top of page

Current Most Read

Elon Musk’s Bid to Acquire OpenAI: A Dangerous Power Grab?
UK Government Pressures Apple for Encrypted Data Access – Security Measure or Privacy Risk?
The Age of Anxiety: How Modern Tech is Making Us More Stressed

Economic Instability and Political Extremism: Then and Now

Writer's picture: Paul FrancisPaul Francis

Part 1: The Parallels of Turbulent Times

History, with all its twists and turns, often feels like a mirror held up to the present. As we explore the turbulent years of 1920–1924 and 2010–2024, one striking thread binds them together: economic instability, coupled with the rise of political extremism, creates fertile ground for upheaval. Yet, by examining the past, we can better understand—and perhaps avoid—the mistakes that shaped history.


Woman in fur coat holds a cigarette in a holder, exhaling smoke. Black and white image with a glamorous, vintage mood.

 

The Economic Struggles of a Century Ago

The world of 1920 was one in recovery mode, but the scars of World War I were fresh. Germany’s economic devastation was particularly profound, thanks to the Treaty of Versailles. War reparations, demanded by the Allied powers, placed an unbearable burden on the German economy. By 1923, hyperinflation reached a point where citizens carried wheelbarrows of cash to buy a loaf of bread. The collapse of the German mark wasn’t just an economic event—it was a societal trauma.


Meanwhile, in other parts of the world, recovery looked different. The United States entered the Roaring Twenties, a decade of unprecedented economic growth, yet one that masked growing inequalities. The wealth gap widened as industrial expansion benefited the upper echelons of society, leaving rural communities and lower-income workers struggling to keep up.


This contrast of roaring prosperity and crippling despair set the stage for future instability. In Germany, it created a breeding ground for anger and desperation, leading to the rise of radical ideologies.


 

Modern Echoes: 2010–2024

Fast-forward to the 2010s and the parallels are hard to ignore. The global financial crisis of 2008 had left economies reeling. Governments implemented austerity measures to stabilize finances, but the social toll was high. Unemployment soared in countries like Greece and Spain, and public services were slashed.


Then came the COVID-19 pandemic, which brought the global economy to a grinding halt. Governments scrambled to inject life into their economies through massive stimulus packages, but these measures came at a cost. Inflation surged globally, with households struggling to keep up with skyrocketing food and energy prices. The economic aftershocks have deepened inequalities—just as they did a century ago.


Steam train crossing an arched stone viaduct, releasing white smoke. Scenic backdrop of hills and trees. Black and white image.

The Role of Economic Despair in Political Extremism

In the early 1920s, desperation made radical ideologies appealing. Benito Mussolini’s 1922 March on Rome marked the birth of fascism as a political force. In Germany, Adolf Hitler’s Beer Hall Putsch of 1923 may have failed, but it signalled the rise of the Nazi Party. These movements thrived by exploiting economic hardship and national humiliation, presenting themselves as saviours in a time of chaos.


Today, the political landscape shows a similar pattern. The aftermath of the financial crisis and the pandemic created fertile ground for populist leaders who thrive on polarization. Movements like Brexit, fueled by economic and cultural grievances, reflect a world where people are disillusioned with traditional politics. Meanwhile, the rise of far-right and far-left parties across Europe mirrors the ideological battles of the 1920s.


The lesson here is stark: economic despair fuels extremism, but it is often the failure of mainstream politics to address these grievances that allows radical ideologies to flourish.


 

Global Crises and Societal Fractures

In both eras, global crises served as accelerants for unrest. Just as World War I’s aftermath destabilized economies, the COVID-19 pandemic exposed the fragility of modern systems. Supply chain disruptions, soaring debt, and political infighting have left many nations struggling to recover.


Moreover, the interconnected nature of today’s world amplifies these effects. What begins as a localized crisis—whether financial or geopolitical—quickly becomes global, much like how the Great Depression of the 1930s rippled across the globe.


 

Concluding Thoughts

A century apart, the years 1920–1924 and 2010–2024 show us the dangers of ignoring the warning signs of economic instability and political extremism. While history cannot predict the future, it can illuminate the paths we should avoid.


As we reflect on these parallels, one truth stands out: societies that invest in fairness, accountability, and resilience are better equipped to weather turbulent times. The past may echo loudly in the present, but the choice to break the cycle remains ours.

Elon Musk’s Bid to Acquire OpenAI: A Dangerous Power Grab?

Elon Musk’s Bid to Acquire OpenAI: A Dangerous Power Grab?

12 February 2025

Connor Banks

Want your article or story on our site? Contact us here

Elon Musk, the billionaire behind Tesla, SpaceX, and xAI, has made an audacious $97.4 billion bid to acquire OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT. This move, framed as a return to OpenAI’s non-profit origins, is widely seen as an attempt to consolidate even more power in the hands of Musk, whose growing influence within the U.S. government raises concerns about unchecked corporate control over artificial intelligence. Musk has long railed against OpenAI’s supposed deviation from its original mission, but in reality, this bid reeks of opportunism rather than altruistic desires.


Purple screen displaying "Introducing ChatGPT Plus" by OpenAI, with text about a pilot subscription for conversational AI. Green text and bars.

Elon Musk's Offer and OpenAI’s Response

Musk’s bid is backed by a consortium of investors, including Baron Capital Group, Valor Management, and Eight Partners VC. His stated goal is to bring OpenAI back to its original open-source, safety-focused AI development approach. However, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman swiftly rejected the offer, mocking Musk on social media and highlighting the hypocrisy of his sudden concern for OpenAI’s direction.


Altman responded with a direct statement: "No, thank you. But we will buy Twitter for $9.74 billion if you’re interested." This sarcastic retort not only dismissed Musk’s bid but also referenced Musk’s own tumultuous acquisition of Twitter (now X), which has been widely criticised for its erratic management and steep decline in value since Musk took control.


The truth is, Musk’s involvement with OpenAI was never about philanthropy. After co-founding the organisation, he left in 2018 when his attempts to take over leadership were rebuffed. Since then, he has aggressively criticised OpenAI while working to build his own competing AI company, xAI. Now, his attempt to purchase OpenAI seems more like a desperate bid to maintain relevance in the AI race rather than any genuine concern for the ethical development of artificial intelligence.


Musk’s Government Role: A Clear Conflict of Interest

In January 2025, Musk was appointed as a special government employee, leading the newly created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) under the Trump administration. This position grants him the power to shape federal regulations and policies, including those governing artificial intelligence. If he successfully takes over OpenAI, Musk would be in the unprecedented position of both owning one of the most powerful AI companies in the world and shaping the very laws that regulate it.


This clear conflict of interest is nothing short of alarming. With his control over DOGE, Musk could weaken regulatory oversight on AI safety while advancing his own corporate interests. His past behaviour, such as gutting Twitter’s moderation policies and prioritising his personal business empire over public responsibility, suggests that he is unlikely to use such power responsibly.


Why Musk’s Takeover is Dangerous

  • Unchecked AI Monopoly: OpenAI is a leader in artificial intelligence research. If Musk acquires it, he could suppress competing AI innovations while monopolising the most advanced AI models for his own ventures. His history of aggressively eliminating competition suggests he would not hesitate to turn OpenAI into a weaponised asset for his empire.

  • Commercialisation Over Ethics: Musk frequently denounces OpenAI for prioritising profits, yet his own companies are aggressively profit-driven. His AI startup, xAI, is already integrating its technology into his social media platform, X (formerly Twitter). A Musk-owned OpenAI would likely prioritise revenue streams over genuine AI safety, contradicting his supposed concerns about ethical AI development.

  • Manipulating AI Regulation: Musk’s dual roles in business and government would give him extraordinary leverage over AI policy. He could push for deregulation that benefits his businesses, weakening necessary safeguards designed to prevent AI abuse and exploitation. This represents a profound threat to democratic oversight and technological ethics.


Deterioration of AI Research Transparency

While Musk preaches about open-source AI, he has a history of keeping key developments within Tesla, SpaceX, and xAI tightly controlled. Under his ownership, OpenAI could become more secretive, reducing transparency in AI research and hindering global cooperation on AI safety.


Regulatory and Legal Challenges

Given the blatant conflict of interest between Musk’s government role and his corporate ambitions, regulators must intervene. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the U.S. Department of Justice should investigate whether Musk’s bid violates antitrust laws. There are also potential national security risks, given AI’s increasing role in cybersecurity, defence, and misinformation control.


If Musk is allowed to acquire OpenAI, the repercussions could be catastrophic. AI development would become even more concentrated in the hands of a single, unaccountable billionaire with a track record of erratic decision-making and self-serving business practices.


The Bigger Picture: The Musk Empire Expands

Musk already wields enormous influence across multiple industries, from electric vehicles to space exploration to social media. His attempt to control OpenAI is not about altruism—it is about dominance. If successful, he would have an iron grip over the future of artificial intelligence, steering it in ways that serve his personal vision while sidelining competitors and regulatory oversight.


This would not just impact AI development; it would shape how society interacts with AI on a fundamental level, from automation in industries to political discourse and national security. Musk has demonstrated time and again that he is willing to put personal power over public good, and there is no reason to believe this situation would be any different.


Stopping the Takeover Before It’s Too Late

Elon Musk’s bid to acquire OpenAI is not about returning it to its non-profit roots. It is a power play, designed to give him unprecedented control over the future of artificial intelligence while weakening regulatory checks that could hold him accountable. His history of self-interest, government manipulation, and anti-competitive behaviour suggests that such a takeover would be disastrous for AI ethics, innovation, and public trust.


Regulators, lawmakers, and industry leaders must take immediate action to block this acquisition and ensure that AI development remains in the hands of those committed to ethical progress, not a billionaire seeking yet another empire to control.

bottom of page