_edited.png)
The Dismissal of Education: Elon Musk’s Dangerous Rhetoric
Elon Musk recently dismissed the existence of the Department of Education by stating, “No such department exists in the federal government.” While this comment may have appeared as a casual remark, it underscores a deeper disdain for governmental institutions designed to promote educational equity. This sentiment coincides with a broader trend of skepticism toward institutions that, until February 15, 2025, were structured to ensure social equity for all students.
Educational institutions have long been under scrutiny for their role in perpetuating systemic inequality, but the recent shift in policies raises critical questions about the future of access to education. As debates intensify, the dismantling of frameworks designed to ensure fairness and inclusion may disproportionately harm vulnerable communities. These changes mark a pivotal moment in the ongoing struggle for educational reform and equity. Critics have long accused educational institutions of indoctrinating students with the notion that the United States is built on “systemic and structural racism” and of promoting discriminatory policies and practices, as seen in cases like Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.
In recent years, defenders of these practices have justified them under the banner of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI), embedding racial stereotypes and race-conscious approaches into training, programming, and discipline. Musk’s dismissal of such initiatives signals a broader ideological stance that prioritizes privatization and market-driven solutions over public education and social programs. This perspective aligns with a growing trend among powerful elites who view social institutions not as vital pillars of a just and inclusive society but as obstacles to personal gain. By advocating for a system where access to resources and opportunities is shaped by market forces rather than collective responsibility, they challenge the very foundations of educational equity.
Historical Context: The Radical Legacy of Ethical Engineering
This disdain for public institutions is not a new phenomenon. In the late 1960s, a group of engineers, disillusioned by the prevailing systems, allied themselves with civil rights and antiwar activists. They were not calling for incremental reforms; they envisioned nothing less than a revolutionary shift in the role of engineering within society. Their goal was to reimagine engineering as a discipline that prioritized humanity, equity, and ethics—shifting it from its cold, mechanistic roots to a force committed to social responsibility.
This movement arose during a time of profound social and political upheaval. The postwar era had seen a near-religious belief in technology’s transformative power, with an optimism that could steer society toward a more prosperous, harmonious future. But by the mid-1960s, that faith began to erode. Critics raised alarms about technology’s darker consequences: its potential to erode human autonomy, threaten environmental sustainability, and undermine social cohesion. What had once been viewed as a symbol of hope now seemed capable of dehumanizing as much as it could uplift.
As America’s landscape shifted, engineers themselves became emblematic of this dilemma. Once celebrated as the vanguard of progress, they were now seen as complicit in perpetuating war, inequality, and ecological damage through their ties to the military-industrial complex. This shift in perception mirrored a broader societal reckoning, as the Vietnam War, environmental crises, and civil rights struggles exposed the moral cost of unchecked technological growth.
In this climate of disillusionment, subversive engineers rose as dissenters within their own profession. They embraced the language of technology’s critics, reframing engineering’s role in sustaining societal harm as a profound betrayal of its ethical responsibilities. These engineers called out not just for new technical solutions but for a fundamental reimagining of the engineering paradigm—one that prioritized human welfare, social justice, and ecological balance. They argued that engineering must break free from its entanglement with corporate and military interests and instead champion technology as a tool for liberation, not oppression.
However, conservative engineers and industry leaders responded with fierce resistance. They painted the dissenters as dangerous radicals—out of touch, hostile to progress, and ideologically driven. Yet, despite this backlash, the call for a radical shift in engineering would continue to echo through the challenges of today.
This ongoing struggle finds resonance in a broader cultural disillusionment, as highlighted in Adam Curtis's HyperNormalisation. Curtis critiques the stagnation of our global capitalist system, drawing attention to how it has ossified into a self-perpetuating, unchanging structure. His analysis suggests that the discontent of our time—manifested in phenomena like Trumpism, Brexit, the rise of nationalism across Europe, and Russia's imperialist actions—is not just a reaction to political systems but a response to the overwhelming sense of stagnation and the absence of new, inspiring frontiers. The idealism that once characterized bold political movements has given way to a pervasive sense of entrapment, in a zone of eternal repetition, where meaningful transformation feels increasingly out of reach.
The Elon Musk Myth: Unveiling Truths Through FOIA Documents
Musk’s glorification in public and academic spaces is not only troubling, it is a jump scare. At UIC, a large mural of Musk adorns the walls of the Science and Engineering Labs (SELE), a space meant to inspire the next generation of engineers. This imagery contrasts sharply with the legacy of engineers in the 1960s and around the world who risked their careers to advocate for a profession grounded in social responsibility and ecological balance.
I wrote a letter to the Dean of Engineering and the university’s chancellors, all of whom have a questionable track record. My concerns were validated when a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request revealed a list of investments, assets and bonds in corporations tied to industries like major banks, real estate such as Tricon, healthcare (including Pfizer), mining companies which include Glencore, and military defense contractors such as Northrop Grumman, Raytheon & Boeing. The list goes on, The FOIA documents exposed a disheartening reality: UIC, an institution that publicly champions diversity, equity, and inclusion, is financially intertwined with corporations that profit from exploitative and harmful practices. For instance, Northrop Grumman is a major defense contractor involved in the production of weapons systems and military technologies used in global conflicts, contributing to violence and civilian casualties. Investments in companies like Pfizer highlight the contradictions within higher education institutions that claim to support health equity while aligning with corporations often criticized for prioritizing profit over public health. The entanglement with real estate firms raises concerns about contributing to gentrification and displacement of marginalized communities, further demonstrating how financial interests often override ethical considerations.
Privatization and Fascism: Elon Musk's Ideological Echoes
But am I surprised? Not really, especially after reading the Heritage Foundation’s “Putting Public Colleges on a Path to Privatization,” which advocates for dismantling public education and transitioning to privatized models. The report suggests that states could save over $126 billion annually by ceasing to subsidize higher education, positioning privatization as a solution to perceived inefficiencies. The public pays for much of this and expects accountability, but “academic freedom” concerns have historically featured deference even to blatant activism among professors. The broader agenda to defund and privatize education aligns disturbingly well with Musk’s comments and the university’s financial practices. The historian Robert Paxton, in his book Anatomy of Fascism, describes fascism as rooted in a set of “mobilizing passions.” He argues that fascism seeks to control education to instill its ideology in the youth, promoting a narrative that supports authoritarian rule and undermines critical thinking. Paxton emphasizes the dangerous belief in “the superiority of the leader’s instincts over abstract and universal reason.” Musk’s attitudes toward public institutions, including education, echo this mindset, prioritizing elite control over collective empowerment.
There is no ethos of civic engagement or self-discovery within higher education when it is reduced to serving the labor market’s demands. The privatization of education transforms universities into corporate training grounds, stripping away their potential as spaces for critical thinking and ethical development. At UIC, many students have expressed discomfort with Musk's glorification as a role model, as seen in the mural displayed prominently in the Science and Engineering Labs. His image stands in stark contrast to the values of justice, equity, and social responsibility—principles that UIC claims to advocate. Yet, to Musk, these ideals are nothing more than abstract buzzwords—concepts he neither embodies nor respects. His actions contradict the university's mission of ethical progress and humanity, making his celebrated presence on campus not only misguided but also a disservice to the diverse and conscientious student body.
Elon Musk is not the visionary he is often portrayed as; he is an active enabler of violent, oppressive ideologies. Musk has repeatedly weaponized his platform to amplify, endorse, and legitimize far-right rhetoric that targets marginalized communities. His alignment with white supremacist, anti-LGBTQ+, and xenophobic ideologies is well-documented, as is his willingness to spread hate through his influence. Most recently, Musk's public performance of a Sieg Heil salute—a symbol of fascist allegiance which further cemented his embrace of white supremacist ideologies.
A Campus in Crisis: UIC’s Role in Silencing Palestinian Voices
Elon Musk's stance on the Israel-Palestine conflict has been deeply troubling, especially his unequivocal support for Israel's military actions in Gaza. By dismissing well-documented war crimes and the ongoing humanitarian crisis, Musk has enabled a platform for hate speech against Arab and Muslim communities, further amplifying anti-Palestinian propaganda.
Equally so, the UIC administration has systematically marginalized Palestinian students and their allies, demonstrating a clear disregard for Palestinian voices advocating for justice. While non-UIC students are permitted to distribute pro-Israel propaganda freely on campus, Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) events—many of which focus on Palestinian rights—are consistently met with heavy policing and administrative resistance. This stark disparity in treatment underscores a troubling pattern of institutional bias and complicity.
The administration's deliberate suppression of student activism, coupled with its glorification of figures like Elon Musk who perpetuate violence and hate, further entrenches oppressive systems on campus. This bias became even more apparent during the nationwide protests in May 2024, following October 7 and Israel’s subsequent genocidal campaign on Gaza. While college campuses across the country erupted with demonstrations demanding an end to the war and university divestment from Israel, UIC remained an outlier—not because of a lack of student activism but because of intentional administrative efforts to stifle dissent.
Where other universities responded with brutal force, deploying riot police to dismantle encampments and arresting peaceful protesters, UIC's silence was by design. The absence of large-scale protests on campus was not a reflection of apathy but rather a result of the administration's oppressive tactics, which effectively quelled Palestinian voices and stifled any momentum for meaningful activism.
Fascism in the Ivory Tower: Musk’s Influence and University Complicity
Musk's legacy of harm extends into his own companies. Reports from Tesla and SpaceX expose a culture of anti-Black discrimination, where Black employees are subjected to racial slurs, segregation, and harassment. Furthermore, Musk's business practices are tied to modern slavery, with his companies profiting from child labor in cobalt mines in the Democratic Republic of Congo. These actions demonstrate deep hypocrisy in Musk's public persona as an innovator while his companies exploit vulnerable communities.
Beyond his bigoted rhetoric, Musk has propagated harmful anti-immigrant conspiracies. He has targeted migrant communities, falsely accusing them of causing crime and spreading fear about migrant caravans, all while his companies rely on immigrant labor. He has opposed visa programs like the H-1B, which allow skilled workers to contribute to the U.S. economy while supporting political figures who seek to criminalize asylum seekers and dismantle protections for immigrant communities. These actions not only contradict the values of inclusivity and fairness but also foster a hostile environment, particularly at this institution, where 8% of undergraduate students are international students.
Demanding Accountability: Concrete Actions for UIC’s Administration
The continued presence of Musk’s mural at UIC sends a clear message: that the College of Engineering and Science values the glorification of figures who perpetuate oppression, violence, and exploitation.
We demand that UIC’s administration take immediate action. This includes:
The immediate removal of the Elon Musk mural displayed in the UIC Science and Engineering Labs SELE hallway.
A transparent dialogue between students, faculty, and administration to ensure that UIC does not serve as a platform for figures who promote oppression, violence, and exploitation.
UIC faces a crucial decision: will it uphold its commitment to diversity, equity, and social responsibility, or will it remain complicit in honoring a man whose actions directly contradict those very values?
This is not merely a symbolic act. Removing Musk’s image and reevaluating whose legacies we celebrate is a concrete step toward aligning our academic spaces with the ideals of social progress, ethical responsibility, and genuine respect for all communities.
References:
Berkshire, T. (2023, December 5). Cruel to Your School. The Baffler. https://thebaffler.com/latest/cruel-to-your-school-berkshire
Connolly, K. (2025, January 21). The Gesture Speaks for Itself: Germans Divided Over Musk's Apparent Nazi Salute. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jan/21/the-gesture-speaks-for-itself-germans-divided-over-musks-apparent-nazi-salute
Curtis, A. (2016). HyperNormalisation. BBC. https://youtu.be/to72IJzQT5k
EEOC. (2023). EEOC Sues Tesla for Racial Harassment and Retaliation. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. https://www.eeoc.gov/newsroom/eeoc-sues-tesla-racial-harassment-and-retaliation
Heritage Foundation. (2022, March 29). Putting Public Colleges on a Path to Privatization. The Heritage Foundation. https://www.heritage.org/education/commentary/putting-public-colleges-path-privatization
Jindia, S. (2023, August 8). Freedom from Dissent. The Baffler. https://thebaffler.com/latest/freedom-from-dissent-jindia
Paxton, R. O. (2005). The Anatomy of Fascism. Random House.
Smith, L. (2024, December 6). Elon Musk, Israel, Trump, and the Gaza Hostage Deal. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/dec/06/elon-musk-israel-trump-gaza-hostage-deal
U.S. Department of Education. (2023, August 14). Dear Colleague Letter: Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College [PDF]. https://www.ed.gov/media/document/dear-colleague-letter-sffa-v-harvard-109506.pdf
Rodgers, J. (2023, November 16). The University of Illinois' Hostility Against Its Palestinian Students. University of Illinois.
Comments