Just weeks before Germany’s general election, a spectre is haunting the country’s political class —the spectre of Elon Musk.
Amid the allegeded threat of foreign interference in the election, the hand-wringing over how to stop the troublesome billionaire boss of X/Twitter—who has publicly backed the far-right populist Alternative für Deutschland (AfD)—has reached worrying heights. This was evident when Thierry Breton, the former European Union commissioner for digital affairs, peddled the idea that the elections might have to be annulled if Germans voted the wrong way.
Breton was discussing the possibility of an election win for the AfD in an interview with French broadcaster BFMTV/RMC. Referring to Musk, he said:
Let’s keep calm and enforce our laws in Europe when they are at risk of being circumvented […]. We did it in Romania, and we will obviously do it if necessary in Germany.
He was, of course, alluding to the shocking annulment of Romania’s presidential election in December after an outsider—a Putin-supporting anti-vaccine populist—had surprisingly won the first round. The EU elites tried to blame the result on foreign ‘disinformation’ spread via social media.
No German politician has yet gone as far as Breton. But it would be a big mistake to dismiss the former EU bureaucrat’s statement as a mere slip of the tongue–even if he has, in the meantime, retracted. (After Musk labelled him “a tyrant of Europe”, Breton claimed that he had been misquoted, that it “was another fake news” or a translation mistake, tweeting: “The EU has NO mechanism to nullify any election anywhere in the EU.”)
Yet other influential figures, such as Germany’s president Frank Walter Steinmeier (SPD), have also issued similar warnings. When Steinmeier dissolved the Bundestag (German Parliament) in December, and announced snap elections, he said: “Outside influence is a danger to democracy. Be it covert … or open and blatant, as is currently being practised particularly intensively on Platform X.” Notably, to date, the president has not distanced himself from Breton’s threat to erase the election results.
There is no doubt that Musk has been meddlesome. He has also emboldened the AfD leadership. In late December, he wrote an opinion piece for Die Welt claiming that “only the AfD could save Germany” from decline. Following Steinmeier’s warnings in December, he took to X, disparaging the president as an “anti-democratic tyrant”.
Then, on January 9th, Musk livestreamed approximately 70 minutes of conversation with Alice Weidel, the AfD’s candidate for chancellor. During the talk, he reiterated his endorsement for her party. Though not everyone in the AfD was happy with Weidel’s performance—she was long-winded, and often very crass—they naturally appreciated Musk’s backing. At the AfD’s party conference, held last weekend, Weidel’s references to Musk received enthusiastic applause.
However, attributing the AfD’s success to Musk, rather than to the failures of Germany’s established politicians, is blatant nonsense. The party’s polling numbers have held steady at around 20% for weeks, and recent surveys indicate that Musk’s interventions have had negligible impact, at best. This narrative reflects a persistent and problematic anti-populist assumption: that voters are passive objects, easily swayed by ‘demagogues’ rather than acting on their own political judgment.
Back in January last year—long before Musk was getting up to mischief online—Frank Walter Steinmeier called for a large alliance against the AfD and said: “We will not allow this country to be destroyed by extremist pied pipers.” What he meant was that AfD supporters were following tricksters and shady characters, as the rats and the children of Hamelin followed the pied piper to their doom in the old German folktale. The insult to German voters in the analogy was obviously lost on the president. The establishment’s fear of Musk is, in truth, its fear of the electorate.
The threat to cancel the election was just one of many that have been made in recent days. Following Musk’s conversation with Weidel, EU vice president Henna Virkkunen announced an investigation into whether the conversation violated the Digital Services Act. Germany’s Bundestag has also launched an investigation into whether it was an illegal “party donation.”
The idea that the speech had given the party an illegal monetary advantage (“geldwerter Vorteil“) has also been peddled by Robert Habeck, Germany’s hapless economics minister and the Green Party’s candidate for chancellor. If the allegation of a financial advantage is proven, “this would have considerable consequences” for the AfD, said Michael Brenner, a constitutional lawyer, adding that the party could face “a very substantial sum” in fines.
Claiming that a single interview may have given the AfD an unfair advantage in the run-up to the federal elections is more than a little disingenuous. While mainstream parties like the SPD, CDU, and Greens regularly receive extensive media coverage through numerous interviews and talk shows, the AfD has frequently been excluded from such platforms.
The systematic exclusion of Germany’s second most popular party from media platforms isn’t surprising. For years, the German media landscape has been dominated by a center-left worldview. This bias is reflected in the demographics of media professionals. A 2020 study of trainees at the public service broadcaster ARD showed an overwhelming preference for left-leaning parties: 57% supported the Greens, 23% the Left Party, and 12% the SPD.
Another comprehensive study indicated that 41% of German journalists align themselves with Green politics. Notably, none of the journalists surveyed expressed political alignment with the AfD.
Musk’s crass intervention in the German election campaign is not without its problems. But as talk of nullifying the election and threats of heavy fines show, it is the authoritarian tendencies of the elite that are the bigger problem. Thierry Breton’s threat must serve as a warning to every democrat who believes that people can make up their own minds about whom to support in an election.
A Spectre Is Haunting Germany
Elon Musk attends a symposium on “Antisemitism Online” during the European Jewish Association conference in Krakow, on January 22, 2024.
Photo: Sergei GAPON / AF
Just weeks before Germany’s general election, a spectre is haunting the country’s political class —the spectre of Elon Musk.
Amid the allegeded threat of foreign interference in the election, the hand-wringing over how to stop the troublesome billionaire boss of X/Twitter—who has publicly backed the far-right populist Alternative für Deutschland (AfD)—has reached worrying heights. This was evident when Thierry Breton, the former European Union commissioner for digital affairs, peddled the idea that the elections might have to be annulled if Germans voted the wrong way.
Breton was discussing the possibility of an election win for the AfD in an interview with French broadcaster BFMTV/RMC. Referring to Musk, he said:
He was, of course, alluding to the shocking annulment of Romania’s presidential election in December after an outsider—a Putin-supporting anti-vaccine populist—had surprisingly won the first round. The EU elites tried to blame the result on foreign ‘disinformation’ spread via social media.
No German politician has yet gone as far as Breton. But it would be a big mistake to dismiss the former EU bureaucrat’s statement as a mere slip of the tongue–even if he has, in the meantime, retracted. (After Musk labelled him “a tyrant of Europe”, Breton claimed that he had been misquoted, that it “was another fake news” or a translation mistake, tweeting: “The EU has NO mechanism to nullify any election anywhere in the EU.”)
Yet other influential figures, such as Germany’s president Frank Walter Steinmeier (SPD), have also issued similar warnings. When Steinmeier dissolved the Bundestag (German Parliament) in December, and announced snap elections, he said: “Outside influence is a danger to democracy. Be it covert … or open and blatant, as is currently being practised particularly intensively on Platform X.” Notably, to date, the president has not distanced himself from Breton’s threat to erase the election results.
There is no doubt that Musk has been meddlesome. He has also emboldened the AfD leadership. In late December, he wrote an opinion piece for Die Welt claiming that “only the AfD could save Germany” from decline. Following Steinmeier’s warnings in December, he took to X, disparaging the president as an “anti-democratic tyrant”.
Then, on January 9th, Musk livestreamed approximately 70 minutes of conversation with Alice Weidel, the AfD’s candidate for chancellor. During the talk, he reiterated his endorsement for her party. Though not everyone in the AfD was happy with Weidel’s performance—she was long-winded, and often very crass—they naturally appreciated Musk’s backing. At the AfD’s party conference, held last weekend, Weidel’s references to Musk received enthusiastic applause.
However, attributing the AfD’s success to Musk, rather than to the failures of Germany’s established politicians, is blatant nonsense. The party’s polling numbers have held steady at around 20% for weeks, and recent surveys indicate that Musk’s interventions have had negligible impact, at best. This narrative reflects a persistent and problematic anti-populist assumption: that voters are passive objects, easily swayed by ‘demagogues’ rather than acting on their own political judgment.
Back in January last year—long before Musk was getting up to mischief online—Frank Walter Steinmeier called for a large alliance against the AfD and said: “We will not allow this country to be destroyed by extremist pied pipers.” What he meant was that AfD supporters were following tricksters and shady characters, as the rats and the children of Hamelin followed the pied piper to their doom in the old German folktale. The insult to German voters in the analogy was obviously lost on the president. The establishment’s fear of Musk is, in truth, its fear of the electorate.
The threat to cancel the election was just one of many that have been made in recent days. Following Musk’s conversation with Weidel, EU vice president Henna Virkkunen announced an investigation into whether the conversation violated the Digital Services Act. Germany’s Bundestag has also launched an investigation into whether it was an illegal “party donation.”
The idea that the speech had given the party an illegal monetary advantage (“geldwerter Vorteil“) has also been peddled by Robert Habeck, Germany’s hapless economics minister and the Green Party’s candidate for chancellor. If the allegation of a financial advantage is proven, “this would have considerable consequences” for the AfD, said Michael Brenner, a constitutional lawyer, adding that the party could face “a very substantial sum” in fines.
Claiming that a single interview may have given the AfD an unfair advantage in the run-up to the federal elections is more than a little disingenuous. While mainstream parties like the SPD, CDU, and Greens regularly receive extensive media coverage through numerous interviews and talk shows, the AfD has frequently been excluded from such platforms.
The systematic exclusion of Germany’s second most popular party from media platforms isn’t surprising. For years, the German media landscape has been dominated by a center-left worldview. This bias is reflected in the demographics of media professionals. A 2020 study of trainees at the public service broadcaster ARD showed an overwhelming preference for left-leaning parties: 57% supported the Greens, 23% the Left Party, and 12% the SPD.
Another comprehensive study indicated that 41% of German journalists align themselves with Green politics. Notably, none of the journalists surveyed expressed political alignment with the AfD.
Musk’s crass intervention in the German election campaign is not without its problems. But as talk of nullifying the election and threats of heavy fines show, it is the authoritarian tendencies of the elite that are the bigger problem. Thierry Breton’s threat must serve as a warning to every democrat who believes that people can make up their own minds about whom to support in an election.
READ NEXT
Ceasefire Is No Victory for the Israelis—Or for Us
California’s Bonfire of Vanities
Leftist French Press Magnate Proud To Control Journalists—for a Good Cause