In an era where democracy feels increasingly fragile, the story of how American tech billionaire, Elon Musk, casually sparked an internal meltdown in one of Britain’s rising political parties offers both a cautionary tale and, perhaps, a glimmer of hope for those of us concerned about the far-right’s recent momentum.
It started, as so many political storms do these days, with a tweet. On 5 January, 2025, Elon Musk – an increasingly vocal right-wing kingmaker – fired a digital broadside at Nigel Farage: “The Reform party needs a new leader. Farage doesn’t have what it takes.”
With those 13 words, Musk lit the fuse on an internal power struggle that would erupt into a full-blown civil war within Reform UK, complete with bullying allegations, police investigations, and the dramatic defenestration of MP Rupert Lowe – the very man Musk had anointed as Farage’s superior.
When an X user suggested Lowe as a possible successor, Musk didn’t hesitate: “I have not met Rupert Lowe, but his statements online that I have read so far make a lot of sense.” The endorsement instantly transformed Lowe from an almost completely unknown backbencher into Farage’s greatest internal threat.
The irony? Just weeks earlier, Farage had been courting Musk’s favour. In December 2024, they met at Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort, with Farage emerging to tell reporters that Musk was “right behind us” and discussing a potential donation that rumours placed at an eye-watering $100 million.
What changed? Musk, increasingly aligned with hard-right positions globally, had expressed support for imprisoned racist thug, Tommy Robinson. When Farage publicly disavowed Robinson, distancing Reform UK from Musk’s stance, the billionaire took offence. (Isn’t it odd how many of these billionaires have such brittle personalities?!)
This ideological falling-out reveals much about both men’s political calculations. Farage, ever the political shapeshifter, recognised that an association with Robinson’s toxic brand would damage Reform UK’s broader appeal. Musk, unburdened by ballot box concerns, sought a more uncompromising champion for his increasingly radical views.
What made Musk’s intervention so powerful was his reach. With over 200 million followers on X, his endorsement of Lowe sent shockwaves through Reform UK, ensuring Lowe’s tweets often got more engagement than Farage’s.
Lowe himself acknowledged this power shift: “I owe a huge debt to Elon Musk because without my X account which gives me a voice, this may well have ended very differently.” For a party built on challenging establishment media, finding their internal communications dominated by an external voice proved destabilising.
The simmering tensions exploded on 6 March, 2025, when Lowe gave an explosive interview to the Daily Mail. He criticised Farage’s leadership style, calling him a “messianic figure who is at the core of everything” and arguing that Reform UK must transition from “a protest party led by the Messiah” into a properly structured organisation with shared responsibilities.
Farage’s response was swift and brutal. Within 24 hours, Reform UK suspended Lowe and withdrew the whip, citing allegations of “bullying” staff and making “threats of physical violence” toward party chairman Zia Yusuf. The party referred the matter to the Metropolitan Police, a signal that Farage saw a scorched-earth policy as his best way out.
Lowe fought back, branding his suspension a “vindictive witch hunt” with “zero credible evidence,” claiming he was being smeared simply for asking reasonable questions of the leadership. The public battle played out across newspaper op-eds, television appearances, and social media, with former colleagues taking sides in what quickly became described as a “civil war.”
What this saga reveals most clearly is the fragility of political movements built around a single charismatic leader. Reform UK, despite its rhetoric about democratic renewal, appears still to operate as what Lowe described as a “Messiah-led protest party” with Farage at its centre.
Lowe’s complaints about basic democratic deficiencies – lack of regular MP meetings, no consultation on policy announcements, no internal elections for positions – paint a picture of a party struggling with the very values it claims to champion externally.
As one Reform UK insider told the Telegraph after Lowe’s suspension: “This is what happens when you mess with Nigel.” The statement reveals a culture where dissent is treated as disloyalty and critical voices are silenced rather than engaged.
Musk’s intervention demonstrates how vulnerable our politics has become to external influence. With a few tweets, a foreign billionaire significantly altered the balance of power within a British political party. The episode raises serious questions about the role of wealthy individuals – especially non-citizens – in shaping our democratic processes.
It’s worth noting that the UK’s election watchdog took this concern seriously enough to urge tighter rules on foreign donations. When a single individual can contemplate injecting US $100m into a political party, the integrity of our democratic system demands stronger safeguards.
For Reform UK, the timing couldn’t be worse. As Farage himself acknowledged, “the public does not like political infighting.” History shows that voters punish parties seen as divided and chaotic.
Instead of presenting a united front against the establishment, Reform UK now appears consumed by the very kind of ego-driven drama that turns voters off politics. Headlines about bullying allegations and police investigations have overshadowed any policy messages the party might have hoped to promote.
If Lowe forms a new movement – potentially with Musk’s backing, as some reports suggest he’s considered – he could split the right-wing vote in key constituencies. Even without a formal split, the public infighting damages Reform UK’s credibility as a serious alternative.
For supporters of Open Britain, this internal combustion offers both warning and opportunity. The warning is clear: our democracy remains vulnerable to interference from wealthy individuals with their own agendas, and personality-driven movements often lack the internal checks and balances needed for healthy governance.
But there’s opportunity, too. Reform UK’s crisis exposes the shallow foundations of populist movements built around cults of personality rather than coherent values and democratic structures. It reminds us why Open Britain’s commitment to inclusive, transparent politics matters so much.
As populist movements worldwide grapple with balancing strong leadership and genuine democracy, the saga of Farage, Lowe, and Musk serves as a timely reminder: true democratic renewal comes not from charismatic messiahs but from building political movements with integrity, transparency, and genuine internal democracy at their core.
That’s the mission Open Britain continues to champion – and in light of Reform UK’s very public meltdown, it’s never felt more relevant.
