When the CEO is actively engaged in:
- far right politics;
- helping Russia killing Ukrainian civilians;
- and threatening the livelihood of Europeans;
These might also help people decide to look somewhere else.
- far right politics;
- helping Russia killing Ukrainian civilians;
- and threatening the livelihood of Europeans;
These might also help people decide to look somewhere else.
The last holdout being the USA, where the gov't is preferentially giving tesla their marketshare instead of letting open competition work in favour of consumers.
But like japanese cars, this will eventually also take root.
Why not? It looks like many people heard "vote with your wallet," and took it seriously. For better or worse, purchasing a Tesla, or not, has become a referendum on Musk himself.
With that said I don't disagree that the market evolved and Tesla isn't what it was.
> - helping Russia killing Ukrainian civilians;
Have you read a single thing about Starlink usage in the Ukraine conflict?
Because if you had, you'd know that Spacex has actively geofenced usage to allow it within Ukrainian territory but disallow it in Russian and Russian-occupied Ukrainian territory, instituted a whitelist policy coordinated with Ukrainian forces to whitelist Ukrainian terminals but disallow Russian terminals acquired through the black market
https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-starlink-ukraine-russ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink_in_the_Russo-Ukrainia...
They literally provide connectivity to Ukrainian forces and actively try to prevent usage by Russian forces but the moment they put any caveats on how the tech is used, like disallowing its usage by fast-moving objects or for offensive weapon guidance, they are "helping kill Ukrainian civilians".
Perhaps they should have just said Starlink would not work with defense/war usage at all and sat the conflict out and geofenced all of eastern Europe, like many protesters at Google ask their leadership to not do any defense industry deals. Would that have been better from your perspective?
You are actively spreading misinformation.
which makes it harder to use it for intercepting incoming drones and missiles
see also https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/10/22/ukraines-access-to...
- not whitelisting the capacity for terrorism and war crimes;
- and not collecting 36 million USD per year from Poland. You know, the guys that asked Elon if he's playing politics with starlink? [0]
> but the moment they put any caveats on how the tech is used, like disallowing its usage by fast-moving objects or for offensive weapon guidance, they are "helping kill Ukrainian civilians".
You mean the moment Trump caved in to Putin (again), when Trump and Musk said Zelensky should be removed from the presidency (again), and then proceeded to cap Starlink speeds, taking away from Ukraine the capacity to intercept jet powered Shahed drones[1]?
Is that the moment you're referring to?
Or you're going to be cynical to the point of saying this was just a SLA update that happened coincidentally with the moment Russia, Trump and Musk are pressuring for the capitulation of democratically elected president?
It looks like it's you who's attempting to spread misinformation.
And maybe they shouldn't have allowed starlink usage, just like maybe Starlink should not be allowed to provide services in Europe, and Twitter should be blocked for foreign interference.
[0] https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/polands-sikor...
[1]https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2026/10/14/8057960/index....