Musk's appointment as head of the newly renamed "Department of Government Efficiency" (DOGE) was initially framed as a bold effort to streamline federal bureaucracy. However, beneath the rhetoric of cost-cutting and regulatory reform lies a far more troubling reality.
Musk, designated as a "special government employee," assumed his role on the first day of President Donald Trump’s second term. His team’s stated mission is to maximize efficiency and eliminate waste within government operations. On the surface, this might appear to be a move toward Silicon Valley-style governance. But Musk’s deep-seated corporate interests, ambitions in artificial intelligence, and long-standing resistance to government oversight suggest motivations that go beyond mere altruism.
Musk controls an expansive business empire, including Tesla, SpaceX, The Boring Company, Neuralink, and AI firm xAI—companies that frequently intersect with government regulations and federal contracts. His new position grants him unprecedented access to sensitive government systems and the power to restructure regulatory agencies. This places one of Trump’s largest campaign donors in a position to extract vast financial and strategic benefits, both for himself and his companies.
A Historical Parallel
The rise of Musk’s influence within the government draws a striking historical comparison. In 1600, the British East India Company began as a merchant shipping firm with exclusive trade rights, only to evolve into a quasi-governmental entity ruling vast colonial territories. By 1677, it was even granted the right to mint currency on behalf of the British crown.
In my forthcoming book, Who Elected Big Tech?, I argue that the U.S. is witnessing a similar privatization of government functions—only this time, the process is unfolding at an unprecedented digital speed. In the 21st century, data access and digital financial control have replaced physical trading posts and private armies. Control over communications now determines power rather than brute force.
The Data Pipeline
Musk’s influence over regulatory agencies poses a significant concern. In his new role, he oversees organizations that have traditionally held his businesses accountable. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has repeatedly investigated Tesla’s Autopilot system, the Securities and Exchange Commission has penalized Musk for market-moving tweets, and environmental regulations have constrained SpaceX. Under the guise of efficiency, DOGE may weaken or eliminate these oversight mechanisms entirely.
But perhaps the most alarming aspect of Musk’s leadership at DOGE is its access to government data. Reports indicate that DOGE employees have digital authorization to view and modify information within the U.S. government’s payment systems, including bank account details, Social Security numbers, and tax documents. Additionally, Musk’s staff has allegedly altered payment processing systems for Social Security beneficiaries and government contractors, enabling transactions to be blocked, hidden, or manipulated without trace.
While a federal court has issued an injunction against further data access, the potential to funnel this information into Musk’s AI system, Grok, remains a serious threat. With its integration into Musk-owned X (formerly Twitter), this data could be leveraged to predict economic trends, identify government vulnerabilities, and even model voter behavior.
Cryptocurrency Coup?
Musk’s deep involvement in cryptocurrency aligns with Trump’s own interests in digital currencies. The timing of Trump’s cryptocurrency launch, coupled with DOGE’s alignment with Dogecoin, suggests more than mere coincidence. Instead, it points to a broader strategy to centralize economic power within private hands.
While each step—modernizing payment systems, enhancing efficiency, updating infrastructure—may seem justified individually, collectively, they create a framework for shifting financial control away from government institutions and into the hands of the ultra-wealthy.
Musk’s history of authoritarian decision-making, evident in his aggressive control of X and his legal threats against those who expose his operations, raises concerns about how he might wield his new authority. Regulatory agencies scrutinizing his companies could see their budgets slashed, and businesses critical of him may suddenly face audits. Meanwhile, his allies could gain privileged access to lucrative government contracts.
A Corporate Coup?
Critics warn that Musk’s role at DOGE represents an unprecedented corporate takeover of government. Some even argue it constitutes a coup. While protests against Musk’s expanding influence are growing in Washington, D.C., and beyond, the structural dismantling of oversight makes it difficult to challenge his actions effectively.
The administration’s recent dismissal of at least a dozen inspectors general suggests a calculated effort to eliminate governmental accountability. With a Republican-led Congress aligned with Trump and slow to act, Musk is moving faster than any legislative body can respond.
The Rise of a Network State?
All of Musk’s and Trump’s moves appear to be laying the groundwork for what cryptocurrency entrepreneur Balaji Srinivasan calls the "network state." Unlike traditional nation-building, a network state forms online first, using cryptocurrency as its foundation. By the time Musk’s digital currency gains official recognition, the underlying infrastructure and financial networks will already be in place, making alternative systems impractical.
This shift could strip power from national governments, allowing financial control to fall into private hands—whether Musk’s, China’s Communist Party, Russia’s Vladimir Putin, or AI-surveillance firms like Palantir. Such a scenario would effectively sideline Congress, the judiciary, and American citizens from decisions about government spending and policy.
The Cost of Efficiency
At its core, this crisis isn’t about whether government systems should be modernized—it’s about whether democracy itself is worth preserving in the process. Handing control of government functions to tech billionaires doesn’t just streamline bureaucracy; it fundamentally redefines the relationship between private power and public governance.
Americans must now decide whether they are willing to accept Musk’s vision of efficiency at the cost of their own democratic agency. Because if this trajectory continues, the greatest threat to national security may not come from foreign adversaries, but from the unchecked ambitions of those who claim to be building the future.