You've presented zero facts that demonstrate Musk's authoritarianism. You've given your opinions on what positions others should have on highly complex, consequential topics like nuclear armed countries in prolonged conflict over deeply-entrenched grievances with long and complex histories. Fine, you're welcome to have opinions about those and any other issues. There's still no evidence there for Musk's authoritarianism, and you don't win arguments by dogmatically redefining words and insisting your opinions are facts. That would be, dare I say, authoritarian?
In true authoritarian fashion, Musk doesn't let facts get in the way. Here is a sycophantic interview in which Musk pathetically attempts to redefine the word "founder": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHmSrK238vI&t=2358s
So, by your own standard, we've found yet another example of Musk's authoritarianism.
By legal settlement he is the founder of Tesla, a term that is not as fixed as people believe. Early employees often haggle for founder status in startups. He joined the company as chairman from the instant of formation and contributed heavily to operations of the company, for example acting as designer of the Roadster. Read up on the early history of Tesla. He didn't just "buy the company" as I have heard claimed numerous times on the internet.
There's no value in defending authoritarians. They simply cannot control their nature and they will make a fool of you, as Musk is making a fool of you now.
I estimate it will take you a further 10 years to understand this. By then enough time will have passed for you to be able to reminisce about Musk's "good old days". But what you won't have understood is that there were no good old days. He was always like that.
