On July 7, 2025, the social and economic space of the United States found itself at the epicenter of an unprecedented conflict between two symbols of the American era — Donald Trump and Elon Musk. The president, remaining true to his hard line, dealt a blow to the clean technology sector by canceling key tax breaks for electric vehicles. In response, the entrepreneur, known for his bold moves, announced the creation of a new political force — the American Party.
The disagreement between these two figures was not ideological, but rather a desire to control the direction of the country’s development. In speeches on his own media platforms, Trump sharply condemned Musk, calling his initiative “dangerous” and “destructive,” accusing him of undermining political stability and undermining traditional institutions. He emphasized that attempts to create a third party in the country’s history had only led to fragmentation of votes, not real change.
Musk, on the other hand, said that his initiative was dictated by the need to break down a rigid system in which “citizens have long ceased to be participants in the dialogue.” His call for the creation of a new political platform was accompanied by a vote on social network X, where millions of users supported the idea of proposing an alternative to the established dualism.
The escalation occurred against the backdrop of the adoption of a large-scale law called One Big Beautiful Bill, which includes the cancellation of subsidies for the purchase of electric vehicles. This move is perceived as a direct attack on Tesla, a company that has bet on sustainable technologies and mass electrification of transport. The loss of federal support of up to $7,500 per car could change the rules of the game for the entire industry, making eco-friendly cars less affordable.
Musk’s reaction was swift. He called the law “treacherous” and accused the administration of undermining technological progress. In a fit of emotion, the entrepreneur even threatened to stop SpaceX flights to the International Space Station, causing alarm among both the public and business partners. He later retracted this threat, but the fact that it was made in the first place speaks to the depth of the crisis.
Investors reacted swiftly: Tesla shares lost 14% of their value, and the company’s market capitalization fell by $150 billion. Concerns also intensified around SpaceX, a critical partner for NASA and the Pentagon. A possible revision of government contracts could lead to the disruption of strategic missions and a weakening of the country’s position in space.
Meanwhile, the White House administration has cautiously hinted at the possibility of revising the terms of cooperation with companies that exert pressure on the political agenda. Musk, whose business empire is tied to government contracts, was faced with a choice: either continue open confrontation or seek compromises while maintaining his image as a reformer.
According to analysts, creating a new political force is an extremely ambitious task. Even with financial resources, it will be necessary to overcome a complex legal infrastructure: from registration in the states to getting on the ballot. However, the idea itself has already had an effect: it has exposed accumulated discontent and caused a public outcry that cannot be ignored.
The confrontation between Trump and Musk goes beyond a standard political conflict. It symbolizes a transition to a new era, where traditional forms of representation are being challenged by figures with personal influence, technology, and direct access to audiences. Whereas elections were previously considered a game played by institutions, there are now increasing signs that charisma, media, and capital can change the very definition of power.
It is becoming clear that the country is entering a period of turbulence where there are no longer any clear scenarios. A new political experiment involving figures of the stature of Trump and Musk has the potential to reshape not only the balance of power, but also the very structure of dialogue between citizens and the authorities. One thing is clear: the coming months will determine whether the governance of the state will remain the prerogative of political institutions, or whether it will begin to be taken over by individuals whose influence in society is comparable to that of entire parties.
