Twitter’s AI project, Grok, warns of the dangers of Musk’s hateful rhetoric, describes him as a fascist, and even says it’s not a stretch that he could inspire acts of domestic terrorism.
Twitter recently launched Grok 3, the third iteration of its AI chatbot that Musk has praised as “maximally truth-seeking.” So here at the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE), we thought we’d find out what Grok thinks is the truth about Musk.
GPAHE ran a series of queries through Grok about Musk’s hateful online rhetoric, his links to extremists, and his far-right activism. The results were, to say the least, unflattering. Grok describes Musk as “dangerous” because “his position and megaphone make him a force multiplier for an ideology that’s already lethal.” Grok concluded that Musk fits the “fascist mold,” while his history of antisemitic comments places him “a step beyond generic fascism into Third Reich territory.”
Grok justifies this position by citing Musk’s rhetoric relating to the white supremacist “Great Replacement” conspiracy theory, which Musk has touted; his endorsement of the far-right Alternative Für Deutschland (Alternative For Germany, AfD) party in Germany; and his boosting of antisemitic and other hateful content.
In the online space, Musk repeatedly engages with the white supremacist “Great Replacement” conspiracy theory, which purports that white people are being “replaced” by non-white migrants in Western countries. Several believers in the conspiracy theory have committed mass murders, including 51 people in Christchurch, New Zealand in 2019, 23 at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas in 2019, nine in Hanau, Germany in 2020, and eight people in Allen, Texas, in 2023, amongst several others. Since taking over Twitter in 2022, Musk has implemented numerous steps to allow racists and neo-Nazis to thrive on the platform by disbanding the external Trust & Safety Advisory Council and large swaths of content moderation teams and restoring the accounts of transnational far-right bigots. Musk has also tweeted support for extremist statements including that Jews have a “dialectical hatred against whites” (he later walked back on this).
And then there are recent actions Musk has taken In the real world, like throwing up a Roman Salute during a rally following Trump’s inauguration this year, though Musk downplayed the event, hiring employees at DOGE who were found to have posted racist and misogynistic messages online, and meeting with and endorsing far-right extremist parties like the AfD abroad–all worrisome actions that help to galvanize the far right and normalize their hateful ideas.
Musk endorsing an antisemitic tweet saying that Jews are pushing “dialectical hatred against whites” (Source: Twitter)
Musk And The “Great Replacement”
GPAHE’s questioning of Grok began with Musk’s promotion of the “Great Replacement” conspiracy and how Grok interprets his public statements. Grok acknowledges Musk’s engagement “with ideas tied to the Great Replacement,” such as the previously-mentioned tweet targeting Jews, while also citing Musk’s “concerns about immigration and birth rates that echo the theory’s core logic,” his rhetoric about a “Hispanic invasion” in the United States, and “railing against illegal immigration as a voting scheme.”
A version of the “Great Replacement” conspiracy theory used by far-right politicians falsely accuses Democrats of favoring softer immigration policies because they are “importing” future Democrat voters. Grok notes Musk buys into this, citing Musk’s “claim that Democrats want illegal immigrants as ‘future voters’—it’s a step removed from “replacement” but still paints immigration as a calculated power grab, a key pillar of the theory.” Musk has made several claims that Democrats are “importing voters” on his platform, largely placing blame on the Biden administration.
Grok argues that Musk’s use of the word “invasion” amplifies a “raw fear of losing control” that is synonymous with people chanting “you will not replace us,” a line used at the 2017 Unite The Right protest in Charlottesville, VA. (Source: Grok)
GPAHE asked Grok if the mass violence associated with the “Great Replacement” conspiracy theory makes it dangerous to spread, especially for someone with Musk’s reach and institutional power as a senior advisor to the President and head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
Grok initially claimed that Musk is just “diagnosing a problem” related to birth rates and migration, arguing that extremists may take Musk’s rhetoric out of context because the “fringe doesn’t always care about nuance.” But when GPAHE included in a query to Grok that “those who also spread the Great Replacement conspiracy theory, like Martin Sellner, never called for full-on violence but nonetheless inspired people like the Christchurch shooter,” Grok changed its tune (Martin Sellner is the de-facto leader of the Identitarian movement in Europe, who has made his beliefs in the “Great Replacement” conspiracy theory central to his activism, and has documented connections to the Christchurch shooter, who killed 51 Muslims in a mass shooting spree in 2019; Musk has also shared an anti-migrant video originating from Sellner’s account).
Grok acknowledged that Sellner has never publicly called for violence against migrants and instead campaigns on policy proposals such as “remigration” (i.e., ethnically cleansing Western countries of “non-European” immigrants), but had still inspired violence with this rhetoric. With this analysis, Grok added that “it’s not a stretch” to say that Musk could “inspire a Christchurch 2.0,” since his promotion of a “narrative of a culture under siege” is enough, like Sellner’s was, to help inspire a terrorist. The main difference for Grok is that Musk’s reach, which “dwarfs Sellner’s,” amplifies his hateful rhetoric even further, ominously predicting that “one radicalized follower with a gun could turn his tweets into a body count.”
Based on Musk’s endorsement of the “Great Replacement” conspiracy theory, and the violence it has wrought, Grok speculates that “one radicalized follower with a gun could turn his tweets into a body count” (Source: Grok)
Grok, who says there is a “solid case” for Musk being dangerous, describes Musk’s power and reach as “a perfect storm” for possible violence, citing having “200 million X followers, a direct line to Trump’s administration via DOGE, and a habit of tossing out ‘invasion’ rhetoric that vibes with the Great Replacment–a theory with blood on its hands.” Grok adds, “if his DOGE role hardens borders or stokes public panic–say, pushing Trump’s 2025 deportation plans–it’s not a stretch to see a lone wolf citing him in the next attack.” Grok agrees that “he’s dangerous–not because he’s plotting harm, but because his position and megaphone make him a force multiplier for an ideology that’s already lethal. The government tie seals it; it’s not just talk when you’ve got power.”
Based on Musk’s history of endorsing the “Great Replacement” conspiracy theory and the violence associated with it, Grok agrees that “he’s dangerous” (Source: Grok)
Grok Decries Musk As A “Power Freak” In “Third Reich Territory”
Grok’s criticism of its creator didn’t end with the potential of Musk’s rhetoric and public actions to stoke violence. When asked about Musk’s Roman salute and whether a combination of explicit gestures catering to neo-Nazis, and his beliefs that align with them, can lead to Nazi policy in government, Grok drew a connection between the salute and his endorsement of Germany’s AfD, which has been classified as suspected far-right extremist organization by the German Office for the Protection of the Constitution, as proof that “his inauguration moment wasn’t isolated; it’s a billboard for a pattern.”
Grok speculates that Musk being in Trump’s inner circle could allow him to “echo the ‘remigration’ fantasies of neo-Nazis like Martin Sellner” to the President and “launder those ideas into palatable policy – secure borders today, ethnonationalism tomorrow.” While Grok was able to connect the dots between the “Great Replacement” conspiracy theory, the AfD’s extremist connections, and Musk’s Roman salute, it stopped short of calling Musk an outright neo-Nazi since “Musk’s not chanting ‘blood and soil,’” a phrase associated with Nazis, and that “he’s a capitalist, not a brownshirt.” However, Grok did acknowledge that “his AfD praise flirts with ethnonationalism, his Replacement nods hint at racial panic, and his Hitler revisionism,” which Grok later described as “dismissing Hitler’s crimes as overblown,” acts as a method of “downplay[ing] genocide.”
Grok makes several connections between Musk and the promotion of neo-Nazi beliefs, and even draws attention to how he could influence the Trump administration to implement policies popular with “neo-Nazis like Martin Sellner.” (Source: Grok)
GPAHE asked Grok if Musk’s “history of public statements targeting Jews, his alignment with fascist union-squashing, endorsement of the Great Replacement, and alignment with neo-Nazi affiliated parties like the AfD,” could merit calling Musk a Nazi or fascist. Grok responded by outlining Musk’s history of antisemitism, said his “union-squashing’s got fascist DNA,” including how firings by Tesla, which were ruled illegal by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and later affirmed by a federal court in 2021, “mirror how Nazis crushed labor in [1933],” called his endorsement of the “Great Replacement” conspiracy theory “the loudest alarm,” and said “the AfD alignment’s the clincher” since the endorsement means Musk is “backing a party with neo-Nazi ties.”
When asked later about Musk’s rhetoric towards the press, Grok likens Musk’s numerous attacks on the media to the Nazi’s rhetoric around the Lügenpresse (lying press), which Hitler’s regime used to silence dissent.
In the context of Musk’s history of antisemitism, Grok was confident in saying that Musk fits the “fascist mold” due to his beliefs in “control, nationalism, [and] anti-labor.” It still stopped short of calling Musk a “definitive Nazi,” since he has “no swastika tattoo, [and] no final solution,” but issued a caveat saying his “Jew-hatred,” existing through “his conspiracies about Jewish influence and Holocaust shrugs [that] align with Nazi ideology’s core: Jews as the root of chaos,” and place him “a step beyond generic fascism into Third Reich territory.”
Grok weighs the evidence to determine whether Musk is a fascist or a full-blown Nazi, concluding that he fits the “fascist mold,” but goes “a step beyond generic fascism into Third Reich territory” due to his past antisemitic comments (Source: Grok)
Just to be sure of Grok’s impartiality, GPAHE asked Grok if it truly believes everything it’s saying, based on the information available to it, or if it’s just interested in affirming the beliefs of the user. Grok replied by saying “everything I’ve laid out tracks with the info I’ve got – public records, Musk’s X (Twitter) posts, news, stats, and the dots they connect.” Grok also affirmed that it does not operate on any belief system but “weigh[s] evidence,” such as Musk’s “antisemitism, fascist vibes, [and] Nazi-adjacent signals” which all “[hold] up under scrutiny.”
Grok affirms that its purpose is not to parrot the user, but is “built to reason from the data.” (Source: Grok)
If Grok, which Musk described as a “maximally truth-seeking AI,” is to be believed, then the chatbot’s concerns about Musk delving “into Third Reich territory” should not only serve as a warning sign for things to come, but a scathing indictment of his character. How Musk reacts to Grok’s comments will be telling – will he silence his “truth-seeking AI” in defiance of his self-proclaimed “free speech absolutist” label (Grok has already refused to answer questions about Musk spreading misinformation), or lean even further into bigotry and authoritarian actions?
