3小时前
发布 2026年3月2日，上午11:00（美国东部时间）
作者：史蒂夫·康托诺
在美国对伊朗发动最新一轮军事行动后，总统唐纳德·特朗普的MAGA运动内部出现了明显裂痕。许多在社交媒体上直言不讳的保守派反对者纷纷围绕一位有影响力人物的言论表达关切：已故活动家查理·柯克。
伊拉克战争退伍军人、保守派评论员罗布·史密斯重新发布了柯克去年6月发起的一项非正式X平台投票，询问追随者美国是否应该介入“以色列与伊朗的战争”（90%的人反对干预）。前国会女议员、MAGA激进分子玛乔丽·泰勒·格林转发了一段柯克的视频（270万次观看），称伊朗政权更迭“病态疯狂”。被称为Hodgetwins的保守派喜剧二人组向其350万粉丝分享了副总统JD·万斯的视频片段，万斯在视频中追授柯克“说服特朗普避免加深对伊朗介入”的功劳。
极右翼神职人员卡尔文·罗宾逊在X平台上发布了同一视频，写道：“愿查理·柯克安息。没有他，我们的处境更糟。”
特朗普支持者阵营中的其他人则反对利用柯克的遗愿来影响这场争论。特朗普忠实拥护者劳拉·卢默表示，她本周末与总统进行了交谈，并在X平台上发文称，“那些公开反对特朗普与以色列结盟的人，从未错过利用他的死亡来宣称我们整个外交政策必须由已故的查理·柯克的意见来决定的机会。”
“当然令人难过，但查理·柯克错了很多时候，”她补充道，“但也对了很多时候。”
这场公开争执提醒人们，特朗普最活跃的在线支持者群体对如何调和他多次承诺的“让美国远离对外战争”与他在委内瑞拉和伊朗采取的激进行动之间的矛盾存在不确定性。
这也表明柯克对共和党政治的持久影响力——这种影响力在他于犹他州大学校园活动中被枪手杀害后的六个月里，在某些方面反而有所增强。明尼苏达州和佛罗里达州的大学已提议为柯克树立雕像。他的形象出现在全国共和党竞选广告中，而印有他肖像的横幅如今悬挂在美国教育部总部。
作为“转折点美国”（Turning Point USA）的创始人——该组织专注于动员年轻保守派（许多人对对外战争持怀疑态度）——以及作为在“9·11”恐怖袭击和伊拉克、阿富汗战争阴影下成长起来的千禧一代，柯克一直是军事干预的著名批评者。
2024年7月26日，查理·柯克在佛罗里达州西棕榈滩的棕榈滩会议中心参加“转折点美国信徒峰会”。
乔·雷德尔/盖蒂图片社/资料图
在9月去世前，他留下了大量关于伊朗的公开警告。他嘲讽共和党内部将对伊战争的言论视为“怪异的狂热执念”，并特别点名批评南卡罗来纳州参议员林赛·格雷厄姆和前国家安全顾问约翰·博尔顿“敲战争鼓”。去年夏天，他辩称推翻最高领袖阿里·侯赛尼·哈梅内伊可能引发“血腥内战”，造成无数难民，并将美国拖入另一场代价高昂、旷日持久的中东战争。
“我们以前见过这种情况，”他在6月表示，“进行政权更迭时，你根本不知道结果会怎样。”
如今，哈梅内伊已去世，美军在行动中阵亡，格雷厄姆和博尔顿为特朗普加油助威，柯克警告的视频片段在社交媒体上广泛传播——不仅被特朗普的左翼批评者分享，也被他自己阵营的成员传播。
然而，柯克对伊朗的看法比这些选择性的片段更为复杂。当特朗普去年轰炸伊朗时，柯克在X平台上写道，德黑兰“别无选择”，并将此次行动描述为“完美执行的外科手术式打击”。袭击发生后，他在播客中告诉听众：“我支持特朗普总统……在这种情况下，我支持我的朋友。他一直支持我，我也支持他。”柯克后来还在自己的节目中邀请万斯进一步解释政府对伊朗发动打击的决定。
在美国导弹再次袭击伊朗后的几天里，柯克最亲密的盟友中，一些人对保守派内部将柯克遗产据为己有的派系感到不安。长期担任《查理·柯克秀》制作人的布莱克·内夫在柯克去世后继续主持该节目，并在周六的广播中承认了社交媒体上流传的视频。
“我知道我们所有人在这种时刻都因查理的缺席而感到失落，因为他是运动中天生的领导者，”内夫在周六的广播中表示。
这两小时的节目捕捉到了正在形成的紧张局势。在演播室里，柯克的照片与总统的官方肖像并列摆放。节目主持人安德鲁·科尔维特和嘉宾们一方面回应了年轻追随者对伊朗军事打击的担忧，另一方面也强调了柯克对政府坚定不移的忠诚。内夫说，虽然柯克可能在军事行动前表示反对，但一旦行动开始，他会“寻找事情的光明面”并“为我们的成功祈祷”。
“看到社交媒体上的很多人反应相反，这真的很令人恼火，”转折点美国组织参谋长米基·麦考伊表示，“他们利用他的声音制造混乱、传播对局势的恐惧，甚至在整个事件中煽动对特朗普总统的仇恨，而这根本不是他想要的。”
即便如此，一些盟友仍清醒地认识到潜在的政治影响。柯克的长期朋友杰克·波索比埃克上周陪同总统旅行，他在周六表示，柯克经常警告白宫，年轻选民对美国关注中东冲突的反应可能会如何。
“去年，查理·柯克告诉我们所有人，美国年轻一代更关注国内政策，而非追求国际冲突，”波索比埃克在X平台上写道，“在中期选举年，我们不能忘记这一点。”
How the Iran war set off a MAGA fight over Charlie Kirk’s legacy | CNN Politics
3 hr ago
PUBLISHED Mar 2, 2026, 11:00 AM ET
By Steve Contorno
A visible fracture has emerged in President Donald Trump’s MAGA movement in the aftermath of the United States’ latest military campaign against Iran, and many outspoken conservative opponents across social media have rallied around the words of one influential figure to express their concern: the late activist Charlie Kirk.
Rob Smith, an Iraq War veteran and conservative commentator, resurfaced an informal X poll Kirk circulated last June asking followers whether the US should get involved in “Israel’s war with Iran” (90% opposed intervention). Former congresswoman and MAGA firebrand Marjorie Taylor Greene reposted a clip of Kirk with 2.7 million views calling regime change in Iran “pathologically insane.” The conservative comedy duo known as the Hodgetwins shared with their 3.5 million followers a clip of Vice President JD Vance posthumously crediting Kirk with persuading Trump to avoid deeper engagement with Iran last year.
Posting the same video on X, the right-wing cleric Calvin Robinson wrote: “God bless Charlie Kirk. We are worse off without him.”
Others in Trump’s sphere of support have pushed back against efforts to use Kirk’s voice to shape the debate from beyond the grave. Trump loyalist Laura Loomer, who said she spoke to the president this weekend after the strikes, wrote on X that outspoken opponents of Trump’s alliance with Israel “never miss a beat exploiting his death to say our entire foreign policy has to be dictated by the opinions of Charlie Kirk, who is dead.”
“Of course it’s sad, but Charlie Kirk was wrong about a lot,” she added. “Just like he was right about a lot.”
The public feud is a reminder of the uncertainty among many of Trump’s most-engaged online supporters over how to reconcile his repeated pledges to keep the US out of foreign wars with his aggressive actions in Venezuela and Iran.
It’s also a sign of Kirk’s enduring influence over Republican politics — an influence that has, in some ways, grown in the six months since a gunman killed him during an event on a Utah college campus. Statues honoring Kirk have been proposed for universities in Minnesota and Florida. His image has appeared in GOP campaign advertisements across the country, and a banner bearing his likeness now hangs from the US Department of Education headquarters.
As the founder of Turning Point USA, a group focused on mobilizing younger conservatives — many of whom are skeptical of foreign wars — and as a millennial who came of age in the shadow of the September 11 terrorist attacks and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Kirk had been a prominent critic of military intervention.
Charlie Kirk speaks at a Turning Point USA Believers Summit conference, at the Palm Beach Convention Center in West Palm Beach, Florida, on July 26, 2024.
Joe Raedle/Getty Images/File
Before his death in September, he left behind an extensive trail of public warnings about Iran. He derided talk of war with Iran as a “a weird fanatical obsession” within the Republican Party and specifically called out South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham and former national security adviser John Bolton for beating the drums of war. He argued last summer that toppling Supreme Leader Ali Hosseini Khamenei could trigger a “bloody civil war,” unleash countless refugees and pull the US into another costly, open-ended Middle East campaign.
“We have seen this play before,” he said in June. “With regime change, you have no idea how this is going to work out.”
Now, with Khamenei dead, American troops killed in action and Graham and Bolton cheering Trump on, video clips of Kirk’s warnings are circulating widely on social media — shared not only by the president’s critics on the left, but by members of his own base.
Kirk’s views on Iran, however, were more complicated than selective clips. When Trump bombed Iran last year, Kirk wrote on X that Tehran gave the president “no choice” and he described the operation as a “surgical strike, operated perfectly.” After the strikes, he told his podcast listeners, “I support President Trump. … In a situation like this, I support my friend. And he’s had my back, and I have his.” Kirk later hosted Vance on his show to further explain the administration’s decision to strike Iran.
In the days since American missiles again struck Iran, some of Kirk’s closest allies have watched with unease as factions within the conservative movement claim Kirk’s legacy for their side. Blake Neff, the longtime producer of the Charlie Kirk Show, which has continued since Kirk’s death, acknowledged on Saturday’s broadcast the videos circulating all over social media.
“I know people, all of us, are feeling the lack of Charlie in a moment like this, because he was a natural leader of the movement,” Neff said.
The two-hour episode captured the emerging tension. In a studio featuring an image of Kirk beside the president’s official portrait, show host Andrew Kolvet and his guests addressed concerns among younger followers about a military strike against Iran while also emphasizing Kirk’s unwavering loyalty to the administration. Neff said while Kirk may have objected in the lead up to military action, after he would “look for the bright side of things” and “pray for our success once that began.”
“It’s really irritating for me to see so many people on social media have the opposite reaction,” Turning Point USA chief of staff Mikey McCoy said, “to use his voice to actually cause chaos, to actually cause fear of this situation, to actually cause hatred of President Trump in this whole ordeal, when actually that’s not what he would want.”
Even so, some allies remain clear-eyed about the potential political fallout. Jack Posobiec, a longtime friend of Kirk’s who traveled with the president last week, said on Saturday that Kirk regularly warned the White House how young voters might react if the US turned its attention toward the Middle East.
“Last year, Charlie Kirk told us all that younger generation (sic) of Americans are far more interested in domestic policy that pursuing international conflicts,” Posobiec wrote on X, “and we can’t forget that in a midterm year.”