Automotive
Trump Must Act to Halt the Tesla Terror Campaign
Christopher F. Rufo
The Left’s splintering violence threatens a veto over democratic power.
Elon Musk finds himself at the fulcrum of American life. His companies are leading the field across the automotive, space, robotics, and AI industries. His ownership of the social platform X gives him significant influence over political discourse. And his DOGE initiative represents the single greatest threat to the permanent administrative state. Musk is arguably the most powerful man in the United States, including President Trump.
The Left has taken notice. Left-wing activists have long practiced a tactic called “power mapping,” which entails diagramming the opposing political movement and identifying “chokepoints.” They have designated Musk as one such chokepoint. This month, activists claimed to have organized 500 protests against Elon Musk’s Tesla—dubbed the “Tesla Takedown”—with demonstrations outside sales lots and a series of incidents of vandalism, property destruction, and fire bombings. A pattern has also emerged of individuals scratching or spray-painting parked Teslas, looking to intimidate owners and potential owners or just to express hatred of Musk.
Precedents exist for this kind of escalation. In the 1970s, following the frustrations of the civil rights era, left-wing splinter groups launched targeted terror campaigns and symbolic acts of violence. They bombed the U.S. Capitol, assassinated police officers, and even self-immolated in imitation of Buddhist monks. We may be entering a similar phase today, as the collapse of the Black Lives Matter movement gives rise to radicalized left-wing factions willing to embrace violence. If so, Musk’s Tesla may be the Number One target.
What, exactly, motivates this campaign? At its core, the Left appears to be shifting from an “antiracist” narrative to an anti-wealth one—from a racial frame to an economic one. The sentiment driving the Tesla Takedown is rooted in economic resentment and a desire for leveling. Musk has become a symbol of everything progressives oppose: oligarchy, capitalism, wealth, and innovation. These, in their view, are marks of the oppressor. They scorn the futuristic Cybertruck, SpaceX rockets, and Optimus robots, believing that such creations should be dismantled and repurposed into chassis for public buses or I-beams for public housing.
A certain element of left-wing Luddism is at work here, but the greater part of these activists’ motives is resentment. Musk represents the triumph of the great man of industry, something the Left believes should not exist.
Unfortunately, the Tesla Takedown may succeed. The Left has likely identified Tesla as a chokepoint because it’s easier to dissuade consumers from buying a car they associate with a malevolent political cause—or fear might be vandalized—than it is to persuade them to buy one in support of Musk and DOGE. When it comes to purchasing a Tesla, fear among the average American is a more powerful motivator than enthusiasm among the MAGA base.
Some evidence suggests that the campaign has made an economic impact. Tesla stock peaked around the time of President Trump’s inauguration and since then has lost approximately 40 percent of its value. Musk has accumulated more power than any other American, but that means that he has more points of vulnerability. His wealth and power are tied to his companies—most importantly, his consumer car company, which depends on individual purchases rather than institutional contracts (like SpaceX).
Trump has signaled that he understands this dilemma. He appeared at the White House in a Tesla and has voiced support for Musk’s firms. Justice Department prosecutors—and their allies in state government—must translate this support into policy by identifying and punishing those who destroy property as a means of political intimidation.
The administration needs to make clear that radical left-wing factions cannot use violence to wield a veto over democratic governance. If the partnership between Trump and Musk is to produce meaningful results, it must be backed by the full protection of the law.
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
“The Supreme Court put to rest any question about whether fuel manufacturers have a right to challenge unlawful electric vehicle mandates”
The Supreme Court sided Friday with oil companies seeking to challenge California’s electric vehicle regulations.
In a 7-2 ruling, the court allowed energy producers to continue their lawsuit challenging the Environmental Protection Agency’s decision to approve California regulations that require manufacturing more electric vehicles.
“The government generally may not target a business or industry through stringent and allegedly unlawful regulation, and then evade the resulting lawsuits by claiming that the targets of its regulation should be locked out of court as unaffected bystanders,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in the majority opinion. “In light of this Court’s precedents and the evidence before the Court of Appeals, the fuel producers established Article III standing to challenge EPA’s approval of the California regulations.”
Kavanaugh noted that “EPA has repeatedly altered its legal position on whether the Clean Air Act authorizes California regulations targeting greenhouse-gas emissions from new motor vehicles” between Presidential administrations.
“This case involves California’s 2012 request for EPA approval of new California regulations,” he wrote. “As relevant here, those regulations generally require automakers (i) to limit average greenhouse-gas emissions across their fleets of new motor vehicles sold in the State and (ii) to manufacture a certain percentage of electric vehicles as part of their vehicle fleets.”
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals previously rejected the challenge, finding the producers lacked standing to sue.
“The Supreme Court put to rest any question about whether fuel manufacturers have a right to challenge unlawful electric vehicle mandates,” American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) President and CEO Chet Thompson said in a statement.
“California’s EV mandates are unlawful and bad for our country,” he said. “Congress did not give California special authority to regulate greenhouse gases, mandate electric vehicles or ban new gas car sales—all of which the state has attempted to do through its intentional misreading of statute.”
Automotive
Opposition Conservatives fail in attempt to “Pull the Plug” on Carney’s Electric Vehicle Mandate
From Conservative Party Communications
After a Lost Liberal Decade of rising costs and slow growth, Mark Carney wants you to think his government has moved on from Justin Trudeau’s failed policies.
Unfortunately for Canadians, Carney has no interest in scrapping one of his predecessor’s most reckless and costly ideas: a zero-emissions vehicle (ZEV) mandate starting next year that will ultimately ban Canadians from buying gas-powered cars by 2035.
As the required percentage of ZEV sales increases each year, the government wants to force manufacturers and importers to buy costly credits of up to $20,000 for every EV they are short of the Liberals’ quota – a huge expense that will ultimately be passed on to, and paid by Canadian consumers.
That’s why Conservatives have introduced a motion to end this harmful scheme, ensuring Canadians can continue to buy the kind of car they need at a price they can afford.
EVs are great for many families, who should always be free to purchase the vehicle of their choice. But for many Canadians – who live in cold environments or travel long distances – they can be practically useless, especially without the infrastructure to power them.
One government report estimated that changes to Canadian infrastructure required to support a transition to ZEVs could cost up to $300 billion by 2040. On top of the costs already imposed on manufacturers and buyers, this policy will require billions in new tax dollars and government debt.
No wonder one 2024 survey found two thirds of Canadians find the 2035 target is unrealistic.
As unjust tariffs threaten an automotive sector which contributes billions to our GDP, the Liberals continue to put their elitist, top-down ideology ahead of the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of proud Canadian workers.
While Carney talks about change, Conservatives are here to deliver. That’s why we’re fighting to repeal the ZEV mandate, scrap the industrial carbon tax and cancel Liberal fuel standards. We trust Canadians – not Ottawa’s Liberal elite – to make the best decisions for themselves and their families.
It’s time to put Canadians back in the driver’s seat.
Last day and last chance to win this dream home! Support the 2025 Red Deer Hospital Lottery before midnight!
Kananaskis G7 meeting the right setting for U.S. and Canada to reassert energy ties
“Evacuate”: Netanyahu Warns Tehran as Israel Expands Strikes on Iran’s Military Command
Alberta announces citizens will have to pay for their COVID shots
-
espionage1 day agoFrom Sidewinder to P.E.I.: Are Canada’s Political Elites Benefiting from Beijing’s Real Estate Reach?
-
Agriculture1 day agoUnstung Heroes: Canada’s Honey Bees are not Disappearing – They’re Thriving
-
Daily Caller1 day agoUnanimous Supreme Court Ruling Inspires Hope For Future Energy Project Permitting
-
Alberta1 day agoAlberta’s carbon diet – how to lose megatonnes in just three short decades
-
Energy1 day agoWho put the energy illiterate in charge?
-
Business1 day agoSenator wants to torpedo Canada’s oil and gas industry
-
Business2 days agoRFK Jr. planning new restrictions on drug advertising: report
-
espionage1 day agoFBI Buried ‘Warning’ Intel on CCP Plot to Elect Biden Using TikTok, Fake IDs, CCP Sympathizers and PRC Students—Grassley Probes Withdrawal