Elon Musk Is South African. We Shouldn’t Forget It.

Elon Musk is everywhere.

{snip}

But discussion of Mr. Musk, especially in the United States, often misses something: He is a white South African, part of a demographic that for centuries sat atop a racial hierarchy maintained by violent colonial rule. That history matters. For all the attempts to describe Mr. Musk as a self-made genius or a dispassionate technocrat, he is in fact a distinctly ideological figure, one whose worldview is inseparable from his rearing in apartheid South Africa. More than just an eccentric billionaire, Mr. Musk represents an unresolved question: What happens when settler rule fails but settlers remain? {snip}

{snip}

He never returned, but South Africa clearly stayed with him. Take his recent intervention into the debate over the country’s land reform as an example. In response to a bill passed in January that allows in specific circumstances the expropriation of land without compensation, Mr. Musk used his platform to suggest that white South Africans are uniquely persecuted. {snip}

Mr. Musk’s role in the controversy suggests he has not so much moved beyond the logic of apartheid as absorbed it. His ideological commitments — deregulated markets, hostility to labor organizing and Trumpist nationalism — bear its trace. In effect, his politics reprise apartheid’s economic principles on a global scale: maintaining zones of privilege under the guise of free enterprise while resisting any moves toward redistribution as threats. You can hear it in his exhortations for others to work harder and his pleas for him and his businesses to receive special treatment.

Mr. Musk is one of a number of reactionary figures with roots in Southern Africa who found an unlikely home in Silicon Valley and now wield disproportionate influence in shaping American and global right-wing politics. These men, such as Peter Thiel and David Sacks, emerged from a historical tradition that revered hierarchy and sought to sustain racial and economic dominance, only to find themselves in a world where that order was unraveling. Their politics reflect an instinct to preserve elite rule, cloaked in the language of meritocracy and market freedom, while channeling resentment toward new power structures they view as threats to their position.

For them, southern Africa is never very far away. They are part of a global right that has long been fascinated with Rhodesia and its successor, Zimbabwe. For them, the loss of white-minority rule in Zimbabwe represents the model of civilizational decay — a formerly “successful” colonial state plunged into chaos through decolonization. The specter of Zimbabwefication is wielded as a warning against any redistribution of power. Now South Africa — “openly pushing for genocide of white people,” according to Mr. Musk — is being made to take on the mantle of scare story. The implicit argument is that settler power, once displaced, leads only to ruin.

{snip}

This reaction is both ideological and deeply personal. For all his vehement opposition to woke identity politics, Mr. Musk is actually an ardent identitarian. He has boosted claims from far-right South African groups that the government is “race mad,” with 142 race laws on its books. {snip}

It’s dangerous, too. The fixation has led to Mr. Trump ending, by executive order, America’s financial assistance to South Africa, with potentially devastating effect on treatment for H.I.V. and AIDS. South Africa is now anathema: Secretary of State Marco Rubio is refusing to travel there for the Group of 20 summit later in the year, saying that it is a hotbed of “anti-Americanism” that is “doing very bad things.” {snip}

{snip}