Al Baghdadi and Elon Musk: Brothers in Arms

Save

Baghdadi and Musk: brothers in arms
I never thought I’d compare a terrorist to a tech billionaire. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the late ISIS leader who butchered thousands in the name of a caliphate, and Elon Musk, the meme-loving CEO who wants to colonize Mars, seem like opposites. But peel back their surface differences, and you’ll find a shared thread—fanatical belief in their ideologies and a willingness to bend reality (or human lives) to fit their vision. 
WHY TO COMPARE
This exploration not only enhances our understanding of ideological contrasts but also evaluates the effectiveness of their communication strategies in a digitized world and the threat such a worldview poses to the world.
There are profound parallels in their worldviews and communication strategies, each wielding significant influence over their respective followers.
By dissecting their tribal worldviews, perspectives on sex and gender, monoculturalism, black-and-white binary thinking, racism, absolutism, transphobia, homophobia, opposition to separation between civil society and state, authoritarianism, and suppression of working people, we aim to illuminate the mechanisms through which they shape narratives and mobilize support.
Both cultivate tribal identities, espouse absolutist ideals, and suppress dissent, leveraging social media to build devoted followings, subjugate women, and seek absolute power.
Their ideological contrasts—techno-optimism versus religious fundamentalism— shared mechanisms of influence, from binary thinking to authoritarian control. This analysis enhances our understanding of how such figures wield power, highlighting the effectiveness of their communication in mobilizing support and shaping societal narratives. It underscores the urgency of critically assessing ideological extremism, whether rooted in corporate innovation or radical religious fundamentalism, to safeguard against its unchecked spread.
We rarely pause to see that moral and social decay often unfolds in subtler, everyday forms. Whether in the vaulted halls of Silicon Valley or the austere corridors of extremist caliphates, the currents of patriarchy, sexism, sexual segregation, misogyny, and paternalism shape lives, constrain freedom, and leave communities fragmented.
Let’s break it down. 
Both men are fundamentalists. Al-Baghdadi’s Islamic fundamentalism demanded a return to 7th-century purity, enforced through brutality. Musk’s market fundamentalism—the quasi-religious faith that unchecked capitalism and tech innovation can fix everything—is less violent but equally uncompromising. For al-Baghdadi, the caliphate was the answer to modern moral decay and decadence of capitalism. For Musk, it’s Mars colonies, brain chips, and Twitter-for-all. Both dismiss critics as heretics and are Takfiri. When Musk calls activists “whining” or mocks safety concerns about Tesla’s Autopilot, it’s not unlike ISIS dismissing civilian casualties as “collateral” in a holy war and Muslims not believing his version of Islam as infidels. The dogma always justifies the damage. 
And oh, the damage. Fundamentalists thrive on sacrificing the “now” for the utopian “later.” ISIS slaughtered Yazidis, destroyed ancient artifacts, and turned cities into battlegrounds to build their fantasy Islamic state. Musk’s empire, meanwhile, relies on cobalt mines where child laborers toil, Tesla factories with rampant worker injuries, and Twitter/X /X layoffs that upend thousands of lives—all brushed off as necessary for “progress.” Remember when he tweeted that Covid lockdowns were “fascist,” ignoring frontline workers? The greater good, it seems, only matters if he’s defining it. 
Musk and Al Baghdadi Propagandists
 Here’s where it gets eerier: propaganda. Al-Baghdadi’s ISIS produced slick videos of executions and Quranic recitals, weaponizing social media to recruit globally. Musk, a self-proclaimed “free speech absolutist,” owns a platform (X) that amplifies conspiracy theories and hate speech, all while he posts memes dunking on “woke” culture. Both understand the power of spectacle. ISIS staged dystopian parades; Musk livestreams Cybertrucks smashing windows. It’s not about truth—it’s about controlling the narrative. Musk grasps that repetition and charisma can make followers swallow contradictions (see: Tesla’s “full self-driving” promises since 2016… still not here). 
Finally, the cult of personality. Al-Baghdadi styled himself a caliph—God’s deputy on Earth. Musk plays the Tony Stark genius, the “self-made” savant who sleeps in factories to “save humanity.” Both personas demand devotion. ISIS fighters swore allegiance; Musk’s fans treat his tweets as gospel. When he smears unions as “bad,” or claims AI could “kill us all” (unless he controls it), dissenters aren’t just wrong—they’re enemies of the future. 
So, why care? Because extremism isn’t just about bombs or beheadings. It’s the refusal to question your own righteousness. Whether it’s a caliphate or a crypto-utopia, any ideology that criminalizes dissent and dehumanizes doubt—or people—is a ticking time bomb. Al-Baghdadi’s legacy is rubble and refugees. Musk’s might be a scorched-earth economy and a Twitter sphere rotting from misinformation. Different tools, same fundamentalist playbook: Believe harder. Crush the rest. The end always justifies the means. 
Next time you see a Musk tweet or a SpaceX launch, ask yourself: Who’s paying the price for this “future”? And who decided they were expendable?
Tribes, Tech, and Terror: Cultivating “Us vs. Them” 
Musk and ISIS both thrive on building tribal identities. Musk doesn’t just sell cars or rockets—he sells a lifestyle. His followers, dubbed “Musketeers,” and I call them the FOX News crowd,  some of them see themselves as part of an elite mission to “save humanity” through tech and save America by enhancing the birth rate and make it “the only imperial power once again”. He’s the quirky genius leading the charge against climate doom and demographic change in the White Christian Western world because of America’s declining birthrates, and warns that U.S. hegemony is essential for humanity’s survival. He means to say: “Follow me, or civilization collapses.”
The person who has lost his humanity and sold his soul to profit is concerned with the collapse of the White Christian Western civilisation. That has killed billions in sectarian violence, wars, genocides, regime change operations, and massacres. Western civilization, which possesses weapons of mass destruction, is the first to use a nuclear bomb on a civil population, that too on Asians, and it has military bases all over the world. He frames his white tribe as humanity.
ISIS does the same, but with religious fundamentalism. They frame themselves as the “true” Muslims fighting a world of “infidels.” And call any Muslim who does not support them an infidels. They killed more Muslims than non-Muslims. And massacred Yezidis. They claim that the Earth and its resources belong to Muslims first. Both groups create clear lines: you’re either with the tribe or against it. You might remember how “either with them or with Us”. The most famous war cry of the war criminal, former President Bush.
And in both cases, dissent isn’t just discouraged—it’s silenced. 
 ISIS constructs its tribe along religious and ethnic lines, positioning itself as the vanguard of “true” Muslims against a world of infidels. This tribalism galvanizes loyalty and delineates clear in-group/out-group boundaries, enhancing group cohesion in both cases. Both take full advantage of it.
 Gender Wars: From Tweets to Theocracy  
Musk’s perspective on sex and gender has drawn scrutiny for apparent patriarchal undertones. Musk’s attitude toward gender feels like a throwback to the 1950s. Remember when he bashed gender pronouns as “annoying”? His disdain for progressivism isn’t just edgy trolling—it’s a worldview. His transgender daughter, Viavin Wilson, publicly cut ties with him, calling out his rigid views and calling him “pathetic man-child”. The same is true of Al-Baghdadi, the leader of  ISIS, who takes misogyny to genocidal extremes, enslaving Yazidi women as “spoils of war” under twisted religious justification. 
The common thread? Both enforce hierarchies where women (and anyone outside their norms) are lesser. Musk’s sexism operates in boardrooms and Twitter threads; ISIS’s sexism thrives in war zones. But both normalize the idea that men, particularly Muslim men, deserve power, and others don’t. 
Musk is dismissive of gender inclusivity as a theological entitlement. While Musk’s sexism operates within a corporate and cultural sphere, ISIS manifests as violent subjugation, yet both reflect a gendered hierarchy.
 
 
Both Nurses’ decadeant values
Moral values and social norms are not ordained by god or grey-haired academics and cannot be eternal for all ages and all people. These are the reflection of power relations prevalent at given times. These are structural, social, and political at the same time.  As society and its power structure and ideational foundations change, so do the moral values. Men’s and women’s power relations have changed drastically, and this should reflect their place in society. However, the likes of Musk and Baghdadi’s reactionary mindset do not accept the change and nurse decadent values that do not operate in society anymore and try to impose these on others, particularly vulnerable segments of society.
He is against cultural diversity and heterogeneity in social relations and tries to impose a false binary that is no longer operative, at least under pluralist societies, and you need to establish a totalitarian society to operate these. 
 The New Patriarchy: Tech Titans and Sexist Cultures
Imagine stepping onto the factory floor at Tesla’s Fremont plant. The whine of machinery competes with whispered complaints: women feeling watched, catcalled, or isolated on the assembly line. In 2021, seven female workers sued Tesla, describing a pattern of catcalling, unwanted touching, and slurs that went unaddressed for years. One engineer recounted being called into a vacant parking lot for unsolicited advances—a practice so normalized she eventually built personal barriers just to work in peace. These testimonies reveal not an aberration but a systemic culture that, however unintentionally, tolerates—and even empowers—patriarchal control.
At SpaceX, similar accusations have surfaced. In mid-2024, a group of engineers sued, alleging they were fired for protesting a “pervasively sexist culture” fostered by comments and conduct from the top ⸺ including euphemistic references to male anatomy in professional settings (reuters.com, silicon.co.uk). When the engineer’s concerns landed on CEO Elon Musk’s desk, they encountered silence—or worse, retaliation. Lawsuits and boardroom memos aside, the message was clear: technical prowess and disruptive visions can overshadow respect for individual dignity.
Sexism in these environments is not merely interpersonal; it’s structural. Policies are drafted, but enforcement is lax. Human Resources, meant to be a shield, often becomes a sieve that filters out complaints. The outcome? An ecosystem where paternalism masquerades as mentorship, and innovation culture conflates risk-taking with risk to personal boundaries.
 Misogyny and Control: The Caliphate’s Moral Police
Travel from Silicon Valley to the self-proclaimed Caliphate in Raqqa, and you confront an antithetical world: one where gender segregation is strictly codified. Under Abu Bakr al Baghdadi’s command, the Al Khansaa Brigade—an all-female religious police force—patrolled streets in pursuit of “moral” offenders. Women who left home without a male chaperone or whose abayas were deemed too form-fitting faced public beatings, arrest, or worse, lashing.
But here, misogyny is not accidental; it is doctrinal. Al Baghdadi’s ideology mandated rigid gender roles: women as childbearers and educators of future jihadists, men as warriors and rulers. Religious edicts justified segregated schooling, barred women from driving, and even criminalized speaking to unrelated men. Those who resisted risked family exile, imprisonment, or death.
Sexual violence under ISIS went beyond punishment. The caliphate institutionalized sex slavery, trafficking Yazidi women and girls as “spoils of war,” while offering theological rationalizations that stripped victims of agency. Paternalism, cloaked in religious duty, became a pretext for pervasive control, echoing the same moral absolutism that fuels misogyny in corporate corner offices, but wielded with lethal force.
Shared Mechanisms, Divergent Extremes
Though the worlds of Musk and al Baghdadi feel oceans apart, both demonstrate how decadence in moral values often arises from similar root causes:
•           Normalization of power imbalances: Whether it’s a boardroom dismissing a harassment claim or a sharia court enforcing modesty laws, power imbalances flourish when institutions prioritize ideology or profit over people.
•           Silencing of dissent: Whistleblowers at SpaceX and Tesla risk termination; women under ISIS faced imprisonment for questioning clerics. Silence becomes complicity.
•           Paternalistic rationales: “We know what’s best for you” is a refrain in high-tech workplaces and theocratic regimes alike, curtailing autonomy under the guise of guidance.
Yet the scale diverges: tech giants inflict social and psychological wounds that scar careers and self-esteem, while extremist regimes perpetrate atrocities that shatter families and communities. Recognizing these parallels helps us grasp the pervasive nature of moral decay—and the urgency of reform.
 Impact on Individuals and Communities
For employees at Musk’s companies, the toll is often silent: diminished confidence, stress-related health issues, and attrition from fields once heralded as meritocracies. Communities lose the talent and diversity essential for innovation, perpetuating a cycle where male-dominated networks reinforce exclusion.
In territories once held by ISIS, the impact is visceral: survivors of sexual slavery wrestle with trauma, societies struggle to reintegrate former members of extremist units, and generalized distrust hampers reconstruction. Paternalistic doctrines fracture social cohesion, embedding victim-blaming attitudes even after the caliphate’s demise.
  Mono-Culturalism
Musk’s vision of colonizing Mars isn’t just sci-fi—it’s a monocultural fantasy. Imagine a future where his companies dictate society’s values, sidelining democracy in favor of technocratic rule. He’s already testing this: Tesla’s “Gigafactories” resemble corporate city-states, and his Starlink satellites give him outsized control over global communication. 
His support for Trump’s immigration policy and drive to get everyone out of America, opposing his societal values, restoring white supremacy,  under the slogan Make America Great Again, increasing inequality, and undermining social justice.  Likewise, he is against political pluralism and the separation of powers.
ISIS pursues an equally rigid mono-culturalism, seeking to eradicate all but its radical interpretation of Islam.  Both ideologies suppress pluralism in favor of a singular, exclusionary ideal.
 ISIS mirrors this rigidity. They demolished ancient cultural sites like Palmyra to erase history and enforce their version of Sharia law. Both see pluralism as a threat. For Musk, diversity is a speed bump on the road to “innovation.” For ISIS, it’s heresy. Either way, dissenters get crushed.  This homogeneity prioritizes his companies’ values over diverse societal inputs.
 
 Crush Dissent, Demand Loyalty 
Musk fires employees who question him and smears critics as “woke mind virus” carriers. At Tesla factories, workers face grueling conditions and anti-union tactics. ISIS? They ruled with executions and torture, turning dissenters into examples. 
The playbook: Fear + loyalty = control. Musk’s cult of personality (“Technoking!”) mirrors ISIS’s reverence for al-Baghdadi. Both demand you submit—or else. 
Musk’s management style has been labeled authoritarian, with reports of firing dissenters and demanding unwavering loyalty. ISIS’s rule over its territories was tyrannical, marked by public executions and rigid control. This top-down approach both ensures compliance and suppresses opposition.
 Social Media as a Weapon 
Here’s where it gets really scary. Both Musk and ISIS mastered digital propaganda. Musk tweets memes, stokes conspiracy theories, and fires employees who question him. He even bought Twitter (now X) to control the narrative. ISIS? They flooded Telegram with Hollywood-style videos of executions to recruit followers worldwide. 
Their tactics rely on binary thinking: you’re either a hero or a traitor, a savior or a sinner. This black-and-white framing hooks people emotionally. For Musk’s fans, supporting him means fighting for progress; for ISIS recruits, it’s holy war. Both groups exploit the human craving for purpose, and both profit from chaos.
Musk’s genius isn’t engineering—it’s viral storytelling. He bought Twitter/X  to own the narrative, blending memes with conspiracy theories. ISIS weaponized social media too, producing slick videos of beheadings to recruit globally. 
The dark side: Both bypass traditional media to radicalize directly. Musk’s jokes about “population collapse” normalize far-right talking points; ISIS’s snuff films desensitize followers to violence. The goal? Rewire brains, one click at a time.   
 Decline Of American Imperialist Worldorder
The decline of American imperialism isn’t just about tanks and tariffs—it’s about who controls the story. Musk represents a new breed of corporate imperialism, where billionaires replace governments as the architects of society. His obsession with U.S. hegemony isn’t patriotic; it’s about maintaining a system where tech oligarchs call the shots. 
ISIS, meanwhile, rose from the ashes of a failed U.S. intervention in Iraq. Their extremism is a grotesque mirror of the same imperialist logic: “Our way is the only way.” 
Black-and-White Thinking: “My Way or the Highway” 
Both Musk and ISIS thrive on binary worldviews—no room for gray areas. Musk paints every debate as a showdown between genius and idiocy. Remember his COVID-19 tantrums? He called lockdowns “fascist” and raged against mandates, framing public health as a battle between “freedom” and “tyranny.” Meanwhile, ISIS divides the world into “believers” and “infidels,” justifying slaughter as a holy duty. 
Why it works: Simplifying complex issues into “good vs. evil” hooks people emotionally. For Musk’s fans, questioning him is a betrayal. For ISIS recruits, doubt is sin. 
 ISIS employs a stark believers-versus-non-believers dichotomy, rejecting compromise or coexistence. This absolutist framing simplifies complex issues, rallying followers around unambiguous causes.
 Racism: Exclusion in Disguise (and in Your Face) 
Musk’s racism is subtle but insidious. Tesla’s 2021 lawsuit exposed a “racially segregated workplace,” while his tweets fret about “population collapse” in white-majority nations—a dog whistle for ethno-nationalism. ISIS? They’re blatant. They massacred Yazidis and enslaved Kurdish women, treating non-Arabs as subhuman. 
The twist: Both feed on fear of “the other.” And call them aliens. Musk warns of “demographic shifts” undermining Western power; ISIS promises racial purity through violence. It’s the same toxic brew, just bottled differently. 
Both exhibit exclusionary tendencies, though ISIS’s is explicitly violent.
 Absolutism: “Rules Don’t Apply to Me” 
Musk calls himself a “free speech absolutist,” which sounds noble—until he lets hate speech flourish on Twitter/X to boost engagement. ISIS takes it further: their “divine absolutism” justifies beheadings and rape as God’s will. 
The common thread: Unchecked power. Musk’s “absolutism” lets him dodge accountability ( SEC fines, worker lawsuits). ISIS’s version lets them rewrite morality. Both see themselves as above society, not part of it. 
Musk’s self-description as a “free speech absolutist” underscores his rejection of moderation, even when speech incites harm, as seen in his reinstatement of controversial figures on X. ISIS’s religious absolutism deems its doctrine the sole truth, justifying atrocities under divine mandate. This inflexibility fortifies their ideological cores.
 Corporate Caliphates: Blurring Lines Between Power and People 
Musk’s SpaceX now handles U.S. national security launches, while Starlink operates as a privatized internet for war zones. That means:  He’s not just a CEO—he’s a shadow policymaker. ISIS did the same, erasing the line between mosque and state by declaring a caliphate where religion was law. 
Why it matters: When corporations or cults replace governments, democracy crumbles. Musk’s fans cheer this as “disruption.” ISIS’s followers called it “God’s plan.” The result? A power grab masked as progress. 
No Separation of Civil Society and State
Musk’s ventures, such as SpaceX’s government contracts for space exploration, blur the lines between private enterprise and public governance, integrating his corporate agenda into state functions. ISIS sought a caliphate where religious and political authority merge, abolishing secular distinctions. Both challenge traditional boundaries of power.
Suppression of Working People
Tesla’s labor practices, including documented poor working conditions and union-busting, reveal a suppression of workers’ rights in pursuit of Musk’s goals. ISIS exploited enslaved laborers, forcing them into brutal servitude. Both prioritize ideological ends over equitable treatment of their workforce.
These shared traits—tribalism, sexism, monoculturalism, binary thinking, racism, absolutism, merged societal roles, authoritarianism, and worker suppression—form the ideological scaffolding that underpins their influence, despite their divergent contexts.
The Takeaway: Extremism Isn’t Just “Over There” 
We like to think extremism is something that happens elsewhere—in war zones or fringe groups. But Musk’s rise shows how it’s baked into systems we interact with daily. Whether it’s tech bros demanding total allegiance to a CEO or terrorists demanding blind faith in a caliphate, the mechanisms of control are eerily similar. 
Toward Restoring Moral Integrity
Confronting decadent moral values demands both institutional and cultural change. Tech companies must reinforce zero tolerance policies with transparent enforcement and empower independent ombudspersons. Governments and civil society organizations need sustained support for survivors of extremist violence, coupled with education campaigns that promote gender equality as a social imperative.
Ultimately, whether unlocking the potential of artificial intelligence or rebuilding shattered communities, genuine progress hinges on respect for autonomy, for dignity, and the equal humanity of all. Only by acknowledging the shadows cast by patriarchy, sexism, sexual segregation, misogyny, and paternalism can we hope to illuminate a path toward more just and compassionate societies.
So what do we do? 
– Question absolutist narratives—whether they’re sold as “innovation” or “divine will.” 
– Protect pluralism. Diversity isn’t just woke—it’s a firewall against authoritarianism. 
– Hold platforms accountable. Social media shouldn’t be a megaphone for tribalism and corporate greed. 
The stakes? Nothing less than democracy itself. Because when we let billionaires or extremists monopolize the future, we all lose.