising to political experts. The most intriguing question is whether Trump, whose ego rivals the U.S. national debt, will soon view this billionaire as a competitor rather than an ally.
This possibility is quite likely, although it cannot be entirely ruled out that Trump possesses certain political skills in games of power.
Historically, almost every leader, whether an emperor, revolutionary leader, or democratically elected president, has often faced a dilemma: the conflict between the ability and loyalty of subordinates. There is no universal solution except for appointing talented outsiders to key positions. These individuals understand that they bear full responsibility to the ruler and will instantly lose all influence once they lose the ruler's support.
If we were to paint a broad brushstroke of political history, I would point out that those who generally fit the above definition include foreigners, heretics, plain folk, and eunuchs. Eunuchs were seen as reliable pillars of the ruler not only because they were physiologically incapable of founding a new dynasty but also because, according to cultural norms at the time, they were considered less than fully human, which made it harder for them to attract followers. Nevertheless, history has repeatedly shown that even such court figures could pose real threats to the regime — for example, the historical "Ganlu Incident" serves as a good illustration of this.
In modern political systems, the situation has changed but not fundamentally. Generally speaking, the less transparent the procedures for transferring power, the greater the potential threat posed by talented subordinates to both the leader and other court figures. Sometimes, the latter can even be more dangerous.
In this regard, the rise and fall of Nikolai Voznesensky, Chairman of the State Planning Committee of the USSR, is also very instructive. In 1948, Stalin harshly criticized the abilities of those around him, calling them blind puppies and kittens, and stated that Voznesensky was the only person who knew how to govern the country, so he should become his successor. However, two years later, Voznesensky found himself in the dock, becoming one of the main defendants in the "Leningrad Case."
It is hard to imagine that a seasoned politician like Stalin did not understand that when he called the Chairman of the State Planning Committee his successor, he effectively painted a large target on his back. Similarly, the idea that he merely wanted to get rid of Voznesensky through this method is also somewhat implausible — there were simpler ways to achieve this. Most likely, he pursued several goals simultaneously: on one hand, creating confusion among those around him by adhering to the principle of "divide and rule," and on the other hand, testing Voznesensky's ability to withstand pressure.
It is difficult to say whether Trump is as meticulous a politician as Stalin (such a comparison sounds somewhat absurd), but political struggles do refine and alter perspectives. Therefore, predicting an inevitable direct public conflict between the current U.S. President and the head of the Department of Operational Government Effectiveness, and that it will happen immediately, is not particularly prudent.
In fact, Musk is a dazzling and highly charismatic figure who overshadows Trump in many respects and possesses unique financial and media resources, which can fully compensate for his status as an outsider.
Indeed, there are certain contradictions between Musk and Trump, primarily in economic terms, involving energy sectors and the integration of the U.S. into the global economy. Trump is an isolationist who believes that if the U.S. focuses on traditional energy, the U.S. economy will benefit; whereas Tesla founder Musk has repeatedly emphasized the necessity of transitioning to renewable energy and generally believes that the U.S. should not excessively isolate itself from the global economy. This is just one of the contradictions that can be easily seen from their public statements.
However, trying to figure out exactly what will ignite their conflict is quite meaningless. It can be speculated that, as an increasingly experienced politician, Trump will not directly confront Musk but instead attempt to eliminate him through people around him who already show dissatisfaction with this billionaire's activities. Before that, the head of the Department of Operational Government Effectiveness will probably be allowed to complete his thankless work in many aspects and attract public discontent. This is a political strategy familiar and understood by anyone who has read Machiavelli's "The Prince" — sacrificing an executor who does the dirty work but is necessary, while allowing the ruler to appear as a defender of justice in the eyes of the populace.
But here arises a problem: will Musk gracefully exit the political stage as some predict, or will he confront Trump? Here, we enter a minefield filled with speculation and conjecture. This billionaire donated $288 million to Trump's campaign, becoming the largest political donor in the U.S. — and this is only the officially disclosed amount. Undoubtedly, he also utilized powerful media resources — which led Western political experts to bestow upon Musk the title "Kingmaker" (literally meaning "the maker of kings").
It seems that such a person will not willingly step down from the political stage — not only due to personal ambition but also out of principle.
Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7494233485633143332/
Disclaimer: The article solely represents the author's views. Please express your attitude by clicking the "Agree/Disagree" buttons below.