The toxic culture behind the right’s civil war

2 hours ago7 min read2 comments

The American conservative movement is currently convulsed by a public and bitter existential conflict, a struggle whose roots run deep into the factional realignments that have been simmering since the rise of Donald Trump in 2016. This internal war, ignited by Tucker Carlson’s friendly late-October interview with the notorious antisemite Nick Fuentes, represents not an anomaly but a harbinger of the post-Trump era to come.The subsequent defense of Carlson by Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts, who decried a 'venomous coalition' of critics, served as the conflict’s Fort Sumter, immediately triggering a backlash that saw the resignation of prominent scholars like Chris DeMuth and public rebukes from Republican senators. The schism has since escalated beyond the walls of Heritage, with board members of the venerable Intercollegiate Studies Institute resigning in protest and publishing a letter invoking the spirit of William F.Buckley Jr. to fight white supremacy and antisemitism.Yet to frame this as a simple battle between a principled old guard and a radical online insurgency is to misunderstand the modern right; the Buckleyite conservatives who warned of this very degradation have largely been exiled, their institutions now forming the right flank of liberalism. The current fight is less about preserving a genteel past—a past that was always more dependent on extremist fellow travelers than many care to admit—and more about defining the future of conservatism after its dominant, unifying figure departs the stage.What we are witnessing is the right’s version of the left’s 2020 moment, where radical ideas from the fringes breached containment and entered mainstream discourse, though here the ideas in question involve pushing women out of the workplace and executing 'perfidious Jews. ' The internal culture at institutions like Heritage provides a worrying microcosm of this shift.A well-placed source within the foundation, who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of professional retaliation, described a pervasive 'rot' and a counter-culture thinking that has seeped in, citing instances of staff using racially derogatory language and lamenting the 19th Amendment as the downfall of society. This account is substantiated by the foundation’s continued employment of chief economist E.J. Antoni after his nomination to a key government post was withdrawn over a secret Twitter account filled with degrading attacks, and by the hiring of figures like John McEntee, who publicly joked about revoking women’s suffrage.The underlying dynamic is one of long-private debates going public. For years, a significant slice of the right’s internal dialogue has involved normalizing discussions around ideas outsiders would deem bigoted, from racial IQ theories to reactionary gender politics.The technological dismantling of gatekeepers and the rise of direct-to-audience funding models have demolished the walls that once kept these conversations contained. Now, as demonstrated by writer Helen Andrews, whose essay blaming workplace ills on 'the great feminization' gained over 100,000 views and a platform on the New York Times podcast, these once-taboo subjects are being aired openly and receiving positive attention.The issue of antisemitism, however, introduces a uniquely divisive generational fault line. While the older conservative guard remains staunchly pro-Israel and views Jewish Americans as a model minority, a substantial portion of the right’s youth cadres are instinctively skeptical of both U.S. foreign commitments and the political influence of the largely liberal Jewish community.This generational chasm was visible in the leaked Heritage staff meeting, where younger staffers defended Roberts. Though estimates like Rod Dreher’s claim that 30-40% of Gen Z Republicans in DC hold Fuentes-like views are statistically baseless, they reflect a profound anxiety among older conservatives that the movement’s future is slipping from their grasp.The escalating infighting is inextricably linked to the looming power vacuum that will follow Trump’s departure. As historian David Austin Walsh notes, the alignment between donors and the rank-and-file on most issues has prevented such public tension in recent memory, but that alignment is fracturing.The fight is now a proxy for broader factional struggles over the GOP’s future direction on issues from tariffs to Israel. This is evident in the perspective of figures like Jack Hunter, a former shock jock known as 'the Southern Avenger' who has since disavowed his racist past.Despite calling Fuentes a 'dickhead,' Hunter strategically sides with Carlson and Roberts, viewing their actions as a necessary, if ugly, tactic in the larger war to shift the right away from its lockstep alliance with Israel and interventionist foreign policy. For him, and for many others, this civil war is not primarily about moral boundaries but about raw factional advantage in the post-Trump landscape.All eyes now turn to Vice President JD Vance, the political avatar of this online, postliberal right and the current frontrunner for the 2028 nomination. His decision—whether to intervene and police the movement’s boundaries or to remain silent, thereby endorsing the flirtation with extremism—will be a defining one, determining if the right’s leadership can, or even wishes to, shove its newly public demons back into the closet.

#Heritage Foundation

#Republican civil war

#antisemitism

#Nick Fuentes

#Tucker Carlson

#internal conflict

#featured

Stay Informed. Act Smarter.

Get weekly highlights, major headlines, and expert insights — then put your knowledge to work in our live prediction markets.

Comments

Loading comments...