#systemchange

When the Market Sanctions Ideology: Tesla's Collapse and the Political Drift of Billionaires

Source: El Manifesto, February 6, 2025 edition, article by Annaflavia Merluzzi.

According to an investigation published in El Manifesto, Tesla sales are plummeting across Europe, with dramatic declines in Germany (-59%), France (-63%), and Norway (-38%). While these figures reflect a broader slowdown in the electric vehicle market, they also reveal a political dynamic: the growing rejection of Elon Musk and his ideological alignment with the far right.

This collapse is not merely an economic sanction—it raises a larger question: can capitalism exist independently of democracy, or will democracy ultimately reassert control?

Reactionary Capital: When the Market Sanctions Ideology

Tesla’s downfall in Germany and across Europe is more than just an economic issue. It highlights a broader phenomenon: the rejection of a capitalism that no longer limits itself to production but seeks to impose a political vision on the world.

Traditionally, the far right has been hostile to both environmentalism and technological progress. At first glance, this makes it a paradoxical ally for a billionaire leading an electric vehicle company. However, Elon Musk’s financial backing of Alice Weidel and the German far-right party AfD reveals another dimension of this alliance: a rejection of ecological transition when framed within a democratic and social context.

A Capitalism That No Longer Hides

Musk embodies a shift in contemporary capitalism: wealth is no longer just about accumulation—it is now a tool for financing reactionary political movements that oppose environmental regulations, social rights, and inclusive policies.

This trend reflects a broader phenomenon in which certain billionaires, rather than remaining neutral market players, become direct political actors. Their strategy aligns with an old fantasy of elite secession: controlling a captive market, securing an electorate aligned with their vision, and developing technologies that ensure their total autonomy from the rest of society.

The Market as a Battleground

But this project faces a fundamental paradox: if billionaires attempt to shape politics, consumers, in turn, can politicize their consumption. The European boycott of Tesla illustrates how the market itself can become an ideological battlefield. Consumers, far from being passive economic participants, are expressing a rejection of a corporate model where ideology takes precedence over innovation.

The philosopher Karl Polanyi identified this tension in the 20th century: the free market only functions as long as society accepts it. When a company oversteps its role and becomes a tool of ideological domination, it risks being rejected by society. The market, far from being an autonomous entity, is always embedded within a moral and political framework.

A New Form of Resistance?

The Tesla case reminds us that in a world where billionaires seek to shape public policy while bypassing democratic processes, citizens can respond economically. When voting appears ineffective against the influence of wealth in politics, boycotting becomes a powerful tool of resistance.

We may be witnessing the emergence of an inverted ethical capitalism: one not dictated by corporate promises of sustainability, but by consumers sanctioning ideological deviations among the ultra-wealthy. If this trend continues, it could redefine the relationship between capitalism and democracy—reminding us that economics cannot be detached from the values it claims to serve.

Also worth reading: Check out my series "Democracy VS Capitalism" on Medium, where I explore the tensions between economic power and democratic institutions:

Coming in mid-February: A three-part series on climate denial fake news, scientific manipulation, collective paralysis, and the secession of the wealthy. Why are some billionaires sabotaging climate action while preparing their escape? Stay tuned.

P'tit Tôlier

Essayist & Popularizer. I analyze the world through accessible philosophical essays. Complex ideas, explained simply—to help us think about our times.

individual change: consiousness, mindfullness, intentional living, (low waste), listening, empathy, politics, getting angry & connected with one's emotions, rebelling; connecting with earth, grounding oneself, growth, daring to imagine

system change: people coming together, listening, organizing, connecting, collective life, sharing, learning together, growing together, empathy and deep connection, understanding, action!!!!

the term low waste was created to recognize, that rather than driving to fullfill the impossible task to be a perfect individual (zero waste) and only focusing on that like it's the only purpose of life and something that can save us, we realize that there's power when we come together and that the bigger picture is beyond individuality. it's all connected of course, but the change that we need is out of our reach, if we act individually.

the term zero waste was created for businneses to stop purposefully overproducing and destroying brand new goods for profit, wasting and polluting, all for profit, but somehow it all got turned into individual choices. the focus went off the big corporations and the blame was placed on individuals. there are no ethical choices under capitalism, so we must change the system. to demand those who are struggling just to survive, the poor and the marginalized, to "consume ethically" is extremely privileged and violent. to place the blame on individuals and to act like we can solve the climate crisis by acting individually is completely disconnected with reality and only serving capitalism. rather than worrying about a plastic wrap on a ready-made meal and shaming someone for buying one, let's focus our energy and everything we got to collect what we need to build a completely new system. we need collective action and we need each other. we need climate justice.