Some people are comparing Musk's current efforts with DOGE to Xi's anti-corruption drive in China that started in 2012. I think it's an interesting comparison but closer examination suggests that Musk’s actions in the U.S. may represent the inverse of Xi’s efforts. To start with, the objectives and contexts are quite a bit different. The issue China had at the time wasn't lack of efficiency or excess government spending. In fact China was in many ways TOO efficient, growing at double-digit rates. The informal networks of government officials and business leaders had created a system that, though corrupt, were instrumental in driving China's rapid economic growth, highlighting the trade-off between efficiency and accountability. Local officials could bypass bureaucratic hurdles through their relationships with businesses, and businesses could fast-track approvals through their connections with officials. In effect, corruption was "greasing the wheels" of bureaucracy to make it more efficient with, it must be said, a lot of negative consequences in terms of environmental damage, unsafe construction, food safety, or growing inequality (the system naturally favored those with the means to participate in these networks, creating an uneven playing field). Musk's DOGE initiative appears to be moving in the opposite direction. It's in the name: DOGE emphasizes "efficiency" and, where Xi tried to eliminate informal networks, DOGE is creating them - bringing in former employees of Musk's companies and other tech firms, emphasizing personal connections over formal procedures, and trying to bypass government oversight or eliminate it altogether (like the shutdown of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau). In essence, where Xi's campaign made China's government more rules-based and accountable (even if less efficient), DOGE aims to make the U.S. government more flexible and informal (even if less accountable). Where Xi tried to separate business and government, DOGE is trying to blur the lines between them. To be clear, I'm not making the case here that more government efficiency isn't needed in the U.S. or that some U.S. government spending wasn't wasteful. For instance looking at what USAID was spending its money on (beyond the largely bullshit "DEI" justification) shows that the agency was running a massive global propaganda operation, spending hundreds of millions of dollars to fund media outlets worldwide. In Ukraine alone, USAID was funding 9 out of 10 media outlets (. In effect, to a large extent, it has been revealed that the U.S. government was paying in some shape or form for a very significant proportion of the news much of the world's population was reading. But even here, it's not clear that Musk is trying to change this state of facts. He is, after all, as the owner of this platform, one of the world's primary media moguls and as such, potentially stands to benefit from the vacuum created by USAID's withdrawal from global media funding. This might more be a case of transferring control of the propaganda apparatus from bureaucrats to tech entrepreneurs, rather than dismantling it. All in all, perhaps the most illuminating parallel isn't with Xi's anti-corruption drive but with Jack Ma's failed attempt to convert his business power into political influence in China. Both Ma and Musk are tech billionaires who tried to challenge and reshape government systems, with Ma's famous 2020 speech criticizing China's banking sector marking his downfall, while Musk's critique of U.S. government inefficiency led to his unprecedented influence through DOGE. The key difference is in the outcome: where China's system effectively put an end to Ma's influence despite his wealth and connections, the U.S. system accommodates Musk's. Time will tell whether Musk's vision of efficiency leads to meaningful reform or further entrenches some of the very issues he claims to address, like corruption or inequality. If history serves as any guide, the blurring of lines between business and government rarely ends well—whether in imperial courts, modern China, or even in America's own history. Musk might in-fine end up demonstrating why China chose to crack down on Jack Ma...