Elon Musk and the AfD

Elon Musk has written an opinion essay that was so controversial it caused the opinion editor at the paper where it was published to immediately resign yesterday. Musk wrote in support of the German political party Alternative for Germany (AfD), and was published in Welt am Sonntag, the Sunday edition of Die Welt, the country’s most respected conservative daily newspaper, alongside Frankfurter Allgemeine.

There was much debate on the editorial team as to whether to publish the essay at all, and even when they did, they took the unorthodox step of giving it a title that did not reflect the view of the author of the essay — “Why Elon Musk is betting on the AfD — and why he is wrong” — and then went one step further by including a disclaimer at the top and a rebuttal to his opinion directly beneath the essay.

Here is the post in full, which I shall translate below, and here is the disclaimer:

Only the Alternative for Germany can fundamentally reform the country, believes the US entrepreneur Elon Musk. Completely wrong, answers Jan Philipp Burgard. The AfD is xenophobic and anti-Semitic in parts. That is why it is a danger to Germany.

Shortly before Christmas, a post by Elon Musk on his platform X caused controversy. According to him, only the AfD can prevent Germany’s decline. In a text that the entrepreneur Musk made available to WELT AM SONNTAG, he tried to justify this statement. It is a text that calls for contradiction. Jan Philipp Burgard takes on this reply.

Burgard is a member of the editorial board and will be named editor-in-chief of Die Welt in the coming year. He wrote his doctoral dissertation on the political genius of former President Obama. In September, he moderated a debated between AfD leader Björn Höcke and Mario Voigt, the leader of the Christian Democratic Union of Germany (CDU). Burgard was criticized for platforming the AfD leader, but defended his involvement by arguing that such debates are the “boxing ring of democracy.”

As a free speech liberal and former professor of debate, I couldn’t agree more. So what did Musk say that stirred up so much controversy? Here is what he wrote:

Germany is at a critical point — its future is teetering on the brink of economic and cultural collapse. As someone who has made significant investments in Germany’s industrial and technological landscape, I believe I have the right to speak openly about my political orientation. The Alternative for Germany (AfD) is the last spark of hope for this country. Here’s why.

Economic revival: The German economy, once the engine of Europe, is now mired in bureaucracy and overwhelming regulations. The AfD has understood that economic freedom is not just desirable, but necessary. Its approach of reducing government over-regulation, cutting taxes, and deregulating the market reflects the principles that made Tesla and SpaceX successful. If Germany wants to regain its industrial strength, it needs a party that not only talks about growth, but also takes political action to create an environment where companies can thrive without heavy government intervention.

Musk is correct. A study by the Ifo Institute estimates that bureaucratic hurdles cost Germany up to €146 billion ($152 billion) annually in lost economic output, equating to approximately 3.5% of the GDP. Meanwhile, white-collar workers reportedly spend over 20% of their working hours navigating red tape. The problem is so bad that 80% of German firms now hire external advisers to manage these bureaucratic processes, which in turns eats up roughly 6% of a typical company’s annual revenue.

The problem is especially bad in the construction sector. For instance, the planned $261 million expansion of the university hospital in Tübingen, which treats 441,00 patients annually, was halted by the nature conservation authority because a rare bird species, the nightjar, had nested on the hospital roof. The bird is rare, but its conservation status is not “endangered” or even “vulnerable,” but “least concern.”

Immigration and national identity: Germany has opened its borders to very large numbers of migrants. While this was done with humanitarian intent, it has led to significant cultural and social tensions. The AfD advocates for a controlled immigration policy that prioritizes integration and the preservation of German culture and security. This is not about xenophobia, but about ensuring that Germany does not lose its identity in the pursuit of globalization. A nation must preserve its core values ​​and cultural heritage to remain strong and united.

This is also correct, but the Union parties, a coalition between the Christian Democratic Union of Germany (CDU) and the Christian Social Union in Bavaria (CSU), also oppose immigration from Muslim-majority nations, except without the credible accusations of anti-black or antisemitic rhetoric that one finds within AfD.

Energy and independence: The energy policy pursued by the current coalition is not only economically costly, but also geopolitically naive. Germany’s decision to phase out nuclear power and instead rely heavily on coal and imported gas, as well as on volatile wind and solar power, without the battery storage on the grid needed to ensure stability of the power supply, has left the country vulnerable, especially in terms of power interruptions.

The AfD takes a pragmatic approach to energy and advocates a balanced approach. I hope they consider expanding safe nuclear power combined with battery storage to cushion large fluctuations in power consumption, because that is the obvious solution.

Again, he is correct. Germany’s energy policy has left it vulnerable, particularly its reliance on Russian natural gas, although in fairness, this stems largely from strategic decisions made over the past two decades, including the expansion of pipeline infrastructure and long-term supply agreements. Specifically, Germany became increasingly dependent on Russian gas through the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 pipelines, which connect Russia directly to Germany via the Baltic Sea. The Nord Stream 2 project was ultimately halted after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Before this, Germany sourced approximately 55% of its natural gas imports from Russia. By relying on Russian gas, Germany allowed itself to become susceptible to geopolitical blackmail. But here’s the thing. AfD is openly pro-Russia, so even if Germany manages to disentangle itself from this energy trap and get out from under Russia’s boot heel, voting in AfD would effectively undermine that correction.

Political realism: The traditional parties have failed in Germany. Their policies have led to economic stagnation, social unrest and an erosion of national identity. The AfD, even though it is labelled as far-right, represents a political realism that resonates with many Germans who feel their concerns are ignored by the establishment. It addresses the issues of the day — without the political correctness that often obscures the truth. Portraying the AfD as far-right is clearly false, considering that Alice Weidel, the party’s leader, has a same-sex partner from Sri Lanka! Does that sound like Hitler to you? Come on!

That last line about Weidel should not persuade anyone. The leader of the Nazi paramilitary wing Sturmabteilung (SA), Ernst Röhm, was openly homosexual. Even Hitler knew about it. Furthermore, in his book Destined to Witness, the journalist Hans Massaquoi details how some lower-level Nazis dated and even married black African women despite the prohibition against such unions. Erhard Milch was a high-ranking Luftwaffe official and deputy to Hermann Göring, and was rumored to have Jewish ancestry through his father. But when this was brought to Göring’s attention, he famously remarked, “I decide who is a Jew.” Emil Maurice, one of Hitler’s friends and the first commander of the SS, also had Jewish ancestry but Hitler but declared him an “honorary Aryan.” And of course, anyone who knows anything about white supremacist or neo-Nazi organizations in the United States knows that many among them, in particular their leaders, tend to have a thing for Asian women.

Innovation and the future: I have built companies on the principle that innovation requires liberation from unnecessary constraints. The AfD’s vision is consistent with this ethos. It advocates for educational reforms that encourage critical thinking instead of indoctrination and supports the technology industries that represent the future of global economic leadership.

To those who condemn the AfD as extremist, I say: Don’t be fooled by the label attached to it. Look at its policies, economic plans and efforts to preserve culture. Germany needs a party that is not afraid to question the status quo, that is not stuck in the politics of the past.

Okay, let’s ignore the label others are slapping on AfD and listen to what AfD members have to say themselves. Björn Höcke, leader of the group’s Der Flügel faction, has said, “the big problem is that one presents Hitler as absolutely evil” and has called the Holocaust memorial in Berlin a “monument of shame.” He has also talked about the need for Lebensraum and has mockingly called former Chancellor Angela Merkel’s staff “Tat-Elite,” a term SS officers used to refer to themselves. In 2019, he co-authored an essay with Thorsten Heise, a leader of the neo-Nazi party The Homeland (NDP). When Obama was elected, NDP published a paper titled “Africa conquers the White House,” claiming that Obama won thanks to “an alliance of Jews and Negroes” that was hell-bent on destroying America’s “white identity.”

On the other hand, Höcke has also been accused of being a Nazi because he wants to abolish section 86 of the German Criminal Code, which prohibits the spread of propaganda, and section 130, which criminalizes incitement to hatred and makes Holocaust denial illegal. In other words, even though he may have immoral reasons for wanting to legalize Holocaust denial, it’s nevertheless the correct position because you do not counter disinformation or attempt to control the national narrative by censoring views you dislike. Nazis do that.

The AfD can save Germany from becoming a shadow of its former self. It can lead the country into a future where economic prosperity, cultural integrity and technological innovation are not just aspirations but reality. Germany has become too comfortable with mediocrity — it is time for bold change and the AfD is the only party that opens that path.

Suffice it to say, while Musk is correct with regard to his assessment of Germany’s problems, there doesn’t seem to be any reason to think AfD has the answer. Worse, Musk has claimed that AfD is “identical” to the Obama Democratic Party. Here’s Alex Griswold, my co-worker and communications campaign manager at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE).

Or consider AfD youth leader Lars Steinke:

So then here is what Burgard wrote in reply:

Elon Musk is the greatest entrepreneurial genius of our time. With his innovations, he has revolutionized the payment, car, and space industries. The prerequisite for his spectacular successes was always a radical analysis of the status quo. With regard to Germany, Musk is right when he sees our country in economic and cultural crisis. The failed migration, energy and social policies of the Merkel era and the traffic light coalition have put our prosperity at risk.

Musk’s diagnosis is correct, but his therapeutic approach that only the AfD can save Germany is fatally wrong. Let’s start with the revival of the German economy. Demands such as reducing bureaucracy, deregulation and tax cuts are not wrong just because they come from the AfD. But Musk seems to overlook the geopolitical framework in which the AfD wants to position Germany. According to its election manifesto, the AfD considers Germany’s exit from the European Union “necessary.” For Germany as an export nation, that would be a catastrophe. More than half of all German exports go to the European internal market.

With welfare gains of around 83 billion euros per year, Germany benefits from the internal market like no other country. According to a survey by the German Economic Institute (IW), 60% of companies see the AfD’s course as a risk. The director of the IW, Michael Hüther, even describes the AfD as “poison for our economy.”

The AfD is not only questioning the European Union as a guarantor of Germany’s economic stability, but also the relationship with our most important transatlantic partner in trade and security policy. “The geopolitical and economic interests of the USA are increasingly different from those of Germany and other European countries,” the AfD’s election manifesto states.

But the numbers tell a different story. In 2023, almost 10% of German exports went to the USA, the highest figure in more than 20 years. Is it not in Germany’s interest for the USA to remain the most important buyer of German exports? Conversely, the USA is one of Germany’s three most important import countries. Doesn’t Elon Musk want to see lots of Teslas driving along Germany’s motorways in the future?

Instead of relying on the Western ties that have been beneficial for Germany’s prosperity and security since Konrad Adenauer, the AfD is seeking rapprochement with Russia. There is no condemnation of the war of aggression against Ukraine in the election manifesto; instead, the party calls for the “restoration of undisturbed trade with Russia,” which includes “the immediate lifting of economic sanctions against Russia and the repair of the Nord Stream pipelines.” But a return to dependence on Putin’s gas will not save Germany — on the contrary, it would once again endanger Germany’s energy security.

The AfD also has friendlier words for China than for the USA: “The relationship with the People’s Republic of China must be based on Germany’s real political interests.” This means appeasement towards Beijing. Donald Trump, who has identified China as the USA’s biggest systemic rival, is unlikely to have much enthusiasm for this kind of “saving Germany.”

Musk sees the AfD as the solution to migration policy. In fact, Germany is struggling with out-of-control immigration. But the AfD is wandering around with unrealistic remigration plans for millions of people. In contrast, the CDU under Friedrich Merz has woken up and wants to turn away from Merkel’s uncontrolled do-gooder policy. To do this, it has significantly toughened its stance, calling for rejections at the borders and faster deportations of rejected asylum seekers. Such measures show that there are alternatives to the AfD’s right-wing extremist positions.

What caught my eye here was the mention of China, which often gets left out of these discussions. Not only is 25% of Musk’s net worth based on his ownership of Tesla, which produces half its vehicles at Gigafactory Shanghai, but Musk also uses his Tesla stock as backing for the loans he uses to pursue his business ventures. For instance, about 30% of the $44 billion deal to take over Twitter was funded by Wall Street banks like Morgan Stanley and Bank of America, whose loans were backed in part by Musk’s Tesla stock. As Musk becomes a policy advisor in the new administration, we should therefore pay attention to the fact that he is reluctant to criticize the Chinese Communist Party and is openly supporting extremist political parties in Europe that would seek to bring Germany, Russia, and China closer together.

If Musk thinks that classifying the AfD as right-wing extremist is “clearly wrong,” he is making a major mistake. The AfD is not just Alice Weidel, but also Björn Höcke. He can be described as right-wing extremist by court ruling. Höcke has also been convicted several times for using a banned Nazi slogan. “Everything for Germany!” — sounds like Hitler! The AfD with its Höcke wing, its pandering to Russia and China and its rejection of America and the EU is by no means “the last spark of hope for this country,” as Elon Musk writes. It is a threat to our values ​​and our economy. Even a genius can be wrong.

Everything for Germany may not sound like a bit of innocuous patriotism, but if you know anything about Nazi history, you’ll recognize this in German — Alles für Deutschland — as the slogan of the SA and a phrase commonly inscribed on Nazi service daggers.

Shortly after Musk’s essay was published online, the editor of the opinion section Eva Marie Kogel resigned — on X, no less — in a decision that I find disgraceful. It doesn’t matter what AfD represents. If your understanding of the purpose of an opinion section is that narcissistic, then perhaps you should resign.

But there is more to this story. Musk’s essay comes shortly after he claimed on X that “only AfD can save Germany.” This was two days after a 50-year-old Saudi Arabian doctor drove his car into a crowd at the Magdeburg Christmas market in Germany, killing five people, injuring at least 235 others. This added more fuel to the ongoing European debate over immigration and the forced Islamization of Europe against the will of the people of Europe themselves.

Musk makes several strong points about the problems facing Germany society today, but I do wonder whether the immigration issue isn’t the cardinal reason Musk is backing AfD, if not the only reason. And here, I sympathize. I have written for

Konstantin Kisin

in my essay, “How Marxism Subverted America,” about the nature of the social erosion gripping our country and the roots of woke ideology. But when it comes to immigration, America is experiencing an influx of Latinos whereas Europe is experiencing an influx primarily of Muslims, which means that Europe’s immigration crisis and its crisis of ideological conversion are one and the same, namely the Islamization of Europe.

So perhaps Musk’s support for AfD is a Faustian bargain that he finds to be a evil necessary, but then I wish he would say this instead of arguing that AfD rhetoric is fine, actually.