In a recent Op-Ed in American Greatness entitled ‘Clearing the Air on the Right,’ Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk wrote that ‘The most interesting debates happening today in American political discourse are not between the Left and the Right, but rather within the Right.’ Kirk then reaffirmed his stance on the market place of ideas with the ensuing ‘We should not shy away from our differences but embrace the dialogue in good faith and with the understanding that the best ideas and the best leaders will win.’
This bold statement was a bit shocking to me and many other on the right considering that for the last 6 weeks, we have all witnessed Kirk as well as several other individuals in Conservatism Incorporated shy away from or shut down good faith debate entirely.
I attended a recent event at UCLA where Donald Trump Jr, Charlie Kirk, and Kimberly Guilfoyle were expected to speak about Trump Jr’s new book ‘Triggered.’ Following the speech, like at every Culture War event Kirk has coordinated, a question and answer session was expected to take place.
Within just minutes of the start of the event, it was announced to the crowd that the question and answer portion was going to be cancelled. Upon hearing this bad news, the entire crowd immediately booed, and for the remainder of the event were obstreperous.
This occurrence was just one recent example of Kirk’s actions being exceedingly antithetical to his suggestion of not shying away from differences and embracing dialogue that he purported to be a proponent of in his recent Op-Ed. There were also numerous occasions where Turning Point employees profiled and shifted attendees around in line if they thought they were going to ask a tough question about America’s demographic shift or foreign aid.
Kirk also attempted to reassure conservatives of his early support for President Donald Trump admitting that it is true that ‘a year before the 2016 election’ he was skeptical of Trump – but that as soon as Trump secured the nomination, he ‘unreservedly did everything within my personal power to help get Donald Trump into the White House.’
The problem with this assertion is that it was not a ‘year before’ 2016 that he was skeptical of President Trump, it was during the year of 2016. According to an archive of old tweets Kirk tried furiously to delete, he expressed extreme dissatisfaction of President Trump. As late at two months before then President-elect Trump went on to win the nomination, Kirk referred to Trump as ‘gross and disgusting.’
These tweets are not dissimilar from other tweets that are archived from individuals like Matt Walsh, Rob Smith, Ben Shapiro, and other mainstream conservatives. As they say, the internet is forever, and these tweets resemble some of the tweets State Department Adviser Mark Kissel fired off about Trump around the same time.
Mike Pompeo hired Mary Kissel last November.
On Immigration and Assimilation
Kirk claims that he has ‘spoken too loosely about F-1 and H1-B visas,’ and that our current immigration status quo is ‘unacceptable,’ but as recent as four weeks ago he called limiting the one million legal immigrants coming into the country annually a ‘wonky’ idea. How are we actually supposed to believe that Kirk authentically holds these new positions if he commenced his Op-Ed deceptive about the timeline of his reputed support for President Trump?
It is perfectly fine and normal for one to change their mind, but did Kirk’s mind truly change this quickly? Is it a coincidence that Kirk apologized for his stated position on ‘stapling green cards to the backs of diplomas’ directly after Michelle Malkin criticized him in her own AmGreatness piece? Does it seem strange that his apology also came almost immediately after Tucker Carlson indirectly deprecated this statement to his millions of viewers?
What’s even more interesting is the fact that the Turning Point USA twitter account tweeted a video of Kirk lambasting some Culture War attendee about the benefits of mass legal immigration the exact same day Kirk’s AmGreatness piece was published.
The tweet was of course quickly deleted soon after it was posted, and the deletion was likely ordered by captain Kirk.
As late as just a couple of weeks ago, Kirk was denying the fact that Republicans are soon never going to be able to win Texas or a general election ever again. Kirk claimed that demographics are not destiny because Cubans vote for Republicans. This was an argument that Ben Shapiro and Michael Knowles also made during their tours when asked about demographic change, so I presume Kirk was likely just parroting their recent responses.
The problem with this argument is that Cubans only voted 54% for the Republican party in the 2016 Presidential election, and the younger generations of Cubans are beginning to lean more left than their parents. Younger Cubans are voting more and more consistently with the rest of Hispanics according to all data.
Outside of Cubans, who only make up 0.5% of the entire American population, the hispanic demographic as a whole has voted approximately 70% for the democratic party consistently every election since the 1970’s.
What is going to happen when Hispanics make up the super majority in Texas come 2024?
Kirk seems to strongly support the first and second amendment of the United States constitution, yet simultaneously disregards the fact that this demographic shift that America is experiencing is not only a direct threat to both of those amendments, but to American way of life as a whole.
According to Pew research, 75% of Hispanics say it’s more important to institute gun control than to protect gun rights. Pew also finds that 72% of Hispanics say that hate speech is violence, and 52% of hispanics say we should criminalize hate speech.
A recent poll published by Campaign for Free Speech showed that over 51% of millennials support a “hate speech” exemption in the first amendment. When that poll is broken down by race, it is almost identical to the Pew research study results.
Kirk demands that ‘conservatives must do a better job winning over minority voters of all varieties,’ but at the rate that minorities are pouring into the country and having children, this is mathematically impossible. Within my lifetime, and to deny this is to deny simple mathematics, a Republican President will soon never be able to win an election ever again unless drastic action is taken.
Kirk among many others have claimed that ‘after two or three generations, voting patterns for these communities historically have normalized,’ but this is not true either. According to Pew Hispanic Center, third generation Hispanics still vote almost 60% for the Democratic party. In Texas this is the most apparent. In the top five counties in Texas that make up 36% of all Texans, Beto O’Rourke received almost 80% of the Latino vote over Ted Cruz.
Dallas county went from deep red to deep blue, and will never ever go red again. California which once elected Reagan will also never ever go red again. In Arizona, a Democrat senator won there for the first time in a quarter century.
The undeniable reason for this drastic change is drastic demographic change.
Kirk claims to be concerned about the 67 million residents now speaking a language other than English at home. Kirk also stated that he’s disturbed by the mainstream media boasting about how mass immigration is wreaking havoc on formerly conservative strongholds. This expression of disquietude however is suspicious to me as it only came after I posted question suggestions about these two exact subjects on my Telegram channel leading up to one of his events.
While the mainstream media is celebrating the eternity of control the Democratic party will have soon, people like Michael Knowles are explaining these trends away with claims of ‘indoctrination’ by academia.
The glaring flaw in this thesis is that college educated hispanics vote more for Republicans than their less educated counterparts. In the recent 2018 Texas Senate election, non-White college grads voted 34% for Ted Cruz while non-Whites with no degree voted only 29% for Ted Cruz. The opposite is true for the White non-Hispanic demographic, however if it weren’t for the blitzkrieg of third world migration into America, induced by the 1965 Hart-Celler act, Republicans would not have received their recent walloping in Virginia, and states like California would even still be in play.
In the 2016 election President Trump lost Virginia by five points, but won the White vote by twenty five points.
The Los Angeles Times is one of the many mainstream outlets that is being more truthful than mainstream conservatives:
“The GOP’s core constituency is white people and they’re a declining slice of the California population pie. Conversely, Democrat-backing Latinos and Asian Americans have been expanding their slices.
That pattern is projected to continue, although at a slower pace. So the raw numbers won’t be getting any better for the already weakened California GOP.
“Republicans are heading into a demographic cul-de-sac,” says longtime Democratic strategist Bob Shrum, director of the Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics at USC.”
For some reason, conservatives have a hard time openly acknowledging these uncomfortable truths.
On The Social Issues
Charlie Kirk, Michale Knowles, Dan Crenshaw, and the rest of what has been deemed ‘Conservatism Incorporated,’ seem to be very defensive of their open promotion of gay activists at conservative events. At a recent Turning Point event, Charlie Kirk invited Rob Smith to speak and following a barrage of tough questions from the America First movement, Smith took to twitter to denounce the questioners as ‘alt-right white supremacists’ despite the fact that several non-White ‘groypers’ showed up to ask questions as well.
This is not the first time that Smith has called someone racist. In a recebt op-ed, Smith reportedly called President Trump a ‘racist,’ and denounced Trump’s decision to bar transgenders from the Military calling it an ‘unthinkable act of discrimination.’
It seems like never-Trump pseudo-conservatives not only surround President Trump inside the administration, but outside the administration as well.
The supposed controversial social issues like homosexuality and gay marriage, weren’t all that controversial ten years ago. In fact, President Barack Obama was openly against gay marriage. The left has seized control of the ‘Overton Window,’ and the current roster at Conservative Incorporated is no match for them in this ideological tournament of tug-of-war.
Russell Kirk argued that if humanity is to conserve the elements in civilization that make life worth living, some coherent body of ideas must resist the leveling and destructive impulse of fanatic revolutionaries. Charlie Kirk calls himself conservative, and likely thinks organizations like Turning Point USA and YAF are this coherent body, but many of these mainstream conservatives are constantly capitulating to the left on almost all of the issues.
Gay marriage for example, was fought for by fanatic revolutionaries with no true opposition. Because of this forfeit followed by normalization, we now have explicit gay pride parades, antiscientific gender theory, drag kids, kids being chemically castrated, TED talks about pedophilia being a sexual orientation, and even many mainstream conservative pundits proudly promoting their selfie with transgenders on twitter.
How can we still expect modern conservatism to be this true opposing force if they’ve proven to be weak on almost every conservative issue?
True conservatism is not about taxes or the GDP, it’s not about individual liberty or the free market. Conservatism is about order first and foremost, and currently we’re living in a very disordered and chaotic America. In nature chaos always is restored to order, and we know that order will also soon be restored in America as well. The question is, will this restoration of order be peaceful or brutal and violent?
I fear that if Conservative Inc doesn’t become the true opposition to leftism we need them to be, the latter will be the reality.