nfalsifiable accusations of "controlled opposition" are a flamethrower that can roast anyone it's pointed at.
If one wished to do so, one could make the case that Ron Paul is "controlled opposition". Hell, I wouldn't be at all surprised if someone had already done so. And then, of course, any person making such a case could in turn be accused of being "controlled opposition" - and so on and so forth. Rather than riding that endless merry-go-round, I would just break the cycle and say that if Ron Paul (or, yes, even Elon Musk) is "controlled opposition", then by God and sonny Jesus, we could do with more "controlled opposition" - a lot more.
And then there's the fact that even someone with ulterior motives for insincerely advocating genuinely libertarian ideals would nevertheless still be advocating genuinely libertarian ideals. It doesn't take a Clausewitz or a Sun Tzu to realize that's not a particularly good strategy if one's objective is to suppress or thwart the expression of libertarian ideals. Quite the opposite - which is precisely why so many enemies of liberty are screeching so hysterically about Elon Musk right now (entirely regardless of whatever Musk's motives or purposes might actually be).
