Steven Crowder’s Daily Wire Rant Epitomizes the Conservative Betrayal Complex

“Big Tech is in bed with Big Con,” declared disappointed right-wing commentator and comedian Steven Crowder on Tuesday. “The people you thought, the people I thought were fighting for you: A lot of it has been a big con.”

That was the opening salvo in a war of words that has escalated over the week between Crowder and other media figures on the right.

At issue are a wide variety of gripes Crowder has about a contract offered to him by the Daily Wire (Crowder did not identify it in his monologue, but the Daily Wire has since acknowledged that they made the offer at the center of his rant.) Among those gripes, Crowder’s core complaint was that under the terms, the Daily Wire would act as one of Big Tech’s enforcers against him.

His case against the Daily Wire rests on several provisions of a model contract that the company sent him. One of those provisions stated that if 50% of advertisers were to drop Crowder, and the revenue were to not be recouped within 90 days, Crowder’s prorated salary ($12.5 million) would be reduced by 25% until it was recouped. Another would have implemented the same reduction for “content strikes” preventing the Daily Wire from monetizing Crowder’s content on YouTube, Facebook, Spotify, etc. for more than 90 days. A third would have reduced his salary by 20% if he were to be outright banned by YouTube or Apple Podcasts and 10% if he were banned by Facebook or Spotify.

The Daily Wire‘s CEO, Jeremy Boreing responded to Crowder’s allegations directly, explaining that the purpose of these portions of the contract was not to punish Crowder or extend the already long arm of powerful progressive companies, but to protect the Daily Wire against the massive losses that would be associated with an eight-figure investment in a single personality.

“Obviously if the show makes dramatically less money, well then Steven has to make less money, because we’re making less money,” argued Boreing. “That’s not punishment, it’s just reality.”

“It’s not punishing him to say ‘you’ll make less.’ We’re all going to make less. The real punishment would be if we [the Daily Wire] took all the hit,” added Boreing. “Steven’s philosophy seems to be: ‘I deserve to be paid millions and millions and millions of dollars whether my show drives the revenue or not… he’s not looking for a business relationship, he’s looking for a benefactor.”

For most level-headed observers, Boreing’s explanation should prove a compelling one. There’s little doubt the Daily Wire wishes it were free to pay Crowder his full salary regardless of the vicissitudes of content monitors at YouTube, Facebook, and other platforms, but to make the kind of guarantees Crowder is looking for, the company would need to place a bet that would put its other projects — and employees — at risk.

But Crowder’s initial accusations garnered quite a lot of attention from other conservatives online. Failed Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake tweeted “I ❤️ this man. 🇺🇸 🇺🇸 🇺🇸 🇺🇸 🇺🇸 Thank you@scrowder!”

For some, they still resonate. Tim Pool defended Crowder’s use of the word “slavery” to describe him because its terms would “control him.”

Why is it that his allegations are treated so credulously? How is it possible that Crowder believed that the Daily Wire, one of the most pugnacious conservative media operations in existence, was acting as an enforcer for Big Tech? How could he believe as much after reading the plain language of the $50 million contract it offered him?

Because conservatives have a betrayal complex.

Its development is not unwarranted: conservatives feel under siege because most of the press is comprised of personalities who — even if they’re not explicitly out to act against the interests of — are instinctually hostile to conservatives. The same goes for most Hollywood stars and content. The same goes for even sports media; just look at the reaction to Ivan Provorov’s quiet decision not to don a pride jersey.

Conservatives feel not only that the cultural powers-that-be have turned against them, but that even among seeming political allies there is no shortage of traitors to the cause.

Ex-Republican strategists have openly admitted that they would advise emphasizing cultural issues during campaign season and then ignoring them in office. Prior to Donald Trump’s rise, the position taken by party officeholders on immigration was vastly different from the sentiments of the base. The only legislation Republicans ever seemed to pass at the national level, it’s been said, are tax cuts. A significant portion of “conservative” commentators on television have renounced almost all of their conservative beliefs.

Betrayal, some might argue, is endemic to the American conservative’s experience.

There’s some truth in this story, but also some self-interested exaggeration. Republican officeholders and personalities looking to differentiate themselves have long blamed the vacuous “establishment” for the conservative movement’s shortcomings. The establishment  makes for a more interesting, more profitable foil than the incontestable, structural fact that in the United States, it is very difficult to pass federal legislation that is in any way unpopular with the bulk of either party’s base.

Strong-willed officeholders are necessary to effect change federally, yes. But so is control of the White House, House of Representatives, and 60+ votes in the Senate. The last time either party boasted as much was the Democrats for only a few months in 2009. Before that, it was the Democrats again in 1979.

Even still, the conservative movement, imperfect as it is, has plenty to boast about. It was only a few months ago that nearly a half-century of effort culminated in the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade. On gun rights, religious freedom, and myriad other issues, conservatives have achieved massive victories. Tax cuts, as maligned as they may be, are popular drivers of economic growth and prosperity. School choice is more popular than ever. Conservatives have effectively pushed back on bad energy and criminal justice policies.

Pretending that the conservative win column is empty, and that nearly all Republicans are all too willing to betray the base only leads to worse outcomes, including the nomination of bad candidates who can’t win general elections and amplification of bad sources of information whose entire model depends on villainizing other conservatives.

Crowder may think himself the hero for turning in “traitors” he once counted as comrades, but really he’s on just another witch hunt feeding into an understandable if overgrown betrayal complex that’s its own kind of impediment to success.

This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.