Warum unterstützen Musk und einige andere US -Politiker die deutsche AFD -Partei?

OP here:

Can someone explain to me, why Musk and some other US polititians want the AFD to be successful? Do they want it to be successful, because it would harm Germany and Europe and make life easier for the US to take advantage of a weakened Germany. Or, do they think it would really make Germany and/or Europe a stronger ally?

Musk is a Nazi. He wants to spread fascism. He and Trump are arguing over who gets to be Hitler and who has to be Goebbles.

Honestly though, Musk’s intent seems pretty clear. He wants to advance an extremely intolerant right wing ideology across the globe, and he wants to be at its helm.

But this is my thought.

Musk isn’t JUST a Nazi. That’s simply a means to an end.
The truth is he is an effective accelerationist, which is fairly antithetical to conservativism and is currently obstructed by Democratic processes.

I think he perceives fascism as his streamlined path towards approving every technology project and contract he has, ethics be damned.

Trump is dangerous in many many ways, but Musk may just be more dangerous.

they align on some jssues. Elon has in the recent years struggled with left leaning governments that he (and not only he) has perceived to be moving too far to the left. specifically over regulation in 1) speech, 2) employment and 3) environmental domains. his actions so far are in line pushing back on all three, and buying twitter acts on 1) directly as an individual and indirectly but clearly more powerfully by mass persuasion of civilians. by inserting himself into government he acts directly against 2) and 3). this means no to DEI, unions, land/water laws.

the immediate interest is to unshackle his businesses particularly Tesla and SpaceX in USA. where Germany is concerned it is his entryway into EU to do the same. There is no reason to assume he won’t act on France too other than those elections aren’t up yet. these are the two big targets. he sees Germany in decline for the same reasons that what he is doing back home.

the overarching goal for him is to advance humanity beyond Earth and that includes acting on some trends he believes that will limit, kill or cause the decline of civilization and make his life goal hard to achieve. in this regard he views far left as more detrimental than far right.

he does have a dangerous mix of messiah complex, a child like nature and money, but people should well note that the former is not borne solely of hubris but also endless strings of real performed miracles. he is definitely not a force for stability but then, stability was and will never be one of his goals.

as for Trump, it is zero-sum USA first. the main threat of Russia is actually not Russia itself but NATO Article 5. in other words he calculates EU as more of a burden than a useful ally against…China–not Russia. I do not see obvious interest alignments between Trump and Elon that is instrumental to geopolitics, except in the case of thermonuclear war, which is easy to avoid if Russia is appeased.

My best guess is that he wants to weaken the European Union. The AfD started out primarily as a Euroskeptic to anti-EU platform. While their political aims have shifted over the years, having the AfD in power could very likely mean Germany’s exit from the European Union, which would be tantamount to the dissolution of the European Union.

One subject that you don’t see quite as much talk about these days is the nature of globalization and how it affects different parts of our societies quite differently. Back in the days of Empire, when countries like the Spain, Portugal and later France and the UK had empires spanning the world, there was a fairly highly degree of global governance at least on paper. This was mostly to the detriment of the people in the colonies because they rarely enjoyed any of the rights or privileges of the home country.

All of this was realigned as a result of the World Wars, when the world was basically split into 2 spheres of influence, the American and the Soviet. The US in particular took a softer approach when compared to the British Empire. Over its sphere of influence, the US imposed its version of capitalism primarily via soft power, sometimes via overt, sometimes via covert intervention. But all in all, the US didn’t exercise direct control over other nations, i.e. it refrained from being a colonial powers in the same way the Europeans did in the Age of Empire or the Soviets did in most of Eastern Europe.

In 1971, Nixon abolished the Bretton Woods system, going from a system where world currencies (exchange rates) were essentially fixed to the price of gold / US Dollar to one where they became free floating and subject to supply and demand. This event proved pivotal as it unleashed a process of rapid financial globalization, where money (assets, investments and such) would flow among the economies of the world more freely than before. Following that, nations of the western world and Asia started to remove trade barriers stimulating global trade and following suite to financial globalization. So with financial interests and (some) business interest now operating supranationally, the only area where globalization was lacking behind was global governance. That is where organizations like NAFTA, the World Trade Organization or more transformationally, the European Union come in. So instead of businesses and money pitting countries against each other, the European Union is really an attempt for countries and their citizens to regain agency over multinational entities.

And well this is exactly where oligarchs and the ultrarich are looking for opportunities to „divide and conquer“. Get rid of the European Union and you no longer have a democratically elected representation that can impose laws on multinational players.