There is an increasingly common phrase that Democrats use for those they dislike: they’re all idiots. Elon Musk is an idiot. Peter Thiel is an idiot. Most anyone who falls into the Left’s crosshairs is an idiot. This phenomenon is most prominent online; simply mentioning one of these names in a liberal-adjacent space triggers an immediate wave of messaging about how stupid they are. Heaven forbid you acknowledge a savvy political or industry move made by a Republican. While this kind of behavior exists on both sides, and has existed for a long time, its prevalence reflects a deeper problem for Liberals right now: their disengagement from power.
Nowhere is this clearer than with Elon Musk. His rebrand has been incredible, moving from beloved, Edison-like tech mogul to culture-war-obsessed, Trump-aligned goon. Whether you like it or not, Musk has become a prominent political figure. And yet, Democrats, especially those in office, haven’t deigned to treat him as a force to be reckoned with. Instead, he’s talked about as a crazy person running around Washington that someone better reign in.
As a caveat, there is nothing wrong with recognizing Musk’s extraordinary privilege and his family’s sticky South African history. But reducing all his success, all his influence, to dumb luck and the stupidity of his followers isn’t just lazy; it’s a dangerous approach for the party. It’s even more problematic given that Conservatives are armed with an increasingly effective message: efficiency.
Efficiency may seem like a trite political talking point. Recently, however, this idea has a slightly different flavor. It means lots of chainsaw props, fundamentally altering government bureaucracy, and hints of extremism. It’s a message that has gained serious steam in the US and abroad.
Javier Milei, Argentina’s president, made efficiency a central pillar of his agenda, and he has followed through. Under his oversight, the number of government ministries has been halved, and 34,000 civil servant positions have been eliminated. The efficiency brand is so popular that Milei was invited to appear at CPAC, where he bestowed a “chainsaw for bureaucracy” to Elon Musk.
The chainsaw messaging is more pervasive than you might think. Eric Ciotti, the former president of France’s Les Républicains party, brandished one during a conference recently to symbolize the billions he plans to slash from the French Budget. While this imagery might seem crude, gestures that attack the government have become an easy way to score political points.
Of course, what hits closest to home is DOGE and their rampage through government agencies. A rampage that has faced shocking little real opposition. There have been loud complaints from liberal lawmakers and hasty lawsuits, but no unified response to stop the bleeding, even in seemingly clear cases of constitutional infringement. Endless hand-wringing over Musk’s incompetence is, unsurprisingly, not working.
The most dangerous part about continuing to dismiss and ridicule figures like Musk or Trump's cabinet appointees is that it abdicates responsibility. If Musk is just an idiot, why take him seriously? If there is so much constraint that our choices don’t matter, why analyze the appeal of his message? Why figure out what’s next?
It is true that the Trump campaign has been ‘Flooding the Zone,’ and Democrats are reeling for a variety of reasons. There’s Trump fatigue, lack of clear leadership, infighting, and just a general feeling of weakness from the party. To reassert their relationship with power, the messaging needs to shift. Acknowledging structural barriers and calling out those in power for their shortcomings is important. However, continuing to attack people rather than underlying issues, something Trump Republicans have long been derided for, is a failure for the party.
For the Left to rebound moving forward, it must develop and promote a cogent response. Reducing the flood of Ad Hominem attacks on social media would also be a step in the right direction, though asking people to keep their emotions in check online might always be a losing battle. But combating this rhetoric is more important than symbolic political wins and online civility. The increasing size of the efficiency movement has allowed and even perhaps encouraged an upswing in extremist rhetoric.
Look no further than the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), who just won the second largest majority in the German Parliament. Musk himself endorsed the party on X, posting that “only the AfD can save Germany.” This is a party that has downplayed the Holocaust, lied outright about Hitler’s politics, and incited blatant hatred toward immigrants. It’s also a party that has repeatedly promised to fix the German government with direct, ‘efficient’ policies.
This trend is not confined to Germany alone. In France, the National Rally has pushed xenophobic policies that were once clearly fringe directly into the mainstream. In the US, anti-immigrant sentiment is palpable, insurrectionists have received sweeping pardons, and neo-Nazis are on the rise, to name just a few concerns. Yet rather than facing unified resistance, these forces have been met with routine name-calling, performative outrage, and, at times, quiet accommodation.
Clear, simple, messaging does not fail just because the person delivering that message has been dismissed as an idiot. Continuing to call prominent Conservatives fools and everyone who voted for them ignorant is, at best, a losing strategy. If Democrats want to right the ship and curb the rise of extremism, they need to do more than mock billionaires. They need to plainly articulate what their version of government actually looks like.
