After Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts delivered a controversial statement regarding its relationship with Tucker Carlson following Nick Fuentes’s appearance on his podcast, something resembling a civil war broke out among conservatives.
Some, siding with Roberts, felt he was right to assert that Christians should be able to critique Israel without being accused of antisemitism, that Carlson should be free to interview controversial figures without being attacked for doing so, and that Roberts’s denunciation of Fuentes was sufficient. Others, however, argued that the Heritage Foundation’s refusal to condemn Carlson more strongly for giving what some have called a “softball” interview to a right-wing activist represented a moral failing, that his statement on American-Israeli relations was red meat for antisemites, and that he wasn’t stern enough in rebuking Fuentes.
Representatives of both these camps have spent the past few days arguing their positions on social media and even within the Heritage Foundation.
“I think what we are seeing here in this schism is a predominantly older, southern-centered conservative establishment being forced to come to terms with a younger, geographically northern Trumpist element that they are unable to resonate with,” Ohio College Republican Federation chairman Gabe Guidarini, who has a large social media presence, told the Washington Examiner. “A lot of old school conservative groups have tried to keep the economic austerity, foreign policy hawkishness, and compassionate conservatism in the equation by latching on to [President Donald] Trump, but the majority of the Republican Party now believes what Trump actually talked about in 2015.”
“The ideological underpinning of the Trump movement is repurposed Buchananism, which appeals more to young people and Catholics, and it’s abundantly clear these older groups have no intention of coming on board with it, which has led to this proxy conflict,” he added.
Indeed, 50% of Republicans between 18 and 49 have an unfavorable view of Israel, according to a poll released by the Pew Research Center in March. In the same poll, only 23% of Republicans over 50 —who make up an outsized share of the electorate and party establishment — had negative feelings toward the Jewish state, providing evidence of a generational divide like the one described by Guidarini. Feelings like these came up during a Heritage Foundation meeting, footage of which leaked to the press, when one unidentified female staffer told Roberts that a “handful of young colleagues and I had no issue with the points you made in the original video,” explaining they believe that “Christian Zionism is a modern heresy” and that Generation Z has “an increased unfavorable view of Israel.”
Some conservatives view such developments with apprehension.
“Among many younger conservatives, there’s clearly a lack of grounding in what the movement actually stands for,” Bethany Mandel, a cultural commentator who has long been involved in the conservative movement, told the Washington Examiner. “They’ve absorbed the aesthetics of rebellion but not the principles behind it. True conservatism is about gratitude, duty, faith, freedom, and moral order — not cynicism, conspiracies, or resentment. What we’re seeing now is a generation that confuses provocation with conviction. That’s partly a failure of institutions and mentors who haven’t taught the intellectual and moral foundations of the Right.”
Institutions and top figures in the conservative movement, such as the Wall Street Journal’s editorial board and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), have criticized Roberts’s initial statement, whereas a number of social media influencers popular among Gen Z conservatives have offered their support. Fuentes himself has cultivated a massive audience primarily composed of younger viewers.
Rod Dreher, an influential conservative writer and friend of Vice President JD Vance, recently claimed that a reliable source told him that “30% to 40% of D.C. GOP staffers under the age of 30 are Groypers,” a term Fuentes’s followers use to describe themselves.
On Fuentes specifically, Roberts advocated against “canceling” him despite “abhor[ing]” his views, and recommending debate instead. Roberts has since called that initial statement a “mistake,” claiming ignorance of Fuentes’s beliefs and criticizing Carlson for hosting him. Fuentes denies that six million Jewish people died in the Holocaust, pushes antisemitic conspiracy theories, and frequently jokes about rape and genocide.
“The most troubling revelation is that Roberts says he didn’t really know who Nick Fuentes is,” Mandel continued. “He’s the head of a political think tank. Knowing the ideological actors in our ecosystem is the job. If you’re outsourcing that judgment to staffers handing you scripts, you’re admitting a deeper failure of leadership. The way forward is careful, deliberate accountability — own the mistake, affirm first principles, and stop elevating voices fundamentally at odds with them.”
Guidarini and others on the opposing side of the debate see things differently, characterizing the attacks on Roberts as an opportunistic means for one wing of the conservative movement to score points against its rival wing rather than a genuine effort to root out antisemitism.
“I don’t think many of the critics of Kevin Roberts are being honest about what this is about,” Guidarini said. “Old school conservative elements have wanted Roberts gone for a long time because of his embrace of National Conservative ideas that American voters have routinely signaled they support, and it’s the same reason why they relentlessly lobbied against JD Vance’s vice presidential selection. The Tucker interview outrage is mostly manufactured, a desperate push using a strawman with the intention of adding a few more years to the inevitably doomed reign of D.C. Reaganites.”
Cruz, on the other hand, believes that antisemitism is at the heart of the issue.
“In the last six months, I’ve seen more antisemitism on the Right than I have in my entire life,” the senator said after Roberts released his initial statement. “If you sit there with someone who says Adolf Hitler was very, very cool and that their mission is to combat and defeat global Jewry, and you say nothing, then you’re a coward and you are complicit in that evil.”
In the telling of some, such a characterization is part of a playbook historically used to silence conservatives.
“The people attacking Heritage for its ‘antisemitism’ are using the exact same tactics
and language the Left uses when it comes to attacking ‘racism,’” one academic close to the conservative movement who requested to remain anonymous, said. “They use bullying,
label you with denunciatory labels like ‘neo-Nazi’ and ‘antisemite,’ smear your
character and malign your motives, and refuse to engage in rational arguments which
might expose the barrenness of their argument.”
The academic also pointed out that many of the people attempting to tone police Heritage, including Cruz, were once enemies of Trump’s movement.
Some, while still accusing Heritage of making light of antisemitism, have advanced other critiques of Roberts’s conduct. Tiana Lowe Doescher, for example, pointed out that his tenure as president and subsequent alignment with the New Right figures has been followed by stagnant fundraising and asserted that the foundation has less input over federal staffing than it has in previous GOP administrations.
At the root of the problem is that Carlson’s interview was widely viewed as “friendly,” with the former Fox News host often not pushing back on Fuentes’s statements and at times agreeing with him. The interview began with Carlson and Fuentes having a conversation about the latter’s upbringing and entrance into the political scene, then progressed to discussions on Jewish influence in American politics, race, and feminism.
Carlson did not push back on Fuentes after he said that he is a “fan” of Joseph Stalin, nor did he question Fuentes on his past praise of Hitler or Holocaust denial. He did, however, offer light resistance when Fuentes claimed conservative media was controlled by “Zionist Jews,” pointing out that Fox News is run by the Murdoch family.
Fuentes being normalized by Carlson and Carlson, in turn, retaining the backing of the Heritage Foundation, bodes ill for the health of the conservative movement, former Heritage Foundation fellow Joel Griffith told the Washington Examiner.
“This isn’t about canceling anyone,” said Griffith, who now works as a senior fellow at Advancing American Freedom, an advocacy group affiliated with former Vice President Mike Pence. “When you’re an organization, you have a fiduciary duty to your members and to your donors to align yourself with respectable people. The concern is that you lend the credibility of your organization, the most important think tank in the world, to someone who very clearly is spreading antisemitic propaganda … When you see a mainstream organization welcoming that, it indicates to people that this is an acceptable point of view.”
While he doesn’t believe Roberts himself is antisemitic, Griffith says that he unfairly criticized those on the Right who are concerned about the rise of antisemitism and felt that he danced around Carlson’s platforming of anti-American voices, such as apologists for the Russian and Iranian regimes. He also took issue with Roberts’s assertion that “globalists” were pushing support for Israel, pointing out that the majority of the world is anti-Israel and that the pro-Israel movement in America is largely funded and staffed by Americans. Mandel pointed out that “globalist” has been used as a dog whistle.
Roberts ultimately apologized for his characterization of Carlson’s critics.
Griffith has been working in conservative politics for about 12 years and, echoing the sentiment of others, says that the rise in anti-Israel views among right-wing staffers is a recent phenomenon, stating that it wasn’t “really a problem up until about three years ago.”
One young D.C. conservative staffer, who requested anonymity, found Roberts’s statement imprudent but has been disappointed by some of the criticism it has received.
They conceded that Roberts’s “response to the controversy, specifically the first video, was unnecessary and a tactical error,” but qualified that statement by claiming that the backlash has “really brought to light that many Zionists will not tolerate any criticism of Israel or reasoned debate whatsoever.”
What all sides can agree on is that this debate isn’t going anywhere.
“This controversy is forcing a reckoning: Do we stand for the ideas that built the movement — free enterprise, limited government, a strong national defense, and traditional values — or do we drift toward the kind of nihilism that corrodes all of that from within?” Mandel asked.
Guidarini argued that a victor in the current confrontation will have to emerge eventually and that he believes “the old establishment will have to find an off ramp” as “there is very little division in the Republican voter base, especially among young people, who almost unanimously lean towards the Buchanan-inspired underpinnings of the Trump movement.”
Some, however, see this as a very D.C.-centric debate.
“This will be a huge division within institutional conservative organizations and for donors,” the anonymous staffer said. “I don’t believe the grassroots will care as much, and in fact may be turned off by gratuitous accusations of antisemitism.”
The anonymous academic, meanwhile, predicted that we’ll continue to see conflicts between individuals who have criticized Roberts and figures like Vance and Daily Wire commentator Matt Walsh, who they say have harnessed support among young conservatives which threatens to displace more centrist Republicans.
A spokeswoman for the Heritage Foundation referred the Washington Examiner to a statement issued by Roberts on Wednesday, in which he reiterated the organization’s commitment to fighting antisemitism.
FOREIGN AGENTS LOOK TO INFLUENCE CONSERVATIVE THINK TANKS IN TRUMP’S WASHINGTON
“Everyone has the responsibility to speak up against the scourge of antisemitism, no matter the messenger,” Roberts said. “Heritage and I will do so, even when my friend Tucker Carlson needs challenging.”
Despite the foundation’s attempts to distance itself from controversy, a number of organizations and individuals have cut ties amid the fallout. Among these have been senior fellow Steven Moore, the National Task Force to Combat Antisemitism, and the Coalition for Jewish Values.
