Rallying the Troops: CPAC and the International Far Right

Rallying the Troops: CPAC and the International Far Right

By Grant Silverman

---

Keywords: CPAC, American Conservative Union, Conferences, Movement Politics, US Politics, Atlanticist reactionary

---

In a far-flung suburb of Mexico City, the jaunty, mixed-meter strains of José Pablo Moncayo’s Huapango rang sonorously through the Westin–Santa Fe’s ballroom to welcome attendees, speakers, and journalists to the Mexico City edition of the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). CPAC is a product of the American Conservative Union (ACU), the pre-eminent organizing tool for movement conservatives on the American right. Of all the places in the world for the ACU to host a gathering of conservative leaders and thinkers, why would they choose Mexico City? It is, after all, the capital of a country that is thoroughly maligned by the American right. It makes for an ironic display of pomp and circumstance considering that Donald Trump in his well-known 2015 candidacy announcement said, “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best … They’re sending people that have lots of problems … they’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”[1]

CPAC is far from the small gathering of conservative bigwigs it once was in its earliest iterations starting in 1974. International reactionary forces have transformed it into a globe-spanning event with tremendous strategic power for the Atlanticist reactionary.[2] The representation of far-right parties from Europe and the Americas is as diverse as Vox from Spain, represented at these events by Hermann Tertsch and Santiago Abascal; Fidesz from Hungary, represented by Miklós Szánthó and Prime Minister Viktor Orbán; and El Salvador and Argentina, represented by their respective presidents Nayib Bukele and Javier Milei. The event’s most recent American occurrence in February 2024 had a roster that was a veritable who’s who of international right-wing superstardom. Despite the redundant rhetoric of the public speeches, CPAC remains a critical part of the arsenal that the international right has at its disposal to affect strategic victories in the electoral and policy sectors. This is not only limited to their respective domestic cases, but also in the international arena where trade and security sectors are concerned.

This article examines the context in which the American right has projected itself onto the world stage, the specific structures and funding mechanisms that make this international adventurism possible, and a breakdown of the different factors of what made the Mexican, Hungarian, and American CPACs each unique. CPAC has developed from a niche meeting of aristocratic (and often Catholic) reactionary philosophers, writers, and their preferred politicians into one of the foremost sites of international reactionary strategic thinking and organizing. In this way, it follows closely the model of the earlier World Anti-Communist League (WACL) through its interface with the Madrid Charter, which functions as a global anti-Communist manifesto (albeit with preferences for the Atlantic world) for the 21st century. CPAC and its most frequent attendees like those listed above form a tight circle of international actors who follow an international speaking circuit that is likely as much about closed-door meetings as it is about the public face of the conference, which includes both the speeches as well as a convention show. The opportunity to network is thus a key element of the international CPAC as a phenomenon.

This article also examines the myriad factors that make CPAC a desirable political tool for conservatives throughout the world to use to develop ideological networks. The ACU, being a flexible organization, is able to cater its rhetorical and organizing style to meet the needs and politically salient realities in each of its different geopolitical contexts by presenting itself variously as a Trump rally in the United States, a meeting of intellectuals in Budapest, and a combination of culture-war and economic concerns at the conference in Mexico City. Running through all CPAC events is the negatively charged use of woke, which is used to single out a number of political positions and identities usually associated with advocacy for left-of-center policies. Anti-wokeness is a major contribution to the shared political language of these conferences and often sticks out as a lone English word in a speech otherwise given in Spanish, Hungarian, German, or Japanese.

History of the ACU

CPAC is the product of the ACU, and CPAC’s recent international conferences are far from the first instance of the ACU’s foreign entanglements. It does, however, represent a new era in which American-style politics are made available for foreign audiences not just by way of cultural diffusion, but through explicit and overt organizing on behalf of the American Conservative Union and its international partners. The focus of this article is on the more recent developments, specifically surrounding the internationalization of CPAC as a global phenomenon that, as of December 2024, has taken place in eight countries. However, it is useful to understand that, from the earliest days of the American Conservative Union, the organization has been just as conscious of the world beyond the United States as it was with domestic politics.

Major conservative activists such as William F. Buckley Jr. (1925–2008) and William Rusher (1923–2011) were instrumental in developing the ACU into a political organization with long time horizons in the 1960s. Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater’s defeat in the 1964 US presidential election against incumbent Lyndon B. Johnson caused a panic among members of the movement conservatives’ leadership, and it was out of this panic that major activists created the ACU.[3] And while the initial purpose of the organization was to plan for future presidential administrations, the organization proved to be quite nimble in terms of its responsiveness to political stimuli of its historical context and is reminiscent of conservative intellectual and member of the Old Right, Frank Chodorov’s (1887–1966) “Fifty Year Project,” which sought to wrest social and political hegemony away from the left.[4]

A survey of the American Conservative Union’s history reveals several instances of the ACU looking beyond the borders of the United States toward reactionary political causes abroad. The best way to understand these instances of international activism is through the context of the Cold War and the international fight against Communism. In some cases, the American Conservative Union set up organizations or launched projects that were international in scope. The American-Chilean Council, its partner organization in Chile, the Consejo Chilenonorteamericno,had overlapping membership with the ACU, notably activist Marvin Liebman (1923–1997) and diplomat Spruille Braden (1894–1978).[5] Another instance where the ACU was likely more directly involved was its so-called fact finding mission to Rhodesia. The American African Affairs Association sent investigators to report on the political situation there and reported it in the National Review, that pre-eminent Buckley publication.[6] Later activities that were more explicitly linked to the ACU included dealings with both the Contras in Nicaragua and vocal opposition to President Jimmy Carter’s plans to hand over the Panama Canal.[7] Earlier activities were not necessarily carried out under the banner of the ACU as such, but involved many of the same individuals in overlapping networks of conservative political organizing. 

Today’s Internationalized American Right

The American right historically was not just interested, but thoroughly involved in international politics. This was manifested in its ability to reach the American public on foreign policy issues through its mailers and close association with magazines like Triumph and the National Review. Additionally, itplayed an important political role through material support and strategic action with foreign reactionary leaders and movements.[8] This tradition continues to this day with the international reach of conferences like CPAC and the ability of right-wing actors to fund projects of interest abroad, such as funding organizations with ties to the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR), a right-wing parliamentary group.[9] The ECR is a group that for the most part draws its membership from the right wing of national parties. It comprises a wide variety of ideologies, but notably some of the parties in the group have neo-fascist and neo-Nazi histories.[10] Perhaps it should come as no surprise, but the exportation of events like CPAC and the funneling of American political capital into foreign projects has resulted in a precipitous increase in American-style political rhetoric and strategy in regions where these efforts are concentrated.

The first international CPAC took place in Japan in 2017.[11] Importantly, Trump Administration political strategist Stephen Bannon (b. 1953) was one of the American figures present.^[12] This is significant because, as it was noted in the conference, Bannon is a pivotal figure in the hard right turn of American politics, having played a major role in Donald Trump’s victory in the 2016 presidential contest. Japan’s conservative political culture surely played an influential role in the ACU’s decision to jointly host a CPAC conference in Japan as its first foray into international conference organizing. For historical precedent, one need only look to WACL, where Japanese participation was a crucial element of the organization’s success, owing to the fascists who comprised Japan’s governing structures in the immediate postwar period.[13] Equally important is the consideration that Japan is a strong US ally in the Asia-Pacific, which is ideologically contested by both China and North Korea. CPAC Japan therefore offers American movement conservatives an opportunity to develop networks of likeminded political actors in the region.  Japan’s equivalent of the ACU is the highly-originally-named Japanese Conservative Union, founded in 2015 and led by Hiroaki “Jay” Aeba (b. 1967) as a direct counterpart to the ACU.^[14] This is an important touchpoint for understanding how CPAC conferences take place. The ACU relies on local partners to execute conferences. This helps ease the burden of organizing such a massive event in a foreign locale and additionally acts as a conduit through which the American-style political rhetoric and strategic organizing can be adopted by those local actors.

While CPAC remains very much an American brand with a distinctly American approach to conference organizing, local partner organizations are critical in putting on conferences. Accordingly, each CPAC has its own flair. In conducting research for this article, the author attended four such conferences: in Mexico City (2022), Budapest (2023), and Washington, DC (2023 and 2024). In Mexico City and Budapest, the partner organizations were Movimiento Viva Méxicoand the Center for Fundamental Rights (Alapjogokért Központ),respectively.[15] The atmosphere in Mexico City was heavily tinged by the influence of Catholic fundamentalism, with “¡Viva Cristo Rey!”being cried by speakers and attendees throughout the conference. Furthermore, each morning began with a Catholic mass. In Hungary, the atmosphere was professional and austere, with attendees wearing expensive business suits and the restrained crowd offering polite applause for intellectualized speeches declaiming right-wing cultural and economic positions. In advance of the 2024 European parliamentary elections, there was little to suggest that the European right was anything other than unified.

A Note about Structure and Funding

Before examining the individual cases of the ACU’s foreign adventures, it is important to discuss the legal structure of the organization. As is common with political organizations like the ACU, two different legal entities comprise it. The American Conservative Union Foundation (ACUF) acts as the 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization,^[16] officially an educational (and not a political) organization. The American Conservative Union acts as the 501(c)(4) social welfare organization,^[17] which has a greater array of political actions it can take legally. The leadership in the case of both organizations is nearly identical, with Matt Schlapp serving as chairman. Dan Schneider, now working for the Media Research Center, formerly acted as the executive director of both. ^[18]

In 2023, the ACU brought in $10.9 million and had expenses totaling $11 million.[19] These figures are a slight change from the previous years, when the ACU was beginning its foray into international conference organizing. Looking back, for example, for the fiscal year that ended in March 2020, the ACU had a revenue of $19.8 million, and 84.1% of this total, or $16.7 million, came from program services. This represents a marked increase over the revenue totals from the first half of the decade. ^[20] Between the years 2010 and 2015, the ACU brought in an average of $6.5 million a year.^[21] What is interesting to note about the dramatic increase in funding, however, is that it comes as the ACU has begun to sponsor CPAC conferences in international locations. In 2017, the first year the ACU undertook an international CPAC event, it posted $9.3 million in revenue, with a net loss of $383,994.^[22]

A major source of funding historically has possibly been for designated special projects based on the needs and desires of major corporate donors. While this is not necessarily apparent through the numbers reported on the IRS Form 990s filed by the ACU or ACUF, respectively, it is possible to glean an idea by considering the construction of several ACU projects which, on their surface, appear to stand on their own as separate entities but are likely just products of the ACU and ACUF, respectively. 

The CPAC Action PAC (Political Action Committee) received $2.9 million in contributions during the 2021–2022 financial period specified by the Federal Election Commission (FEC).^[23] Of this sum, $2.8 million came from individual contributions.^[24] Of the $2.9 million in revenue, $2.5 million was spent during this period on operating expenditures, $139,250 was transferred to other committees, and $236,440 was spent on independent expenditures.^[25] It should be noted, too, that when attempting to retrieve information about what those “independent expenditures” were, the FEC page that should have covered that information was blank.

The ACU Super PAC, according to the nonpartisan political contributions tracker, Open Secrets, did not spend any money during the 2022 election cycle in the United States, but did spend $579,375 in 2020.^[26] In that year, the Super PAC received $410,000 from the American Conservative Union itself; $100,000 from the Whittier Trust Company, a private investment firm; $40,000 from JA Tiberti Construction; and smaller donations from Bear Mountain Bison; T SQUARE STUDIO, LLC; Clarkston School District; and Grove Collaboration, producers of home goods.^[27]

That such a large percentage of ACU funding has come from so-called “program services” is somewhat of a recent development. Between the years of 2010 and 2017, it was much more likely in any given year for funding to have come from contributions in a more equal manner alongside program services. One way that the ACU may obfuscate the true nature of its funding is through its annual domestic, and more recently its international, CPAC conferences—especially in the United States, where tickets can cost anywhere from $50 for students to $30,000 for the platinum plus level.^[28] By offering tickets at such a high price, the ACU can support its operations through would-be megadonors who now conveniently can just buy a ticket as a fee for service instead of making a charitable donation for which no goods or services could be exchanged, and which would otherwise have to be reported to the IRS.^[29]

Though it concerns a decidedly internal affair, it is important to understand the inner workings of the ACU as a kind of hub from which other organizations branch out. This is done either explicitly, through the creation of projects, which then have the opportunity to branch out to become their own fully independent organizations, or through a personnel roster that overlaps. For the former case, a telling example is that of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), which was founded by the ACU.^[30] In a discussion of ALEC’s independence from the ACU, Board Member Jim Roberts said that “it could be one of the most important things the ACU has put together so far.”^[31]

Any discussion of the ACU, therefore, must have an understanding that the structure of the organization provides ample flexibility for ventures that may fall outside the narrowly defined purpose of the parent organization. The membership and ancillary organizations associated with the ACU have ties that lead back into the central organizing hub, where members can discuss freely plans that are national or international in scope. Thus, in the international area, it is vital to note whom the ACU is working with as a local partner, both historically and in the contemporary landscape.

Foreign Adventures with the ACU

Mexico City

The first Mexico City edition of CPAC was held on November 18and 19, 2022. Despite the largely Mexican crowd and slate of speakers, the range of topics discussed was of concern to the wider pan-American and Atlantic worlds. This fits in neatly with the idea of hispanidad, a concept used to link Spanish-speaking territories to one another by crafting a sense of shared heritage. As a concept, hispanidad has a variety of assumptions and outcomes, but its manifestation at CPAC in Mexico City followed closely a formulation of colony and metropole relationships.[32] This idea, also called hispanismo, relies upon historical and nostalgic cultural memory that extends back to the Spanish conquest of the region in the 16th and 17th centuries.[33] This idea could be seen at play in Mexico City through the conspicuous participation of the Spanish far-right party Vox, which sent Hermann Tertsch, a member of the European Parliament, as its emissary and included a recorded video message from the party leader, Santiago Abascal. In this context, it is impossible to consider hispanidad without also considering the rhetoric of a new Reconquista, which is frequently employed by party members of Vox to draw on the memory of Spain’s empire.[34] Reconquista as an organizing concept also has purchase in other countries, like in France where Éric Zemmour named his political party Reconquête. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán also spoke of a new Reconquista in Europe at his 2023 keynote speech at CPAC Hungary.[35]

Hispanidad’s presence in Mexico City was reinforced by the existence of the Madrid Charter, a pact between conservative leaders from across the world who oppose the alleged advance of Communism in the “Iberosphere.”^[36] Significantly, several signatories of the Madrid Charter spoke at Mexico City: Eduardo Bolsonaro (Brazil), Eduardo Verástegui (Mexico—also the conference organizer), Hermann Tertsch (Spain), Javier Milei (Argentina), José Antonio Kast (Chile), Mario Duarte (Guatemala), Matt Schlapp (USA), Santiago Abascal (Spain), and Pablo Kleinman (USA).

The Madrid Charter thus represents a transatlantic initiative focusing on ways to protect right-wing interests in the Western Hemisphere, specifically where the notion of Hispanidad is concerned. The document expressly names the São Paulo Forum (Foro de São Paulo) and the Puebla Group (Grupo de Puebla) as its ideological opposition.^[37] During the conference, speakers went to great lengths to connect the São Paulo Forum to liberal activist and perennial villain of the reactionary international, George Soros. These attempts to draw such parallels and conclusions function as an antisemitic trick, especially where culture war topics are of concern. The connection between George Soros and his Open Society Foundation seems tenuous at best in relationship to the São Paulo Forum, with no real evidence of either’s involvement in the structure or organization of the Forum.

The invocation of George Soros at CPAC in Mexico City, as it was in Washington, DC and Budapest, is of course a classic antisemitic trope.^[38] As with all other cultural elements of the conference in Mexico City, the message fit the cultural setting it was in, and thus anti-Soros rhetoric was channeled through fears of a resurgent São Paulo Forum, but the core message was the same. It is somewhat ironic then, that the anti-globalist message carried in fears of the Forum are held up against the tacit praise for the universalism of the Catholic Church and the cultural artifacts of hispanidad. These twin cultural elements were of great importance in holding the CPAC Mexico City conference together, where nuns in habits made up a conspicuous presence in the audience, and the sponsoring partner, Movimiento Viva México,was founded as an anti-abortion political group.[39]

Movimento Viva México’s president, Eduardo Verástegui, is a former telenovela star-cum-anti-abortion activist.^[40] Verástegui has been photographed with right-wing activist Ignacio Arsuaga, the director of the right-wing organization HazteOír (“make your voice heard”).^[41] HazteOír and its foundation, CitizenGo, are organizations that belong to the pantheon of European anti-abortion organizations.[42] CitizenGO in particular was featured prominently at the conference in Mexico City, with a table in the exhibition hall and its logo projected over the stage where speakers addressed the attendees. HazteOír and CitizenGo, taken together, represent the influence of European anti-abortion political organizing in the Americas. Thus, the Catholic tenor of the conference was not limited to the shouts of old Cristero battle cries and the morning masses, but to the organizational structure of the conference itself. [43]  It is through these intermediaries that Moviemeiento Viva Méxicocould be connected to the right-wing paramilitary group El Yunque as described by Álvaro Delgado in El Yunque: The Ultra-Right in Power (El Yunque: La ultraderecha en el poder).^[44]

Interestingly, many of the speakers and organizers at the conference suggested that Verástegui would be the next president of Mexico, and following the conference, he ran as an unsuccessful independent candidate in the 2024 election.^[45] Along similar lines, Javier Milei, the Argentinean far-right candidate who would go on to win the election for president in November 2023, was featured as the final speaker of the 2022 Mexico City CPAC. When he came on stage, he was greeted by the crowd cheering his name in a seemingly interminable standing ovation.[46] Milei addressed the crowd for well over an hour, in which he performed his usual tirade against socialism and globalism. Considering that this took place before Milei’s candidacy was international news, his appearance at CPAC (as the speaker of honor, no less) signals that CPAC’s ability to sort out strong political actors is a significant factor in its success. Simultaneously, the increased visibility granted to participants can help boost one’s candidacy—though we should refrain from making causal conclusions regarding the conference’s unilateral ability to elevate someone like Milei to the Casa Rosada.

In many respects, CPAC Mexico, in terms of the content of the speeches presented, was an unremarkable event. Its speakers were conventional Latin American reactionaries, and the presentations they gave expounded on the conservative views of several right-wing factions from the Rio Grande to the Río de la Plata. Despite its banality, there is an obvious question that arises from the American Conservative Union’s decision to host one of its flagship conferences in a country that is the recipient of so much conservative ire in the United States. The involvement of a US-based event organizer like CPAC speaks to the geographic interests that American reactionaries have in the region.

Based on statements made at CPAC Mexico as well as other such conferences, right-wing Atlanticists see an opportunity to use Latin American elites to control population flows north, which is the most obvious reason for American right-wing interest in the politics of the region. At a higher order of strategic thinking, there is the issue of China’s economic and political ascendency. For the American right, Chinese economic power is a threat to American hegemony in the region, and with more and more investment by China in Latin America there is worry that the region could fall out of the orbit of the United States.^[47] At numerous conferences of right-wing actors, the issue of the energy and technology needs of not just the United States, but the entire Western world are cited in relation specifically to the Lithium Triangle.^[48] It is easy to see why international right-wing actors would want to see a fellow reactionary in the highest offices from Mexico to Argentina, if only for economic reasons. Javier Milei has been somewhat mum on the issue of lithium specifically, but the twin factors of Argentina’s potential as an export superpower and Milei’s plans to remove taxes on commodities exports would mean a boon for importing countries’ telecommunications and high-tech sectors.^[49]

The geopolitical considerations of the United States and Latin America offer an interesting window into the rhetorical styles of each conference. In Mexico City, CPAC’s ideological character (as far as there was any single unifying theme) best fit into the mid-20th-century political formation known as fusionism. Fusionism was developed by conservative thinker and activist Frank Meyer (1909–1972) as a synthesis of free-market libertarian economic policies and social traditionalism, according to Lee Edwards, writing for the American Conservative.[50] Because of both economic incentives as well as an underlying traditionalist social orientation, the speakers in Mexico City represented a sense of fusionism through these two poles of political speech, even if they did not name it as such.

The Latin American case, as it relates to CPAC, is tied up in both social and economic concerns for the American organizers. In both cases, there is a strong influence coming from the United States, and therefore the political preferences of the ACU significantly influence the intellectual if not ideological production of the events. In this way, the ACU’s presence in Mexico City is indicative of the international politics championed by the organization based on the domination of the hemisphere. Despite the turn away from the vaunted neoconservatism of Ronald Reagan, there exists still a kernel of a desire for a muscular foreign policy on behalf of the American right that is represented by the ACU. International affairs as carried out by the ACU, thus, has clear demographic, cultural, and economic implications on hegemonic lines. Here concepts of hispanidad and traditionalist Catholic values flow into Latin America to bolster the popular support of antidemocratic and reactionary politicians and movements.

The ACU’s ability to elevate figures emerging from this milieu is quite powerful as can be observed in the cases of both Eduardo Verástegui and Javier Milei. Latin America thus stands in opposition to the example set by the Europeans at the now twice-held CPAC in Budapest, where the rule of the day is less concerned with economic issues and more interested in the creation of a quasi-spiritual environment where attendees can take with them an air of right-wing inspiration and unity.

Budapest

The Bálna Conference Center’s glass exterior glittered in the sunlight of a crisp spring day next to the rolling River Danube. The morning brought forth some of the leading minds of the European right, and on May 4 and 5, 2023, the ACU held its second CPAC alongside the local Hungarian organizer, the Center for Fundamental Rights. The issues at hand in Budapest largely centered around social and cultural topics, and in this regard, the conference took on a more philosophical or spiritual tone. But within this intellectualized atmosphere are the seeds of a Hungarian-Atlanticist relationship that stand in opposition to the one cultivated by Hungary with Russia. There are practical considerations for Hungary’s closeness with Russia, and Hungary’s material needs have long made the country dependent on Russian energy and investments in its domestic energy infrastructure.[51] At the same time, Orbán’s political movement benefits from events like CPAC, which require an ideological coziness with the West. It is for the latter reason that in matters cultural, Hungary under Orbán has positioned itself as the ideological champion of the West through a shared sense of European history.[52] Here and affinity for religious, philosophical, and artistic movements associated with the Western Canon are afforded a primacy that serves to unite Europe into a single entity that can then be defended from the right. Speeches at CPAC from both Hungarian and foreign speakers emphasized the uniqueness of Hungary and its language while also paying homage to the shared identity and values of Europe.

The cultural elements of the conference could be seen in the presence of journals like the European Conservative, which was passed out to conference attendees for free. In contrast to the speeches in Mexico City, which had a more even interest paid to cultural as well as economic or strategic issues, the discussions heard in Budapest were almost entirely in the realm of the culture war. This could be because of the symbolic meaning that Hungary has taken on vis-à-vis the international right as a bastion of anti-woke politics. Hungary’s position as an international inspiration to the Atlanticist reactionary was best summed up by US Representative Paul Gosar (R-AZ). To demonstrate the  nature of the radicalism that is latent in CPAC conferences, it is important to note that Gosar has ties to armed extremists and paramilitary organizations, including the Three Percenters in the United States.[53] In his address, he stated that Hungary stands as a beacon to the entire West for the way it has fought to preserve its culture and heritage. Gosar, one of the United States’ most reactionary politicians, illustrates the affinity of the American far right with Viktor Orbán’s Hungary.

CPAC Hungary was strange for all the reasons that have come to be expected of the arch-reactionary rhetoric of the internationally active right-wing political set. But if one looks under the surface, it is possible to catch a glimmer of the Hungarian orientation towards NATO and the United States. In this way, Hungary is pursuing its unique brand of sovereigntism by playing its relationships with the United States and Russia off each another.^[54] This also manifests in a version of Euroskepticism by which, after the political disaster wrought by Brexit, Euroskeptic far-right parties are more inclined to attempt to institutionally capture the European Union’s governing structures. At the conference they spoke of remaking the EU it in their image. Accomplishing this is no easy task, but the Hungarian right’s engagement with the American right is likely a critical part of this strategy. Following the success of right-wing parties in the June 2024 European Parliamentary elections, the connections between them and their American allies will be more prevalent than ever. Considering that members of the ECR and parties that were part of the now defunct, further-right Identity and Democracy (ID) groups were mainstays at American-influenced and -inspired conferences, CPAC could have a continuing influence in bringing together broad swaths of the European right to plan for the future. Before the elections, the topic of how to effect a takeover by conservatives broadly speaking was a prominent topic in speeches and likely also a topic of discussion in any closed-door meetings as well.

This vision of Europe as a sovereigntists’ paradise is also mirrored in the 2023 electoral victory of Prime Minister Robert Fico in Slovakia. Despite their obvious differences in domestic political preferences (Fico is a former Communist and Orbán’s background is decidedly anti-Communist), the two countries now have a chance to align themselves as an anti-Ukrainian bloc within the European Union.[55] At the same time, these relationships leave the door open to pursuing other Atlanticist international relations policies.[56] Because CPAC is a conference that brings together sometimes disparate views on international relations, the organization of the conference itself does not represent a particular ideology regarding international affairs beyond an affinity for Western values and cultures. Participants’ specific positions regarding the Russian invasion of Ukraine should serve as a basis for understanding the inter-conservative actions those actors take. For example, Hungary showed a strong reticence toward the NATO accessions of Finland and Sweden in 2023 and 2024, respectively.[57] Contrasting with this, Italy, led by Prime Minister Georgia Meloni and her party the Brothers of Italy (Fratelli d’Italia), was supportive of NATO expansion in the face of Russian aggression in Ukraine.[58]

Heavy on nostalgia and historical grievance, the Budapest conference served as the perfect site for an American-produced and tonally populist conference. But understanding why Budapest figures so prominently in the minds of contemporary American reactionaries requires a brief discussion of history. The legacies of the 1956 Hungarian Uprising as well as, in the memory of the Habsburg rule over Hungary, a lasting cultural sense of dynastic hegemony or the loss thereof serve as cultural and historical touchstones for Atlanticist right-wing populists and intellectuals alike. This is especially true considering the predominantly anti-Communist ethos of both present and past right-wing political actors.

Because anti-Communism is often an underlying principle of right-wing politics, both historically and today, the Communist history of Hungary also plays an important symbolic role in CPAC’s Budapest iteration.[59] This use of historical memory is especially poignant for members of the right in Hungary, where the results of the repression of the 1956 Hungarian Uprising is addressed in the book Making Hungary Great Again: 2010–2022.Its authors describe an economic and social arrangement following the uprising where there was greater affluence than before thanks to public spending but nevertheless an economic environment that failed to provide a basis for economic growth.[60] For the authors, the continuation of Communism therefore represented its own problem that reforms, even if they changed some aspects of Hungarian Communism were ultimately insufficient. Of the book’s three authors, one, Miklós Szánthó, is the director general for the Center for Fundamental Rights, the ACU’s Hungarian partner in organizing CPAC.[61]

Regardless of the veracity of the claim that Hungarians’ ability to have an increased standard of living in exchange for abandoning politics (for which the book’s authors offer no empirical data), the modern, more consuming ideology of Fidesz, which seeks to incorporate a traditional sense of Hungarian-ness into everyday life, stands in direct contrast to the authoritarian tendencies of the post-1956 Kádár regime. In such a model, as Ágnes Patakfalvi-Czirják writes, “the hegemonic power presents the concept of culture war as political action undertaken by the Orbán government as a legitimate means of defending national pride, national values, and community.”^[62] In both cases the authoritarian nature of government in Hungary required citizens to abstain from politics, but in the contemporary instance Magyar ethnic identity is more important in terms of defining the bounds of Hungarian society.

Accordingly, in the realm of the culture war, Fidesz has staked an important claim to the idea that, to be authentically Hungarian, one must follow a narrow set of parameters in which a society of Magyar supremacy resonates profoundly across the culture war. Americans in particular at the CPAC event were quick to praise how, despite Hungary’s being a small country that is linguistically and culturally distinct from its neighbors, Hungarian culture has thrived. This is at once both a stand against the memory of Communist rule along nationalistic lines, as well as a tool for the right to entrench itself against a perceived onslaught of globalism, wokeism, cultural Marxism, or any other –ism thought not to fit within the definition of Hungarian culture in a hegemonic sense.

For Orbán, a political movement that prizes constructing an idealized past allows for the definition of Hungarian identity along narrow lines that invite a conservative worldview. Hungary is a small nation, but by positioning itself as a sort of intellectual vanguard of rightward thinking and policy development, it has carved out for itself a place of prominence among those who wish to emulate its politics. For the American co-organizers, the political imaginary of lost Habsburg grandeur, whether explicit or implicit, serves as a legitimizing purpose. It is worth noting that Edouard Habsburg serves as Hungary’s emissary to the Vatican.[63] He also authored a book with a forward by Viktor Orbán detailing a conservative approach to life modeled on Habsburg sensibilities.[64] The ACU is thus able to capture some of the aristocratic legitimacy of the Hungarian model by having its signature event on the banks of the Danube. Given the ACU’s foundations with William F. Buckley Jr., who was well known for his aristocratic affect, it is probable that the ACU has found a sense of legitimacy offered by an association with Habsburg Europe.

National Harbor, Maryland, USA

CPAC’s flagship event takes place at the end of each winter, just before Washington, DC’s iconic cherry blossoms grace the city. But the placid scene of the cherry trees belies the fury of the event taking place just a few miles away in National Harbor, Maryland. Between the author’s visits in 2023 and 2024, the tenor of the event did not change much. The ACU has become an organ of Trumpism in the United States, and while there are still other formulations of conservative thought in the United States, the ACU as an institution and CPAC as its product have aligned themselves with Trump the brand as well as the political style represented by the former and current president.

Journalists, both independent and with prestigious associations, made note of the far-right character of the event and the people in attendance, including a gaggle of real-life internet trolls called groypers fawning over Jared Taylor, the publisher of the white supremacist magazine American Renaissance.[65] In reports following the conference, many authors claimed that CPAC was a dying event. Even the National Review published an article questioning the value of the conference, stating:

This event was once a calendar highlight, as people from all factions and all parts of the country gathered to meet, debate, and network. Now, under the leadership of its embattled chairman Matt Schlapp, it has devolved into a MAGA carnival where only one part of the conservative movement is welcome and dogma has replaced debate.[66]

The quote from the National Review here offers validity from that right to the claim that CPAC lacks the intellectual vim and vigor of its former self. It is ironic that the late William F. Buckley Jr.’s magazine wrote a review in anticipation of CPAC 2024 that was dubious of the populist turn within the Republican Party. Additionally, the exhibition hall floor even between 2023 and 2024 showed a precipitous drop in the number of vendors present at the exhibition. There were roughly half as many organizations, businesses, and publications on the exhibition floor in 2024 compared to the previous year.

Speakers at CPAC in both 2023 and 2024 were oriented towards Trumpism, further cementing the event as a quasi-campaign rally. Of course, this legally was not permissible, because CPAC is organized under the ACUF, the 501(c)(3), legally making CPAC an educational event. This legal reality feels awkward next to the speeches given by participants at the conference. To exemplify this awkward relationship of the organization to its legal status, just before Trump’s speech placards were passed out with zippy lines like “Joe Biden, You’re Fired!” and “Road to Victory.” Before the speech began, however, attendees were instructed not to display the placards.

As awkward as a domestic phenomenon CPAC is, the international component of the US conference is still an important organizing tool for the international reactionary. Beyond just the speeches given by foreign dignitaries and heads of state, which included Presidents Nayib Bukele and Javier Milei of El Salvador and Argentina, respectively, there was a significant opportunity for networking at the event. Networking opportunities existed in at least one official, programmatic way in addition to the informal way speakers and attendees had access to one another. The first substantive event of the 2024 conference was a private “international summit.” According to ACU Chairman Matt Schlapp in his keynote speech the following morning, the international dignitaries hailed from 20 countries.

Significantly, it was not just official government representatives in attendance, but also prominent political leaders from across the world. For example, Francesco Giubilei, the president of the Italian far-right think tank Nazione Futura,was present with the explicit mission of growing the professional network of the organization.[67] Another non-speaker attendee of note was Ernesto Araújo, Brazil’s former foreign minister under President Jair Bolsonaro. Araújo represents symbolically, if not officially, the interplay of Ibero-American conservatives with the American right, as an advisor for Vox’s think tank Disenso.[68]

The strategic value of CPAC is perhaps the most important element of the event. Furthermore, the ACU maintains its intellectual importance through the dissemination of the ideas discussed in private meetings even as the rhetoric of the public side of the conference has devolved into little more than a Trump campaign rally. As the centerpiece of the ACU universe, CPAC brings together regional, national, and international actors from the MAGA movement. For international visitors, the conference offers proximity to other major institutions of conservative and right-wing power in the United States. It provides attendees the opportunity to meet with not just members of the ACU, but other elite institutions of American conservative power such as the Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute, and any number of Freedom Caucus members of Congress.

When in Budapest or Mexico City speakers invoked the ubiquitous specter of wokeness or wokeism, they did so in English. And when vast sums of money are available through the networks encountered at CPAC through either hosting the event itself in international settings or the potential to court big-ticket American donors looking to make an impact in Europe and Latin America, the ACU’s international footprint is indispensable to the Atlanticist reactionary. The American impact on the widest reach of the reactionary international is unmistakable and is evident not only in the way speakers use bombastic American-style rhetoric to denounce their chosen culture war enemies, but also in frequent trips made by leading figures on the American right to visit their allies abroad and for those same allies to visit the United States.

Comparison to National Conservatism Conference

Another international conference that occupies a similar space in the Atlanticist reactionary’s imagination and cross-border organizing potential is the National Conservatism Conference (NatCon). When it comes to the specific American ties to both CPAC and NatCon, the two events exist in slightly different camps of the American right. Looking at the 2024 events, which were held in Washington, DC (NatCon) and National Harbor, Maryland (CPAC), there is a highly differentiated speakers list. Upon review, the rosters online indicate that only former Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director Tom Homan and businessman and former Republican candidate for President Vivek Ramaswamy appeared at both conferences.[69]

Yoram Hazony is the creator of the National Conservatism Conference and the first occasion for the conference took place in Glen Cove, New York from December 18–22, 2016.[70] The conference was not branded as “NatCon” at that time, but conservative research institute and Zionist training institution, the Herzl Institute, organized the conference. President Hazony holds a significant position within Israeli politics and intellectual life through his association with the Herzl Institute.[71] It is for this reason that NatCon, while drawing on much of the same ethos as CPAC’s European conferences, does not share much of the same roster. At its surface level, NatCon is a more intellectual environment than CPAC. The international versions of CPAC are specifically themed both in terms of style and content to match the location. In the United States, Europe, or Latin America, each has its own flavor, but largely exist as a tool for projecting American influence at a substate level into host countries. NatCon’s ethos, on the other hand, exists within the realm of political theory and offers significant organizing and networking power, but in a different intellectual sphere.

Conclusion

Budapest’s New York Café stands as a kind of testament to the capital “T” Tradition that is so often praised by reactionaries from the most obscure social media accounts to the highest levels of right-wing governments. There, visitors can have a decent, if overpriced, sweet treat and coffee, but ultimately one practically expects to be escorted through the gift shop before exiting. The jarringly kitschy New York Café is thus a perfect metaphor for Viktor Orbán’s vision of Hungary. American CPAC visitors in Budapest described how much they enjoyed being in not just the Hungarian capital, but specifically Orbán’s Budapest. In this way, Orbán’s Hungary represents the cultural, political, and social aspirations of the American right. Their project is similarly wrapped up in the artifice of the glorious—if romanticized—past. Writers and thinkers are then able to claim that Americans themselves need a Salazar or Vlad the Impaler.^[72]

But for the American right to look abroad is not at all in contradiction to the nativist image that Americans often assume is the modus operandi of the conservative establishment. Quite the contrary—the American right has long looked to the international stage for inspiration as well as for fertile ground for economic and cultural domination. Whether looking to Spanish General Francisco Franco or to Viktor Orbán as a source of legitimacy in an anti-Communist crusade, or to influence the internal politics of countries in the Global South, the American right is fundamentally oriented towards a position of reactionary Atlanticism, whereby the scope of the right’s project is inextricable from its international context.

The purpose of international CPACs is thus an obvious one. In each case, a partner organization is utilized to spread an American-approved vision of right-wing politics in that country. While the internationalization of CPAC and a specifically American brand of right-wing organizing might be novel in a global sense, the interaction of the American Conservative Union with the global community is not. From its earliest days, the ACU has engaged in myriad projects internationally, starting with its Rhodesia mission, followed by the creation of the American-Chilean Council, its opposition to the handover of the Panama Canal, and advocating for the material and logistical support to the Contras.

The adventurism of the ACU was and continues to be executed through its subsidiaries as well as local partners internationally. Doing so offers a valence of credibility while being able to tailor a program for that locality. The popular perception of the American right is one of nativism and nationalism, but the reality is that no political actor can escape their geographic, temporal, or contextual reality, and far from shirking from that reality, the American right for the last 60 years has launched itself headlong into it. 

---

[1] Amber Phillips, “ ‘They’re Rapists.’ President Trump’s Campaign Launch Speech Two Years Later, Annotated,” Washington Post, June 16, 2017, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/06/16/theyre-rapists-presidents-trump-campaign-launch-speech-two-years-later-annotated/.

[2] The Atlanticist reactionary, or “reactionary Atlanticism,” is a growing trend of viewing Atlantic international relations through a right-wing lens. It is typified by the CPAC phenomenon, which has seen multiple international editions, and by the Madrid Forum’s (Foro de Madrid) namesake charter. In this case, the Atlantic world in question should be understood as broadly as possible, with important interplay between North and South. In this new worldview and political strategy, its adherents seek to confront their enemies on strategic, economic, and cultural terms. 

[3] George Nash, The Conservative Intellectual Movement in America since 1945 (Wilmington, Del.: Intercollegiate Studies Institute Books), p. 576.

[4] Nash, p. 82.

[5] Grant Silverman, “Building the International Right: The American Conservative Union and its Interests Abroad,” IERES Occasional Papers (February 2025): https://www.illiberalism.org/building-the-international-right-the-american-conservative-union-and-cpac.

[6] Silverman, “Building the International Right: The American Conservative Union and its Interests Abroad”

[7] Silverman.

[8] Silverman.

[9] New Direction, “Think Tank Central – Defending Freedom Conference // 22 September 2023,” YouTube, October 5, 2023, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvwcMNIqlnw.

[10] Ellen Rivera, “The European Conservatives and Reformists in the European Parliament: A Big Tent with a Brown Lining,” Illiberalism Studies Program, The George Washington University, Illiberalism.org, May 2, 2024, https://www.illiberalism.org/the-european-conservatives-and-reformists-in-the-european-parliament-a-big-tent-with-a-brown-lining/.

[11] Conservative Political Action Committee, “Standing for Freedom at CPAC Japan,” 2023, CPAC.org, December 11, 2023, https://www.cpac.org/post/standing-for-freedom-at-cpac-japan.

^[12] CPAC, “Standing for Freedom at CPAC Japan.”

[13] Scott Anderson and Jon Lee Anderson, Inside the League: The Shocking Exposé of How Terrorists, Nazis, and Latin American Death Squads Have Infiltrated the World Anti-Communist League (New York: Dodd, Mead & Company, 1986), p. 61.

^[14] CPAC Japan, “Aeba Jay Hiroaki,” November 30, 2020, JCPAC.org, https://jcpac.org/speakers-en/aeba-jay-hiroaki/.

[15] Movimiento Viva México, “La Derecha, al Debate—Movimiento Viva México,” accessed March 15, 2024, https://movimientovivamexico.org/la-derecha-al-debate/; Justin Spike, “At CPAC, Hungary’s Orban Decries LGBTQ+ Rights, Migration,” AP News, May 4, 2023. https://apnews.com/article/cpac-hungary-orban-woke-gender-migration-da47d0febc22d935de0b48fe5e3ad4a6.

^[16] Spike, “At CPAC, Hungary’s Orban Decries LGBTQ+ Rights, Migration.”

^[17] Andrea Suozzo Roberts, Alec Glassford, Ash Ngu, Brandon Roberts, “American Conservative Union—Nonprofit Explorer,” ProPublica, May 9, 2013, https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/520810813.

^[18] Media Research Center website, “Staff” page, accessed March 15, 2024, https://mrc.org/staff.

[19] Suozzo Roberts, Glassford, Ngu, and Roberts, “American Conservative Union – Nonprofit Explorer.”

^[20] Suozzo Roberts, Glassford, Ngu, and Roberts, “American Conservative Union – Nonprofit Explorer.”

^[21] Suozzo Roberts, Glassford, Ngu, and Roberts, “American Conservative Union – Nonprofit Explorer.” Per its Form 990s (Return of Organization Exempt from Income Tax) filed with the Internal Revenue Service, the ACU brought in $3.9 million in 2010, $4.6 million in 2011, $6.5 million in 2012, $8 million in 2013, $6.4 million in 2014, and $9.1 million in 2015. This is in comparison to the dramatic uptick in funding for the years 2019 and 2020, in which $16.7 and $19.8 million were raised, respectively.

^[22] Suozzo Roberts, Glassford, Ngu, and Roberts, “American Conservative Union – Nonprofit Explorer.”

^[23] Federal Election Commission, “CPAC ACTION PAC – Committee Overview,” FEC.gov, accessed March 15, 2024, https://www.fec.gov/data/committee/C00130658/.

^[24] Federal Election Commission, “CPAC ACTION PAC – Committee Overview.”

^[25] Federal Election Commission, “CPAC ACTION PAC – Committee Overview.”

^[26] Open Secrets, “American Conservative Union Super PAC Outside Spending,” OpenSecrets.org, 2024, https://www.opensecrets.org/outside-spending/detail/2020?cmte=C00505792&tab=summary.

^[27] Open Secrets, “American Conservative Union Super PAC Outside Spending.”

^[28] Conservative Political Action Conference, “CPAC in DC 2025,” CPAC.org, 2024, accessed December 11, 2024, https://www.cpac.org/us/events-dc2025.

^[29] Per the CPAC website, ticket prices from lowest to highest: $50 (student); $250; $3,000 (Silver); $7,000 (Gold); $15,000 (Platinum); $30,000 (Platinum Plus).

^[30] ACU Board Minutes 1979.09.22, L. Tom Perry Special Collections, Brigham Young University Archives.

^[31] ACU Board Minutes 1979.09.22, L. Tom Perry Special Collections, Brigham Young University Archives.

[32] Arsenio Cuenca, “The Spanish and French Far Rights in Their Quest for a New Traditionalist Order,” Journal of Illiberalism Studies 3, no. 1 (Spring 2023), p. 92, https://www.illiberalism.org/the-spanish-and-french-far-rights-in-their-quest-for-a-new-traditionalist-order/.

[33] Enrique R. Lamadrid, “Aurelio Macedonio Espinosa’s ‘Great(Er) Spain’: The Snares of Querencia and the Pitfalls of Cultural Nationalism and Fundamentalist Hispanismo,”  Journal of American Folklore 136, no. 542 (2023): 413–432, https://doi.org/10.5406/15351882.136.542.03.

[34] Mar Padilla, “La Reconquista, el nuevo alimento de la guerra cultural de la ultraderecha,” El País (Madrid), October 12, 2022, https://elpais.com/cultura/2022-10-12/la-reconquista-el-nuevo-alimento-de-la-guerra-cultural-de-la-ultraderecha.html.

[35] Mar Padilla, “La Reconquista, el nuevo alimento de la guerra cultural de la ultraderecha.”

^[36] Carta de Madrid: In Defense of Freedom and Democracy in the Iberosphere, October 26, 2020. https://ecrgroup.eu/files/CartaDeMadrid-EN.pdf.

^[37] Carta de Madrid.

^[38] Harris Mylonas and Scott Radnitz, eds., Enemies within: The Global Politics of Fifth Columns (New York: Oxford University Press, 2022) p. 46.

[39] Movimiento Viva México. “Nuestro Movimiento – Movimiento Viva México.” Accessed March 15, 2024. https://movimientovivamexico.org/nuestro-movimiento/.

^[40] Moviemento Viva Mexico. “Nuestro Movimiento – Movimiento Viva México.” Accessed March 15, 2024. https://movimientovivamexico.org/nuestro-movimiento/./

^[41] Marta Borraz and Jesús Bastante. “Quién está detrás de los lobbies ultracatólicos que arremeten contra las mujeres y el colectivo LGTBI,” elDiario.es, October 3, 2016. 

[42] Ellen Rivera, “Unraveling the Anti-Choice Supergroup Agenda Europe in Spain:  A case Study of CitizenGo and HazteOir,” IERES Occasional Papers (October 2019): 8-9, https://www.illiberalism.org/unraveling-the-anti-choice-supergroup-agenda-europe-in-spain/.

[43] The Cristero movement emerged in the context of a conflict between Mexican Catholics and the anticlerical post-Revolutionary Mexican government, which forced churches to close and prohibited the celebration of the Mass. See Jean A. Meyer, The Cristero Rebellion: The Mexican People between Church and State, 1926–1929, trans. Richard Southern, Cambridge Latin American Studies Series (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1976).

^[44] Álvaro Delgado, El yunque: La ultraderecha en el poder, (Mexico City: Editorial Grijalbo, 2003).

^[45] Thomas Graham, “Sound of Freedom Film Producer Plots Long-Shot Bid for Mexican Presidency,” Guardian, September 8, 2023, sec. World News, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/08/mexico-president-sound-of-freedom-film-producer.

[46] Grant Silverman, “¡Che Milei! Argentina, the Far Right, and the Politics of Anti-Peronism, Illiberalism Studies Program, The George Washington University, February 13, 2024, https://www.illiberalism.org/che-milei-argentina-the-far-right-and-the-politics-of-anti-peronism/.

^[47]Diana Roy, “China’s Growing Influence in Latin America,” Council on Foreign Relations, June 15, 2023, https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/china-influence-latin-america-argentina-brazil-venezuela-security-energy-bri.

^[48] An area found in Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile that contains a majority of the world’s lithium supply. Lithium is a key natural resource used in the production of high-tech devices such as cell phones and computers.

^[49] Jonathan Gilbert, “Lithium: Argentina’s Commodities Sector Faces Political Upheaval,” Australian Financial Review, August 14, 2023, https://www.afr.com/markets/commodities/argentina-s-commodities-sector-faces-political-upheaval-20230815-p5dwhr.

[50] Lee Edwards, “A New Fusionism: Conservatives Must Unite around Ordered Liberty,” American Conservative (Arlington, Va.), vol. 19 (September/October 2020): 36–37, https://www.proquest.com/magazines/new-fusionism/docview/2436419389/se-2?accountid=11243.

[51] Já Kornai, “Hungary’s U-Turn: Retreating from Democracy,” Journal of Democracy 26, no. 3 July 2015: 34–48, https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/hungarys-u-turn-retreating-democracy/docview/1697197404/se-2.

[52] Andrzej Sadecki, “From Defying to (Re-)Defining Europe in Viktor Orbán’s Discourse about the Past,” Journal of European Studies 52, no. 3–4 (November 2022): 255–271, https://doi.org/10.1177/00472441221115565.

[53] Luke Broadwater and Matthew Rosenberg, “Republican Ties to Extremist Groups Are under Scrutiny,” New York Times, January 29, 2021, sec. U.S., https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/29/us/republicans-trump-capitol-riot.html.

^[54] Soverigntism should be understood here in the manner that the European intellectual set of right-wing to far-right parties use it. They have a particular Euroskeptic set of policy preferences that would see right-wing parties take over the EU rather than leave it, while maintaining a strong sense of national identity. For a corollary in the United States, the history of anti-Federalism is as old as the Constitution and its attempts to create a strong central government. It also continues through to contemporary history in the rhetoric of states’ rights, which offers an insight into the political legacy of this brand of political alignment.

[55] Justin Spike, “Slovakia’s Leader Voices Support for Hungary’s Orbán in EU Negotiations on Funding for Ukraine,” AP News, January 16, 2024, https://apnews.com/article/slovakia-hungary-ukraine-funding-93b5a489a1995ff9e33cba328f797a6a.

[56] Zsolt Enyedi, “Orbán’s Great Power Politics,” European Politics and Policy (blog), London School of Economics, February 21, 2022, https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2022/02/21/orbans-great-power-politics/.

[57] Krisztina Than and Niklas Pollard, “Sweden Clears Final Hurdle to Join NATO as Hungary Approves Accession,” Reuters, February 26, 2024, https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/hungary-set-ratify-swedens-nato-accession-clearing-last-hurdle-2024-02-26/.

[58] Francesco Tumminello “Ucraina: Delegazione FDI Incontra Ambasciatore Svezia per Ingresso NATO. – FDI,” Fratelli d’Italia, June 2022, https://www.fratelli-italia.it/ucraina-delegazione-fdi-incontra-ambasciatore-svezia-per-ingresso-nato/.

[59] Grant Silverman, “Blues on the Danube: CPAC’s Return to Hungary,” Illiberalism.org,June 6, 2023. https://www.illiberalism.org/blues-on-the-danube-cpacs-return-to-hungary/.

[60] Kovács, Molnár and Miklós Szánthó, Making Hungary Great Again (Budapest: Jogállam és Igazság Nonprofit KFT, 2022),pp. 28

[61] Center for Fundamental Rights “Staff” webpage, Alapjogokert.hu, 2018, https://alapjogokert.hu/en/about-us/szantho-miklos.

^[62] Ágnes Patakfalvi-Czirják, “ ‘The Voice of the Unheard Nation’: Culture War in the Field of Popular Music in Hungary,” The George Washington University, Institute for European, Russian, and Eurasian Studies, Illiberalism.org, 2024, p. 3, https://www.illiberalism.org/the-voice-of-the-unheard-nation-culture-war-in-the-field-of-popular-music-in-hungary/.

[63] Jason Horowitz, “Eduard Habsburg, Hungary’s Ambassador to Pope, Has Offbeat Résumé,” New York Times, April 27, 2023, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/27/world/europe/hungary-habsburg-ambassador-vatican.html.

[64] Eduard Habsburg, The Habsburg Way, with a foreword by Viktor Orbán (Manchester, N.H.: Sophia Institute Press, 2023), https://sophiainstitute.com/product/the-habsburg-way/.

[65] Ben Goggin, “Nazis Mingle Openly at CPAC, Spreading Antisemitic Conspiracy Theories and Finding Allies,” NBC News, February 26, 2024, https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/nazis-mingle-openly-cpac-spreading-antisemitic-conspiracy-theories-fin-rcna140335.

[66] Henry Olsen, “Should Conservatives Care about CPAC?” National Review, February 16, 2024, https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/02/should-conservatives-care-about-cpac/.

[67] Joseph Cerrone, “Nazione Futura Expands US Network at CPAC,” Illiberalism Studies Program, The George Washington University, March 12, 2024, https://www.illiberalism.org/nazione-futura-expands-u-s-network-at-cpac/.

[68] Fundación Disenso, “Ernesto Araújo, Ex Ministro de Relaciones Exteriores de Brasil, se incorpora a la Fundación Disenso Como asesor internacional,” fundaciondisenso.org, October 18, 2023, https://fundaciondisenso.org/ernesto-araujo-ex-ministro-de-relaciones-exteriores-de-brasil-se-incorpora-a-la-fundacion-disenso-como-asesor-internacional/.

[69] National Conservatism Conference, “Confirmed Speakers,” NatCon, 2024, https://nationalconservatism.org/natcon-4-2024/; Conservative Political Action Conference, “Speakers / CPAC,” CPAC.org, 2024. https://digital.cpac.org/speakers-dc2024.

[70] “Reclaiming and Rebuilding Conservatism.” 2021. Reclaiming and Rebuilding Conservatism. May 19, 2021. https://reclaimingconservatism.org.

[71] Suzanne Schneider, “Light among the Nations,” Jewish Currents, September 28, 2023, https://jewishcurrents.org/light-among-the-nations.

^[72] Michael Warren Davis, “Waiting for Salazar,” American Conservative, January 23, 2021, https://www.theamericanconservative.com/waiting-for-our-salazar/; Auguste Meyrat, “Learning from Vlad the Impaler,” American Conservative, April 19, 2023, https://www.theamericanconservative.com/learning-from-vlad-the-impaler/.