To hear Tucker Carlson tell it, an American attack on Iran wasn’t just likely to precipitate World War III. It would do something worse: destroy Donald Trump’s presidency. “A strike on the Iranian nuclear sites will almost certainly result in thousands of American deaths at bases throughout the Middle East, and cost the United States tens of billions of dollars,” the conservative commentator wrote on X on March 17. “Trump ran for president as a peace candidate,” Carlson added on June 4. “It’s why he won. A war with Iran would amount to a profound betrayal of his supporters. It would end his presidency.”
听到塔克·卡尔森（Tucker Carlson）告诉这，美国对伊朗的袭击不仅可能引发第三次世界大战。这会做得更糟：摧毁唐纳德·特朗普的总统职位。保守党评论员在3月17日在X上写道：“对伊朗核网站的罢工几乎可以肯定会导致成千上万的美国死亡人数在整个中东的基地，并损失了美国的基地，并付出了数万美元的损失。
“We can’t do this again, we’ll tear the country apart,” declared Steve Bannon, Trump’s former chief strategist and 2016-campaign CEO, when asked on June 18 about potential war with Iran. “Worth noting how rare this crossover actually is,” observed Curt Mills, the anti-war executive director of The American Conservative, after Carlson joined Bannon’s podcast to oppose American intervention, dubbing the pair the “two largest intellectual architects of the Trump years other than the president.” The implication: Trump was risking his base if he didn’t stay out of the Israel-Iran conflict. “I’m very concerned based on every[thing] I’ve seen in the grassroots the last few months that this will cause a massive schism in MAGA,” wrote Charlie Kirk, the head of the conservative youth organization Turning Point USA. “This is a White House that is responding in real time to its coalition,” which is “revolting to show it’s disgusted with the potential of war with Iran,” Mills told ABC News on June 21. That night, Trump bombed Iran.
特朗普的前首席战略家兼2016-Campaign首席执行官史蒂夫·班农（Steve Bannon）在6月18日被问及与伊朗的潜在战争时，特朗普前首席策略师兼2016-Campaign首席执行官史蒂夫·班农（Steve Bannon）宣称：“我们不能再做一次。”“值得注意的是，在卡尔森（Carlson）加入班农（Bannon）的播客以反对美国干预之后，美国保守党的反战执行董事库特·米尔斯（Curt Mills）认为，这对“比总统两年最大的知识分子建筑师相比，这是美国保守派的罕见。”含义是：如果特朗普不在以色列 - 伊朗的冲突中，特朗普就冒着自己的基地冒险。“我非常关心我在过去几个月中在基层中看到的每一件事，这将导致玛格（Maga）的大量分裂，”保守派青年组织Turning Point USA的负责人查理·柯克（Charlie Kirk）写道。米尔斯在6月21日在6月21日对美国广播公司（ABC News）表示：“这是一座白宫，正在实时回应其联盟。”
The U.S. strike may or may not have obliterated the country’s nuclear facilities, but it has certainly obliterated the notion that any of the self-proclaimed MAGA intellectuals, such as Carlson and Bannon, speak for the Trump movement. Far from shattering the president’s coalition, Trump’s strike on Iran brought it together, despite the loud protestations of some of its supposed elites. “This is Donald Trump’s Republican Party,” CNN’s chief data analyst, Harry Enten, said three days after the attack on Iran, referring to polls showing that 76 percent of GOP voters approved of Trump’s action, compared with just 18 percent who didn’t. “Republicans are with Donald Trump on this, Tucker Carlson be darned. The bottom line is he does not speak for the majority of the Republican base.”
美国的罢工可能会或可能不会毁灭该国的核设施，但它肯定剥夺了这样的观念，即卡尔森和班农等自称为玛格玛知识分子都代表特朗普运动。特朗普对伊朗的罢工并没有打破总统的联盟，尽管对一些所谓的精英进行了大声抗议，但伊朗的罢工将其汇聚在一起。CNN的首席数据分析师Harry Enten在伊朗袭击发生三天后说：“这是唐纳德·特朗普的共和党。”“共和党人与唐纳德·特朗普（Donald Trump）在一起，塔克·卡尔森（Tucker Carlson）被吓坏了。最重要的是，他没有代表大多数共和党基地。”
Robert Kagan: American democracy might not survive war with Iran
罗伯特·卡根（Robert Kagan）：美国民主可能无法与伊朗战争
The conservative pollster Patrick Ruffini, whose 2023 book, Party of the People, predicted the shape of Trump’s victorious 2024 coalition, offered a similar conclusion. “Polling has been consistent that Republicans remain more committed to a posture of military strength—and MAGA Republicans more so, not less so, than other Republicans,” he told The Dispatch. Indeed, surveys before and after the attack found that self-described “MAGA Republicans” were more likely than other Republicans to back the president on Iran. In other words, Trump’s decision to strike the country’s nuclear sites didn’t just expose the Iranian regime’s empty threats of massive retaliation. It also exposed prominent commentators who have postured as tribunes of Trumpism to be pretenders to power, purporting to speak for a movement that has little interest in their ideas.
保守派的民意测验者帕特里克·鲁菲尼（Patrick Ruffini）的2023年著作《人民党》预言了特朗普胜利的2024年联盟的形状，得出了类似的结论。他告诉Dispatch：“民意测验是一致的，共和党人仍然更加致力于军事力量的姿势，而玛格·共和党人比其他共和党人更重要，而不是其他共和党人。”确实，袭击发生前后的调查发现，自称为“玛格玛共和党人”比其他共和党人更有可能支持伊朗总统。换句话说，特朗普决定罢工该国的核遗址不仅揭示了伊朗政权对大规模报复的空洞威胁。它还揭露了著名的评论员，他们曾被认为是特朗普主义的法庭成为伪造者的义务，并声称要为他们的思想兴趣不感兴趣的运动说话。
Watching the president dispense with his critics, the conservative influencer John Ekdahl quipped, “Props to President Trump for being able to manage a two front war against Iran and Tucker Carlson.” But neither of these was ever much of a contest. Few jobs in Trump world are more farcical than the position of “architect” of “America First”: There are no MAGA intellectuals, just Trump and opportunistic ideologues attempting to hitch their pet projects to his brand. The self-styled thought leaders of the Trump movement are merely political entrepreneurs trying to appropriate the president for their own purposes and to recast his chaotic and idiosyncratic decisions as reflections of their personal worldview.
保守派有影响力的人约翰·埃克达尔（John Ekdahl）看着总统与他的批评家分配，“向特朗普总统的道具能够管理对伊朗和塔克·卡尔森的两场战争。”但是这些都不是一场比赛。特朗普世界上很少有工作比“美国第一”的“建筑师”的职位更荒谬：没有杂志知识分子，只是特朗普和机会主义的意识形态，试图将他们的宠物项目拖到他的品牌上。特朗普运动的自我风格的思想领导人只是政治企业家，试图出于自己的目的恰当的总统，并将他混乱和特质的决定重新塑造为对他们个人世界观的反映。
“Considering that I’m the one that developed ‘America First,’ and considering that the term wasn’t used until I came along, I think I’m the one that decides” what it means, Trump told my colleague Michael Scherer a week before the bombs dropped. The president was wrong about being the first to claim the mantle of “America First,” but right about everything else. “Trumpism” is not “anti-war” or “pro-worker,” “neoconservative” or “neo-isolationist,” or any other ideologically coherent category; it is whatever Trump says it is.
“考虑到我是一个发展'美国'的人，并且考虑到这个术语直到我出现之前才使用这个词，我认为我是决定的意思。总统是第一个声称“美国首先”披风的人是错误的，但对其他一切都是错误的。“特朗普主义”不是“反战”或“亲工人”，“新保守主义者”或“新统一主义者”或任何其他意识形态上一致的类别；这是特朗普所说的一切。
This has always been the case, notwithstanding the pretenses of Trump’s alleged intellectual allies. Back in 2017, Trump took office for the first time and brought along Bannon, who set up shop in the West Wing with a whiteboard full of goals for the new administration. Less than seven months later, however, Bannon was cast out of the White House. Not long after, Trump began publicly deriding him as “Sloppy Steve.”
尽管特朗普所谓的知识分子盟友的借口，但这种情况一直都是这种情况。早在2017年，特朗普就首次上任，并带上了班农（Bannon），后者在西翼开设了商店，白板上充满了新政府的目标。然而，不到七个月后，班农被赶出了白宫。不久之后，特朗普开始公开派他为“马虎史蒂夫”。
Carlson has followed the same trajectory. The conservative podcast host spoke before Trump on the final night of the 2024 Republican National Convention and was seen as one of the big winners when the president returned to power. But again, Trump quickly tired of his ally’s antics. “I don’t know what Tucker Carlson is saying,” the president said in response to the commentator’s criticism of his Iran policy. “Let him go get a television network and say it so people actually listen,” he added—a reference to Carlson being fired from Fox News. Trump then mocked his longtime associate as “kooky Tucker Carlson” on Truth Social, and later claimed that Carlson called to apologize, something the latter has not denied, because whether it happened or not, he knows exactly where he stands.
卡尔森遵循相同的轨迹。这位保守派播客主持人在2024年共和党全国代表大会的最后一个晚上在特朗普面前讲话，当总统重新掌权时，被视为最大赢家之一。但是再次，特朗普迅速厌倦了盟友的滑稽动作。总统在回应评论员对伊朗政策的批评时说：“我不知道塔克·卡尔森在说什么。”他补充说：“让他去获取电视网络并说这句话，所以人们实际上会听。”然后，特朗普嘲笑他长期担任“库克·塔克·卡尔森（Kooky Tucker Carlson）”的事实，并随后声称卡尔森（Carlson）呼吁道歉，这是后者并没有否认的，因为无论发生是否发生，他都知道他的立场。
The simple truth is this: There is Bannonism and Tuckerism, and perhaps, in a quiet corner of the Naval Observatory that has been repeatedly swept for bugs to ensure that the boss isn’t listening, J. D. Vance–ism. But there is no Trumpism without Trump. People in the president’s orbit are not his confidants—they are his chumps, to be used or discarded when doing so suits the principal’s purposes.
一个简单的事实是：存在班诺主义和塔克主义，也许是在海军天文台的一个安静的角落里反复扫除了虫子，以确保老板不听，但是没有特朗普就没有特朗普主义。总统轨道上的人们不是他的知己 - 他们是他的笨蛋，在这样做时要使用或丢弃。
Carlson seemingly knows this—and resents it. “We are very, very close to being able to ignore Trump most nights,” he texted his producer after the president lost reelection in 2020. “I truly can’t wait.” After the January 6 riot, Carlson texted: “He’s a demonic force, a destroyer. But he’s not going to destroy us. I’ve been thinking about this every day for four years.” Off the record, people like Carlson not only know that they do not represent Trump, but hold him in contempt. Why, then, do so many still take them seriously as reflections of the president’s perspective and coalition? And why does the myth of the Trump whisperer persist despite its manifest failure to explain events?
卡尔森似乎知道这一点，并感到遗憾。“我们非常非常接近能够忽略大多数夜晚的特朗普，”他在2020年失去连任后发短信给制片人。“我真的等不及了。”1月6日的骚乱之后，卡尔森发短信：“他是恶魔般的力量，是一名驱逐舰。但是他不会摧毁我们。我每天都在考虑这四年。”在记录下，像卡尔森这样的人不仅知道他们不代表特朗普，而且让他蔑视。那么，为什么这么多人仍然认真对待他们作为总统的观点和联盟的思考呢？尽管明显地解释事件，但特朗普耳语者的神话为什么仍然存在？
For enterprising conservatives, the utility is clear. Trump may not subscribe to any of their ideas, but he can be prodded to act on them, and in any case, he is 79 years old and serving his second term. Once he departs the scene, his base will be up for grabs among those who have managed to position themselves as its champions.
对于进取的保守派，该公用事业很明确。特朗普可能不会赞同他们的任何想法，但他可以对他们采取行动，无论如何，他今年79岁，服务于他的第二任期。一旦他离开现场，他的基地将在那些设法将自己定位为冠军的人中争夺。
For some anti-Trump liberals, people like Bannon, Carlson, and Vance provide a perverse sort of reassurance. Trump’s opponents may find the ideologies of these men to be odious, but at least they suggest a method to the president’s madness. The presence of even a rough philosophical framework provides the false hope that what Trump will do next will be predictable and follow from first principles, rather than from haphazard impulse. Better, some may feel, to live in the realm of an evil but explicable king than in that of a demented one.
对于一些反特朗普的自由主义者，班农，卡尔森和万斯等人提供了一种不正当的放心。特朗普的对手可能会发现这些人的意识形态令人讨厌，但至少他们为总统的疯狂提出了一种方法。即使是一个粗糙的哲学框架的存在，也提供了一个错误的希望，即特朗普接下来要做的事情将是可以预测的，并遵循第一原则，而不是从随意的冲动中。更好的是，有些人可能会觉得生活在一个邪恶但可阐明的国王的境界，而不是一个痴呆的国王。
Read: The MAGA coalition has turned on itself
阅读：Maga联盟已自动打开
Finally, Bannon and later Carlson may have played into the media’s desire for an intellectual from their own class who could domesticate and interpret Trumpism in conventional terms. Rather than a boorish outsider winning the presidency on his own scattershot instincts, one could suppose there was a Svengali behind the scenes who had masterminded the whole affair. This belief imposed order on what appeared to be chaos, imputed logic to what otherwise looked like a personality cult, and thus rescued the prognosticating profession from a situation where its skills might no longer be of use.
最后，班农（Bannon）和后来的卡尔森（Carlson）可能扮演着媒体对自己班级的知识分子的渴望，他们可以从传统的角度驯化和解释特朗普。与其以自己的分散本能赢得总统职位的狂热局外人，不如说幕后有一个策划了整个事件的幕后。这种信念施加了似乎是混乱的秩序，将逻辑推定为原本看起来像个个性崇拜的逻辑，因此从可能不再使用其技能的情况下拯救了预言的职业。
The only problem with this arrangement was that the pro-Trump intellectuals and influencers were making it all up. They were the political equivalent of the Wizard of Oz, shadows behind a curtain trying to fool people into thinking that they spoke for the president and his movement. But like Oz’s projection, they were nothing more than an intimidating illusion. All it took to make them disappear was for Trump to turn on the lights.
这种安排的唯一问题是，亲特朗普的知识分子和影响者都在实现这一切。他们是绿野仙踪的政治等同，在窗帘后面的阴影试图欺骗人们以为他们为总统和他的运动说话。但是，就像绿野仙踪的投影一样，它们不过是一种令人生畏的幻想。使他们消失所需要的只是特朗普打开灯光。
