Musk Decries Hitler’s Censorship, Right Before Threatening To Jail Critics
I'm going to go out on a limb here and make a fairly wild suggestion: if you spend years calling yourself a free speech absolutist" while decrying government censorship," maybe one of your first moves after taking over the government shouldn't be demanding prison sentences for journalists who report things you don't like.
But that's just me.
At this point, the gap between Elon Musk's free speech rhetoric and his actual behavior has become almost comically wide. He has sued and silenced critics over and over again. Just recently there was a report about how Tesla regularly sues customers and journalists in China if they're critical of his cars.
Zhang Yazhou was sitting in the passenger seat of her Tesla Model 3 when she said she heard her father's panicked voice: The brakes do not work. Approaching a red light, her father swerved around two cars before plowing into a sport utility vehicle and a sedan, and crashing into a large concrete barrier.
Stunned, Zhang gazed at the deflating airbag in front of her. She could never have imagined what was to come: Tesla Inc sued her for defamation for complaining publicly about the vehicles brakes - and won. A Chinese court ordered Zhang to pay more than US$23,000 in damages and publicly apologize to the US$1.1 trillion company.
Zhang is not the only one to find herself in the crosshairs of Tesla, which is led by Elon Musk, among the richest men in the world and a self-described free speech absolutist." Over the past four years, Tesla has sued at least six car owners in China who had sudden vehicle malfunctions, quality complaints or accidents they claimed were caused by mechanical failures.
And it's not just China. In the US, Musk has developed what you might call a comprehensive litigation strategy" against speech he doesn't like. That's a polite way of saying he files lawsuits, threatens critics, and generally tries to make life difficult for anyone who says mean things about him or his companies.
But this weekend, Musk outdid himself with two tweets, posted just hours apart, that perfectly encapsulate his free speech hypocrisy - while simultaneously highlighting his near total lack of self-awareness. First, responding to some nonsense that isn't even worth explaining, Musk pointed out that one of the first things Hitler did upon gaining power was to apply aggressive censorship."
Then, less than six hours later, after CBS' 60 Minutes posted an interview with a former (Republican) administrator of USAID calling out Elon's utter nonsense" claims about fraud at USAID, Elon declared that people at 60 Minutes deserve a long prison sentence" for reporting on things in a manner he disapproves of.
Again, let's be explicit here: this is Elon Musk, a federal government employee with unprecedented power and tremendous influence over the entire federal government at this moment, saying that journalists should be thrown in prison for a long time, because he doesn't like their reporting. This isn't just Musk being thin-skinned - it's a billionaire currently running much of our government, trying to weaponize state power against the press, just because they called out how his claims about USAID were nonsense.
It is difficult to think of a more obvious First Amendment violation than that. The framers literally wrote the First Amendment to prevent exactly this kind of government intimidation of the press. Though they probably didn't anticipate a scenario where a tech CEO would be effectively running the government while simultaneously controlling the one of the world's largest social media platforms. But even ignoring the legal side, it shows how inherently censorial Musk is, and how he's willing to abuse his power to create threats against and chilling effects on journalists.
The irony of Musk decrying Hitler's censorship while simultaneously threatening journalists with imprisonment would be amusing if it weren't so dangerous. His complete lack of self-awareness would be comical if he didn't wield such significant power over both government operations and global communications platforms.
The sequence here is almost too perfect: First, Musk warns about Hitler's censorship tactics. Then, he threatens to jail journalists for critical reporting. Finally, using his control of a global communications platform, he starts blocking tools that journalists and government employees use to communicate securely. He is what he claims he's fighting against.
Elon Musk is no free speech absolutist. The pattern is clear: Musk's version of free speech" has always been about amplifying voices he agrees with while systematically suppressing those he doesn't. His platform encourages certain forms of controversial speech - particularly those targeting marginalized groups - while actively working to silence legitimate criticism and reporting.
And, hell, just as I was finishing this article, ExTwitter provided yet another example of Musk's censorial impulses: (once again, as this seems to happen pretty regularly) blocking links to an internet service Musk doesn't like. The platform is now blocking links to Signal, according to Matt Binder, and confirmed by many users.
Elon Musk's social media platform, X, is currently banning links to Signal.me," a URL used by the encrypted messaging service Signal. The Signal.me" domain is specifically used by the service so that users can send out a quick link to directly contact them through the messaging app.
X, formerly Twitter, is blocking users from posting a Signal.me" link through DM, public post, or even in their profile page. When trying to post a Signal link, users receive a variety of different message failed" prompts depending on what version of the X platform they use (i.e. X for web, X for iPhone, etc.)
And for posts that already had a Signal link, well, ExTwitter tells you it's unsafe:
The timing here requires a bit of unpacking. Government employees have apparently been using Signal to tell journalists about how Musk's DOGE crew is wreaking havoc across federal agencies. Now, if you're running both the government and a major communications platform, and you discover people are using an encrypted messaging app to leak stories about your... let's call it innovative approach to federal management," you have some options:
- You could address the underlying concerns about your management
- You could try to stop the leaks through normal government channels
- You could declare the messaging platform itself unsafe" and block it entirely on your social network
Musk, naturally, appears to have gone with option 3. Because when you control both the government apparatus AND the means of communication, why choose just one form of censorship?
It's the kind of move that would make those 20th century censors he was just criticizing say now that's efficiency!" Though they might suggest he also throw in some book burning for good measure. But hey, there's always tomorrow's DOGE directive for that.