It was only a matter of time before Elon Musk and Donald Trump would fall out. Their partnership in power lasted four months, and the tangible impacts of his DOGE initiatives may take time to be seen. As things stand however, analysts have commented that these are far less than what was pronounced rhetorically during Musk's stunts.
Beyond celebrity drama, Musk's exit can also be read in terms of their social ramifications.
First, Musk's recent trajectory offers evidence of people in power in social contexts. For years, Tesla was hailed for its innovative impacts in the automotive industry. Yet, when Musk increasingly used his platform for political propaganda, including polarising positions on social and cultural issues, public sentiment began to shift, and his activism increasingly became an economic liability. This disenchantment did not remain abstract-it had material consequences. Tesla's share value took a significant hit, underscoring that public figures are not immune to the repercussions of their actions.
People's agency- in terms of critique, boycott, consumer patterns, investment decisions, and activism -can in fact shape economic realities. Thus, consumers, investors, social movements, and citizens can collectively exercise a form of social impact, highlighting the mutual relationship between public trust and corporate leadership.
Second, Musk's absolutist claims - like claiming DOGE would transform the U.S. public sector-reveal the vast gap between sensationalism and substance in politics and policy-making. As is the case with Tesla, Musk faced pressure here too, including from Government elites who are vital in Trump's political coalition.
Musk symbolizes the cult of self-appointed gurus who, via their online pulpits, promote simplistic solutions to complex problems. They attempt to manufacture the illusion that they hold the keys to resolving the challenges and risks of our times. Social media platforms amplify this by rewarding snackable soundbites, outrage, brevity, and sensationalism. They seduce us to shout, to issue quick-fire judgements, to divide the world into good and evil, to embrace dogma over dialogue, and to reach conclusions before engaging with the evidence.
On the surface, catchy slogans and viral videos may dominate headlines. But beneath the spectacle lies a dense and intricate policy backstage. Public policy is not an instant problem that can be solved with an app. It involves negotiation, consultation, legal frameworks, social values, institutional checks, and economic constraints in processes that are often messy, uneven, and unintended.
It is about listening, deliberating, and evolving within a system that resists easy answers. It is slow, often frustrating, and grounded in social relations, compromise, and context.
In this sense, the Musk-Trump saga reminds us of the importance of measure, of thoughtful participation, and of resisting the urge to reduce public life to a spectacle. Indeed, the real challenge is not who yells the loudest, but who can navigate the journey of meaningful social change.
Prof. Michael Briguglio is an Associate Professor at the Department of Sociology, Faculty of Arts, University of Malta
www.michaelbriguglio.com