Charles Kesler
Claremont McKenna professor; Harvard PhD in government 1985 (student of Harvey Mansfield); Dengler-Dykema Distinguished Professor of Government at Claremont McKenna; senior fellow of the Claremont Institute; founding editor of the Claremont Review of Books; author of Crisis of the Two Constitutions (February 2021); “hedger-and-apologist-in-chief” for Eastman and Trump post-January 6; “Truth is, of course, that claims are ‘baseless’ only until such time as a base of evidence appears for them”
Who He Is
Charles Kesler is the intellectual face of respectability at the Claremont Institute — the figure who, more than anyone else, channels what Field calls “the genteel spirit of Buckley” into the New Right’s increasingly extremist project. Shep Melnick (Boston College) called him “without a doubt, the brains of the outfit.” He is the founding editor of the Claremont Review of Books and a Harvard-trained constitutional scholar who serves as the most sophisticated apologist for the Claremont turn toward Trumpist extremism.
Background
Graduated with a PhD in government from Harvard in 1985 as a student of Harvey Mansfield (the same mentor who trained Julius Krein and Gladden Pappin). Became the Dengler-Dykema Distinguished Professor of Government at Claremont McKenna College. Senior fellow of the Claremont Institute. Founding editor of the Claremont Review of Books — the journal that published Michael Anton’s BAP review, that served as a vehicle for Kesler’s own election-denialism-adjacent writing, and that featured the debate between Eastman and Joseph Bessette.
Crisis of the Two Constitutions (2021)
Kesler’s book, released in February 2021 — just weeks after January 6 — argued that American constitutionalism can only be understood through two competing frameworks: the Founders’ Constitution (good) and the Progressive Constitution (catastrophic). The progressive constitution had all but replaced the original, meaning America was “close to wrecked.” The book demanded a “new founding” and “counterrevolution.”
Shep Melnick: “The arguments of Kesler’s book can easily be read as a justification for storming the corrupted seat of power in hopes of restoring American greatness.” Rich Lowry (National Review) also saw the connections. Kesler denied that his thought provided cover for extremist action — but, Field notes, “if that was his genuine view, then it does raise questions about why he continued to be so involved with the Claremont Institute.”
The book’s title referenced Harry Jaffa’s Crisis of the House Divided, which alluded to Lincoln’s 1858 “House Divided” speech — meaning Kesler’s title alone involved “a hyperbolic, dystopian analogy between today’s partisan struggles and the shattering conflict over slavery.”
Post-January 6 Apologetics
After January 6, Kesler became the institute’s “hedger-and-apologist-in-chief.” His strategy was to:
- Express disapproval of the violence
- Critique the Trump administration for being unprepared
- Express mild skepticism about Eastman’s VP theory
- But keep “the door wide open” to the possibility that Eastman/Trump’s stolen election claims were justified
Key quote: “Truth is, of course, that claims are ‘baseless’ only until such time as a base of evidence appears for them.” This while sixty-plus lawsuits had been lost and no credible evidence of widespread fraud had been found.
In the Claremont Review of Books, Kesler published a long exchange between Eastman and critic Joseph M. Bessette — playing up counterfactuals, “provisionally granting Trump and Eastman’s premises to explore the esoteric implications of their arguments,” flooding the zone with sophistication. He eventually conceded that there was “persuasive evidence of a more normal sort” that Trump lost — and also quietly conceded the only thing that actually mattered: “none of the state legislatures in question had actually filed a formal request to withdraw and reexamine their state’s electoral votes” (meaning the entire premise of Eastman’s plan was fabricated).
In early 2022, Kesler appeared on Steve Hayward’s Power Line podcast — “The Claremont Question” — and was self-satisfied about having published a critique of Eastman, treating it as “service to the community” and the issues as “very complicated.”
By summer 2022, after the January 6th Committee hearings, Kesler admitted to the Washington Post and New York Times that Eastman was wrong, that he had “always thought that Trump lost” the 2020 election, and that it was “awkward and raises some questions” for the institute. But he still obscured the connection between Eastman’s theoretical ideas and the furor that drove rioters into the Capitol.
Field’s verdict: Kesler played a “long, coy minimization game” — advantageous personally (Claremont’s profile and donor base rose sharply after its Trumpist pivot; criticizing Eastman would have cost him friendships and standing) and psychologically (admitting complicity in something destructive is “a tough psychological proposition for anyone, especially someone purportedly committed to the cultivation of virtue and high statesmanship”).
The 1619 Project / George Floyd Moment
When George Floyd was murdered in 2020, Kesler wrote an op-ed for the New York Post headlined “Call Them the 1619 Riots” — implying a direct causal connection between the 1619 Project (the New York Times’ 2019 special issue centering slavery in American history) and the violence that broke out in connection with the George Floyd protests. This is a paradigmatic example of the New Right’s “Ideas First” framework deployed against the left.
Significance
Kesler is the key figure in understanding how the Claremont Institute’s scholarly reputation was deployed as cover for an anti-democratic project. By treating January 6 as “complicated,” by defending Eastman in the Claremont Review of Books, and by writing a book that called for “counterrevolution,” Kesler provided the institute with intellectual respectability it did not deserve. The ultimate judgment: “Some ideas, I guess, are consequence-free.”
Cross-References
- Claremont Institute — senior fellow; the institution whose reputation he protected
- Claremont Review of Books — founding editor
- John Eastman — the colleague he defended and hedged on
- Harvey Mansfield — his graduate mentor
- Michael Anton — fellow Claremonter; Kesler defended Flight 93 rhetoric as “galvanizing”
- West Coast Straussianism — the tradition he represents
- January 6 2021 — the event his apologetics addressed
- The Flight 93 Election — defended by Kesler as merely “metaphorical”
- Ideas First — his deployment of this logic in “Call Them the 1619 Riots”