Kevin Roberts of the Heritage Foundation flounders in the Tucker Carlson-Nick Fuentes fever swamps.
The Editorial Board
Source link
Kevin Roberts of the Heritage Foundation flounders in the Tucker Carlson-Nick Fuentes fever swamps.
The Editorial Board
Source link
People mourning the killing of Charlie Kirk carried candles and American flags in a solemn memorial last week at the Huntington Beach Pier, long a destination for conservative gatherings ranging from protests over pandemic-era lockdowns to rallies in support of President Trump.
But on this night, things took a dark turn when dozens of men joined the crowd, chanting, “White men fight back.”
Then on Saturday, a white nationalist organization, identified by experts as Patriot Front, showed up at another beachside memorial for Kirk. The men, wearing khakis, navy blue shirts and white gaiters concealing their faces, marched down Main Street toward the beach holding a picture of Kirk. “Say his name!” they yelled. “Take back our world! Take back our land!”
By Sunday, key political leaders in the conservative Orange County city known as a hotbed for the MAGA movement were fighting to contain the situation, issuing a statement denouncing violence. Kirk’s assassination, City Hall said, “serves as a stark reminder of the devastating outcomes that can result from vitriol and violent rhetoric.”
“I despise them,” Councilman Butch Twining said of the white nationalists who disrupted the vigil. “There is no place for them here, and they disgust me.”
Huntington Beach is one of many communities grappling with the aftermath of the shooting of Kirk, a beloved activist in the conservative movement and close ally of President Trump.
Since his killing, conservatives have demanded the firing of people who posted online comments about Kirk they considered offensive. There have been debates over whether to lower flags to half-staff. One U.S. congressman is asking his colleagues to force social media platforms to kick off users who celebrated the killing. Vice President J.D. Vance encouraged people to take it a step further: “Call them out, and hell, call their employer.”
Huntington Beach is in a unique position because of its history of fringe white supremacist activity that goes back decades.
In the 1980s and 1990s, skinheads converged on Main Street throwing Nazi salutes and intimidating people of color. In 1995, a pair of white supremacists fatally shot a Black man after confronting him outside a McDonald’s restaurant on Beach Boulevard.
Huntington Beach leaders have fought to rid the city of that image and tried to make clear that hate is not welcome in Surf City. But events of the last week have made these efforts more difficult.
“Typically, when there’s an opportunity like this, white supremacists and far-right folks more generally are very good about inserting themselves and seeing it as an opportunity to pull things in their direction and shift the narrative,” said Pete Simi, a professor of sociology at Chapman University in Orange County who studies extremist groups.
This is happening as Huntington Beach has emerged as a West Coast beacon for Trump and MAGA. The city has made headlines in recent years for removing the Pride flag from city properties, rewriting a decades-old human dignity resolution — deleting any mention of intolerance of hate crimes — and wading into fights with state officials over issues like transgender student privacy.
Brian Levin, the founder of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism and professor emeritus at Cal State San Bernardino, said the U.S. is witnessing not just polarization between left and right, but a splintering within both the left and right. And that polarization, he said, is being exploited by extremist groups seeking to advance a certain message.
“The notion that these camps are unified teams just simply isn’t true,” Levin said. “I think what’s happening is we’re seeing the exploitation of civic discourse by people who are trying to outdo each other as being more authentic and how they do that is by being more eliminationist and more aggressive. Aggression and being an edgelord is considered currency.”
Barbara Richardson, who has lived in the city since the early 1970s, criticized city leaders for extending the mourning period for Kirk, flying flags half-staff through sundown on Sept. 21 — the day of his memorial service — saying that it will only contribute to rising tensions in the city.
Over the weekend, Richardson watched the videos of the white supremacists chanting downtown in horror. The moment was an unwelcome reminder of what residents grappled with decades ago.
“It’s disheartening,” Richardson said. “I think what happened at the Charlie Kirk rallies was a real black eye for Huntington Beach and it hurts tourism. It made me not want to go downtown. I remember the city in the 1980s and it was scary. I didn’t want to be around skinheads then and I still don’t.”
Last week’s memorials were for Kirk as well as Iryna Zarustka, the woman killed while riding a train in Charlotte, N.C., in a brutal attack captured on video.
Twining attended the event on Wednesday and was disturbed at what he heard from the white supremacists. He said he left quickly after they arrived and started chanting.
“They ruined a perfectly nice vigil where we recognized two people — Iryna [Zarustka] and Charlie—and prayed for them and sang Amazing Grace and had our own conversations about how much they meant to us,” he said.
He and others have stressed the vast majority of those who attended the vigils were there simply to mourn.
Twining said he and his wife have been accosted in a restaurant and at the grocery store over his presence at the vigil and the incorrect assumption that he’s supportive of white nationalists. There have been calls for him to resign and he’s even received death threats that have warranted police protection, he said.
“I reject the presence of hate groups loudly and unequivocally,” Twining said. “Their attempts to corrupt our democratic spaces will not succeed. As a leader in this community, I will not allow my voice to be twisted for extremism. I remain committed to preserving inclusive, respectful, and peaceful spaces where dialogue and remembrance can flourish untainted by hate.”
Videos of Saturday’s gathering show some attendees waving flags associated with Patriot Front, a white nationalist organization founded in 2017 by Thomas Rousseau after the deadly “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Va.
“They were intentionally generated to try and distance themselves from that violence and present themselves as pro-American,” Simi said. However, Simi noted, the group has also been accused of racial violence. In 2022, the Patriot Front was sued for a racist attack on a black musician in Boston and ordered to pay $2.75 million in damages.
On Saturday in Huntington Beach, resident Jerry Geyer was riding his bicycle in downtown watching as the group marched toward the pier chanting and decided to push back. He positioned his bicycle on the sidewalk in front of them in an effort to block their path. He rode next to them, shouting expletives.
“I cannot allow that to run through the streets of Huntington Beach,” he said in an interview with KCAL News. “That’s not what we are. That’s not who Huntington Beach is.”
Hannah Fry, Jenny Jarvie
Source link
The alleged gunman who opened fire on a Catholic school in Minneapolis on Wednesday, killing two children and injuring at least 17 people, most of them students at the school, used a gun that had antisemitic and anti-Israel writings across it, according to the Anti-Defamation League.
The assailant’s gun also included praise for mass killers “across the ideological spectrum,” including white supremacist, anti-Muslim and anti-government actors, the ADL stated.
Two of the names that appeared on the gun were Natalie Rupnow, who killed a staff member and a student at Abundant Life Christian School in Madison, Wis., last December, and Brenton Tarrant, who killed 51 people at two mosques in New Zealand in 2019.
Unverified images of the alleged shooter’s gun, taken from a video posted to a YouTube account believed to be associated with the shooter, show scrawlings on the gun and related paraphernalia that say “6 million wasn’t enough,” “Burn Israel,” “Israel must fall” and “Destroy HIAS,” a reference to the Jewish refugee organization.
Minneapolis law enforcement identified the shooter as 23-year-old Robin Westman, NBC News reported.

Michael Smart chuckled as he thought back to their banishment.
Truthfully he couldn’t say for sure what the problem had been, why it was that in 2012, the John Birch Society—the far-right organization historically steeped in conspiracism and opposition to civil rights—had found itself blacklisted by the Conservative Political Action Conference. “Nobody knows the official reason, because they don’t tell you that,” Smart, a field coordinator for the group, told me.
He has theories, of course. Perhaps the Birchers’ unapologetic crusade against “globalism” had started to hit too close to home for the Republican Party of 12 years ago; perhaps their warnings about, of all people, Newt Gingrich—a “wolf in sheep’s clothing” whose onetime membership on the Council on Foreign Relations, as Smart saw it, revealed his “globalist” vision for conservatism—had rankled the Republican powers that be.
In any event, the ouster had made the news, coming as it had after a change in leadership at the American Conservative Union, the host of CPAC, the annual gathering of conservative politicians, commentators, and activists. “When they applied, I said, ‘I don’t want any segregationist groups at CPAC; it sends the wrong message,’” Al Cárdenas, the ACU chair from 2011 to 2014, told me recently. “And that was that.” For some optimistic observers, the decision had signified a small but symbolic effort to purge the movement of its most “highly offensive” elements, as one report put it.
Though CPAC has long catered more to the activist base of the Republican Party than to its establishment, the event has marched steadily closer to the fringes in the years since Donald Trump’s election, the barrier to entry for speakers and organizations being little more than a sufficient appreciation of the 45th president. But even Smart seemed a touch surprised by the ease of it all in 2023; when he applied on behalf of the John Birch Society for a booth at CPAC, and when, after the fuss and hand-wringing of 11 years earlier, the application was approved.
“It was a very basic process,” he recalled with a shrug. (CPAC organizers did not respond to a request for comment about the John Birch Society’s presence at the conference.)
It was half past noon yesterday, day two of the 2024 gathering, and Smart, a soft-spoken, genial man wearing a trim blazer and slacks, was standing before the red-white-and-blue curtained backdrop of the John Birch Society booth. He occasionally paused our conversation to direct curious passersby to the literature spread across a nearby table—brochures outlining the history of the organization (“How are we unique?”); copies of its latest “Freedom Index,” or congressional scorecard; issues of The New American, the group’s in-house journal, including a “TRUMP WORLD” collector’s edition featuring such articles as “Trumping the Deep State” and “The Deplorables.” It was the contemporary output of an organization with an older and more controversial heritage than probably any other group featured this year at CPAC. And yet what was most striking about the John Birch Society of 2024 was how utterly unremarkable it appeared among the various booths lining this hotel conference center.
The John Birch Society, once the scourge of some of the nation’s most prominent conservatives, relegated to the outermost edges of the movement, now fits neatly into the mainstream of the American right. David Giordano, another field coordinator for the organization who was attending CPAC, credited Trump for hastening the shift, challenging the global elite in ways that past Republican presidents had only ever talked about doing. “What were the things they said about him? ‘Racist’ and ‘anti-Semitic’—that got my attention,” Giordano told me, smiling. “What’d they say about the John Birch Society? ‘Racist’ and ‘anti-Semitic.’ That’s when you know you’re over the target.” Longtime members and officers of the organization exuded the polite but unmistakable air of I told you so at the conference. “A lot of people will say, ‘Oh, my grandmother or my dad was a member. We used to think he was crazy, but now, not so much,’” Smart said, beaming. “Because we’ve been warning people about a lot of this stuff for decades, obviously.”
The John Birch Society, so named for a U.S. Army intelligence officer and Christian missionary killed by Chinese Communists toward the end of World War II, was founded in 1958 by Robert Welch, a retired candy manufacturer who made his fortune by way of Sugar Daddies and Junior Mints. Welch persuaded a handful of the country’s wealthiest anti–New Deal businessmen to join him in a mission to extinguish the “international communist conspiracy” he believed had penetrated the U.S. government and was set to consume every facet of American life. President Dwight Eisenhower, Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, CIA Director Allen Dulles—all of them, Welch insisted, were dedicated agents of the U.S.S.R.
For Welch, the Warren Court was incontrovertible evidence of the Soviet mandate in motion, given its decision outlawing prayer in public schools and, crucially, its ushering of America into a racially desegregated future. Donations flooded in as the John Birch Society took aim at the civil-rights movement, the United Nations, local public libraries and school boards, and the diabolical plot apparently enshrouding all of them. As the organization grew in prominence, a number of conservative leaders, including National Review founder William F. Buckley Jr., agonized over how to contain Welch’s influence without alienating the electrified legion of Americans—many of them subscribers to Buckley’s magazine—whom Welch had brought into the movement. In the early 1960s, Buckley would publish a series of editorials critical of Welch and his worldview, urging conservatives to unite in rejection of his “false counsels.” By the mid-’70s, the organization’s formal ranks and funding had significantly dwindled.
Yet the Bircher worldview never really went away. On the margins of the right, it continued to find purchase in new candidates and new personalities who adapted it to meet new moments. The society’s anti-communist crusade translated into alarm over a post–Cold War plot by the global elite to construct a “new world order” defined by porous borders and centralized, socialist rule; the birther conspiracy theories of the Tea Party era fit well within the Bircher tradition. And then, in 2016, the John Birch Society saw many of its core instincts finally reflected in the White House.
Giordano was at first skeptical of Trump’s candidacy. But then he watched as President Trump in short succession scrapped the Trans-Pacific Partnership and withdrew the United States from the Paris climate accords—dramatic blows, in Giordano’s view, to plans for the new world order. Giordano counts COVID—the lockdowns, the vaccines—as the wake-up event for many Americans, himself and others in the John Birch Society included. “I’ve been a member since 1994. And I said to my wife, ‘I wonder if this new world order will come in my lifetime,’” he recalled. And then came 2020. “They said, ‘Go home and flatten the curve.’ And I said, ‘This is the new world order. It’s here.’” He refused to take a vaccine or ever wear a face covering in public, recalling to me the time he successfully wore down a sales associate at Designer Shoe Warehouse who’d asked him to abide by the store policy on masks.
The John Birch Society, Giordano claimed, has been in a “growing phase” in the years since. “I’m constantly signing people up—I’ve got a new chapter in Ocean County; we had no chapters in Delaware, and now I’ve got a new chapter right in Wilmington.” Oddly enough, it’s a Trump victory in November that he fears could reverse the tide. “If Trump wins—which I personally hope—our membership will drop,” he predicted. “‘Oh,’ they’ll all say, ‘he’s gonna save us.’ And I explain to people, we’re the watchers on the Wall. The Founders said, ‘Here’s a constitution; this is forever; you got to fight every day to keep it.’”
Giordano’s claims of growth dovetail with the recent uptick in references to the John Birch Society by right-wing celebrities. Last May, in conversation with the Moms for Liberty co-founder Tina Descovich on his War Room podcast, Steve Bannon mocked left-wing efforts to deploy the “Bircher” label as a smear. “They say, ‘Oh! Moms for Liberty is just the modern version of the John Birch Society,’” Bannon said, laughing, before turning back to Descovich: “You’re doing something right, girl.” A few months before that, Nick Fuentes, a far-right vlogger and white supremacist who has repeatedly denied the Holocaust, heralded the John Birch Society as a “prelude to the Groypers”—the army of neo-Nazi activists and online influencers Fuentes counts as followers.
Some national Republicans, moreover, no longer try to maintain even a nominal distance from the organization. Joining the John Birch Society for its return to CPAC in 2023 were lawmakers including Representatives Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Ronny Jackson of Texas, both of whom sat for livestreamed interviews with The New American as throngs of conference-goers listened from the sidelines. At this year’s conference, a woman helping staff the booth urged me to check out the magazine’s January issue, the cover of which featured a close-up portrait of Andy Biggs; the Arizona congressman—former chair of the House Freedom Caucus—had sat for an exclusive interview on “many of the issues facing our country,” including President Joe Biden’s “corruption,” as the magazine put it, “immigration, and China.”
It’s unclear just how large the John Birch Society is today—even Smart told me, “They keep those numbers close”—but to measure its influence by membership is to miss the point. Naturally, as the principles and positions of the John Birch Society have insinuated themselves into the mainstream on the right, the Birchers’ own claim to those ideas has weakened. The organization’s rogue crusades of the past are now so familiar and universal that the original fingerprints are no longer visible.
Consider fluoride. At the height of the group’s relevance in the ’60s, the John Birch Society railed against fluoridated drinking water as a communist conspiracy to poison Americans en masse, a go-to data point for the National Review set and others invested in the political exile of the Birchers. As soon as I stepped off the escalator at the convention center outside Washington, D.C., that hosted CPAC, though, I came upon cocktail tables scattered with brochures listing “Fun Facts on Fluoride,” among them that “Fluoride was used by Hitler and Stalin” and that “it will kill you.”
There was no stated affiliation with the John Birch Society, and no person around to discuss the pamphlets. And perhaps that was telling; far from the niche boogeyman of one conservative organization, the perils of fluoride had become part of the generic paraphernalia of the movement. (The “Myth vs Facts” section of the John Birch Society website, I should note, currently states that “while the JBS doesn’t agree with water fluoridation because it is a form of government mass medication of citizens in violation of their individual right to choose which medicines they ingest, it was never opposed as a mind-control plot.”)
Plenty have noted the John Birch Society’s echoes in the GOP’s oft-invoked specter of the “deep state,” the conspiracism that immediately hijacked the memory of Seth Rich, the Democratic National Committee staffer murdered in July 2016. Yet to attend CPAC today is to see those instincts taken to their most troublingly banal ends. Lifestyle and wellness products are hawked as solutions that the medical establishment never wanted you to find; a payment-processing company warns, with a massive image of a human-silhouette target riddled with bullet holes, “Your business is a target.”
For the John Birch Society, returning to CPAC has meant slipping seamlessly back in among groups and personalities that for years have been operating within its legacy, whether they knew it or not. The organization has been “eclipsed by many different groups and offshoots, so they’re not controversial in the same way that, say, Richard Spencer was a few years ago,” Matthew Dallek, a historian at George Washington University and the author of Birchers: How the John Birch Society Radicalized the American Right, told me.
Why was the John Birch Society invited back to CPAC? The better question, in Dallek’s view: “Why wouldn’t it be?”
Elaina Plott Calabro
Source link