Elon Musk is reshaping global power structures through a system that blends advanced technology, state partnerships, and social control, according to a new analysis that traces his influence back to his upbringing in 1970s apartheid South Africa. Political economist Quinn Slobodian and technology journalist Ben Tarnoff argue in their book "Muskism: A Guide for the Perplexed" that Musk's approach mirrors Henry Ford's industrial dominance, but with far more troubling implications for democracy and individual freedom.

What Is "Muskism" and Why Should We Care?

The term "Muskism" draws a parallel to "Fordism," the economic model that shaped American society from around 1935 through the postwar era. Ford's mass production system created jobs, decent wages, and strong social security. Muskism, by contrast, aims to build what the authors describe as a "stupendously networked, massively surveilled, anti-liberal and insular" socioeconomic order. Under this system, oligarchs and national governments use advanced technology to weaken democracy, divide populations, impose social hierarchy, and shield themselves from external threats.

The distinction matters because Musk's influence extends across multiple critical sectors. Unlike Ford, who focused primarily on automobiles, Musk commands stakes in space exploration, electric vehicles, artificial intelligence, and social media. This diversification amplifies his power to shape not just markets, but governance itself.

How Did South Africa Shape Musk's Vision?

According to Slobodian and Tarnoff, understanding Musk requires understanding the world that built him. Musk was born and raised in 1970s South Africa during the final years of apartheid, a period when systemic racism organized society entirely. The state and big business conspired to favor whites through elaborate bureaucratic procedures and numerous laws, despite international hostility.

The authors argue that South Africa taught Musk what they call "fortress futurism," a belief that technology can strengthen self-reliance in a hostile world. This ideology, shaped by a surveillance state designed to maintain racial hierarchy, became embedded in Musk's worldview. When he emigrated to Canada at age 17 to avoid mandatory military service, he carried these beliefs with him rather than shedding them, the authors note.

By 1992, Musk was in the United States, attending the University of Pennsylvania to study physics and economics. Within a few years, he had established his first tech startup and begun building the empire that would eventually span multiple industries.

How Does Musk Build "Techno-Sovereignty"?

Slobodian and Tarnoff describe Muskism as a blend of proven technologies, technological promises, state-business relationships, and memes designed to legitimize Musk's business empire. Together, these elements promote what they call "techno-sovereignty," where advanced technology produced by private companies allows national governments and their preferred citizens to project power overseas while reducing vulnerability to external threats.

The system ensures American wealth in a post-free trade era where China, Russia, and Iran are seen as threats. Critically, many people cannot see this system operating, even as it negatively affects the world they inhabit. This invisibility is part of its power.

Ways Musk Consolidates Control Across Industries

• Vertical Integration: Musk builds companies that control their entire supply chains rather than relying on outside suppliers. Tesla, for example, now produces not only vehicles but also batteries at massive scale and has expanded into renewable energy battery systems, resembling old-style Fordist conglomerates without unionized workforces.
• State Symbiosis: Rather than competing in open markets, Musk prefers partnerships with national governments. SpaceX is a preferred U.S. government supplier and contractor with few rivals, and the U.S. military uses Starlink, SpaceX's low-orbit satellite internet system, suggesting an intimate relationship between government and big business.
• Hype and Future Fabulation: Musk drives innovation relentlessly while raising capital through effective sales pitches and promises about future technology. This allows him to amass resources and influence before technologies are fully proven.
• Media Dominance: Since acquiring Twitter in late 2022 and founding xAI with its Grok chatbot eight months later, Musk controls both a major social media platform and an artificial intelligence company, giving him unprecedented power to shape information and narrative.

What Role Did Government Support Play in Musk's Rise?

Musk's recognition of the power of the national state, and the benefits of partnering with it, is clearest in his space and energy ventures. During the Obama administration, worries about Chinese economic competition and climate change allowed Musk to gain massive federal support after the 2008 financial crisis. This gave him an advantage over other American vehicle manufacturers who were barely in the electric vehicle game at the time.

This pattern of state support differs markedly from Ford's era, when companies competed more openly in markets. Musk's approach represents what the authors call "state symbiosis," a closer entanglement between government and private business than existed during the industrial era.

How Does Musk's Social Media Presence Amplify His Power?

From 2017 onward, Musk became what the authors describe as "extremely online, an incurable poster" on what was then Twitter. Initially, he used the platform to promote his companies. Later, he used it to broadcast his political views and shape public discourse. This direct-to-public communication channel, combined with his ownership of the platform itself, gives him unparalleled ability to influence narratives without traditional media gatekeeping.

His brief tenure as head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) in 2025 further illustrated his reach into governance. Though he held no prior political experience, he attempted to transform government into a problem of data synthesis and pattern recognition, leading to optimized policy solutions. The authors note that in doing so, he seemed to forget that real people, entitled to fairness and justice, were affected profoundly by his desk-based decisions.

What Makes Musk Different From Other Tech Billionaires?

While other tech titans like Amazon's Jeff Bezos, Palantir's Alexander Karp, and Meta's Mark Zuckerberg have also drawn criticism, Slobodian and Tarnoff argue that Musk occupies a unique position. His unusual South African upbringing and the ideology of fortress futurism it instilled give him a distinctive capacity to amass social power in ways his peers do not.

"Musk sells the fantasy that, in an increasingly unstable world, both states and individuals can fortify their self-reliance by plugging into his infrastructures. The paradox is that, in doing so, you become reliant on him," the authors stated.

Quinn Slobodian and Ben Tarnoff, authors of "Muskism: A Guide for the Perplexed"

This paradox is central to understanding Muskism. Citizens and governments believe they are gaining independence and security by adopting Musk's technologies and systems. In reality, they become increasingly dependent on his infrastructure, his decisions, and his vision of the future.

The scale of Musk's accomplishments is undeniable. Before turning 55, he had founded or co-founded SpaceX (2002), Tesla (2004), OpenAI (2015), Neuralink (2016), the Boring Company (2017), acquired Twitter (2022), and founded xAI (2023). He briefly became the world's first trillionaire before returning to billionaire status. Few individuals in history have wielded such concentrated power across so many critical domains simultaneously.

The question Slobodian and Tarnoff raise is whether this concentration of power, rooted in an ideology shaped by apartheid-era surveillance and hierarchy, poses an unprecedented danger to democratic institutions and human freedom. Their analysis suggests that understanding Musk requires looking not just at his companies, but at the ideological system they collectively represent.