Who is Afraid of Elon Musk?

Elon Musk. Image Source: X

“EU Commission urged to act over Elon Musk’s ‘interference’ in elections,” reads a recent headline from the British Guardian.

“Elon Musk's interference in national debates angers Europe's leaders” warns a headline on Euro News.

In the last couple of weeks, Europe’s governing elites have been vociferously bemoaning Elon Musk’s alleged meddling in Europe’s political process. Amid the maelstrom of hysteria and accusations, however, it may be instructive to look at what Musk’s “interference” actually consists of.

The complainers have been mainly pointing to two of Elon’s recent transgressions:

1. In the first week of this year, Musk posted some documents from the UK government describing the shocking level and scope of sexual abuse of British girls by Muslim grooming gangs that have taken place over the last two decades.

2. On January 9, Musk interviewed Alice Weidel, the co-chair of the German AfD. The AfD is the second most popular political party in Germany and is quickly rising in the polls even as we speak.

These actions have caused European government officials to go apoplectic, crying foul and claiming that Musk’s deeds pose a dire threat to democracy.

They are largely wrong about this: Elon Musk indeed poses a danger but not to democracy. Rather, he poses a danger to the governing elites.

This is because Musk’s popular platform X allows discussion in the public square of burning subjects that people want to talk about, but that the elites have kept under the lid. This they’ve managed by means of the extensive censorship regime they’ve erected throughout western “democracies.”

The assertion that Musk threatens British democracy by bringing attention to the systemic and pervasive sexual exploitation of young British girls by Muslim gangs is absurd on its face.

This is what we learn from Reuters about the situation in the British town of Rotherham:

“A report in 2014, made a conservative estimate that more than 1,400 girls were sexually exploited in the town of Rotherham between 1997 and 2013.”

The fact that there have been over 1,400 girls sexually abused in a single British town gives an idea of the magnitude of the problem. It goes without saying that in situations like this not all victims are identified. And this happened in only one place. There must have been many thousands of young girls exploited in this way across Britain.

The British establishment, however, has largely suppressed public discussion of this matter.

There has been a revealing statistic published recently. From 2011 until 2025 there have been 4,659 mentions of grooming gangs in the UK press. Black Lives Matter, on the other hand, have been referenced nearly sixty thousand times and George Floyd 38,824 times.

What is happening here? Thousands of young British girls were abused by Muslim grooming gangs, and yet the British press has given them only a fraction of coverage – nearly 8 times less – than it has given to one black man who died on another continent of an apparent heart failure brought on by a drug overdose. To make the differential even more glaring, the mentions of the abused girls cover the period of 11 years whereas the sad story of George Floyd extends over a period of four and a half years. To give it perspective, the thousands of sexually molested British girls received 480 mentions a year on average, while George Floyd, who had an extensive criminal record with multiple prison sentences, received well over 7,000 per year.

This mind-boggling imbalance has come about because the British establishment has made it largely taboo to publicly discuss the criminal side of the British Muslim community. And yet, large swathes of the British public feel unsettled and threatened by the plague of grooming gangs and want something to be done about it. Elon Musk has managed to bring this issue into Britain’s public square. By this he has furthered the cause of democracy and not imperiled it. It is, in fact, Musk’s accusers who have – by censorship and suppression – seriously damaged the democratic process.

As far as Musk’s interview with Alice Weidel went, this was another admirable act in service to democracy. Ms. Weidel – an intelligent, photogenic, highly-educated, and cultivated woman – leads a mildly conservative Eurosceptic party with libertarian leanings that enjoys a broad populist appeal in Germany. The top priorities of her party, the Alternative for Germany (AfD), are immigration and energy.

Alice Weidel by Sandro Halank, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0

Weidel’s party is resurgent and currently the second most popular in the country. Nevertheless, the establishment has been smearing Weidel and her AfD as “far right,” “extremist,” and successors to Hitler. They have gone so far as to use the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, Germany's domestic intelligence agency, to classify the AfD as a "suspected extremist" organization.

To supporters of Donald Trump this will sound all too familiar. They, too, have been labelled as “extremists” not only by the Democrats but also by agencies within the US government.

This is how Alice Weidel has been described by the British Telegraph:

“The insurgent Right-wing party of Alice Weidel – a gay, Hayekian, Mandarin-speaking Goldman Sachs alumna, who worked for the Bank of China and wrote a paper on the Chinese pension system – is flying high as elections approach next month, reaching 22pc in the latest INSA poll.”

The above does not sound exactly like the profile of your average Hitler, does it?

Needless to say, Alice Weidel cannot obtain a fair interview in Germany’s mainstream media. Whenever she tries to speak, she is aggressively interrupted and heckled by hostile interlocutors ever ready to hurl accusations and insults her way.

By interviewing her on X, Elon Musk gave Weidel the space to speak freely about her party’s program. It was an informative conversation which, among other things, plainly showed that the charges of extremism and fascism against the AfD are nothing but calumny and defamation. Even as Musk provided the public with an opportunity to see Alice Weidel as she is – undistorted and uncensored – Europe’s governing elites went into a frenzy, claiming that the interview posed a grave threat to the democratic process.

But how does giving voice to the leader of a populist party who has been speciously slandered, vilified, and censored constitute a threat to democracy?

The elites felt so threatened that they lost control of themselves and inadvertently revealed their criminal election scheming. A few days after the Musk–Weidel talk, Thierry Breton, a former EU commissioner for Internal Market and EU’s Censor-in-Chief, appeared on a TV program to complain about Musk and X.

Breton — his hair on fire — openly admitted that EU officials were monitoring the impact of the interview on the German political situation and were considering what actions to take. When challenged by a censor-minded moderator why not more is done to prevent an undesirable outcome in the upcoming German election, Breton suffered a bad slip of the mouth and revealed something that sent shockwaves around the world and should make everyone’s blood curl:

“We did it in Romania, and if necessary, we will have to do it in Germany as well.”

For those not familiar with what happened in Romania, last December the country’s Constitutional Court canceled the second round of a presidential election in which the populist candidate by the name Calin Georgescu, was nearly certain to win big. Georgescu, a former diplomat and a religious man, is a noted Euroskeptic who has called the United Nations “satanic.”

It should come as no surprise that Breton and his scheming cabal of globalists found a way to prevent a populist candidate who enjoyed broad support among the Romanian people from taking office. The EU leaders conspired to sabotage the democratic process in Romania, and they are clearly ready to do it – per the words of Thierry Breton – in Germany and elsewhere as well.

Who, then, is a threat to democracy? Elon Musk or Thierry Breton and his globalist comrades?

As an aside, if not for Musk’s X, Thierry Breton’s disastrous revelatory slip would have been buried and gone unnoticed.

This brings us back to Musk’s historic achievement in the realm of political discourse: Through his largely uncensored global social media platform X, which is used by hundreds of millions of people worldwide and has become the main source of news for people in many countries, he has managed to do an end run around the global censorship regime.

By bypassing the censorship regime and allowing free and open discussion on X, Elon Musk has caused the globalists to lose control of their narratives.

This is the real reason why these censorious, anti-democratic totalitarians hate Elon Musk so much.

If truth be told, it is Musk’s accusers who are the true successors of the fascists. Like their fascist brethren, they censor, cancel, take opposing candidates off the ballot, and conduct lawfare against political rivals. They also annul elections and instinctively oppose free speech with every fiber of their despotic souls.