A recent tweet by Elon Musk on X has sparked concerns across the United States, especially for President-elect Donald Trump. Responding to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s assertion that “The U.S. cannot force us to ‘sit and listen’ at the negotiating table. We are an independent country,” Musk replied with, “He sense of humor is amazing ,” a comment that left many puzzled.
Musk’s response contained two noticeable mistakes. First, he wrote “he sense” instead of “his sense,” and second, he used a laughing-crying emoji instead of a period. Given Musk’s new role heading a so-called “Department of Government Efficiency” alongside Vivek Ramaswamy, it raises the question: would a competent efficiency czar make such careless errors?
Careless errors in Musk’s post leave many questioning his diplomatic tact
Musk might argue that minor mistakes are irrelevant to the overall message, claiming that social media is all about quick, informal communication. While that may be true, doubts linger. After all, Musk is a self-declared genius and the wealthiest man in the world, suggesting that he should have taken more care in his tweet rather than dismissing the errors as unimportant.
The issue isn’t merely about sloppiness; the very idea that a billionaire genius wouldn’t double-check his work when addressing the Ukrainian president is troubling. After all, such figures don’t build their fortunes by being careless. Imagine Musk telling a business partner, “Did I say $5 million? Sorry, I meant $50 million.” It’s inconceivable.
Yet, when it comes to insulting Zelensky, Musk seemingly saw no need to double-check his post. It seems that the only thing that matters is delivering the sentiment, no matter the messiness.
Musk’s string of insults extends beyond Zelensky. He recently called German Chancellor Olaf Scholz a “Narr,” or fool, shortly after Germany’s Socialist-led coalition collapsed. But what’s even worse is that Musk didn’t address Scholz by his full name, referring to him simply as “Olaf.” His disregard for diplomatic norms raises the question: is Musk acting like a “Grobian” (boor)?
Though such antics might entertain some, they also reveal much about Musk’s character and his approach to public discourse. However, what’s more concerning is how they reflect on his ability to lead a government efficiency initiative.
In the private sector, sloppiness and insults may not cause much harm, but running a semi-governmental agency designed to investigate bureaucratic inefficiencies requires a different approach. Such an endeavor demands deep knowledge of government systems and legal frameworks—qualities that neither Musk nor Ramaswamy possess. What’s more, it calls for humility and empathy, virtues neither of them seem to demonstrate. Instead, they seem poised to charge in like bulls in a china shop, leaving chaos in their wake.
Their call for volunteers with high IQs willing to work 80-hour weeks for no pay only further highlights their misguided approach. They seem to believe that being intelligent and energetic is enough to overhaul government bureaucracy.
However, smart but uninformed individuals are unlikely to succeed in such a task. Revolutionaries without sufficient knowledge or understanding of what they’re attempting to change are doomed to fail, often with disastrous consequences. Only experts—those knowledgeable, decent, and independent—can truly bring about meaningful reform.
Musk’s sloppiness and insults fit into this broader pattern. As a leader, he’s more concerned with the fervor of his followers than the quality of his message. His base likely tolerates, if not appreciates, his occasional carelessness and vulgarity. In that sense, Musk mirrors Trump: a leader who thrives on controversy and the loyalty of a fanbase willing to overlook flaws.
While this may seem like great news for the two men, the reality is that their partnership is unlikely to last. Two self-styled geniuses cannot coexist without conflict, and their collaboration is likely to end in a dramatic clash.
In the years to come, the “Department of Government Efficiency” will either be a monumental failure or—ironically—another bloated and inefficient bureaucracy. It’s hard to say what emoji Musk will use to comment on that outcome—laughing, crying, or perhaps both.
Alexander J. Motyl is a professor of political science at Rutgers University-Newark. A specialist on Ukraine, Russia, and the USSR, and on nationalism, revolutions, empires, and theory, he is the author of 10 nonfiction books, including Imperial Ends: The Decay, Collapse, and Revival of Empires and Why Empires Reemerge: Imperial Collapse and Imperial Revival in Comparative Perspective.
