How Elon Musk Bought America
How Musk’s Wealth and Influence Have Reshaped Politics and Business to Serve His Interests.
Elon Musk's rise—from electric cars to vague interplanetary ambitions—has laid bare a system where the rules are set by billionaires. The question, however, is simpler than it first appears: why is he getting away with it?
Musk’s empire wasn’t forged solely through free-market brilliance. In 2010, Tesla was on the brink of collapse. The company’s balance sheet was in shambles, its future uncertain.
It wasn’t Musk’s personal genius that saved the company—it was a $465 million federal loan secured through the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program.
This lifeline, funded by the public, allowed Tesla to develop the Model S and establish its dominance in the electric car market. Musk’s image—sold as pure innovation and visionary leadership—was powered not by entrepreneurial magic, but by the financial backing of the U.S. taxpayer.
This early government support set the stage for a deeper relationship between Musk and political power. Musk’s political contributions didn’t stem from civic duty; they were transactions.
He needed subsidies and tax breaks to fuel his vision, while lawmakers needed a symbol of green innovation.
The result was a mutually beneficial arrangement that presented Musk as the ideal entrepreneur: a visionary capitalist solving climate change. But the truth is messier. Musk’s public persona was carefully curated to embody grit and genius. His political strategy, however, is about pragmatic deal-making.
As Tesla’s fortunes flourished, so did Musk’s understanding of the political game. Unlike traditional corporate benefactors, Musk didn’t tie himself to a single party. He spread his financial influence across both sides of the aisle.
He supported Senator Chuck Schumer, a Democrat staunchly backing renewable energy. But he also backed Republicans, who championed deregulation and tax cuts. It wasn’t about ideology; it was about ensuring that no matter who held power, Musk’s interests were safeguarded.
What’s unique about Musk is that, unlike traditional lobbyists who operate in the shadows, he flaunts his political maneuvering in plain sight. What critics call manipulation, Musk frames as strategic pragmatism. And it worked—until the pandemic.
The COVID-19 crisis exposed Musk’s growing impatience with government regulation. As California imposed strict lockdowns, Musk balked, openly defying what he called authoritarian rules. When restrictions curtailed Tesla’s operations, Musk moved his company to Texas, a state with lower taxes and a friendlier regulatory environment.
He framed the move as a stand for personal freedom, a symbolic fight against what he portrayed as an overreaching government. In truth, it was a financial decision, made to maximize profits and minimize oversight.
The geographic shift wasn’t just about taxes; it was about aligning his politics with the right-wing.
Musk’s political donations, once spread across the spectrum, began to tilt sharply toward the Republican Party. The same man who once supported climate policies now found common cause with conservatives advocating deregulation and limited government.
The pivot was abrupt, but not surprising. Musk’s previous political alliances had always been calculated—ensuring his power remained intact no matter the political winds.
Then Musk made a $100 million donation to Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign. Musk had long balanced his political contributions, but this was a decisive step into the conservative fold.
Trump’s first term had been favorable for Musk. Environmental rollbacks, coupled with increased funding for space exploration, benefitted both Tesla and SpaceX. The $100 million donation wasn’t a gamble; it was an investment in continuity—an investment in maintaining the status quo.
Extraordinarily, this move went largely unnoticed. The donation was monumental, but no one seemed outraged by Musk’s openly transactional approach to politics.
Why?
The answer lies in Musk’s carefully crafted image. Musk isn’t just a billionaire—he’s a brand. He’s the “disruptor,” the outsider challenging the establishment. He markets himself as a genius unbound by the normal constraints of business and government.
Purchasing Twitter was a stroke of genius—a global tech platform from which to amplify this persona.
And it worked.
Millions rallied to his side, defending him as the indispensable innovator of our time.
Musk’s critics are painted as enemies of progress, while his supporters revere him as a harbinger of a brighter future.
In many ways, the media is complicit in this narrative. Musk’s ventures—whether Tesla’s breakthroughs or SpaceX’s historic launches—make for sensational headlines, driving traffic and ad revenue.
Few outlets risk alienating Musk’s immense following by holding him accountable. He’s simply too valuable as a spectacle, too important as a cultural figure. This isn’t to say that Musk is immune to criticism, but the coverage tends to focus on his achievements, not the structures supporting his wealth and influence.
Musk’s immunity to accountability reveals the truth: the systems that reward wealth over oversight are alive and well.
Musk is more than a successful businessman; he’s a political powerbroker. Through his wealth, he influences policy, shapes elections, and dictates industry standards.
Critics argue that this undermines democracy, turning it into a playground for the ultra-rich. Supporters, however, call it capitalism working as intended. The truth lies somewhere between these viewpoints.
When one man can shape elections, manipulate policy, and dominate industries with little to no oversight, democracy ceases to function as a system of checks and balances.
It becomes a system where wealth is the ultimate determinant of power—a system that caters to the interests of the few rather than the many.
Musk’s rise reveals an uncomfortable reality: the very institutions designed to check the power of influential figures—the government, the media, and the public—are more interested in maintaining the existing order than in challenging the concentration of power, allowing figures like Musk to operate with impunity and manipulate the system to their advantage.
As a result, he thrives unchecked. The question remains: why is he getting away with it? Because the system is designed to let him.