Last week, on the podcast Can’t Be Censored, Tucker Carlson said there was no chance he would ever support the Republican Party again. The clip went viral on Monday. He would not back the Democrats either, he added, and “did not know what he would do” when the next American election came along. After 35 years of defending the party, he said, there was no defending it now: it had just become too immoral. “I’m out. And if I’m out, then I think a lot of other people are out.”

The temptation is to file this under the long-running Trump-Tucker feud: another sulk from a man the President dismissed in March as having “lost his way”. That reading fails to understand what Carlson is doing. After decades of trying on various ideologies, the commentator is now reviving a strain of American conservatism that predates Trump and has been homeless since the Cold War ended: the isolationist, anti-interventionist, restrictionist Right. Carlson has managed to secure a wedge issue with a real constituency behind it.

That issue is Israel. His disillusionment hardened after Trump attacked Iran in February, which Carlson has called “treasonous” and a “betrayal of American interests in favor of a foreign government and its donors”. He also regrets backing Trump in 2024, and claims some American politicians are more loyal to Israel than America. This broader position is no longer fringe inside his own coalition. A Pew survey conducted in late March found that 57% of Republicans under 50 now hold an unfavorable view of Israel, up from 50% a year earlier.

As can be seen when Aipac moved against Thomas Massie, the lobby can still win individual primaries while losing the rising generation that will decide the party’s future. But Carlson’s war on the GOP is even broader. On a recent episode of his show about the trucking industry, Carlson’s guest Gord Magill noted that the states handing out the most dubious commercial licenses to foreign drivers were Texas and Florida, both run by Republicans. Carlson did not blink. The Governor and Lieutenant Governor of Texas, he said, were “way more liberal than a lot of Democrats I know”. He has stopped fighting over what he perceives as an arbitrary party label, and now treats it as a costume worn by people who do not share his politics.

So is there a chance that Tucker sets up his own Right-ward challenge to the GOP? Probably not soon, and probably not as a third party. After two memorable GOP primary challenges in 1992 and 1996, Pat Buchanan tried that route in 2000, on the Reform Party of the United States ticket. It delivered the election to internationalist Republican George W. Bush, who went on to launch the war in Iraq.

Trump showed in 2016 that the easier path is to seize a lane inside an existing primary, in his case, the anti-war lane the other candidates had vacated. Carlson could attempt the same trick, but his wing would need money, candidates, a whip and a reason for ambitious politicians to stake their careers on it. He has none of this assembled, only an audience whose true size is questionable.

What Carlson has not built, and may not bother to build, is the machine that turns a grievance and an audience into a small-but-potent faction to the Right of the House Freedom Caucus, and its Trump-supporting members such as Jim Jordan and Lauren Boebert. A presidential run within the GOP in 2028 would likely break MAGA; a durable faction might even replace it. Whether Carlson does the unglamorous work of actually organizing it is the only thing still in doubt.

---

Oliver Bateman is a historian and journalist based in Pittsburgh. He blogs, vlogs, and podcasts at his Substack, Oliver Bateman Does the Work

MoustacheClubUS

---

China is trying to catch up with America on artificial intelligence. The Wall Street Journal has reported that Zhipu AI — one of China’s six “AI tiger” LLMs — has released a new model that can rival leading US systems, including Anthropic’s Mythos, in cybersecurity tasks such as pinpointing security bugs. While this marks a milestone in China’s drive to catch up with Western AI capabilities, strong performance on a single benchmark does not mean it has taken the lead. Chinese models still lag behind their Western counterparts in broader capabilities, such as autonomous operation. Skepticism is therefore warranted before resorting to hysterical conclusions, but complacency about the geopolitical implications of China’s AI advances would be an even greater mistake.

On the infrastructure side, Chinese AI is still constrained by access to advanced chips, with American labs way ahead in computing capacity as well as investment. Analysis from earlier this year suggests that Chinese models are likely to be at least a few months behind those in the US. But they are still continuing to make progress, or that the geopolitical importance of AI will be decided only by whose LLM has ventured deeper into the technological frontier. The practical applications of AI, countries’ to capture foreign markets, and the application of AI into the real economy will matter just as much.

Here, China may hold an advantage. As with its dominance across many critical supply chains, Beijing may not need to produce the most advanced AI systems — only those that are affordable and widely deployable. In doing so, it could consolidate global influence by supplying functional, low-cost AI at scale.

Beijing seems to be pursuing exactly that path, developing an AI “open-source” strategy that offers affordable, widely available AI models for companies and individuals to use and modify as they wish. The production of the DeepSeek AI model, which matched the performance of Silicon Valley tools such as ChatGPT at a fraction of the cost for users, created goodwill among Chinese models with developers.

The four most popular models on OpenRouter, an AI hardware platform for developers, are now all Chinese. The goal for China is not only to win the frontier-model race, but to make its systems the default layer of AI adoption across industries and global markets. For most economies, the choice is increasingly between an affordable tool they can deploy now and a more robust one that may be out of reach.

And while the countries adopting Chinese models may be exposed to political pressure and cyber threats from Beijing, safer and more capable alternatives matter little if they are unaffordable. American AI companies are already under pressure to monetize products whose operating costs are rising. If Chinese open-source models become the cheap default for startups, universities, governments and businesses across the developing world, then America’s AI lead will be eroded from below.

Perhaps more concerning for America in the long run is how AI can give Chinese manufacturing even more strength, through the ongoing integration of AI as a general-purpose technology. China’s new Five-Year Plan mentioned AI more than 50 times and includes an “AI+” action plan aimed at spreading AI across the economy.

Beijing has been pioneering automation of its critical infrastructure for years, with promising recent results in increasing warplane production capacity. In that regard, China’s open-model strategy and manufacturing dominance will reinforce each other. Cheap, adaptable models accelerate deployment across the real economy while those deployments generate real-world data and use cases that can feed back into further model improvement.

The United States should not dismiss the importance of its lead in the AI race. That lead worries Beijing, not least because a more automated Chinese economy would also become more vulnerable to AI-generated cyber threats. But nor should Washington assume that China cannot catch up with American capabilities over time.

This AI competition represents part of a broader struggle over tech supply chains and geopolitical influence. Decisions over whether to adopt US or Chinese models could produce a more fragmented global reality, with different regions relying on different cloud providers, chips and security structures. The result will likely be a global economy which is divided into competing spheres, rather than one which produces a single winner.

---

Miquel Vila is a political and geopolitical risk consultant focusing on industrial strategy, critical infrastructure and global supply chains.

miquelvilam

---