Elon Musk and the Reality of Politics: Between Technological Genius and the Naivety of Power Ambition

After serving for 130 days as the head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) under the Trump administration, Elon Musk announced his resignation. His tenure ended without extension—leaving behind a crucial lesson on the distinction between intelligence and wisdom in the realm of politics.

As a key figure who played a significant role in Trump’s electoral victory—both through substantial financial contributions and his ownership of platform X (formerly Twitter)—Musk seemed to increasingly view himself as a kingmaker. He attempted to replicate this influence in Europe by supporting far-right populist parties, yet all such efforts ultimately failed. His personal reputation, along with the Tesla brand, suffered considerably—boycotted by consumers who opposed his political entanglements.

In the United States, Musk's libertarian mission to slash government spending through DOGE turned him into a public scapegoat. Many came to perceive him as the mastermind behind several unpopular policy decisions, while Trump remained strategically in the background—using Musk as a political heat shield.

What is most striking, however, is how Musk was eventually sidelined—not due to technical failure, but because he violated a cardinal rule of politics famously articulated in The 48 Laws of Power: “Never outshine the master.”

As Musk began to outshine Trump in visibility and influence—being even referred to as a “shadow president”—their relationship began to deteriorate. In a political landscape shaped by ego and perception, shining too brightly can hasten one's downfall.

This is not merely a story about Elon Musk. It reflects a deeper political reality: that politics is not a matter of technical intelligence, but rather the art of understanding people and reading the tides of momentum. Politics is not an algorithm; it cannot be conquered solely with logic, data, or wealth.

What, then, is the lesson?

Genius in technology, business, or academia does not necessarily translate into competence in political life. Even a figure as formidable as Elon Musk can falter if he fails to grasp the complex and ego-driven nature of power structures.

More critically, the direct involvement of global corporate elites in international politics sets a worrying precedent—opening the door to manipulation of public perception that could undermine global democratic stability.

In today’s world, the line between the public and private sectors grows increasingly blurred. Yet one truth remains clear: politics is a domain that demands comprehensive understanding—not unilateral control.