Elon musk and his sons

[Robert]

i agree. i struggle with term limits. they might eliminate good reps, and, if by age, clearly, people age very differently!
the electorate is responsible.

which goes to the question of insufficient, unbalanced public education. too much is not taught! balance is sorely needed.
[/quote]

I am willing to give up Rand Paul if it means we get rid of the rest.

It does sadden me when I see Musk not with his family. Sleeping on factory and office floors may sound good, but there are children not seeing their father and interacting with him. He may not be wired to be a monogamous person, so he should stop having children that require that. He is doing himself and them harm.

Now go cut spending.

[Judas Maccabeus]

This expresses my understanding of Musk well:

He Is Not Just a “Nazi”: Why It Matters
It’s not name-calling. It’s not theoretical.
Jim Stewartson
Mar 16, 2025

I was asked in my weekly Zoom meeting to explain why it matters that Elon Musk is a “Nazi.” It was pointed out, correctly, that many people glaze over at the word — in much the same way that people glazed over at the word “Russia” for years. Many people are still left with the remnants of a long hoax portraying Musk as a “genius” and a “visionary” when he’s never invented anything but his own mythology. So, here’s my answer, as concisely as I can.

Elon Musk is not just a “Nazi.”

Elon Musk’s psychology is comparable to neo-Nazi mass murderers Anders Breivik, Brenton Tarrant, Patrick Crusius and Dylann Roof. He is a mentally ill, emotionally broken teenage boy committing mass violence in order to make the world safe for white people.

He won’t stop until millions are dead.

This isn’t name-calling, and it’s not theoretical. What he has already done with DOGE will kill countless people in countries we were helping with life-saving food and medicine. He didn’t do it to save money, he did it because he hates Black and brown people and he wants them to die, as fast as possible.

Elon Musk wants to destroy the social safety net in America so he can disempower and identify the ethnic groups he wants to imprison, enslave, and ultimately eliminate. He wants to incentivize white births because he’s terrified of being replaced himself, a condition he was born into as a son of apartheid South Africa. He’s fine with dismantling the health care system because the only people who will die from measles, in his mind, deserve it. It’s not just being a memelord, and it’s not just greed, it’s enacting national eugenics as policy.

Elon Musk was taught by his father that he is a special little boy born for greatness — destined to live out the dreams of great Nazi rocket scientists. And then his father abused and abandoned him, and married his half-sister. When Elon was required to go into the military, Errol Musk told his son to leave South Africa because he didn’t think Black people could run the government and was convinced everything would collapse. So, Elon went to Canada and quickly schemed his way into America with his father’s money.
...

Read the rest of the article here: https://www.mind-war.com/p/he-is-not-ju ... it-matters

His views on genetic determinism clearly comport with the views of National Socialism. His view that any reproduction is permissible as long as it is genetically superior also do. Did anyone know there were like 300-400 pregnancies among the “ Bund Deutscher Mädel” or league of German girls after the Nuremberg rally? Complaining fathers were told to, effectively shut up.

[Grace]

This expresses my understanding of Musk well:

Read the rest of the article here: https://www.mind-war.com/p/he-is-not-ju ... it-matters

The article is full of claims that are either unverifiable, lies or fearmongering hypotheticals.

Just a few from the article.

He won’t stop until millions are dead.

Stop what? That is a hypothetical. And if Musk wanted millions of people dead, how different would that be than the evil warmongering, that emboldened a brutal dictator and indirectly impowered a cruel, barbaric organization such as Hamas which has left thousands dead.
He was not complicit in the horrific deaths at the border, due the open border. Open borders that resulted in over 50 people, including children being cooked in a trailer. Or became the largest purveyors of sex trafficking in the world which included children.

This isn’t name-calling, and it’s not theoretical. What he has already done with DOGE will kill countless people in countries we were helping with life-saving food and medicine. He didn’t do it to save money, he did it because he hates Black and brown people and he wants them to die, as fast as possible.

Although I do think some of the USAID that went to poor countries, should not have been cut. But the rest of the statement is unverifiable and fearmongering.

Elon Musk is a serial mass killer who is quite literally sitting on the floor of the West Wing with his gaming laptop hacking the US Government to make America more white, patriarchal and violent.

There is no verification for the claim that he is racist nor that he is a mass killer.

he cannot understand empathy, and finds the whole concept of human emotion, altruism and charity to be “inefficient”

Well, let's see about his altruism and charity.

$55 million to St. Jude Children's Research Hospital: which helped and supported pediatric healthcare and research. And…gasp…some of the lives saved were black and brown children.

XPRIZE Foundation: $54 million which hosts competitions to spur technological innovation.
https://www.xprize.org/

Schools and Nonprofits in Brownsville, Texas: $20 million to Cameron County schools and $10 million for downtown revitalization in Brownsville, near the SpaceX launch site. These donations supported education and community development in an area tied to his business operations.

He provided Starlink to places devastated by floods, hurricanes, etc.

Sent hundreds of Powerwall battery systems that can be paired with solar panels to the devastated Puerto Rico in an effort to restore electric power there after a hurricane. And once again…gasp…those people were brown people.

He has donated to the Sierra Club, National Wildlife Federation, Oxfam, the Clinton Foundation, and Doctors Without Borders and gave $480,000 for water filtration in Flint, Michigan, and $424,000 for laptops in Flint schools.

And lastly, his company brought the stranded astronauts back to earth.

[JohnH]

His views on genetic determinism clearly comport with the views of National Socialism. His view that any reproduction is permissible as long as it is genetically superior also do. Did anyone know there were like 300-400 pregnancies among the “ Bund Deutscher Mädel” or league of German girls after the Nuremberg rally? Complaining fathers were told to, effectively shut up.

Eugenics was widespread in America in the 30s, so one could also just say Elon Musk’s views comport with the Democratic Party.

It is utterly ridiculous to keep calling Elon Musk a Nazi, much as it was ridiculous to call Trump Hitler. And no, cutting off USAID’s billions to put on drag shows overseas does not make one a “Nazi”.

[Szdfan]

The reality is we all rationalize some. We have to. No other person will live up to our expectations. Well, few will. Just because I really like that Musk is working with DOGE and finding all kinds of waste and corruption does not mean I give him a pass on other things. It just means I can accept him as the broken person we all are.

I also do not see a moral shift where he is given more tolerance in those areas. If you do, that is fine, but I just am not seeing it. You are welcome to point it out if I do it. You have my permission. If I am doing it and am unaware, seeing it will at least allow me to consider it and evaluate if I should change some of my perspectives. Just do it in a healthy way, not a "I caught you!" way.

I agree that we all rationalize at times—that’s human nature. I frequently wrestle with my own biases, blind spots and hypocrisies. But I don’t think that means we should just accept it without questioning when it happens, especially when it affects how we apply moral principles.

You say you don’t see Musk being given more tolerance than others—I respect that, but I do see it. I’m not coming at this with a “gotcha!” mindset, but I do think it’s worth asking questions about. I think this is something worth reflecting on.

Can you think of a public figure on the left who has had multiple children with multiple women and was given the same grace Musk has been given in this conversation? If there is one, I’d be interested to hear about it. If not, doesn’t that suggest there might be a different standard at play?

I think your last questions are the ones that should be wrestled with. I can't think of any public figures on the left who have had a thread on MN dedicated to their having had multiple children with multiple women. Perhaps we should start one but I'm guessing if one was started, people would be extra careful not to come across as hypocritical.

Having said that, I'm wondering why we, as followers of Jesus, should be looking to politicians and/or public figures to provide us with examples of what is/is not moral or ethical. I have seen reports in the recent past of two politicians, one Republican and one Democrat, who are separated from their wives but not yet divorced, having what appears to be affairs with other women. This kind of immorality is not new in politics or in the world in general.

Politics, by nature, is hypocritical. Therefore, offering opinions about political matters and politicians will be viewed by others as hypocritical. I think what you are observing about the responses you are seeing on MN is generally true. I've observed it on both sides.

Thanks for your thoughtful response, Gary. I agree with a lot of what you’re saying. If this forum were dominated by liberals, I’d expect to see more examples of liberal hypocrisy and similar patterns of selective outrage in defense of prominent liberal figures. But since MN is largely a conservative space, it tends to reflect conservative-leaning inconsistencies. It’s human nature to overlook moral failings when they happen within our own “side.” That’s why I think it’s important to wrestle with these patterns rather than just accept them as inevitable.

I also agree that public figures shouldn’t necessarily be our moral guides. But when their morality (or lack of it) becomes a talking point—whether to condemn or excuse—it’s worth examining how consistently those judgments are applied. It’s not just about whether public figures live up to moral standards, but about how we, as a society, decide who gets a pass and who doesn’t.

[Szdfan]

I think this particular thread of conversation has played itself out, so I’ll move on to the next thing, but I just wanted to say a couple of quick things.

In some of these discussions, I push harder because I want to see how certain people respond. I’m genuinely curious about how some of our more vocal Trump supporters think and how they rationalize their support. For me, the issue here isn’t just whether Musk is moral or a genius, but whether the same standards of morality are applied to Musk as they would be to anyone else. In other words, if Musk were Team Democrat, would the same people give him the same grace they are giving him now?

What I’ve observed in this thread is a tendency to shift the conversation away from Musk’s morality—whether through deflections (“Musk builds great rockets”), whataboutism (“What about Biden?”), personal attacks against me, or claims that questioning these inconsistencies is just “derangement.”

So, I’m not frustrated in the way Valerie implies. I’m pointing out a pattern of behavior, and so far, the responses are only reinforcing what I’ve observed. These responses highlight how difficult it can be to apply moral standards consistently—especially when the person in question is on our team.

That’s something I’ve wrestled with myself. There have been times I’ve defended or overlooked behavior I knew was wrong because I liked the person or thought they were on my side. As a Christian, I don’t want to play that game anymore.

As Gary pointed out, politics is inherently hypocritical. I think life in general is full of contradictions, and the best way to navigate that is through self-reflection, challenging our own assumptions, and striving for integrity.

For me, the value in these conversations isn’t about “winning”—it’s about thinking through faith and morality in a deeper way. I’m not a neutral person—I have deep convictions, and I want to live them out with integrity and consistency. Conversations like these help me reflect on that.

I believe these discussions should challenge us—not just in what we believe, but in how we apply those beliefs. If morality only applies selectively, is it really morality at all?

I know some might disagree with how I’ve approached this conversation, but for me, it’s been a valuable opportunity for self-reflection and self-examination.

Thanks for engaging.

[mike]

In some of these discussions, I push harder because I want to see how certain people respond. I’m genuinely curious about how some of our more vocal Trump supporters think and how they rationalize their support. For me, the issue here isn’t just whether Musk is moral or a genius, but whether the same standards of morality are applied to Musk as they would be to anyone else. In other words, if Musk were Team Democrat, would the same people give him the same grace they are giving him now?

Oh, absolutely. I believe that if Musk were Team Democrat, the liberals here would be talking about such things as the problem with violence against Tesla assets and excusing Musk's personal morality.

For me, the value in these conversations isn’t about “winning”—it’s about thinking through faith and morality in a deeper way. I’m not a neutral person—I have deep convictions, and I want to live them out with integrity and consistency. Conversations like these help me reflect on that.

I believe these discussions should challenge us—not just in what we believe, but in how we apply those beliefs. If morality only applies selectively, is it really morality at all?

Great points. I agree.

[Franklin]

Eugenics was widespread in America in the 30s, so one could also just say Elon Musk’s views comport with the Democratic Party.

I support eugenics and I am not a Nazi. The Nazis used eugenics, but they also used math. Does that mean that people who support math are Nazis? This is silly. Also, eugenics doesn't require coercion. So this is one area where I somewhat agree with Elon Musk, I just disagree on which characteristics to select for. I don't think the genes of intelligent psychopaths who become rich in modern culture but don't produce anything of value are the genes I want.

[Robert]

I believe that if Musk were Team Democrat, the liberals here would be talking about such things as the problem with violence against Tesla assets and excusing Musk's personal morality.

Musk was Team Democrat and he was shielded and loved by the left for all the things he is doing now except for supporting Trump but mostly DOGE.

This is basically all that has changed.

When you throw a rock into a pack of hounds, the hit dog does the howling. Could it be he is cutting off the pipelines to money and those loosing out are using their useful idiots to do the attacking, just like the KKK and BLM were used?

[Judas Maccabeus]

His views on genetic determinism clearly comport with the views of National Socialism. His view that any reproduction is permissible as long as it is genetically superior also do. Did anyone know there were like 300-400 pregnancies among the “ Bund Deutscher Mädel” or league of German girls after the Nuremberg rally? Complaining fathers were told to, effectively shut up.

Eugenics was widespread in America in the 30s, so one could also just say Elon Musk’s views comport with the Democratic Party.

It is utterly ridiculous to keep calling Elon Musk a Nazi, much as it was ridiculous to call Trump Hitler. And no, cutting off USAID’s billions to put on drag shows overseas does not make one a “Nazi”.

Ah, yes. The "eugenics" in American history was largely an attempt to keep people who were considered "defective" or "substandard" from reproducing. It was a misguided and evil attempt to keep people out of the gene pool.

National Socialist eugenics was a completely different animal. While it definitely included the above, evil as it was, but it included an attempt to have those with perceived "superior" genetics to "breed" as much as possible. Family nurture was unimportant in their program. SS men, in particular, were encouraged to "inseminate" as meany good German maidens as possible, married or not. For evidence I submit the Lebensborn program:

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/ ... rn-program

Pure evil. And what is going on reeks of this ideology.