{"id":873585,"date":"2026-04-05T11:24:13","date_gmt":"2026-04-05T11:24:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/873585\/"},"modified":"2026-04-05T11:24:13","modified_gmt":"2026-04-05T11:24:13","slug":"joe-rogan-and-the-influencers-who-built-maga-are-revolting-over-iran-was-this-an-alliance-doomed-to-fail-jason-okundaye","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/873585\/","title":{"rendered":"Joe Rogan and the influencers who built Maga are revolting over Iran. Was this an alliance doomed to fail? | Jason Okundaye"},"content":{"rendered":"

If you spend enough time swiping online, you may have seen skits by the American comedian and influencer Druski (real name Drew Desbordes), in which he parodies everything from Republican patriots<\/a> to flashy mega churches<\/a>. Once again, he has exploded on social media channels with a skit satirising \u201cconservative women in America<\/a>\u201d, a nakedly targeted roast of Erika Kirk, now the CEO<\/a> of Turning Point USA (TPUSA) after her husband, Charlie Kirk, was assassinated last year.<\/p>\n

Predictably, it has drawn conservative backlash<\/a>, with Ted Cruz calling the video \u201cbeneath contempt<\/a>\u201d. But Desbordes is far from the only one mocking Erika Kirk. Her entrances to the Charlie Kirk memorial and TPUSA\u2019s AmericaFest have been widely memed online for their surreal, WrestleMania-like production and pyrotechnics. In fact, much of the opprobrium comes from her own side. Far-right live streamer Nick Fuentes has disparaged Kirk\u2019s public appearances after her husband\u2019s death (\u201cshe looks like she\u2019s over the moon<\/a>\u201d), and commentator and conspiracy theorist Candace Owens, a former darling of TPUSA, repeatedly takes aim at her<\/a> (Owens describes Druski\u2019s skit as \u201chilarious\u201d).<\/p>\n

What this brings to the fore is the succession crisis that has plagued the Maga movement since Charlie Kirk\u2019s death. Erika Kirk was swiftly appointed the CEO of TPUSA as a mark of continuity. But it is evident that her appointment has only deepened divisions within Maga<\/a>, and she has failed to establish the same authoritative leadership as her husband. And so, outside the White House, the Maga movement lacks something crucial: disciplined institutional influence.<\/p>\n

This matters beyond an assessment of TPUSA \u2013 it speaks to the lack of an institutional structure to absorb the fragmentations and diversity of thought among the US political right. That void aligns with a very modern form of politics, where political projects are hinged on influencers, podcasters and radio hosts. Like Fuentes and Owens, figures such as Joe Rogan<\/a>, Alex Jones, Megyn Kelly and Matt Walsh were instrumental to the election of Trump 2.0. They hold the Maga movement together. That had always been Maga\u2019s strength and a sign of its modernity \u2013 a decentralised influencer ecosystem, viewed as authentic, anti-establishment, voice-driven and better able to connect with ordinary people.<\/p>\n

The problem is that it is exactly this decentralisation that prevents Maga from functioning effectively as a governing coalition. These figures may have championed Maga, but they are personalities with their own brands who refused to allow their platforms to be absorbed by the project. Indeed, they have developed followings based on a core set of principles, and like most influencers, their loyalty is primarily to the audience that keeps them on air. As such, the US-Israel war on Iran has functioned as a stress test of this kind of personality-driven politics, particularly as the war is viewed as an abandonment of the isolationist, \u201cAmerica first\u201d principles that influencers cheered on while putting Maga back into office. These personalities have quickly shown where their true loyalties lie<\/a>, and it\u2019s not lining up behind Trump or his war of aggression. As Rogan said on his podcast<\/a>: \u201cA lot of people feel betrayed \u2026 he ran on \u2018No more wars,\u2019 \u2018End these stupid, senseless wars,\u2019 and then we have one that we can\u2019t even really clearly define why we did it.\u201d<\/p>\n

Erika Kirk takes to the stage at the first Turning Point USA summit after the death of her husband, Charlie Kirk, in December 2025. Photograph: Cheney Orr\/Reuters<\/p>\n

Now that such key figures have turned on Trump, we are left with a political movement that has a clear image crisis. They are embroiled in a \u201cMaga civil war<\/a>\u201d \u2013 not just over Iran<\/a> but a range of issues, including the administration\u2019s approach to Israel and immigration. Political infighting in itself is unremarkable \u2013 we are well familiar with factionalism, media briefings and open challenges to leaders from their own side. But that is usually mediated through political parties, their bureaucracies and memberships. What we have here instead is in effect a series of personality contests, taking place between people whose priority is their own sphere of influence, rather than a political engine larger than themselves. This new reality reflects the design of the online, algorithmic universe that they serve, in which outrage, conflict and novelty are rewarded and thus economically incentivised. That is why Owens can openly laugh at a skit mocking Erika Kirk, discussing it on her show<\/a> and promoting conspiracy theories about her takeover of TPUSA. And so we\u2019re left with a question: can any modern political movement survive the logic of the platforms that now sustain them?<\/p>\n

Those old, scorned traditional party structures that emphasised a clear hierarchy, message discipline, compromise and collective responsibility look far more suitable for office. When disagreement occurs within traditional party structures and bases, containment is smoother and it is more difficult to smear individuals.<\/p>\n

It is a warning, too, that politicians who consider themselves left-of-centre may want to think twice about copying the Maga model. The Democratic governor of California, Gavin Newsom, in perhaps the earliest starting campaign to become the presidential nominee in my lifetime, has won praise for mimicking the Maga social media<\/a> strategy. The X account for his press office regularly posts memes and mockery<\/a> that trade in the language of the terminally online<\/a>, and last year he launched his own podcast, This is Gavin Newsom. He is also building his own cabal of influencers<\/a>. Yet when he walked back his own criticism of Israel<\/a>, the leftwing influencer Hasan Piker, who had previously been open to supporting<\/a> Newsom\u2019s candidacy and invited him on his podcast, was quick to denounce him<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The takeaway for any political project is simple: hitch yourself to personalities whose voices you cannot discipline, and the coalition you build will implode on contact with the realities of office.<\/p>\n