Frequent users of social media may have encountered the comedic sketches of American comedian and influencer Druski, whose real name is Drew Desbordes. His parodies cover a wide range of topics, including Republican patriots and ostentatious mega churches. Recently, he gained significant attention for a sketch that humorously critiques “conservative women in America,” specifically targeting Erika Kirk, the new CEO of Turning Point USA (TPUSA), following the assassination of her husband, Charlie Kirk, last year.
The sketch has understandably prompted backlash from conservative circles, with Senator Ted Cruz labeling it as “beneath contempt.” However, Druski is not alone in his mockery of Erika Kirk. Her appearances at memorial events for Charlie Kirk and at TPUSA’s AmericaFest have become the subject of numerous memes, characterized by their extravagant, WrestleMania-style theatrics. Interestingly, much of the criticism has arisen from her own political allies. Far-right streamer Nick Fuentes has ridiculed Kirk’s demeanor after her husband’s death, suggesting she appears excessively cheerful, while former TPUSA star Candace Owens has taken shots at her, even finding humor in Druski’s sketch.
This situation underscores a succession dilemma that has emerged within the Maga movement since Charlie Kirk’s passing. Erika Kirk was quickly promoted to CEO of TPUSA to maintain continuity; however, her leadership has seemingly exacerbated existing rifts within the movement, and she has not managed to command the same authority as her late husband. Consequently, the Maga movement is currently lacking an essential element: cohesive institutional influence.
The implications extend beyond just TPUSA; they highlight an absence of a structured framework to accommodate the varied perspectives and divisions within the American right. This gap reflects a contemporary political landscape where movements increasingly rely on influencers, podcasters, and radio personalities. Figures such as Fuentes and Owens, along with Joe Rogan, Alex Jones, Megyn Kelly, and Matt Walsh, played pivotal roles in the resurgence of Trumpism. This decentralized ecosystem of influencers has been a hallmark of the Maga movement, perceived as authentic and anti-establishment, allowing for a direct connection with the general populace.
However, this very decentralization poses challenges for the Maga movement’s functionality as a unified governing coalition. While these influencers have promoted Maga, they prioritize their personal brands and audiences over the movement itself. Their followings are built on a distinct set of principles, and their allegiance often lies with the audience that supports them. The ongoing conflict in the US-Israel relations has tested this personality-driven political model, particularly as it appears contrary to the isolationist, “America First” principles that many influencers once championed to secure Trump’s re-election. Influencers have demonstrated where their loyalties truly lie, often diverging from Trump’s aggressive stances. As Rogan remarked in a podcast, many feel betrayed by Trump’s shift towards foreign military engagements, contrasting sharply with his campaign promises of non-intervention.
With key figures now critical of Trump, the movement faces a distinct identity crisis. A “Maga civil war” has erupted over not only foreign policy regarding Iran but also various domestic issues like immigration and the administration’s stance on Israel. While political disagreements are common, they typically occur within the confines of organized political parties, which provide a framework for managing internal conflicts. In contrast, the current dynamics resemble a series of contests among individuals focused on personal influence rather than a cohesive political agenda. This scenario reflects the nature of the digital environment they inhabit, where outrage and conflict are financially rewarded. This is why Owens can openly mock Druski’s skit about Erika Kirk while advancing conspiracy theories regarding her leadership role at TPUSA. It raises a pertinent question: can any political movement thrive under the constraints imposed by the platforms that support them?
The traditional party structures, often criticized and dismissed, emphasize hierarchy, message control, compromise, and collective accountability, making them more conducive to governance. Within these structures, when disagreements arise, they can be managed more effectively, reducing the likelihood of individual smear campaigns.
This serves as a cautionary tale for left-leaning politicians who might contemplate adopting a similar approach to Maga. For instance, California Governor Gavin Newsom has gained attention for emulating the social media strategies associated with Maga, earning praise for his meme-centric communications and launching his own podcast, “This is Gavin Newsom.” As he assembles his own network of influencers, it is worth noting that when he retracted his criticism of Israel, left-wing influencer Hasan Piker, who had previously shown support for Newsom, swiftly condemned him.
The lesson for any political initiative is clear: aligning with personalities whose influence cannot be controlled will ultimately lead to the disintegration of the coalition when faced with the realities of governance.
Jason Okundaye serves as an assistant Opinion editor at the Guardian.
