Vanity Fair published a profile on Barron Trump in mid-February drawn on evidence from N.Y.U. students and their understanding, or lack thereof, of the first child and his whereabouts. Less than a week after the article was published, Kaya Walker, College Republicans president at N.Y.U., was urged to step down from her post by Will Donahue, the president and CEO of the national College Republicans. The recommendation was based on her “poor wording” and “speaking with [a] left-wing source” without approval from the organization before contributing to the Vanity Fair article. In the profile, Walker is quoted as saying Barron is “sort of like an oddity on campus” and that he “goes to class, he goes home.”
This was a quick, seemingly unprecedented defense from a top conservative voice for Barron, who, despite occasionally appearing at his father’s political events, has yet to speak on his political opinions publicly. It is notable and somewhat jarring that the jargon that is fine to use as a college Republican, according to Donahue’s Twitter, includes labeling the president of Ukraine as a “prick” and writing that Tim Walz “looks like he’s on Adderall,” among other proclamations with objectively negative connotations towards others. Donahue could have proclaimed his disagreement with Walker based on the lopsidedness of her statements with the precise image he would like to craft of the Trump administration on behalf of his organization. But, of course, this would have been admitting the truth and consequently diminishing his argument for the recommendation of her resignation in the first place.
We’ve been witnessing the drastic transformation of the Republican Party into Trump’s party for years now. Nothing about the direct correlation between Trump and American Republicanism today is new in conservative politics. Yet if being a part of Trump’s party isn’t a concern, sensible Republicans should still be bothered by the strict rule book they are voluntarily subscribing to by associating with the party and current administration. Policing the vernacular and phrasing that doesn’t conform to a pre-established narrative is emblematic of fascist-influenced doctrines of the past and present outside of the nation. These doctrines’ harmful impacts and eventual failures are widely recognized in global politics. Yet, many people fail to notice or completely disregard how the present administration employs similar strategies.
Donahue’s reaction towards Walker’s truthful testament is mirrored and multiplied in the political circle surrounding the president. The worship-like praise and almost fearful rhetoric from some of his past critics perpetuate the strict rules for any conservative positioned in politics wishing to remain prominent within the current majority party.
Donahue is only one of several voices that implement the heavy crackdown on anti-Trump sentiment and language surrounding the party — figures outside the government act as defense shields for the Trump family, enforcing these guidelines and policing language. Their reward is praise and ties to the Trumps and the “legacy” they are helping to build. Charlie Kirk, a conservative commentator and Trump loyalist, promotes a similar strict agenda for the party (in particular the youth of the party). This in turn has provided him with praise and accolades as a contributor to Trump’s political success.
Kaya Walker’s recent confrontation with the reality of the Republican Party is a sign that, knowledgeable or not, conservatives are being taken advantage of to subscribe to and even voluntarily police the rhetoric used by the party. This has morphed into a cult-like organization reliant on the voluntary work conducted by its disciple-like following.
This dilemma poses a contentious question to modern Republicans: knowledgeable of the ever-growing terms and conditions, are they still willing to subscribe to this administration and the doctrine of discourse that comes with it?
The Zeitgeist aims to publish ideas worth discussing. The views presented are solely those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial board.
