As a political scientist I know all the problems in Elon’s initial framing, but I would not dismiss him—for two reasons. 1) The electoral and party systems are far more norm-based than hard-wired, so the status quo persists in large part because third-party challengers like Perot have respected all the unwritten norms. With sufficiently aggressive and autistic will, from a sufficiently powerful outsider, I can see ways that the American party system could be altered in historically N=1 fashion. It would be “constitutional crisis” territory, but if you think the debt spiral is existential then that’s what constitutional crises are for. Though ultimately aborted, DOGE was an N=1 proof that Musk is capable of extremely aggressive and uncorrelated attacks on the entire DC dinner party. If he takes his learnings and goes all out, at higher-leverage exploits in the system, it is hard to put a ceiling on what he could do. Wagging Duverger’s Law at Musk like he’s a child only shows your own smallness. Great men periodically overwrite even the most iron laws. 2) Tesla, xAI, X, Neuralink, Starlink, and SpaceX are not just big companies and Musk is not just another billionaire. He’s the only individual in the world who presides over an entire civilizational stack. AI is going to melt the DC status quo in ways we cannot imagine, while increasing his leverage in ways we cannot imagine. Again, the political commentators dismissing Elon for entering their area of “expertise” are not going to age well. Human civilization is at a crossroads. Washington DC is a critical link in the chain if we want to make this turn out well for America, and this planet. But there is only one person in the world whose bargaining chips include leaving the planet. There is only one person who could oversee the reconstitution of an advanced civilization from his own businesses alone. Only time will tell, but you’d be crazy to dismiss him.