On March 21, 2025, the growing tensions over Elon Musk's involvement in politics have ignited protests and economic repercussions, particularly involving Tesla. This surge of dissent aligns with public sentiment against his intertwining with political figures like former President Donald Trump. Organizers of the 'Tesla Takedown' protests are undeterred by state and corporate pressures, stating their intention is to "bankrupt Elon Musk" for his perceived missteps in governmental involvement.
A grassroots coalition known as Indivisible, originating from Seattle's Eastside, has manifested frustrations directly outside the offices of Musk's SpaceX and Starlink. Over the last five weeks, crowds have consistently swelled, with attendance reaching approximately 350 participants, eclipsing the turnout from the initial week. These individuals seek to convey dissatisfaction regarding Musk's influence on federal governance, particularly through the controversial Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which many view as detrimental.
One of the rally's key organizers, Michaele Blakely, voiced the feelings of the community, explaining, “Musk has his right to be here as a business owner. But when he started messing with our government, that’s very different.” The evolving protests signal a response to deep-rooted concerns over how familial affiliations and corporate governance can affect public policies and funding.
These protests have sparked a call for boycotts against Tesla, prompting participants to sell their vehicles, divest from stocks, and even refrain from purchasing the Cybertruck. In the past few months, these actions correlate with a staggering 38% drop in Tesla’s stock values since the start of the current year. The boycotts underscore a larger fear of diminishing consumer trust and growing discord:
“If you had asked me ten years ago, I was all on board,” admitted Saul Reynolds-Haertle, a 34-year-old attendee. “These are important fields making life better for humankind. It is deeply unpleasant that the person I used to support has managed to make space uncool.”
The protests have gathered profound sentiments from individuals expressing outrage at deeper issues such as proposed cuts to Medicare and funding to local and international agencies. Flags supporting Ukraine's sovereignty and rights for the transgender community were also prominent among demonstrators, illustrating the varied motives behind these protests. Socially conscious individuals, such as Jules Hughes, highlighted the dual focus of the demonstrations: “I have no vendetta against Tesla. It’s how the president is using Elon Musk.”
The protests are not only economic; they are political remnants manifesting from discontent with perceived governmental overreach by corporate powers. This landscape has become turbulent as Musk's prior linkages with Trump have pushed some to reconsider both social and economic loyalties.
Samson Williams, of the Milky Way Economy space think tank, has stipulated that https://fortune.com/img-assets/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/GettyImages-2204586767_26c873-e1742574696803.jpg?w=1440&q=75 the present mood, if sustained, could hamper the trajectory of Musk's space ventures long-term. “Investors don’t want to put good money after bad causes,” he noted. The impacts may not be immediate, especially considering that SpaceX and Starlink predominantly rely on government contracts. However, Williams warned that negative sentiments routed towards Musk could arrive at a tipping point come the closer approach to the midterm elections.
According to Kimberly Siversen Burke, who heads government affairs at Quilty Space, the immediate futures of SpaceX and Starlink remain secure due to their technological lead and lack of comparable rivals. However, as public sentiment shifts, alternatives may see heightened investment simply on the premise of distancing from Musk's controversial presence in the political realm.
In all, while Tesla's share price dips contribute to a perception of decline in Musk's corporations, the reactions against him have largely been rooted in broader societal issues—from public health to foreign policy. As such, the protests reveal a complex interaction between public sentiment, corporate governance, and political engagement.
Trump, during an earlier rally, defended Musk’s societal contributions, asserting, “You can’t be penalized for being a patriot, and he’s a great patriot.” This defense aligns with those seeking to reframe Musk positively, as activists on either side continue to dissect the intricacies of his influence.
Amidst this brewing storm, it is clear that Musk remains a polarizing figure. His companies are currently facing activism that not only seeks financial repercussion but underscores larger questions about ethics in governance, the ownership of public discourse, and the role of billionaires in shaping policy.
