TPUSA Civil War Between Ben Shapiro & Tucker Carlson
Turning Point USA’s annual AmericaFest conference in Phoenix, Arizona, was meant to honor the legacy of founder Charlie Kirk, assassinated in September 2025. Instead, it became the epicenter of an explosive public feud within the conservative movement, pitting pro-Israel hawk Ben Shapiro against isolationist Tucker Carlson. Labeled by media outlets as a “MAGA civil war,” the clashes highlighted deep divisions over foreign policy, antisemitism, platforming controversial figures, and the future direction of Trumpism.
The conference kicked off with Shapiro, co-founder of The Daily Wire and a staunch defender of Israel, delivering a blistering address. He accused fellow conservatives—including Carlson, Candace Owens, Megyn Kelly, and Steve Bannon—of being “frauds and grifters” who traffic in “conspiracism and dishonesty.” Shapiro singled out Carlson for platforming Nick Fuentes, a self-described white nationalist and antisemite, in a recent interview, calling it “an act of moral imbecility.” He argued that the late Charlie Kirk “despised” Fuentes and viewed him as an “evil troll.”
Shapiro also criticized Owens for spreading baseless conspiracy theories about Kirk’s assassination, implicating entities from French intelligence to Mossad and even TPUSA staff. He warned that failing to condemn such figures amounted to “cowardice” and posed a serious danger to the conservative movement. These remarks reflected broader concerns about rising antisemitism on the right and unflinching U.S. support for Israel amid its war in Gaza.
Hours later, Carlson took the stage and fired back without naming Shapiro directly, mocking calls for “deplatforming and denouncing” as antithetical to Kirk’s free-speech ethos. He dismissed the narrative of a “civil war” in the Trump coalition as “totally fake,” suggesting it was manufactured to block Vice President JD Vance’s path to future leadership. Carlson framed Vance as the true heir to “America First” principles.
Carlson downplayed antisemitism concerns, claiming it was less pervasive than bias against white men, and defended platforming controversial guests as consistent with open debate. He also praised aspects of Islam, calling it “mostly good,” which drew awkward silence from the audience.
The feud intensified over the four-day event. Steve Bannon accused Shapiro of prioritizing Israel’s interests over America’s, calling him a “cancer” on the movement. Megyn Kelly criticized Shapiro for gatekeeping conservatism. Owens, absent from the conference, doubled down on her theories online.
Underlying the personal attacks were ideological rifts:
Foreign Policy and Israel: Shapiro represents neoconservative support for strong U.S.-Israel ties, viewing criticism of Israel as often veering into antisemitism. Carlson embodies “America First” isolationism, questioning endless foreign aid and entanglements, including support for Israel in its Gaza conflict.
Antisemitism and Platforming Extremists: Shapiro demanded conservatives denounce figures like Fuentes explicitly. Carlson argued for engaging diverse views without immediate cancellation.
Post-Trump Power Struggle: With Trump term-limited, the conference became a proxy battle for 2028, with Vance’s endorsement by TPUSA’s new leadership (Erika Kirk) fueling speculation that pro-Israel voices like Shapiro opposed his rise.
Polls at the event showed strong support for Israel among attendees (87% viewed it positively, one-third as America’s top ally), complicating Carlson’s influence.
Vice President JD Vance closed the conference urging unity, warning against internal “cancel culture.” Yet the infighting dominated headlines, with outlets like CNN, The Times of Israel, and Fortune framing it as a fracture in Trump’s coalition.
Supporters of Shapiro praised his stand against bigotry; Carlson’s backers saw him defending free speech and prioritizing America. Progressives and some moderates viewed it as grifters exposing the movement’s extremism.
This public meltdown underscores challenges for Republicans post-Trump: balancing populist isolationism with traditional alliances, combating fringe elements without alienating the base, and defining “MAGA” in a polarized era. As one attendee noted, the event revealed “competing visions for the future of the right.” Whether these divisions heal or deepen remains a critical question for the party’s trajectory.