Ben Shapiro: Time for ‘Ideological Border Control’ in the Conservative Movement
The podcast host Ben Shapiro appeared at the Heritage Foundation on Monday to sound an alarm about the direction of the conservative movement and call on its leaders to enforce “clear intellectual boundaries.”
The post Ben Shapiro: Time for ‘Ideological Border Control’ in the Conservative Movement appeared first on .
If conservatives will not defend capitalism, who will?

In the aftermath of Zohran Mamdani’s electoral victory earlier this month, it became clear that socialism is a greater threat on the left than ever before. It is also clear that the GOP could no longer coast along by proclaiming, “Vote for us because he’s a socialist,” assuming that people would forever have a knee-jerk reaction to that word.
One issue that defined New York’s mayoral race — and increasingly politics throughout the country — is affordability. For millions of Americans, affording rent, groceries, health care, and a home seem further out of reach than ever before. The issue has been winked at by politicians across the spectrum for years around election time with precious little results to show for it.
Explaining to voters why they are wrong — or even worse, outright dismissing their concerns — has never worked politically, and that is not going to change now.
We have largely reached a point where this can no longer be avoided: We are now seeing regular releases of ever-worsening economic figures. The median age for all U.S. home buyers is 59 — a staggering statistic by itself, made even worse by the fact that it is up from just 28 back in 1991.
And it is not just that people are getting priced out of home ownership — rents have gone up astronomically over the past decade, leading us to a situation in which the American consumer is clearly struggling to get by. From credit card debt at record highs with seriously delinquent accounts hitting 12%, the highest since 2012, to auto repos matching 2009 levels, it is pretty clear that the consumer is maxed out.
Looking around at how conservative pundits spent the last few weeks talking though, you would not know it at all. You would be forgiven if you thought they had just come off a huge electoral victory. Conservatism simply cannot reduce itself to being the worst caricature of cold elitism that turns a blind eye to the very real economic struggles many in the country are facing.
Ben Shapiro kicked things off after suggesting to young people that they simply should not live in places like New York City, criticizing the idea that someone would deserve to live where they grew up and where job opportunities are heavily concentrated.
That same week, Donald Trump opened a rift within his own base — a rare sight for sure — in an interview with Laura Ingraham over the issue of H-1B visas. When she pushed him on his stance, saying that we have “plenty of talented people here,” he interrupted with, “No you don’t, no you don’t.” Instead of focusing on how to make American workers more competitive through better education or training, the message heard by many was that Americans were not up for the job.
Worst of all may have been Dinesh D’Souza, who felt the need to weigh in on Vivek Ramaswamy’s meritocratic education reform by essentially race-baiting, saying: “How ironic it will be if a brown American like Vivek actually helps to fix education and raise the prospects of white kids, while all the professional whiteys on X continue their idle boasting.” Whatever the merits of education reform, mocking struggling Americans — especially through whatever “professional whiteys” is supposed to mean — is not doing anyone any favors.
With approaches like these from the right, who needs the left anymore? It took Ramaswamy’s opponent in the Ohio gubernatorial race, Amy Acton, all of 24 hours to put together an ad saying that Ramaswamy thinks “Ohioans are lazy and mediocre. He’s wrong.” It practically wrote itself.
Arguments like these from conservatives do more damage to the defense of capitalism than attacks from socialists ever could and are totally disconnected from what free markets actually are. Capitalism has delivered more prosperity than any system in human history, and it is not even close — but it did not get there by running on the platform of saying, “You’re too poor to live where you grew up, our country isn’t talented, move aside.”
New York City is famous throughout the world because it is the city where generation after generation of people who wanted to work hard could go and make something of themselves. Nobody I have seen on the right is asking for a luxury life handed to them on a silver spoon while they sit on the couch. They are frustrated by the fact that the world seems to be increasingly out of reach for them.
The only person in the GOP who seems to be able to see this, I’m horrified to say, appears to be Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.), who spent the last few weeks getting attacked for acknowledging that many “young adults are barely making it” and accusing Trump’s allies of gaslighting Americans about the cost of living. On Saturday, she posted on X: “My heart is with Americans who struggle to afford life in America today.”
To her credit, she has been consistent in prioritizing cost-of-living issues — something that has become far too rare in the GOP since Donald Trump took office. She has taken the lead in warning that health insurance premiums would double for millions of Americans — including her own adult children — when enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies expire, while Republican leadership has largely sidestepped the problem.
RELATED: Mamdani sells socialism — and Republicans peddle the Temu version

We on the right have long embraced a tougher-love approach that certainly includes prioritizing a strong work ethic, and nobody needs to give that up. But that is not the issue here at all — Ben Shapiro’s comments are not directed at people who do not want to work; they are directed at and felt by those who do work and still cannot afford many basic things that previous generations took for granted.
Explaining to voters why they are wrong — or even worse, outright dismissing their concerns — has never worked politically, and that is not going to change now. Support for capitalism has now fallen to 54% overall, with Democrats preferring socialism 66% to 42%.
Peter Thiel’s now-viral email from 2020 captures exactly what is underlying this shift:
From the perspective of a broken generational compact ... when one has too much student debt or if housing is too unaffordable, then one will have negative capital for a long time ... if one has no stake in the capitalist system, then one may well turn against it.
He was right then, and he is right now. The only thing left to be seen is whether the right will wake up to that reality before it is too late.
If this month’s performance is any indication, I am not holding my breath.
Editor’s note: This article was originally published by RealClearPolitics and made available via RealClearWire.
Blue cities reject law, reject order — and reject America

Allow me to shock some of my readers by declaring my opposition to President Trump’s plan to send the National Guard into crime-ridden cities. My objection has nothing to do with constitutional authority. Having studied the matter, I believe the president does, in fact, have the power to deploy federal forces to address rising urban crime.
History also shows such interventions can work. The drop in violence in Washington, D.C., after federal forces arrived to restore order is evidence enough.
If residents wanted leaders who took crime seriously, they would vote for them. Their refusal to do so exposes their political priorities.
I also concede that a case can be made for this step in the District of Columbia. Washington is under congressional jurisdiction, and the president, operating within that framework, has made the city safer for residents, political leaders, and foreign visitors. The mayor has even expressed appreciation for the assistance, although the District’s electorate — heavily black, heavily Democratic, and deeply hostile to the administration — continues to seethe at the very idea of federal involvement.
And for the record, the president is entirely justified in directing Immigration and Customs Enforcement to pursue illegal aliens with criminal records. These offenders have no right to remain in the United States, and the Democratic effort to preserve them as foot soldiers for the party is as cynical as it is transparent. The administration deserves credit for removing these “high-value” assets from the Democratic client network.
Ungrateful, unwanted
My problem arises with Trump’s call for federal intervention in cities where the local government — and most of the population — passionately opposes it. Even if the president can deploy the National Guard without a governor’s approval, prudence suggests he shouldn’t.
I can think of few officials more odious than Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker (D) or Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson (D). Yet both remain far more popular in their city than Trump or the GOP. Johnson’s approval is collapsing, but it is almost certain that whoever succeeds him will be another black or Hispanic Democrat who wins votes by railing against our supposedly “fascist” president.
Residents of Chicago’s most violent neighborhoods express emphatic disapproval of Trump’s plan. These are people who live amid constant danger yet habitually vote for leftist mayoral candidates. The same pattern holds in Portland, Charlotte, St. Louis, and Baltimore — cities Trump proposes to “liberate” with federal intervention.
Voters chose this
I cannot imagine why Trump should insert himself where voters clearly do not want him.
If residents wanted leaders who took crime seriously, they would vote for them. Their refusal to do so exposes their political priorities. I consider those priorities misguided and even self-destructive, but it is absurd to claim “the people are demanding” help when most are vocally rejecting it.
Voters should be allowed to live under the governments they choose. If they wanted different policies, they would stop electing Democrats who call for defunding the police, eliminating bail, and condemning crime prevention as racist. Despite the Fox News narrative, minorities who vote this way are not “victims” of Democratic manipulation. That idea is as fanciful as the GOP refrain that today’s Democratic Party is simply the slaveholding party of the 1830s. Voters who elect leftist Democrats are not trapped. They are expressing, clearly, the type of society they want.
RELATED: ‘He's not that smart’: Homan lampoons Chicago mayor for pleading with UN to intervene against ICE

The vote that counts most
Ben Shapiro recently said something that rattled some listeners but which I find eminently defensible: If you abhor the politics of the place where you live, move. He followed his own advice, leaving deep-blue California for increasingly red Florida. Some interpret this as a call to uproot families and abandon long-standing communities.
But what exactly is the alternative? Should the federal government override election results because a city or state radicalized itself? Should Trump nullify votes? That will not happen. Nor can we easily disenfranchise those who lawfully exercise the franchise and continue electing the mayors, prosecutors, and governors responsible for our collapsing urban order.
Those who reject the leftist agenda retain one real option: vote with their feet. This path frees citizens from majorities who have democratically chosen anarcho-tyranny — not only for themselves but for everyone else who lives under their jurisdiction.
If a community insists on preserving violent disorder, permissive prosecutors, and ideological governance, the federal government cannot save them from themselves. Only the voters can. And until they do, they deserve the government they support.




