One of the issues that conservatives have been facing in the current culture war is the balance of optics and principles. Ideological purity comes at the cost of being unpalatable to many who are not so inclined, and as conservatives, we have found ourselves in the position where often times we must choose whether to make ourselves more accepted by others, whether it be the media or even just a more moderate/left-leaning population, or whether we should stick to our principles. This is, I believe, the key issue at the heart of the number of people who were banned or whose attendance was limited for this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). I mention the media and those who lean left as the groups which CPAC and the American Conservative Union (ACU) was seemingly trying to appeal to, as many left-wing media agents, such as Jared Holt of Right Wing Watch, were invited to the event, while known conservatives were either disinvited entirely or had their attendance restricted. One of th
e most prominent bannings was, of course, Mitt Romney, the former presidential candidate and now senator who was publically not invited after his vote on impeachment.
Ann Coulter
Ann Coulter, who has previously been one of the highest-rated CPAC speakers amongst attendees and has been a prominent voice in the conservative movement for decades. However, Coulter was not invited to speak at the event. Many have speculated that this is due to her criticism of Trump for not being hard enough on immigration, despite his campaign having run primarily on the issue.
InfoWars
Alex Jones, Owen Shroyer, and Harrison Smith all were present at CPAC, but their attendance was not 
exclusively as media. As evidenced by the image to the right, Jones is wearing a red attendee lanyard, as opposed to a yellow media lanyard. Harrison Smith was given press credentials, as can be seen in a video of him talking to Dr Sebastian Gorka who called those at InfoWars “kooks”, “conspiracy theorists”, and said that the event was only for “real conservatives” – which again calls into question why many mentioned in this article were or were not invited, especially since Alex Jones was one of the first conservatives to give then-candidate Trump a platform. While Owen Shroyer was in attendance and did interviews, he was kicked out without being given a reason.
While by no means a comprehensive list, in the wake of these expulsions and disinvitations, it is also pertinent to take note of the side conferences and events which took place separately from CPAC. Most notably, there was a “First Amendment Conference” held during CPAC by National File where Gavin McInnes, Alex Jones, and Nick Fuentes all spoke. Although information is limited about the event, it should be noted that National File is a right-wing news organization and that the event was clearly catering towards a conservative audience, specifically what is dubbed on their website as the “new right”. The other event that should be given mention is AFPAC (America First Political Action Conference) started by the same Nick Fuentes who spoke at the National File event. More importantly, however, Michelle Malkin who gave a speech at CPAC 2019 chastising establishment conservatism was not invited to speak at this year’s CPAC (although she was allowed media credentials). It has not been publically stated if the ACU not inviting Malkin to speak at CPAC was related to her attendance as a speaker for AFPAC or her criticism of the conservative establishment.
Given this information, it is reasonable to ask what kind of message this sends about the conservative movement. More specifically, if we preach freedom of speech, and claim that open discussion is necessary, how can we claim ideological consistency if organizations like the ACU ban people because they’re the wrong kind of conservative? Of course, CPAC is a private event, and the ACU have every right to allow or disallow whoever they want for whatever reason. However, I believe that the only path forward for the Republican party and the conservative movement as a whole is a wide tent approach wherein everyone from libertarians to paleocons can be present; so long as we all agree on certain fundamental conservative principles, we can deal with the details later. Additionally, it is reasonable to ask if this silencing of alternative conservative voices is done to try and appease the left, to say “we’re not like those guys”. But the key issue with this approach is that no matter what conservatives do, it is my experience that the MSM and the left will not accept our best of intentions. The same accusations of being racist, sexist, “literally a nazi”, etc. that were levelled against Trump and his supporters, I saw used against Mitt Romney, against John McCain, and every conservative alongside them. I do not think that appeasement will serve the conservative movement in any way, shape, or form, and will only serve to fracture the movement at a precarious moment in American history.
