British politics began the new year under online siege from the incoming US government’s provocateur (a.k.a. “troll”) Elon Musk, ironically dubbed the “Efficiency Emperor.”
The culprit, Musk claims, lies in the way the British government has handled abuse and grooming cases being investigated by the National Crime Agency. Musk recently uncovered a scandal in the UK that has already been the subject of much debate and investigation.
He is currently posting to X (formerly Twitter) several times a night, sharing his thoughts on the issue, and is determined to link Prime Minister Keir Starmer and the broader Labor Party to this horrific scandal. This suggests that they are part of a rape gang. For failing to act when he was Director of Public Prosecutions.
Want more political coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of government developments and fact-check the claims being made.
Sign up for our weekly politics newsletter, delivered every Friday.
Needless to say, the legal system is more complex than Musk suggests, and political action is limited to what is legally possible. But that doesn’t prevent Mr. Musk from using the scandal to politicize and attack Mr. Starmer.
Musk also praised convicted far-right criminal Tommy Robinson (real name Stephen Yaxley-Lennon), saying he should be released despite his conviction for contempt of court. I intervened by making a suggestion.
It’s worth remembering that both Mr Musk and reform leader Nigel Farage have a relationship that predates his latest intervention. Just a few weeks ago, the two met at Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home, where they are said to have discussed Musk’s funding of U.K. reform.
The current status of such discussions is unclear after recent exchanges regarding X, which may suggest that the relationship is not as stable as it appears.
Mr Farage is a shrewd political operator with extensive experience of engaging with voters. He recognizes that a relationship with Robinson would be the endgame for any party, especially a young party like Reform UK. However, Mr Musk’s defense of the former British National Party, UK Liberal Party and British Defense Alliance member prompted Mr Farage to disassociate himself and Reform UK from Mr Musk’s post supporting Mr Robinson.
This prompted Mr Musk to call for Mr Farage to be replaced by the Reform UK leader. The split between Mr Musk and Mr Farage came shortly after it was confirmed that he appeared to be switching support for Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch and his moderate party, which called for a national inquiry into gang grooming.
EPA/Will Oliver
This suggests that Mr. Musk is not a friend of thoughtful or prudent policy-making. Also, he is not faithful to the people he is dating. Indeed, as author Nick Cohen recently pointed out, his quickness to dump Farage and embrace Badenoch while hinting that he was previously a friend of Britain’s meant that “he’s not a friend worth having.” suggests.
patronage costs
The issues Mr. Musk points out are extremely important. The abuse of young women and children is too important to be a billionaire’s plaything. The events of the past few weeks have shown us that the price of an alliance with Musk is betrayal, when a moment or a thought pops into your head. Farage was already seeing this.
Such capriciousness is a dangerous habit for those close to power, and a worrying one for incoming US President Donald Trump. Meanwhile, British politicians must be realistic about what it means for their country.
Politicians of all parties need to immediately distance themselves from Mr. Musk. He is no friend of democracy or legal process. Importantly, any contribution to any party’s coffers should be treated as a business transaction in which Mr. Musk, as a businessman, expects something in return.
Want more coverage of UK politics from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of government developments and fact-check the claims being made.
Sign up for our weekly politics newsletter, delivered every Friday.
Although it is unclear what the quid pro quo looks like, there is no doubt that all business transactions involve payment for services or products, and that it may be in the form of favorable business treatment or a broader political agenda. There is a possibility that it will be taken. This comes at a very high price, and donations, no matter how tempting, should be refused.
The principles of large-scale foreign interference witnessed in recent weeks reveal serious problems that need to be addressed. Mr Musk has certainly crossed the line, particularly in the scale of his comments about Starmer, Gordon Brown and Nigel Farage.
Some form of response from the UK should now be inevitable, but it will be through a legal and democratic process. We need to move away from social media diplomacy and return to carefully considered interactions that are made public only after an agreement is reached.
Those who doubt that necessity should consider the consequences of allowing members of a foreign government to effectively end democratic choice in the UK. This is not just a crossing of a political line, but a complete undemocratic interference that endangers the safety of democratically elected politicians from all sides. It certainly requires a meaningful and united response.
