From selling cars and building rockets to engaging in politics: Elon Musk's path of high-tech dissemination
Editor's Note
Through controlling the social media platform X and constructing a grand technological vision, Elon Musk is reshaping the communication logic in the guise of a "technological prophet."
The world's richest man, Elon Musk, is well - known for entering the so - called "founder mode" — when he focuses intently on something, he will invest extraordinary energy and time, even spending nights in the office.
He did so when he acquired Twitter (now known as X), and the same goes for Tesla. He also adopted the same approach when fully supporting Donald Trump in 2024. He showed the same level of commitment to the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE for short), established by executive order on January 20, 2025, until he left in late May.
On June 5, Musk asked his followers on X, "Is it time to form a new political party that truly represents the middle 80%?" More than 5 million people participated in this poll, with 80% voting in favor, indicating significant interest among the American public in forming a new political party as an alternative to the current two - party system.
A month later, angry about the passage of the "Big Beautiful Bill" and encouraged by the results of the above - mentioned online vote, Musk announced that he would form a new American political party.
Another month passed, and Musk had not taken any formal steps required to form a new political party, and he had not publicly mentioned this idea for weeks.
In the United States, forming a new political party requires a great deal of effort, including submitting relevant documents to the Federal Election Commission, collecting signatures on state election lists, and recruiting candidates for next year's House and Senate elections. In other words, it is a resource - intensive and time - consuming process, and there are few signs that Musk has started working on these tasks.
Of course, this does not mean that Musk won't return to this project at some point. If he does, he will join the ranks of businessmen who have tried to challenge the U.S. two - party system for years.
In recent years, Musk's role in the political arena has become increasingly prominent, especially after acquiring Twitter for $44 billion and participating in Trump's second - term government. As the owner of several large companies, he has been involved in multiple political initiatives. He has shifted from donating to Democratic candidates in the past to supporting Republicans, including Trump. His political stance is often described as far - right libertarian and has been criticized for his views on topics such as the COVID - 19 pandemic and climate change. At the same time, he is well - known for claiming to be an "absolutist of free speech," yet this stance has sparked wide controversy due to the spread of misinformation and hate speech on the X platform.
Regardless of Musk's future political direction, he represents a new example of promoting political mobilization and organization through high - tech narratives, representing a new type of political strategy that combines social platform operations, personal brand building, and cross - border political participation.
Enter X, Enter the Kingdom of Musk
Since acquiring Twitter and renaming it X in 2022, Musk has become the dominant force on the platform. His number of followers has more than doubled, reaching over 220 million. The Associated Press found that none of the other top - ten accounts has achieved a continuous, month - by - month increase in followers like Musk. As a result, the world's richest man, by controlling the most popular account on a social media platform used by hundreds of millions of users globally, wields significant political influence.
Given the lack of transparency in the algorithms that power the X platform, it is difficult to precisely determine what factors have driven the abnormal and continuous growth of Musk's account. However, researchers who have analyzed the data patterns of the X platform believe that the platform's algorithms have indeed been adjusted at times to amplify Musk's voice. He uses the platform's algorithms to push himself and the information he intends to spread to the forefront, thus becoming the "first - appearing figure" on the platform. This forms a kind of "digital belief engine" that drives public opinion rather than providing a balanced discussion.
When Musk acquired X, he promised to turn it into a haven for free speech. However, in fact, X is not a neutral forum for speech but has become Musk's "giant microphone." Musk frequently claims that his platform is a "digital public square" and packages political issues as a "struggle for free speech." This drama creates space for far - right or controversial views, thereby stimulating active responses from supporters and followers. This transformation gives him extensive power to guide public attention.
It can be said that Musk's operation of X is not only a business act, nor just an expression of personal ideology, but also the construction of a new political influence structure: it bypasses the existing political party system, marginalizes the editorial system of media elites, and shifts the focus to a charismatic individualism mediated by technology.
The core of this new model is a fundamental restructuring of the political intermediary structure. The traditional political communication path is: political party → mass media → public opinion; while the communication system built by Musk operates on a completely different logic: opinion leader (Musk or his supporters) → platform (X) → followers/voters.
In this structure, the platform itself becomes an institutional entity, replacing the roles of political parties and the media. Musk's personal interventions — whether it's adjusting the recommendation algorithm, hosting live talks with political figures, or reposting highly controversial memes — create an immediate, emotional, and seemingly "real" connection. This influence is not based on the systematic nature of a political program but on visibility, resonance, and identity symbols.
Relying on this new structure, Musk has become a "king - maker" at home and abroad. According to an analysis of public data by the Associated Press, the figures he focuses on cultivating include far - right political figures and radical influencers in Europe. His platform accelerates the rise of specific political figures. For example, the tweets of far - right candidates are amplified several times, triggering responses from supporters. Musk's online interactions with these people have extended to political endorsements, policy advocacy, and even financial support. He is helping transnational nationalists unite to oppose immigration, overturn progressive policies, and promote an extreme view of free speech. Although his actions have triggered strong backlash in some countries, the alliance of hard - right political parties and individuals he has promoted is shaking the foundation of the trans - Atlantic bond that has maintained U.S. - European relations for over eight decades. His dominant position has brought about real financial and political impacts, raising concerns in Europe about foreign interference — this time the threat comes from the traditional ally, the United States.
Technological Vision Replaces Traditional Policy Promises
What makes Musk unique is not only his cultural influence but also his extensive control over the technological ecosystem: he doesn't just rely on the platform — he owns it. The technological resources he controls go far beyond X, an information dissemination infrastructure. He also has xAI, an AI tool for real - time generation and amplification of discursive stances; Neuralink, symbolizing the vision of human - machine integration through brain - computer interfaces; Starlink, providing globally uncensored network connections with significant geopolitical implications; and Tesla/SpaceX, offering futuristic symbolic capital to legitimize his ideas technologically.
In an era when people are generally disillusioned with politics, Musk is emerging as a new type of political figure — neither a candidate nor a party leader, but a "technologist - prophet." Through the depiction of future scenarios such as Mars colonization, brain - computer interfaces, and general artificial intelligence, Musk has created a narrative system that can compete with traditional political language: in this system, policy proposals are replaced by future blueprints, and the sense of government responsibility is overshadowed by the talent and courage of engineers.
Whether intentionally or not, Musk is not running for office but "selling the future." What he is constructing now is not just rocket launch pads and social platforms, but a new grammar of legitimacy. In this grammar, "the future itself" becomes a new moral justification, making today's political disputes seem inefficient and outdated. This is no longer politics in the traditional sense but something new: a "platform populism" driven by technological fantasies.
In traditional democratic politics, leaders gain trust by proposing clear policies: tax plans, healthcare reforms, climate initiatives, etc. These proposals must be debated, reviewed, and revised in public institutions. Musk completely bypasses this model. His political language is apocalyptic and redemptive:
- Mars is not just a scientific goal — it is the "escape plan" for human civilization;
- AI alignment is not just an academic issue — it is a moral survival proposition;
- Neuralink is not just a device — it is the ultimate challenge to human limitations.
These visions do not seek public consensus but are presented as "inevitable," backed by a deeply held technological creed: technological progress is faster, cleaner, and more reliable than democratic negotiation. In Musk's worldview, we don't need better policies — we need to "build the way out."
Through a clever association with film and television works (such as being paralleled with the image of Tony Stark in "Iron Man"), Musk creates the role of a "savior of future technology," strengthening his identity as a visionary leader in the public consciousness. This image has led to wide - spread emotional recognition of his technological initiatives among his fans. However, if these future scenarios did not resonate deeply with the public, they would not have such a great impact. In fact, they precisely address the deep - seated anxieties of certain groups.
For tech - savvy youth who grew up in a "disruptive culture" and algorithmic logic, Musk's vision brings a sense of excitement, scale, and purpose that political parties and institutions cannot provide.
For "rationalists" and "long - termists," Musk's undertakings embody the "ethics of survival": either take humanity off Earth or ensure that AI does not destroy us.
For liberal entrepreneurs, he is a symbol of "sovereign innovation" — a builder unshackled by the inefficiencies of the state and moral preaching.
For many middle - class men who feel marginalized in the post - industrial era, Musk's rough - edged futurism evokes a long - lost fantasy of "doing great things," filling the void that technocracy and identity politics cannot soothe.
Even globalist elites and the "rootless" digital class have a favorable view of his ambition. In their eyes, nation - states are too narrow, while interstellar civilization is boundless. In this narrative, democracy is local, and Musk is "trans - planetary."
New Political Narrative: Let the Future Determine the Present
Musk's core narrative is "techno - libertarianism," which binds technological development to political ideas:
For example, the commitment to space exploration is a story of strengthening American leadership and countering geopolitical competition, aiming to arouse the sentiment of "making America great again"; the development of electric vehicles promotes the idea that market innovation is superior to government regulation, attracting free - market advocates; artificial intelligence emphasizes technological autonomy and preventing government monopoly, winning support from the tech community; the X platform absolutizes free speech, aggregating anti - mainstream media groups.
Musk uses this narrative to outline the "future society." He is not just "telling a story" but building a path for storytelling.
This path is the "simulation of the future political landscape," a time inversion where "the future determines the present." His narrative does not focus on current compromises or differences but projects a long - term vision of inevitable technological realization — whether it's "humanity will inevitably become a multi - planetary species" or "brain - computer interfaces will inevitably change the way we perceive." This makes real - world political issues seem secondary and even overshadowed by the "technological destiny."
Traditional ideology holds that society is full of conflicts, such as labor - capital contradictions, the tug - of - war between the state and the market, and class and identity politics. One of the functions of politics is to coordinate and mediate these conflicts.
Musk's future landscape simplifies complex social conflicts into engineering problems and technological challenges. It is no longer about "how to distribute interests" but about "how to maximize efficiency through algorithm optimization and technological breakthroughs." Political issues are replaced by technological issues, and social contradictions are "solved" by technological solutions, resulting in an obvious depoliticization.
Or rather, Musk's "politics" is more about the design of a technological architecture — through satellite networks covering the globe, self - driving cars revolutionizing transportation, and brain - computer interfaces reshaping cognition, these technological systems themselves form new governance spaces and social orders.
In other words, ideology has shifted from slogans and policies to system architectures and technological ecosystems, and its legitimacy is no longer based on value consensus but on the fact of "whether the system can operate."
Musk has successfully combined technological narratives with political mobilization. Through memes, short tweets, and controversial remarks, he creates a brand personality of "anti - elite, anti - censorship, and technology saving the nation," allowing political ideas to spread naturally among his fan community, thus politicizing the fan community. He also cleverly uses the "sense of participation" to get his fans involved in voting, protests, and online opinion battles. X, as an information source, spills over into media ecosystems such as YouTube, Telegram, and right - wing podcasts, forming an information cycle of "Musk - X - right - wing media."
Through the digital platform, the "infrastructure of narrative power," Musk shapes his leader image through personal narratives, mobilizes fan resonance, implants political opinions, and transforms them into real - world influence. This operation has upgraded him from a tech entrepreneur who "sells cars and builds rockets" to a political player who can directly influence public opinion, mobilize voters, and impact policies.
How Far Can Technological Power Interfere in Democracy?
This strategy is highly representative in contemporary digital governance and has sparked in - depth discussions about "private technological power interfering in democracy."
How to transform personal charisma into an institutionalized and sustainable political force is a major test for Musk. His setback in Washington shows that he still has a long way to go.
Undoubtedly, the biggest obstacle Musk faces is the solid fortress of the U.S. two - party system. The United States has long been dominated by the Democratic and Republican parties, which control most of the election resources, media exposure, and voter loyalty. Historically, third - parties or new political parties have had difficulty breaking through this "binary monopoly." Even when they make waves, they often play the role of "spoiler" rather than truly seizing power.
If Musk wants to form a new political party, he must first face many obstacles in the election system, including the plurality - voting system in constituencies, the Electoral College system, and the complex ballot qualification requirements in each state. These institutional designs effectively limit the rise of third - forces.
Secondly, although Musk controls the influential social media platform X, the U.S. media ecosystem is extremely fragmented and polarized. In addition to social media, there are traditional media such as television, radio, and newspapers, which often have distinct political leanings.
It is extremely difficult for a new political party to cross the barriers of different ideological camps and win broader public support. Especially in the current era of highly fragmented political information, how to transform technological visions into specific policies that address the concerns of ordinary people remains a huge challenge.
Thirdly, there is a gap between technological optimism and the reality of voters. Musk's political narrative is deeply rooted in an optimistic belief in technological progress such as AI, space colonization, and brain - computer interfaces. These concepts are very attractive to technology elites and young digital natives, but ordinary voters are still more concerned about real - world issues such as income inequality, healthcare, and educational opportunities.
If the new political party cannot effectively address these immediate interests, it may be difficult to form a lasting voter base. Over - emphasizing future technology may be seen as "out of touch with reality" or a "castle in the air."
Finally, there is a Weberian problem, that is, the contradiction between personal charisma and institutionalized governance. Musk's leadership style is highly personalized, centered around the image of a "founder - genius," emphasizing rapid decision - making and disruptive innovation. However, democratic politics requires institutionalized rules, checks and balances of power, and multi - party negotiation.
Despite these numerous challenges, Musk, his supporters, or relevant political forces may still achieve breakthroughs in some areas:
Agenda - setting for technological issues — by shaping public attention on issues such as AI governance, digital privacy, and space policies, indirectly influencing the policy directions of mainstream political parties.
An incubator for platform politics — using digital tools and social media to create a flexible, decentralized political action network, changing the traditional model of political mobilization.
Reshaping political discourse — linking "technological progress" with "the nation's future" to attract some voters disappointed with the existing political system, forming a new value identity.
In view of this, the future of politics is being redefined by technology and platforms. Whether Musk forms a new political party or not, the more profound political impact may not lie in his possibility of winning elections, but in his ability to challenge the traditional political party system and governance model through platform power and technological vision, reshape political discourse, and change the public's political imagination.
In the future, finding a balance between technological innovation