For several months, South African billionaire and owner of X (formerly Twitter), Elon Musk, has been engaged in a public feud with Alexandre de Moraes, a Brazilian Supreme Court justice. Musk claims to be defending the “free speech” rights of Brazilian citizens on his platform, but this clash has done little to enhance freedom of expression in the country. Instead, it has revealed the contradictions in Musk’s stance on free speech and the risks posed by powerful tech leaders who defy legal authorities.
The conflict started in January 2023, following a violent attack on Brazil’s National Congress by far-right supporters of former President Jair Bolsonaro. These individuals, fueled by false claims of electoral fraud spread on social media, attempted to overthrow President Lula da Silva’s democratically elected government. As part of his responsibility, Justice Moraes ordered X to limit or remove accounts that played a role in inciting the violence, a lawful action under Brazil’s constitution.
However, Musk framed these actions as censorship, accusing Moraes of being an ideological pawn of Lula’s government. Musk’s defiance stands in stark contrast to his compliance with similar demands from authoritarian governments elsewhere, such as in India, raising questions about his true commitment to free speech. His actions suggest that he is more interested in protecting the global far-right, with which he has grown increasingly aligned.
In April 2023, American journalist Michael Shellenberger released internal communications between X employees and the Brazilian judiciary, portraying the legal efforts to remove harmful content as an assault on free speech. Even a legitimate data request for an organized crime investigation was used to fuel this narrative, despite no legal violations by the judiciary.
Musk escalated his attacks, branding Justice Moraes as a “dictator” and calling him the “Brazilian Darth Vader” on X. He even went as far as to suggest the judge should resign or face impeachment. In August, Musk announced plans to close X’s office in Brazil and refused to appoint legal counsel, leaving the platform in violation of Brazilian laws.
In response, Moraes ordered the complete suspension of X’s operations in Brazil on August 31 until the platform complies with court orders and appoints a legal representative. As a result, around 40 million Brazilians lost access to X.
This confrontation goes beyond a personal rivalry or issues surrounding a social media platform. It illustrates a multinational corporation, led by a figure with ties to the far right, trying to undermine a sovereign nation’s legal system under the guise of defending democracy.
Musk’s refusal to follow Brazilian law, his calls for a Supreme Court justice to step down, and his suggestion that he should define free speech in Brazil showcase the dangers posed by billionaires who control key communication platforms. While debates over Justice Moraes’ actions are valid within the context of Brazil’s democracy, Musk’s foreign intervention, aligned with far-right activists, represents a serious threat to the country’s rule of law.
Musk’s collaboration with Bolsonaro’s supporters is evident. In April, a right-wing congressman proposed a law to imprison judges for restricting social media accounts, and Bolsonaro himself has praised Musk as a champion of “freedom.” Bolsonaro’s base is attempting to frame themselves as victims of left-wing persecution, while Musk is positioned as their savior, despite their disregard for democratic principles.
In a further challenge to Brazilian law, Musk recently attempted to bypass the X ban by modifying the platform’s network to allow some users access without a VPN. This act demonstrates his continued defiance of the judiciary, raising questions about X’s future in Brazil.
This situation is more than a dispute over free speech. It is an attempt by a tech billionaire, aligned with far-right forces, to challenge a democratic nation’s independent judiciary. What is unfolding in Brazil is an assault on its democracy, and it must be recognized as such.