The U.S. Government Must Reconsider Elon Musk’s Role as a Defense Contractor
Elon Musk’s latest unhinged claims aren’t “bad takes”—they’re national security risks. Is it time for the U.S. to cut ties with a defence contractor who’s fanning political violence?
For a petulant edgelord, Elon Musk exercises far too much influence on American technology, space exploration, and defense.
His companies, especially SpaceX, have entrenched themselves industries long dominated by traditional contractors.
And what does the man himself do while his companies take on Government contracts? He tweets dangerous, irresponsible, idiotic and incendiary bullshit that can be broadly interpreted as either:
- Assassination attempts on Donald Trump are orchestrated by the President and Vice President of the United States, or
- Someone should attempt to assassinate the President and Vice President of the United States, or
- He‘s too fucking stupid to understand that his primary school-grade fucking humour has far reaching fucking consequences.
And any one of them should be enough to disqualify him from holding any public contract.
Musk is a public figure who regularly makes provocative, controversial, violent, incoherent, anti-Semitic, anti-democratic statements. This isn’t him “going too far” - he officially went too fucking far too many fucking years ago.
So why the fuck should the U.S. government keep up its relationship with him as a contractor?
Make No Mistake. This is Dangerous Shit.
When Musk tweets, millions listen. His massive platform amplifies every word into a deafening roar. In a fractured political hellscape, his reckless allegations pour gasoline on an already raging fire of paranoia and hatred.
Musk towers above political pundits. As a defense industry colossus, he's embedded in America's national security apparatus. This man helms companies privy to the nation's most guarded secrets. When Musk hurls inflammatory arsedrippings into the social abyss, he's not stirring Twitter drama - he's detonating trust at the highest levels of government. His reckless outbursts corrode the critical bond between the U.S. and its vital security partners.
Public-private partnerships, regardless of their domain, require utmost discretion, responsibility, and mutual trust. The U.S. government depends on its contractors - not only for cutting-edge tech - but also for the stability and reliability of those who provide them.
Every unhinged tweet from the man the internet has dubbed Phony Stark should have Pentagon brass questioning the wisdom of their bedfellows.
Should.
The Risk of Over-Reliance on Musk
SpaceX’s technological advancements have been critical to U.S. military strategy, but they also give Musk unprecedented influence over these operations. His remarks can’t be easily separated from his role in providing crucial defense infrastructure.
When Musk suggests that one political party is behind assassination attempts on a former president, or thinks it’s funny to speculate about why there aren’t more assassination attempts (???) he shifts from being an influential businessman to a demagogue whose public opinions have national security implications.
When a contractor’s behavior jeopardizes the stability and trust required for such partnerships, is it even possible to continue relying on that individual?
What happens when - not if - Musk’s political views, personal whims, or provocative comments interfere with the U.S. government’s ability to carry out its operations?
Musk is actively stoking the fires of a violent accelerationist movement.
So what should the consequences be?
Responsibility and Accountability
Musk’s defenders might argue that his comments are simply a matter of free speech.
This is obtuse and absurd.
Musk’s words have wide-ranging consequences. His tweets are not just expressions of personal opinion; they are designed to incite a reaction, shape public discourse and, by extension, alter the perception of national security.
There is a heightened responsibility that comes with being a major defense contractor. Clear and simple - Musk has zero understanding or appreciation for that responsibility. As a contractor who provides services essential to U.S. military and defense operations, he must be held to a standard. JFC, at this point any standard would do.
Defense contractors must be trusted partners. They provide more than just technological solutions; they offer stability, discretion, and the ability to operate in sensitive environments. Musk’s willingness to engage in political fire breathing, amplified by his enormous following, makes him an outlier and an accountability in the defense space.
The U.S. government faces a difficult decision. It has to weigh the benefits of Musk’s technological contributions against the risks posed by his unacceptable public behavior and vile politically partisan statements.
Meaning?
It’s time to reassess the relationship with Musk and SpaceX.
The U.S. government has to ensure that its partnerships are stable, reliable, and not subject to the whims and mood swings of Ketamine addled white-supremacist sympathising individuals with vast public influence.
In the case of Elon Musk, the risks outweigh the rewards.
