【Author/Observer Net Columnist Chen Feng】

Less than a year ago, Musk and Trump were as close as ever, known as BFFs (Best Friends Forever), with a private suite at Mar-a-Lago. When Trump "returned to power" for the second time, Musk could freely enter the White House Oval Office riding on his son's neck, and his influence over Trump was overwhelming, with many worried about the collusion between politics and business affecting the basic operations of American politics.

However, by late May this year, when Musk left the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), their differences had become public. Now, the two have become enemies, and Trump even said he would consider expelling Musk.

Trump further threatened: "He (Musk) is losing electric vehicle subsidies. He is angry about many things, but you know, he might lose more than that. I can tell you right now, Elon may lose much more than that."

The root cause of the split between Musk and Trump lies in the "Big and Beautiful Act". If DOGE was an appetizer, this was Trump's main course. Originally, the trade war and the revival of industry and employment were the main courses, but seeing them fail, they quickly changed the menu, offering whatever was available.

The key points of the "Big and Beautiful Act" are:

· Permanently institutionalize the tax cuts from Trump 1.0

· Increase military spending

· Fund large-scale deportation of undocumented immigrants and border security plans

· Raise the debt ceiling to $5 trillion in one go

· Eliminate tax credits for new energy (and vehicles)

· Cut Medicaid and food assistance

· Exempt tips, overtime pay, and低保 income

According to analysis by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), these measures would result in the wealthiest families gaining $12,000 annually, while the poorest families would lose $1,600 annually, with 11.8 million people losing health insurance and 3 million losing eligibility for food assistance.

When the "earlier wind" failed to stop Trump, Musk's criticism of the "Big and Beautiful Act" became public, leading to his withdrawal from DOGE and subsequent open confrontation. Musk's biggest complaints about the "Big and Beautiful Act" were:

· Greatly increase government spending, which would undo the hard-earned savings that DOGE had painstakingly achieved

· Give handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future ("gives handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future")

By June 30, DOGE claimed to have achieved $190 billion in government spending cuts. Musk had once claimed he could achieve $1 trillion in savings, but later stopped mentioning it. To achieve this $190 billion, DOGE became the "public enemy" of America in recent months. The dismissed civil servants were furious, as were the public affected by the reduced government services. Musk not only personally bore the blame, but also his companies and stocks suffered significant losses, with Tesla being the most affected.

But the "Big and Beautiful Act" led to a sharp increase in the U.S. government deficit. CBO estimates that it will add $2.6 trillion in debt over the next 10 years, taking into account all changes in government spending, but not including additional costs due to interest rates or increases in U.S. bond yields.

Both parties in the United States agree on reducing spending and debt, but the question is where to cut. The Democrats want to cut from military and stability, while the Republicans want to cut from social security and welfare. When both parties cannot push their own reduction proposals, nothing is cut. The problem is that whether it is military and stability or social security and welfare, they have an inherent pressure to increase spending. Thus, both parties end up increasing deficits, turning the U.S. debt into a giant monster.

With the deficit difficult to control, the U.S. debt ceiling is used as leverage, leading back to partisan fighting. Defaulting on U.S. debt and government shutdowns have gone from unthinkable to routine. The debt ceiling agreement can only provide a few years of relief, and if Trump were to raise the ceiling to $50 trillion in one stroke, according to the current trend of U.S. government spending, it would only provide a few years of relief, but at least it would avoid the annual U.S. debt ceiling issue, so Trump and Vance (if elected) would not have to worry about it during their terms.

The increasingly heavy U.S. debt means an increasingly heavy burden of interest expenses. Normal government spending is consumed by interest expenses, eventually transforming into an increasingly heavy tax burden. With the U.S. real economy shrinking, light asset operations like "pretend manufacturing" and financial economy "internationalization" have plenty of ways to avoid taxes. This means beating the cow, with the remaining profitable domestic industrial entities becoming the main burden of taxation. This is what Musk particularly opposes.

Promoting U.S. employment through reindustrialization is Trump's main policy focus. The broad tariff war was intended to force manufacturing to return to the U.S., ultimately boosting blue-collar employment in the U.S. Tax and investment support are the "pull" side, which is also reflected in the "Big and Beautiful Act", with tax cuts and support for the military-industrial complex as examples.

Trump does not care about the development prospects, competitiveness, supply chains, and cost structures of industries. He just wants employment. With employment, there is consumption, which leads to further demand and further employment. As for whether it is a sunrise industry or a sunset industry, he doesn't care. In fact, sunset industries are more favorable for employment because they require less labor, which benefits MAGA supporters' employment and further expands their support base. The increased overall costs caused by the Americanization of supply chains are not a problem for him, as the pot is big enough.

The problem is that rising water levels is a dynamic issue. If the boat remains watertight, the speed at which the water rises is not a problem; but this huge ship in the U.S. has long been leaky. "Cheap imports" and "trickle-down economics" are the siphons of the U.S. economy and society. If the siphon breaks or is removed, and the water rises too fast, the boat will be filled with water and sink.

U.S. President Donald Trump said he hopes to have the "Big and Beautiful Act" on his desk for signing before July 4, 2025, the American Independence Day. European Press Agency

For this pot of soup in the U.S., there are those who drink the broth and those who eat the meat. The traditional industries in the U.S. have already lost their competitiveness. The traditional mainstays such as automobiles, machinery, and steel are major areas of concern. Intentionally protecting them only locks the U.S. into backwardness, like intentionally protecting steam locomotive railways in the era of automobiles. Only geographically protected industries still have some unique advantages, such as snacks, toilet paper, toothpaste, and cola, which are difficult to substitute with imports, but these industries cannot provide high-quality employment.

Even the military industry no longer represents meaningful high-tech innovation for civilian technology, as weapon technology has become highly specialized. Although U.S. naval shipbuilding is still technologically advanced without considering efficiency and cost, it has completely lost competitiveness in civilian shipbuilding, shrinking dramatically. The design and manufacturing of U.S. tanks and armored vehicles remain in the first tier globally, but the U.S. automotive industry has long fallen from the top position to being a bystander.

Civilian technology is also developing rapidly on its own track. For example, in the most active fields of AI, robotics, and biotechnology, military R&D and applications have lagged behind civilian efforts. General ICT is similar, with 3nm chips already used in mainstream smartphones, but military chips still "stick" to traditional chips above 28nm due to requirements for reliability, radiation resistance, and environmental tolerance.

Even in aerospace, which has traditionally been driven by the military, military and civilian sectors have diverged. Civilian reusable launch vehicles and low-orbit constellations lead in military applications, and fighter jet technology has long been unrelated to commercial aircraft. Now that bombers have become stealthy, they have completely diverged from commercial passenger aircraft in technical aspects, even with engines no longer sharing the same source, for example, the engines of the B-2 and B-21 come from fighter jets F110 and F135.

On the other hand, the U.S. still has some industrial sectors that maintain their leading position, with SpaceX and Tesla as representatives of Musk, and he has long been deeply involved in AI and robotics.

From Trump's perspective, the role of government support is to boost employment and increase personal support. Traditional but declining industries are exactly the ones that need to be boosted; from Musk's perspective, government support should focus on sunrise industries, which are the sustainable sources of competitiveness and the foundation for the U.S. future development.

Musk's involvement in supporting Trump is partly out of distaste for the Democrats and partly out of the hope of "reforming" Trump and the Republicans. The "reform" of Trump obviously failed, but Musk is not someone who gives up easily. His political involvement is not necessarily about money and power, just as his commitment to Mars colonization is not based on money and power. He wants to change the U.S. political and economic ecosystem and has enough money to indulge himself.

The Democrats have become addicted to big government and progressive social issues, and bear an irrefutable responsibility for the inefficiency and social chaos in the U.S. The Democrats rely heavily on industrial policies economically, and government-led initiatives are something Musk opposes. He still believes in free competition and the market economy.

The Republicans have been taken over by post-liberalism and anti-intellectualism. The MAGA party is eager to "reject everything," confident that the power of will alone can reject market competition and the principles of political economy. Post-liberalism advocates for government-led ideological and cultural development politically, which is the theoretical basis for Trump's clash with elite universities; economically, it advocates for serving community development rather than solely pursuing profit. Of course, what kind of ideology and cultural development, and who constitutes the "community," is decided by them.

In a way, both parties have become "parties of our own kind," becoming more extreme, and thus creating a growing and increasingly silent middle group who are dissatisfied with both parties. Their voting tendencies are largely not influenced by the platforms of either party, but rather by their aversion to the other. Democracy's original intention was to maximize unity for good intentions and good governance, but now it has become the maximum unity for the least harmful and least hateful.

Musk is a political novice, but he is quite shrewd. He did not directly target the MAGA party, but instead took on both the Democrats and the Republicans, even using the sensitive term "one-party system" that touches Americans' nerves. In today's context, where a large number of Republican supporters are simply against the Democrats and a large number of Democratic supporters are simply against the Republicans, Musk's approach is smart and avoids the MAGA party labeling "The America Party" as a "rebranded Democrat Party."

A third party is also in line with the needs of the U.S. political landscape. The reality of the U.S. is relative decline, and the traditional solutions of both parties are powerless to pull the U.S. out of this situation, requiring increasingly stronger remedies, of course with opposite effects. The Democratic solution is unrealistic and blindly forward-looking, while the Republican solution is to go back to the past.

Both parties also try to reshape U.S. society and culture, using the counteraction of superstructure on the economic base to promote economic transformation. The Democrats advocate for absolute rights and freedoms of traditional liberalism, while the Republicans advocate for government-led development of society and culture based on tradition. Similarly, the medicine and prescriptions are opposite, leading to the weaponization of social and cultural policies, and further division and increased hostility in society.

The U.S. needs to return to the economy, science and technology, and culture, avoiding too much weaponization of ideas and policies.

"The America Party" may target people on the political spectrum of "tech and knowledge elites - populist moderates," meaning those who are moderately right-leaning economically, hold moderate or liberal views on social issues, and advocate for breaking traditional thinking on digital rights and innovation. In political philosophy, it may establish two pillars: "fiscal conservatism" and "radical industrial investment," advocating for cutting fiscal deficits, streamlining bureaucracy, and implementing growth-oriented policies, while focusing investments on cutting-edge technological fields such as electric vehicles, artificial intelligence, and aerospace.

"The America Party" has enough issues to provoke public dissatisfaction with the two parties. Over the past few decades, elections have fully demonstrated that existing political options have disappointed Americans, and widespread dissatisfaction has existed for a long time; however, grassroots movements lack organization, influence, and sustainability, eventually becoming historical fragments. Musk's wealth, energy, and successful history of self-made entrepreneurship could potentially consolidate the public's dissatisfaction into a base. Money is not everything, but money combined with like-minded ambitious individuals and activists makes a difference. Internet and social media have made today's party-building vastly different from historical times.

Many analysts believe that the establishment will stifle any third party's growth. The establishment definitely wants to do so, but whether they can is another matter. Musk built his empire through entrepreneurship and innovation, naturally being an anti-establishment figure. The tech innovators and knowledge elites he aims to attract are also naturally anti-establishment. Innovation inherently opposes the establishment, and elites who want to lead public opinion and society need to be ahead of the mainstream establishment. These people may be few in number, but they have great energy and could mobilize the "silent middle group."

The far-left Democrats and the far-right Republicans also oppose the establishment, but they do so by hijacking the establishment, pushing further and more extreme along the existing path, leaving a large gap in the middle. This is precisely the space for "The America Party" to survive.

Musk wants to rally the "silent middle group" by forming a new party, which poses a significant threat to both parties, especially to Trump and the MAGA faction. Considering Musk's borderline actions during the 2024 election, if Musk promises "pay xx dollars to join the party," he might attract many "pawn-like founding members," combining with idealistic, energetic ambitious individuals and activists to form an effective political force. Once a certain number of members are obtained, the party can be registered and participate in the election. When both the Democratic and Republican parties decide the outcome based on the last few votes, the "America Party's" disruptive votes could become the deciding factor.

Trump and Musk represent fundamentally conflicting interests and positions

But at present, Musk's sword is still aimed at the Republicans. The Republican primary elections before the 2025 midterm elections are the last chance for Musk to "reorganize" the Republicans. Musk is not without chances, and "The America Party" may only truly start after failing to reorganize the Republicans.

Republican lawmakers who were elected by supporting spending cuts but then voted for the "Big and Beautiful Act" have weak political credibility, which is an easy point of attack. Attacks from the Democrats can be brushed aside with "boring partisanship," but attacks from Musk are harder to deal with, as small government and spending cuts are still the mainstream belief of the Republicans.

Some Republican lawmakers supported the "Big and Beautiful Act" out of political ideals, and changing their stance is part of their political game rules. Others were forced to support it due to Trump's intimidation, otherwise they might be disrupted by Trump and not be able to run again. This would mean the end of their political lives and the end of their "political business."

But Musk's interference complicates the already complicated political calculations of Republican lawmakers and further complicates the internal politics of the Republican Party. The struggle between Trump's MAGA faction and the Republican establishment has not ended, and Trump does not need Musk challenging him from the sidelines.

Trump has a strong desire for kingship, and his sweeping victory over the opposition within the Republican Party in the 2024 election greatly fueled his desire to win and his arrogance. He enjoys the feeling of being adored by the masses and is addicted to the authority of being the final decision-maker. He enforces "loyalty is absolute, or else it's absolutely not loyalty" towards his subordinates and even the entire Republican Party. What Musk is challenging is precisely the absoluteness of loyalty.

If problems cannot be solved, solve the person who raises the problem. To stop Musk, Trump has no choice but to force Musk out.

Checking accounts won't work, that would at most put Musk in prison for tax evasion, and it's unlikely to be done. Trump can only strip Musk of his U.S. citizenship, making Musk an overseas black hand if he wants to interfere in U.S. politics, and he would be dealt with mercilessly.

But Musk is extremely wealthy and can drag lawsuits for eternity. Moreover, the Department of Justice has no reason to strip Musk of his U.S. citizenship. The U.S. Department of Justice can strip naturalized citizens of their nationality, but only under conditions such as war crimes, extrajudicial killings, crimes against humanity, posing a real threat to the U.S., and being convicted or being a terrorist. Musk clearly does not meet these criteria. There is also a special case: if a naturalized citizen refuses to testify before Congress about activities involving subversion within 10 years of naturalization. Musk was naturalized in 2002, so this provision does not apply.

Trump's threat to use DOGE to trouble Musk is just empty talk. DOGE only handles government departments, and Musk and his companies are outside the government. To stop Musk's company contracts with the government through DOGE, that can be done without DOGE. But his threat to terminate subsidies for SpaceX and Tesla, the former is impossible to implement, and the latter has already been realized through the "Big and Beautiful Act."

SpaceX not only provides critical space launch services to NASA but also provides critical satellite launch services for the U.S. military. NASA and the military cannot do without SpaceX, which explains why when Trump first clashed with Musk, Musk threatened to stop the Dragon spacecraft, causing NASA and the U.S. Air Force to be extremely frightened.

Starlink also has important military applications, serving as an indispensable supplement to U.S. military communication satellites, not to mention that Ukrainian forces rely entirely on Starlink for operations. Synchronous orbit communication satellites are still the mainstream for military communication satellites, but data rates and communication capacity are naturally limited, and the inherent delay in uplink and downlink links hinders real-time applications. A military or militarized Starlink is a necessity for U.S. field communications, and for the foreseeable future, no one else can provide it except SpaceX.

Trump's "Golden Dome" also relies on low-orbit early warning satellite constellations, which will form the core of the U.S. Air Force's quasi-stationary global warning and surveillance system. Regardless of SpaceX's low-cost constellation technology, Musk's reusable rocket launch technology is the key foundation for the feasibility of military constellation technology.

As for Tesla, even without Trump's help, Tesla is already facing strong headwinds. In Europe, the dislike of Musk personally and the increase in electric vehicle choices in Europe are the main reasons; in China, domestic electric vehicles have made Tesla increasingly appear to be a "tax on intelligence." In the U.S., the further development of electric vehicles has entered deep waters, with slow progress in charging station popularization, low oil prices, and deep reliance on gasoline cars being issues, and subsidy revocation is just another layer of pressure.

The problem with Tesla is that it is not keeping up with the pace of innovation in electric vehicle technology. Originally, Tesla was leading the way, but Chinese electric vehicles have completely overturned the previous chessboard, and suddenly Tesla found itself no longer leading, and the gap is widening. Scale x technology = strength, current x update speed = potential. Once Chinese technology takes off, it transitions from catching up to surpassing, and with rapid iteration in fierce competition, it is rare for competitors to catch up again, especially in the electric vehicle sector.

Musk is not unaware of the difficulties ahead for Tesla, and he has already started to shift toward AI (including intelligent driving) and robots. Of course, these are also areas where China is also making a strong push.

Trump may be able to make Musk lose money, but it won't force Musk to stay silent. Trump controls the state machine, while Musk controls his vast wealth and the public opinion machine. However, abusing the state machine by Trump not only causes public outrage among opposing groups but also causes unease within his support base. The U.S. society highly emphasizes individual rights and property protection. The more Trump abuses his power, the greater the damage to his power base, and further strong suppression becomes free publicity for "The America Party," prompting "The America Party" to become a credible option outside the two parties.

But he can't sit idly by as Musk threatens his absolute control over the Republicans, nor can he ignore "The America Party" becoming the deciding factor in the direction of U.S. politics. Trump is a proud and greedy person, and he has his own political legacy to protect.

What to do? No way. He really is desperate.

This article is exclusive to Observer Net. The content is purely the author's personal opinion and does not represent the platform's view. Unauthorized reproduction will result in legal liability. Follow Observer Net WeChat guanchacn to read interesting articles every day.

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7522652583014564395/

Statement: This article represents the personal views of the author. Please express your attitude by clicking the [Up/Down] buttons below.