Elon Musk
Is the World’s Richest Man. Why Is He Sleeping on an Office Floor?
Feb. 27,
2025
By Erik
Baker
Mr. Baker is
a historian at Harvard and the author of “Make Your Own Job: How the
Entrepreneurial Work Ethic Exhausted America.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/27/opinion/elon-musk-billionaire.html
Elon Musk
hates the weekend. For well over a decade, the world’s richest man has
proclaimed the necessity of working at least 80 hours a week — “peaking above
100 at times,” as he said in 2018 — in order “to change the world.” Now he and
his subordinates at the so-called Department of Government Efficiency are
supposedly toiling up to 120 hours a week, which is why, in Mr. Musk’s view,
their “bureaucratic opponents” stand no chance. “It’s like the opposing team
just leaves the field for two days!” Mr. Musk recently remarked. “Working the
weekend is a superpower.”
This
association between incessant work and entrepreneurial success is pervasive in
American business culture today. Jeff Bezos reports working 12 hours every day
of the week in the early years of Amazon. The Apple chief executive Tim Cook is
famous for sending emails at 4:30 a.m. Mr. Musk’s ostensible boss, despite his
well-known fondness for TV news and social media, also insists that “no
president ever worked harder than me.”
These
boasts, plausible or not, reveal something important about the American
valorization of work, and help explain why this class of supposedly busy
billionaires has come to believe they’re entitled to dominate our national
life. For Mr. Musk and his associates, a herculean enthusiasm for work isn’t
merely a way to get things done; it’s also a mark of innate superiority, a
“superpower” that confers the right to impose their vision on the world. Mr.
Musk’s decades in the highest echelons of the tech industry, surrounded by
other executives who justified their lordship over their private empires by
trumpeting their inexhaustible work ethic, have taught him that if you work
harder than everyone else, you should be rewarded with unquestioned rule over
your dominion. Now he is seeking to extend this logic into our government,
transforming it, like one of his companies, into another personal fief.
While the
scope of Mr. Musk’s project may be novel, the archetype he embodies has a long
history. The Austrian-born economist Joseph Schumpeter, who taught at Harvard
from 1932 until his death in 1950, helped popularize the idea that
entrepreneurs possessed a special set of personality traits that set them apart
from lesser businessmen and managers. Entrepreneurship, according to
Schumpeter, smashed economic routines. That took “will and personality.” True
entrepreneurs generated “gales of creative destruction,” in his famous phrase,
a notion he adapted from the German economist Werner Sombart, who maintained in
1909 that entrepreneurs were “men (not women!) equipped for everything with an
extraordinary vitality, from which pours forth an unusual drive to act, a
passionate joy in work and an irrepressible desire for power.” They were
superheroes.
It didn’t
take long for American business leaders to embrace this way of thinking. It
enabled them to rationalize their success as the natural outgrowth of their own
productivity, and to cast heavier workloads as a way of empowering employees
rather than grinding them down. When Georges F. Doriot, a co-founder of one of
the first major American venture capital firms, was asked in 1960 whether he
planned to hire new staffers to keep up with his company’s rapid growth, he
replied, “No, we will all just work later into the night.” This mind-set spread
into the tech firms Doriot invested in and shaped the worldview of Silicon
Valley executives. In the early 1980s, employees working under Steve Jobs in
Apple’s Macintosh division made T-shirts that read “90 hours a week and loving
it!”
In recent
decades, two trends in American life have supercharged the spread of this
entrepreneurial work ethic, helping to push busy billionaires to the center of
our politics. First, more and more ordinary Americans learned to think of work
as something scarce. As deindustrialization ravaged wide swaths of the country
and unionization declined, they got accustomed to cycles of layoffs and the
need to retrain in new occupations or new industries. Now, in an era when over
70 percent of Americans worry about the availability of good jobs with good
pay, the bosses atop our class pyramid correctly perceive how such jobs have
become a status symbol: If the rich of the Gilded Age had conspicuous
consumption, flaunting their freedom from toil, the rich of our new Gilded Age
have conspicuous work. We see them working constantly while we hunt for extra
shifts or struggle to string part-time jobs together, and we marvel at how
special they must be.
Then there
is the looming threat of a seismic technological breakthrough. Many tech
leaders today believe that the development of artificial intelligence is poised
to automate most jobs into oblivion. Tech companies including Google, Dropbox
and Meta have already invoked A.I. advancements to justify recent layoffs, and
over 40 percent of companies worldwide anticipate following suit in the next
five years, according to a World Economic Forum survey. For those driving the
A.I. boom, this is a prospect to look forward to. In the automated world to
come, billionaires seem to expect to be some of the last workers standing,
charged with much of the only work they imagine humans will have left to do:
calling the shots for everyone else.
For Mr.
Musk, culling the work forces of firms he acquires seems to be a way of
bringing this future one step closer. After he took over Twitter, he fired half
its employees and informed those who remained that he would be imposing an
“extremely hard-core” management style; many of them took his offer to resign
in exchange for three months of severance. Now Mr. Musk is applying the same
playbook to the federal government, seeking to replace career officials with
DOGE shock troops and machine learning algorithms. “Everything that can be
machine-automated will be,” one official observing Mr. Musk’s blitz recently
told The Washington Post. “And the technocrats will replace the bureaucrats.”
Common sense
would seem to suggest obstacles to this vision. As Mr. Musk is proving before
our eyes, working 120 hours a week is not the same thing as doing a good job.
Mr. Musk and his DOGE henchmen are making the kinds of sloppy mistakes one
might expect from people toiling around the clock, subsisting, as they
reportedly are, on “a steady stream of delivery pizzas, Red Bull and Doritos”
and resting only intermittently in office “sleep pods.” They put up a website
attempting to document their cost savings that was riddled with glaring
accounting errors. They fired hundreds of workers responsible for nuclear
weapons safety, then scrambled to rehire them.
Mr. Musk
knows how much an executive can get away with when he is believed to possess
extraordinary productive powers. He made Twitter a worse, less valuable
company, dismantling its verification and moderation systems and suppressing
links to other websites, and yet he profited from turning it into a MAGA
megaphone. His cars catch fire, and yet they keep coming off the assembly line
at his hyper-automated factories, their appeal buoyed by his cultlike fan base.
And now, it seems, if anything ever stops DOGE’s wrecking ball, it will be the
courts, or perhaps the president’s jealousy, not the discovery that Mr. Musk
and his team don’t know what they are doing.
As Peter
Thiel once observed, “A startup is basically structured as a monarchy.” And as
in a monarchy, the core purpose of many startups is to flatter the egos of
their leaders rather than to make ordinary people’s lives better. If the United
States feels increasingly like a country ruled by two petulant kings, perhaps
it’s because the government is finally being run like a business.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário