Protests Target Tesla Showing How Brands Can Be Focus of Political Ire
Elon Musk has been a high-profile, controversial figure in U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration in the first weeks of Trump’s second term. Prior to becoming an outsized part of the 2024 presidential election, and even prior to purchasing Twitter and transforming it into X, Musk was best known for running the electric vehicle company Tesla, the primary contributor to Musk’s vast wealth.
Tesla now finds itself a target of people who are angry at the political situation in the United States and the role Musk has played in the administration. In many locations across the United States, Tesla auto showrooms have been the site of anywhere from dozens to hundreds of protestors picketing Musk’s actions as Trump’s lieutenant charged with finding and correcting alleged fraud and waste in the U.S. government.
In several incidents, protestors have done more than picket. A Tesla dealership in Oregon was shot at during off hours when human casualties would be unlikely. At a few sites, protestors used Molotov cocktails to try to damage vehicles and showroom property. Cars have been painted and damaged. Tesla charging stations have also been vandalized; one in Littleton, Massachusetts, for example, was sprayed with gasoline and set ablaze.
Outside of dealerships and showrooms, people have damaged personally owned Teslas with graffiti, stickers, and damage. Numerous social media photos show Tesla vehicles spraypainted with swastikas or with trash dumped on them.
A growing trend is Tesla owners preemptively making political statements themselves. The BBC reported owners writing with chalk or soap on a Tesla with Musk’s name and an expletive and a slew of bumper stickers with messages such as “I bought this before Elon went crazy” and “Anti-Elon Tesla Club.”
In addition to the protests, Tesla has felt a Musk-in-politics effect financially as well. Tesla stock sharply increased immediately after the 2024 election by 97 percent, reaching an all-time high on 18 December. After Trump was inaugurated and the extent of Musk’s involvement in the administration became apparent, the stock tumbled, giving up all those gains and falling below pre-election levels as of the close yesterday, 10 March.
Sales have also fallen. The Wall Street Journal reported that Tesla sales worldwide fell by 1 percent in 2024 while overall electric vehicle sales increased by 25 percent. Sales in the United States declined by 7 percent last year and have declined 2 percent so far this year. European sales have declined far more sharply, with declines of 76 percent reported in Germany and 26 percent in France.
While business titans and politics have frequently intermingled, several factors make this situation unique in recent U.S. history. Musk is by far the richest person in the world with a net worth more than $100 billion more than anyone else. He also bought what was arguably the world’s most influential social media network in Twitter, which he renamed X. With his political activism, he built a huge following. In addition, Trump empowered him to quickly cause seismic disruptions to the federal workforce with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), making him a target of an opposition that polling suggests outnumbers proponents by as much as 15 percent.
While the situation of Tesla-targeting fueled by anger at Musk may be the result of unique circumstances, organizations need to be aware of the context and climate in which they operate.
Between the approach to the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, tariffs and trade wars, migrant deportations, imperialistic territory pronouncements, and other policies, the Trump administration has said and done many things that have or could lead to unrest being directed at organizations. The success of left-leaning parties in the recent Canadian election and right-leaning parties in recent German elections underscore a volatile geopolitical dynamic.
In pre-election coverage provided in Security Management, ASIS member Jason Porter, CPP, advised organizations on areas to monitor in case political protesting affected them. What was true prior to the election also applies to the current political environment. He wrote:
“Organizations should begin by identifying how politically motivated protesting, rioting, looting, or violence could impact operations internally and externally. Businesses should use the information from the assessment to map out policies and procedures, addressing potential incidents. Depending on the nature of the threat, mitigation strategies could range from shoring up internal communication systems and cross-training employees to working with a security partner to bolster onsite protection for major events.
“Finally, companies need to use every tool at their disposal to monitor possible threats, ensuring they are well-placed to mobilize should the need arise. For example, organizers are increasingly leaning on digital platforms to enlist support. This can make social media sites a rich tool for gathering intelligence on emerging threats associated with a particular event, topic, or business.
“In today’s charged political climate, organizations cannot completely avoid risk. However, by building a proactive plan to anticipate and mitigate threats, they can position themselves to respond swiftly and effectively, minimizing the impact on their operations, employees, and assets.”
A recent Security Management package of articles on extremism and political instability offers several resources for security professionals seeking additional guidance in this area, including an article on combating enemies who have adopted the leaderless resistance model, how to gain and use intelligence on the security issues posed by extremism, and self-examination dealing with the personal aspects of geopolitical tensions.
