Trump and Musk - a dangerous cocktail
Donald Trump and Elon Musk show the danger of people who are allowed to run free for too long. That ends up being a danger to democracy
21.09.2023
Hugo Gaarden
Two people in the US, Donald Trump and Elon Musk, have become a dangerous cocktail for American democracy and business because they are freewheeling. This doesn't just concern the US. It has implications for allies' relations with the US and for the attitude of authoritarian states towards democracy.
The sentencing of individuals from the insurgent groups that stormed Capital Hill on 6 January 2021 shows how dramatically the case against Trump can develop.
When a leader of the radical right-wing group Proud Boys can be sentenced to 18 years in prison, it is safe to assume that Trump will receive a significantly longer sentence - effectively a life sentence. Such a harsh sentence would shake American society. If it doesn't happen, it will cast doubt on the justice system, because how can the man behind the riot get a lighter sentence than someone who followed Trump?
The severity is seen in the reasoning of Judge Timothy J. Kelly's judgement against Ethan Nordean, who was sentenced to 18 years in prison. He didn't kill anyone and he didn't blow up buildings or military installations. He was not convicted of a terrorist offence. Instead, he was convicted of a rebellion aimed at interfering with the electoral process - to "influence the government through intimidation and pressure."
He wanted to prevent parliamentary approval of the election that Trump lost - a loss he didn't want to recognise. Therefore, he had been whipping up a mood about the stolen election for a long time, and he had urged his supporters to go to parliament and prevent the democratic confirmation of the election results. So he was the mastermind.
New York Times journalist Peter Baker wrote some time ago that the impeachment of Trump will determine the future of American democracy. The case is fundamentally about whether a sitting president is trying to override the will of the people. This is at the heart of the 236-year-old constitution.
Obviously, it is not allowed to override an election result, for example by calling it "stolen". The fact that a year and a half has passed without any consequences has obviously had an impact in the US, where support for Trump is enormous despite the lies. But it has also led many in authoritarian states to claim that the US is no better than them, with opponents being prosecuted or thrown in jail.
The special prosecutor against Trump, Jack Smith, has presented a 45-page indictment with over 90 specific offences. Apparently, that's how much it takes to conduct what is essentially a very simple trial. By comparison, one of the Proud Boys members, Dominic Pezzola, was sentenced to 10 years in prison for smashing a window on Capitol Hill to enter Parliament. This is disproportionality of the highest order. It can only create distrust in American democracy and the justice system when it is so difficult to take action against a president who would hold power against the will of the people.
The US faces an enormous task if trust is to be restored. The situation is not as serious with Elon Musk, about whom American author Walter Isaacson has written a biography. But here again, we are talking about a person who is freewheeling - with major consequences.
No one doubts Musk's genius as an engineer and businessman. He has repeatedly spotted trends and turned them into reality at lightning speed while others hesitate for years, and he has managed to raise capital by convincing shareholders of the profitability of investing in electric cars, namely in Tesla. He raised billions of dollars for his projects without proving a return on investment. It was his personality and dynamism that convinced shareholders and others.
He has become known for his takeover of Twitter and for his attempt to send rockets to Mars to create a new world if the Earth is destroyed. One of the most striking is his massive investment in satellites through his company Starlink. Half of the world's satellites are owned by Starlink, which provides communications to the most desolate and impoverished countries around the world, but has also been used by Ukraine to provide communications between military units in the fight against the Russians.
A private citizen has become a vital player in the war. His system helps the Ukrainians pinpoint Russian targets. Only Russians can oppose this. But he has also intervened in the war by preventing the Ukrainians from using Starlink during an attack on Crimea on the grounds that it could – in the view of Mr. Musk - provoke a nuclear attack from President Putin and a Third World War. Indeed, it also prompted him to suggest that Ukraine should give up Crimea and eastern Ukraine and declare neutrality in order to reach a peace treaty with Russia.
No matter how realistic this proposal is, it is a private multi-millionaire´s meddling in a war that is normally decided by political leaders.
This has prompted the renowned British business newspaper, the Financial Times, the mouthpiece of capitalism, to warn against giving private businessmen the kind of free rein we see with Elon Musk. According to the newspaper, Musk helps determine how we drive and what we think (through the Twitter successor X). He believes himself capable of making plans for the survival of humanity - and he directly intervenes in the issue of war and peace.
Private businessmen are essential for a dynamic capitalism, but even wealthy business leaders should not have a decisive influence on defence, security and space, says the Financial Times.
Both the cases against Donald Trump and Elon Musk show how dangerous it becomes if the population and elected leaders do not draw a line in time for individuals who will not respect the baselines of a society.