In order for the good and sane to prevail in your own tribe, it’s necessary to police the borders of that tribe and, at times, defenestrate those on the fringes to make clear to the wider society that “they are not with us.”
In 1992, the Democrats had their “Sister Souljah moment,” when then-presidential-hopeful Bill Clinton criticized a hip-hop artist who said it would be “wise” for black gang members to take a day to kill white people. Clinton’s words were seen as a signal to centrists that normal Democrats do not support such things. Notably, the Democrats largely failed to do the same in 2020 during the worst riots in the county’s history and amid calls to “defund the police.”
Republicans made a similar move in the 1960s and 70s, when conservative leaders successfully banished the John Birch Society from the mainstream movement. The effort was spearheaded by William F. Buckley, founder of the National Review, considered a leading visionary of 20th century “fusionist” coalition that become modern conservatism.
Buckley and other Republican voices believed the “Birchers,” as JBS acolytes were called, were consumed by paranoid conspiracy theories, unfounded character attacks, and bigotry and that their influence in the party would turn off voters who would otherwise be open to conservative principles. While American culture was overwhelmingly moving towards acceptance of equal treatment under the law (with the vast majority of both parties voting for the 1964 and 1965 Civil Rights bills), JBS was warning that the entire Civil Rights movement was just a conspiracy to create a “Soviet Negro Republic” and took out ads asking “What’s wrong with Civil Rights” law as it was?
Birchers also entertained wilder and wilder conspiracy theories about secret cabals ruling the US and the world behind the scenes (sounds familiar?). They were against joining NATO and other international alliances and trade agreements because they assumed those behind these efforts were part of this globalist cabal. When JBS founder Robert Welch began to spread the theory that Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower was a “dedicated, conscious agent of the communist conspiracy,” mainstream conservatives like Buckley decided to act.
And their articles and public statements successfully pushed the Birchers and their ilk to the fringes for decades. By making clear that these views were outside of acceptable opinion, conservatives were able to create a coalition that saw success in the Reagan years and beyond.
Enemies to the right
Now, half a century later, there are again fringe elements successfully influencing conservatism. Could it be time for another “John Birch moment” to draw some lines in the sand about what we will and will not accept inside the tent?
The conservative landscape has been thrown into chaos by the assassination of Charlie Kirk and the battle over what the future of grassroots conservatism will look like. And a new generation of “Birchers,” led by Nick Fuentes and Candace Owens, has emerged to fight for the reigns of the movement. They are a group obsessed with conspiracies about global cabals, quick to make unfounded character assassination, prone to protectionism/isolationism, and quick to divide by religion or race, just like the old Birchers.
The situation is arguably worse. Because when the old Birchers were accused of antisemitism and racism, they officially denounced these views, but the new Birchers openly embrace them. Fuentes openly praises Hitler and Stalin, roots for Islamic extremists like the Taliban, downplays the Holocaust, said the Jim Crow laws were a good thing, and blasted JD Vance repeatedly for having a non-Christian, non-white wife.
He goes as far as to say that this globalist cabal of Jews should be executed once he is able to take over the country. It’s just big talk for now, but many young right-wing men hang on his every word.
Fuentes also went after Kirk’s widow, saying Erika was a “spook” and a “plant,” meaning an intelligence asset. He then gloated that he and his “Groyper” movement had successfully taken over Kirk’s TPUSA organization because so many young right wingers peppered the vice president with questions based on Fuentes’ messaging.
The decision by Tucker Carlson to host Fuentes on his show for a softball one-hour interview poured gasoline on this fire. Carlson has chosen which side of the line to be on. Matt Walsh of the Daily Wire has been pushed to pick a side, but for now he has been taking a “NETTR” (no enemies to the right) position, arguing instead for unity against the left. The Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts announced yesterday that they are standing behind Carlson and Fuentes against the “venomous coalition” that seeks to “cancel” them, though he did say he disagrees with “and even abhors things that Nick Fuentes says.”
I’m with Dillon; with the editors of National Review, who have again drawn a line in the sand like they did with the Birchers; and with the “Freedom Conservatives,” who have been calling out this growing threat for a couple years now. It’s time for another John Birch moment. And people should pick their sides carefully and prudently.
If the right fails to police their side and lets it be conquered by white nationalism and conspiracy madness, we will be dragged down the same way the left has been by “woke.” And we will have nobody to blame but ourselves.
