Elon Musk Shared, Then Deleted X Post Absolving Hitler, Stalin and Mao of Genocide - The New York Times
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The post falsely claimed that Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler and Mao Zedong were not responsible for the murders of millions of people, but rather public sector workers were.
Elon Musk at President Trump's joint session of Congress last week.Credit...Haiyun Jiang for The New York Times
By Kate Conger
- March 14, 2025
Early on Friday, Elon Musk shared a post written by an X user about the actions of three 20th century dictators — then quickly deleted it after it sparked a backlash.
The post falsely claimed that Joseph Stalin, the communist leader of the Soviet Union until 1953; Adolf Hitler, the leader of the Nazi party in Germany; and Mao Zedong, the founder of the People's Republic of China, didn't cause the deaths of millions of people under their watch. Instead, the post said, their public sector workers did.
Mr. Musk shared the post without any other comment. He removed it soon after users on X criticized the post, saying it was antisemitic and dismissive of genocide. Historians have widely chronicled that millions of people died under Stalin, that millions of Jews were massacred under Hitler during the Holocaust, and that millions of Chinese were displaced or killed during Mao's cultural revolution.
It was the latest post by Mr. Musk to devolve into controversy. In 2023, Mr. Musk endorsed an antisemitic post on X as "the actual truth" of what Jewish people were doing, prompting advertisers to flee. And after an assassination attempt on Mr. Trump last year, Mr. Musk wrote — then deleted — a post suggesting it was odd that nobody had tried to kill former President Joseph R. Biden Jr. or former Vice President Kamala Harris.
Mr. Musk has long appeared to favor strongmen and has promoted right wing modern-day leaders. He has repeatedly used X to support politicians like Javier Milei of Argentina, Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil and Narendra Modi of India, leaders in countries where he also has business interests. Most recently, he threw his support behind the hard-right Alternative for Germany party, hosting an online town hall for its candidate for chancellor.
"It is deeply disturbing and irresponsible for someone with a large public platform to elevate the kind of rhetoric that serves to undermine the seriousness of these issues," the Anti-Defamation League said in a statement about Mr. Musk's sharing of the post.
Tags
Who is online
133 visitors
Elon BUSTED, again...
No one cares.
Some people do. What you really mean is that no one in power cares. And that should startle us.
Musk deleted his tweet because a hella lotta people cared...
That is the problem, too many people try to ignore the bad or contort themselves into pretzels trying to explain away what Trump, et. al. are doing.
Like trying to explain how Trump, as the facilitator for peace, throws our ally under the bus and provides Russian media with perfect propaganda where the PotUS states that Ukraine started the war and has essentially lost it instead of strengthening Ukraine's position to encourage Putin to negotiate a cease fire.
Or that he realized that there's too many people who are simply incapable of understanding the meaning of the repost.
Trump's administration has played out its credibility in the Russia-Ukraine war. Basically, Ukraine is trying to hold on to a bad situation until something better can ("the Unknown") materialize—hopefully.
It’s actually worse than that. I believe most are fully capable of understanding it. They are purposefully obfuscating the intended meaning to push their preferred narrative.
Pretty sad really ….
Kind of reminds me of all the contortion into pretzels trying to make an article about Trump even though it doesn't mention him at all.
Musk is prominent in the Trump administration. He is part of the et. al. You get that, right?
Mentioning Trump as an example does not make the article about Trump.
Nitpicky nonsense from you.
Like I said, contortion.
And to prove it you're going to use an article that lies in the headline and very first line? I think that's called 'propaganda'.
Did Elon post and then delete this, or not?
Posting evidence of the X repost is not evidence that your interpretation of the quote is correct.
First question.
Where in that quote does it say Stalin, Mao or Hitler are not responsible for the murder of millions of people?
Second question.
What is the key to understanding the quote?
Then explain this, "Stalin, Mao and Hitler didn't murder millions of people"...
You can see why he keeps moving the goalposts. His interpretation was so absurd it almost makes sense why he's so furiously trying to change the debate to a strawman dispute over whether Musk reposted the tweet or not.
That's exactly it.
Do public sector workers deserve shifting blame for Holocaust to them from Nazis?
Never mind Nazis were Hitler's Red Hats!
Why should I do so when you haven't answered my questions? Of course, you're not going to answer this question, either. I think that it shows something about who's being more honest here; the one who answers questions or the one who won't.
At first glance, the whole quote appears preposterous. Unfortunately, that's as far as many people go. They don't ask themselves, "How could someone write such nonsense? What could they mean?" and then try to figure it out.
The key to explaining the first part of the quote, appearing above, is in the second part of the quote.
The public sector people did what, exactly? Going back to the first part of the quote, the answer is 'kill'. So, did the public sector workers, which I assume to mean all branches of the government, including the military and various other agencies, kill people? Yes, they did. So, to state the second part more fully.
This is obviously true, regardless of the first part of the quote. So, in what way is it true? Well, they actually pulled triggers on guns. They pulled the lever on the gallows. They stuffed people into gas chambers and sent in the gas. And just about every other thing you can imagine to kill someone.
Okay, hopefully no one will argue the objective fact of this so far. So what does this mean for the first half of the quote? Since we established what we mean by killing in breaking down the second half of the quote, meaning the one literally pulling the trigger on a literal gun, we have to apply the same definition to the first half as well.
Did Stalin, Mao or Hitler actually ever personally kill anyone? Not that I've heard of. Further, the quote seems to assume that they haven't so we'll deal with this in that assumption.
So, where are we now? Well, we see that, if we read the quote with a literal and personal sense of the meaning of 'kill', that is physically killing someone oneself, we see the quote is true in a literal sense. I will repeat that. The quote is true in a literal sense.
Okay, but where does recognizing this get us? Are we saying that Stalin, Mao and Hitler aren't guilty of anything. No. Why? Because it's obvious that just because one may not have personally killed anyone in person, that doesn't absolve you of the responsibility for it. Bush personally did not kill anyone in Iraq when we invaded, but whether for good or bad, he's responsible for everything that happened there because, overall, it happened because of his will. The same goes for us all. If we hire someone to kill someone else for us, we are as responsible as if we had done it ourselves. So the claim, as written, absolves Stalin, Mao and Hitler of the murder of millions is false.
"Um, okay. So what's the point of the quote, then?" you may, no, should, ask? It's just this.
Stalin, Mao, Hitler and many, many others would never have been able to do what they did if people had not blindly followed them. If only they had thought about what they were doing. If they had only thought about the lies and propaganda they were being fed rather than just responding to it emotionally. If they had only not been seduced by the glory promised by their leaders.
None of this absolves the leaders of anything. It's a warning to you and I to be vigilant with what we believe, what we do, what we won't do, to seek the truth whether we like the truth or not and so on. To not live by our emotions, which can so easily corrupt. Because, in one way or another, we're all public sector workers, even if it's only through paying taxes.
Who's public sector workers? Germany's or ours? If Germany, then for the most part, yes, except it isn't a shift of blame. They didn't need it shifted. They already had it.
Keep Digging...
People are going to respond to this in one of two ways. They're going to agree with you, not because you're right but because they want the propaganda of the article to be true. This is because you haven't presented anything remotely like an argument to be right with so that is all you leave them to do.
The others will see that you aren't saying anything that isn't really just trolling. They, too, will note that you aren't making anything resembling a counter-argument and will dismiss you because of it.
If you're happy with that, then I'm happy for you.
Fortunately most people are starting to see past propaganda like this some on the left are pushing.
Except this is a straight news story from The New York Times.
So you let The New York Times do your thinking for you?
While it is impossible for one man, or three men, to have killed such a number of victims. . . it is equally as uninformed to try to SPIN the "X" commenter Alice Smith comment to say what exactly her motivation or reason for dragging public servants into the discussion is—or Elon Musk's reason for carrying it forward. What is clear is when others are unclear. . . people can interpret what they will from their POOR COMMUNICATION PRACTICE.
The moral of is this: Be a better communicator to be properly understood.
Its very evident.
I really hope so.
How does that not make it propaganda?
So, where in the Musk repost does it say they didn't cause the deaths of millions?
Answer: It doesn't. It says they didn't personally go out and kill people. There's nothing about saying that which means they didn't cause those millions of deaths, as we all know they did. One has to suspend common sense to do otherwise.
And there is the 'dig' at the messenger, which serves to distort and misalign 'everything' which came before it.
Here is the gist of this: People who have positions of power and influence. . .by definition, have access to persons, who for their own reasons or whatever, would love to help them COMMUNICATE properly. So why is Elon Musk, wealth personified, risking his reputation and his ventures, on. . . malformed statements online. As the CEO of "X". . . he as a responsibility to be precise in his sharings on the service - as befits a man/director of his status.
Is it arrogance or being dare I say. . . "cheat" that he does not have an Editor, go-between, reviewer, or someone to "save" him from himself and his public statements?
Not for me to state.
The public 'arena' nor the media should be tasked to clean up and 'correct' what a media TITAN means, be it Musk or Trump. One man bears the moniker: 'wealthiest man in the world and the other, "president of the most preeminent nation on Earth."
They should use delay posting. . .a brief interlude. . . to allow someone to properly COMMUNICATE out on their behalf or take on the task of learning it as a skill themselves!
It is not a dig. One may have an opinion on the rightness or wrongness of their actions, but no one could possibly state they are not responsible for their actions without suspending common sense.
Musk's "action" to repost without clarifying his intent and purposes exposes a "depravity" of one kind or another. Why? Because a man of his stature (wealthiest man) and position ("X" -CEO) has no excuse for not displaying patience and wisdom in his COMMUNICATIONS to the public. Why? Because to the public, such a man with a penchant for firing people . . . seems to have an aversion to hiring USEFUL people in the form of an editor or "better" communicator.
In any case, there is no excuse that covers him (or anybody else in his or similar "shoes") for letting such. . .negativity going out in his name!
Incidentally, it is not a good use of "Mr. Efficiency's" time to have to spend time "mopping up" after or applying 'salve" to this self-inflicted wound to his reputation and credibility. . . whether he lets surrogates or "fans-groupies" (in general) do it for him after the fact.
The sentence "Stalin, Mao and Hitler did not murder of millions of people." does not qualify with 'directly' | 'personally' or 'indirectly' | 'delegate'.
So, as is often the case in English, the sentence can be read multiple ways.
Musk is playing a little game with an implied adverb of 'directly' or 'personally' because the implied adverb of 'indirectly' or 'delegate' is the more common, natural interpretation. That is, the more natural reading based on knowledge of history, etc. is that these were mass murderers so of course they are responsible (albeit indirectly / delegated) for the murder of millions.
Ultimately, it is rather slimy to try to blame only underlings who are told what to do and imply the top of the hierarchy is blameless.
Interesting, you don't "absolve" these miscreant leaders of anything. . . but you do not acknowledge these leaders policy prescriptions and authorizations as sufficient enough for the cause of the deaths either.
Now then, I took a long look at "X" Alice Smith timeline (the questionable comment is not present on it now) and thus it is near impossible to get context on why she posted that specific comment in the manner she did. But, she is no fan of liberals in any shape, form, or fashion by what she has posted there in defense of right-wing causes.
So we remain. . . free to decide her and Musk's points for posting and reposting it!
1.2.8
1.2.18
At this point I think Musk is just trolling liberals.
I agree. He sees how mentally unstable some on the left are and he’s messing with them.
Or , he's just a stupid fuck who acts impulsively without thinking of the consequences.
And winning - even on NT
Are Tesla shareholders winning? I think not.
Yeah, they are doing awful. Up nearly 50% from a year ago.
Actually Tesla stock at about $250 was $400 in 2022. So, no!
Wrong. [ deleted ] [ ✘ ] I said a year ago. So, on 03-18-24 the value was about 174, on 03-14-25 it was about 250.
So yes, Tesla is still doing great. Especially when compared to some other Auto companies.
Up about 44% from a year ago
Down about 17% from a year ago
But keep trying. Eventually you might find some truth.
There is a lot of that going on. That and projection. Lots of projection!
Opinions do vary but if so, it’s better than the complete bullshit many on the left are shoveling.
Much better.
His company can't take much more of his Nazi antics and the board of directors should take action to oust him considering how much money the company has lost. If Musk wasn't creating so much fear by his actions at both DOGE and with his Nazi sympathies these protests wouldn't be happening.
Funny how Republicans had no problem with armed "tea party" protests of Obama saying they were afraid Obama was going to take their guns.
Republicans denounced January 6 rioters immediately afterward but then rewrite history by going along with Trump erasing it from the law by pardoning violent rioters who did bring various weapons and even erected a gallows.
Violence and weapons and guns are okay with Republicans but for gods sake don't carry protest signs critical of Musk.
Nope, this is still a load of disingenuous claptrap. As noted in the last article published here on this topic.
The New York Times Elon musk blogger is pandering to illiterate progressives. A moderately bright sixth grader should be able to see through what’s she doing.
It is a good example of the closed circle of progressive reporting, the story is that progressive users on x criticized it as Meaning”, so that give the progressive musk obsessed blogger the chance to Write a post using the anymous users framing rather than trying to actually justify the post actually being anti Semitic or “dismissive of genocide”. It’s an entire story based on the “people are saying” it means this, rather than what it actually said.
NOW WHERE HAVE WE HEARD THAT PHRASE BEFORE
Kinda like "Here, hold my beer".
From the first time this topic was published here:
No more need be said.