By Katarina Damčević
Did Elon Musk make a Nazi salute? This question has sparked heated debate since the US President’s inauguration. Regardless of his intent, Musk’s response to criticism, lack of accountability, and the public’s reaction could further fuel division.
On January 20, 2025, Tesla owner Elon Musk found himself at the center of controversy after a rally in Washington D.C. to celebrate Donald Trump’s inauguration. During his speech, Musk placed his hand over his heart and extended his arm into what appeared to be a Nazi salute. He then repeated the gesture to the audience behind him. While some defended it as a clumsy display of enthusiasm, others condemned it as a deliberate evocation of hate-filled symbolism.1 The combination of the repeated hand gesture and Musk’s rhetoric about “the future of civilization” triggered heated criticism.
Potential arguments that the salute was a “Bellamy salute” fail to offer Musk much reprieve. The Bellamy salute, named after Francis Bellamy – the American Christian minister who wrote the US Pledge of Allegiance in 1892 – was once a patriotic gesture. It involved a straight arm angled slightly upward with a palm facing down. While the Bellamy salute was common in the US until the 1930s, World War Two triggered controversy and concerns that it could be misinterpreted as pledging allegiance to Hitler and Mussolini. This prompted Congress to amend Section 7 of the Flag Code in 1942. From that point on, Americans were instructed to place their right hand over their heart while reciting the pledge.2 Whether Musk is familiar with this history or not, his nonchalance toward potential associations with fascist ideology is troubling.
About the author:
Katarina Damčević’s research focuses on hate speech and contested symbols in (post)conflict contexts. She earned her PhD from the University of Tartu, where she examined memory politics and the contestation surrounding the World War II Ustaša salute in contemporary Croatia. Her work also explores how different forms of speech contribute to polarization, the spread of extremist narratives, and violence. She emphasizes approaches that help identify speech with the potential to incite such dynamics.
Among those who rushed to Musk’s defense was the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which described the act as “an awkward gesture in a moment of enthusiasm, not a Nazi salute.”3 Their statement, posted on Musk-owned X, prompted Musk to respond with a “Thanks guys” and a laugh-crying emoji. This defense raised eyebrows, particularly given the ADL’s recent controversies, such as its CEO Jonathan Greenblatt’s comparison of the Palestinian keffiyeh4 to the Nazi swastika. Critics have suggested that the ADL’s swift defense of Musk contrasts starkly with its efforts to demonize Palestinians, revealing a possible agenda more focused on silencing criticism of Israel than combating antisemitism.5
Musk dismissed the backlash on X with a flippant post: “Frankly, they need better dirty tricks. The ‘everyone is Hitler’ attack is sooo tired.”6 This deflection ignored the broader implications of his actions in a politically charged atmosphere. Instead of addressing legitimate concerns, Musk’s response sought to trivialize the incident, portraying critics as overly sensitive. This strategy is unsurprising, given Musk’s history of aligning with figures who similarly eschew responsibility. Notably, his “go-to guy” is none-other than Donald Trump, who famously claimed that he could shoot someone on New York’s Fifth Avenue without losing support. Trump’s presidency has repeatedly demonstrated a disregard for accountability7, a pattern Musk appears to emulate.
A History of Far-Right Endorsements
Even if Musk’s gesture was not an intentional Nazi salute, it cannot be divorced from his broader behavior. Musk has a documented history of amplifying antisemitic views and supporting far-right parties and organizations. For instance, he endorsed Germany’s far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, claiming in December 2024 that “Only the AfD can save Germany”8 following the collapse of the German government. In January 2025, Musk expressed agreement with AfD leader Alice Weidel’s claim that Adolf Hitler was a communist and that left-wing groups supporting Palestinian causes have more in common with Nazis than her party does. Such statements, made on X9, bolster perceptions of Musk’s alignment with far-right ideologies. His endorsement of the AfD comes ahead of Germany’s snap election on February 23.
Musk’s actions extend beyond rhetoric. After acquiring X in 2023, he allowed white supremacists to proliferate on the platform. One user posted, “Jewish communities have been pushing the exact kind of dialectical hatred against whites that they claim to want people stop using against them. I’m deeply disinterested in giving the tiniest shit now about Western Jewish populations coming to the disturbing realization that those hordes of minorities that support flooding their country don’t exactly like them too much. You want truth said to your face, there it is.” Musk replied, “You have said the actual truth.”10
He also changed his avatar to Pepe the Frog, a symbol co-opted by white supremacists11, and openly supported British far-right figure Tommy Robinson, founder of the English Defense League, an Islamophobic nationalist group known for its violent street protests in the late 2000s and 2010s.12
Dangerous Speech and the Role of Influence
The controversy over Musk’s salute highlights broader implications associated with influential figures normalizing hate symbols and rhetoric. According to the Dangerous Speech Project, dangerous speech is any expression that increases the risk of violence or discrimination against a group.13 By performing an inflammatory gesture at a high-profile event such as a presidential inauguration, Musk’s actions risk legitimizing hate groups and emboldening their narratives. The widespread media coverage of such actions further amplifies their impact, making it even more crucial to challenge and denounce them to prevent normalization on a larger scale. Ultimately, what matters most is not Musk´s intent but the subsequent interpretations and consequences his act triggers.
Wow, that sure looked like what it was.
Stephen Colbert
Far-right groups quickly seized on Musk’s gesture as a rallying cry. On Telegram, the administrator of a Nazi meme channel shared a clip of Musk’s salute with the caption, “WE ARE FUCKING BACK,” and members responded with lightning bolt emojis, a reference to the SS. Christopher Pohlhaus, leader of the American neo-Nazi group Blood Tribe, dismissed the gesture’s intent, declaring, “I don’t care if this was a mistake; I’m going to enjoy the tears over it.” Right-wing commentator Evan Kilgore echoed these sentiments on X, calling Musk’s act “incredible” and later adding, “We are so back.”14
Stephen Colbert summarized the controversy aptly: “Wow, that sure looked like what it was.”15
Over the past eight decades, society has learned that certain symbols, gestures, and phrases carry undeniable historical weight. Their public use – especially by influential figures like Musk – risks amplifying harmful ideologies. Musk’s failure to acknowledge this underscores the dangers of his cavalier approach.
Missed Opportunities for Accountability
Rather than dismissing criticism with mockery, Musk could have used the incident as an opportunity for dialogue and education. A constructive response that would have acknowledged the historical weight of symbols would have shifted the narrative from defensiveness to accountability. For Musk, accountability could have taken the form of direct engagement with critics and public education about the dangers of normalizing hate symbols. Instead, Musk opted for deflection and mockery through juvenile posts on X, such as: “Don’t say Hess to Nazi accusations! Some people will Goebbels anything down! Stop Göring your enemies! His pronouns would’ve been He/Himmler! Bet you did nazi that coming”, followed by a laugh-crying emoji.16 While Musk may find humor in these remarks, his actions underscore a broader unwillingness to confront the responsibilities of his influence, serving as a stark reminder of the power – and peril – of influence. For someone with a platform as vast as his, accountability is not optional; it is essential.
That said, whenever Musk feels the need to express what he alleges as enthusiasm, he might consider sticking to jumping.
- Elon Musk Ignites Online Speculation Over the Meaning of a Hand Gesture [↩]
- Elon Musk at Trump’s inauguration: What’s the history of the Nazi salute? [↩]
- How did the ADL conclude that Elon Musk didn’t give a Nazi salute? It isn’t saying [↩]
- Symbols of Palestine [↩]
- It’s Clear Enough What Elon Musk Did. The ADL’s Response Is Pathetic [↩]
- https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1881536518206218445 [↩]
- What to Know About Trump’s Broad Grant of Clemency to Jan. 6 Rioters [↩]
- https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1869986946031988780?lang=en, Musk urges Germans to vote for AfD in latest involvement in European politics [↩]
- Elon Musk and Far-Right German Leader Agree ‘Hitler Was a Communist’ [↩]
- Elon Musk agrees with tweet accusing Jewish people of ‘hatred against whites’ [↩]
- Pepe the Frog added to online hate symbol database [↩]
- Who Is Tommy Robinson, the Activist Behind a Far-Right London Rally? [↩]
- Dangerous Speech: A Practical Guide [↩]
- Neo-Nazis Love the Nazi-Like Salutes Elon Musk Made at Trump’s inauguration [↩]
- Insurrectionists Go Free | Elon’s Nazi Salute | Trump’s Worst Executive Orders [↩]
- https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1882406209187409976 [↩]
OpenEdition schlägt Ihnen vor, diesen Beitrag wie folgt zu zitieren:
Redaktion ostBLOG (5. Februar 2025). When Gestures Speak Louder than Words: Elon Musk, Accountability, and the Weight of Influence. ostBLOG. Abgerufen am 8. November 2025 von https://doi.org/10.58079/1398u
