WhatsappThe liberal establishment stifled debate and smeared its foes, discrediting “gatekeeping.” But that’s no excuse for being neutral about real neo-Nazis and antisemites.
Nick Fuentes had good reason to celebrate. He is the leading example of the so-called “groypers”—the term applied to the particular brand of fanatical antisemites and far-right extremists for which he is the leading spokesperson. Any doubt that he was gaining ground in his efforts to be mainstreamed in American political discourse was removed on Sunday by President Donald Trump.
In one of his typical off-hand media availabilities, this time on his way back to the White House from a stay at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, Trump was asked what he thought about former Fox News host Tucker Carlson giving Fuentes a friendly interview on his podcast.
The president replied, “You can’t tell him who to interview.” Trump publicly dined once with Fuentes in Mar-a-Lago along with Kanye West, another prominent Jew-hater, in 2022, and then afterwards claimed that he didn’t know who he was. He seemed to be repeating that story now by saying that he “didn’t know much about” Fuentes. Still, as far as he was concerned, if Carlson wanted to interview Fuentes, then “get the word out,” the president said. “People have to decide. Ultimately, people have to decide.”
A defeat for decency
While the claim of ignorance might have been credible three years ago, it doesn’t hold up anymore, especially after the debate among conservatives over Fuentes that has been raging in the last month.
While Trump and his supporters can claim that this doesn’t constitute an endorsement of the young antisemite, that wasn’t how the groyper leader—a figure with a large following on social media—treated it. He shared the video of the Trump statement with the comment, “Thank you, Mr. President.”
That’s a defeat for decent people, regardless of where they stand on the political spectrum, who would like to relegate extremist trolls like Fuentes to the fever swamps on the far right and out of mainstream discourse.
The Democratic Party has elevated its own brand of antisemites—far-left, progressive Israel-haters like New York City mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani and the members of the far-left congressional “Squad”—to be the rock stars of the political left. The moral equivalents of Mamdani and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) on the right, such as the erratic Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), whose re-election Trump now opposes, are not treated with the same deference or in a position to lead the Republicans in the future. But the willingness of Trump and others to tolerate Carlson—and now, apparently, Fuentes—has created a crisis about antisemitism on the right.
This is shocking—and not just because one would have thought that no sensible person, regardless of political affiliation, would have thought a softball interview of Fuentes, in addition to other antisemites and Israel-haters Carlson has hosted on his show in the last year, would have been defensible.
But those who are voicing outrage about what Trump just said, as well as the other examples of those who rushed to Carlson’s defense, are missing something important. The argument isn’t so much about whether Fuentes’s hate is laudable. It’s about “gatekeeping.”
Discrediting ‘gatekeeping’
The notion that some views, like Fuentes’s particular variant of neo-Nazi lunacy, are so abhorrent that they ought not to be considered worthy of discussion, let alone a fair hearing, has become completely discredited among many conservatives.
A not-insignificant portion of political thinkers and voices on the right seems to have adopted the position that shutting down discussion of any opinion—no matter how disgusting or immoral—is wrong. And many people who may not be comfortable with extremists in any other context are nodding along with the defense of Carlson because of this.
How did we get here?
The answer is that it is an overreaction to the way the political left and its toxic ideologies about race have come to dominate the public square in recent years. The long march of the progressives through American institutions that control education, the media and culture, which culminated in the Black Lives Matter summer of 2020, created a wave of “cancelations” in which anyone who dissented from the new neo-Marxist leftist orthodoxy was shamed and hounded out of public life.
A refusal to genuflect to the noxious ideas of critical race theory, intersectionality and settler-colonialism rendered otherwise qualified persons ineligible for jobs in academia, mainstream liberal media outlets, the fine arts and even popular culture. Those already in such positions were often driven out of them if they were labeled as conservatives.
Moreover, the entire tenor of the national debate was deeply influenced by the intolerance of the left. The risible notion that “anyone I don’t like is Hitler” or a foe of democracy became normative for political liberals. Calling Republicans Nazis or fascists, though, is nothing new; similar false accusations were frequently heard 20 years ago against figures such as President George W. Bush. However, it went into overdrive once Trump came on the political scene and is now almost a reflexive reaction to almost any conservative opinion or personality.
Trump defeated efforts not merely to cancel him, but to bankrupt and imprison him. The left, though frustrated by their political defeats, has now shifted to using the same methods to apply the same tactics to supporters of Israel. Following the lead of the Soviet propagandists who convinced the United Nations to falsely label Zionism as racism 50 years ago, they now do the same to Jews, employing blood libels about Israel committing “genocide.”
Sadly, in confirmation of the horseshoe theory of politics in which extremists always find common ground in their shared antisemitism, some on the right, like Carlson (and the even more odious far-right political commentator Candace Owens and Fuentes), are playing the same game. The only difference is that rather than claiming that Israel is a racist state because it’s Jewish, they seek to delegitimize Christian Zionists and Jews by upholding old traditions of Christian theological antisemitism and isolationist tropes about Jews being aliens who threaten and manipulate American interests for the sake of Israel.
In a saner era, conservative thought leaders would not put up with such appalling views being treated as debatable, let alone something decent people should tolerate. That is exactly what William F. Buckley, the founder of modern conservatism, did in the 1960s to the extremists of the John Birch Society, and again, in the 1990s to antisemites like Pat Buchanan and Joseph Sobran. Buckley’s “gatekeeping” was long celebrated by conservatives as evidence not only of his leadership but of how the political right was able to discard crackpots and achieve enormous political victories.
Overreacting to the left
That kind of gatekeeping isn’t merely out of fashion on the right. It is currently being viewed as wrong and somehow no different from the cancellations meted out to dissenters from the woke catechism of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) or the idea that America is an irredeemably racist nation by BLM and other progressives.
In its place is the sort of nonjudgmental attitude about extremism voiced by popular podcasters like Megyn Kelly, Matt Walsh, and now, the U.S. president himself.
But just because leftists were wrong to accuse Trump of being a racist, a Nazi, or—in an act of unconscious irony because he is the most pro-Israel president in history—an antisemite, and to do the same to others on the right doesn’t mean that there are no such things as racists, Nazis and antisemites.
Carlson’s decision not merely to platform but give the views of the repellent racist and Jew-hater a sympathetic and even supportive hearing has divided conservatives in recent weeks. More than that, he used the show to vent his own hatred for Israel, “Christian Zionists”—whom he denounced as guilty of “heresy” and suffering from a “brain virus”—and to float the traditional antisemitic trope about Jews being guilty of dual loyalty.
Most mainstream conservatives and Republicans treated this latest example of Carlson’s soft spot for Jew-hatred as conclusive proof that the podcaster and longtime member of the Trump family inner circle should be condemned as a hate-monger, rather than be treated as a star of the political right. Others, such as Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts, as well as other right-wing podcasters like Kelly and Walsh, defended Carlson and condemned those calling him out.
Roberts walked back his claims that Carlson’s critics were “venomous,” as well as some of his claims that the issue was opposing efforts to force America to disregard its own interests to help Israel. But the continued willingness to treat Carlson as a friend, rather than someone to be censured and isolated, has led to an exodus of staffers, scholars and donors from Heritage, and some of its task forces. They believe that an institution that had become a leading voice of opposition to the growing threat of left-wing Jew-hatred is fatally compromised by its ties to someone who is obsessed with disgust for Israel and the Jews.
Part of this is just another manifestation of the surge of antisemitism that was unleashed by the Hamas-led Palestinian Arab attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
Mainstreaming antisemitism
That demonstrated the way that the violent victimization of Jews seems to unleash the virus of hate against them that continues to plague civilization. That it exists on the right as well as the left, which has given up being judgmental about people who support the destruction of the one Jewish state on the planet, is tragic. It’s an objective that can only be achieved via the genocide of approximately half of the Jews in the world who live in Israel, and almost always involves the use of tropes, language and actions that are inherently and unabashedly antisemitic. At the same time, significant numbers on the right—though nothing close to the consensus on the left—have come to a similar conclusion, even though they arrive at it via a different ideological path.
The allergy that conservatives have developed to the idea that lunatics should not be tolerated is a problem that must be addressed. Trump’s acquiescence to this idea and Vice President JD Vance’s silence about the actions of Carlson, who is his personal friend and someone to whom he owes a political debt, is more than troubling.
The cancellations of the left and their intolerance for free speech remain a major concern. They still have no problem with shouting down or ensuring that conservatives and supporters of Israel don’t get a hearing on college campuses. That they treat their efforts to suppress the speech of others as a form of free speech that must be protected—their main argument against Trump’s efforts to defund schools that tolerate and encourage antisemitism—is nothing less than gaslighting.
However, if the right’s reaction to this lamentable state of affairs is to declare that nothing is out of bounds and that everything, including the unabashed racism and hatred of Fuentes, is something about which decent people must agree to disagree, then that is just as bad. It also contradicts normative conservative political philosophy from its origins in the writings of English statesman Edmund Burke to Buckley to those who are now seeking to defend the right from Carlson and Fuentes. Such ideas attack the basic notions that liberty is best defended by the preservation of traditions and norms that stem from the founding principles of Western civilization, and the legacy of Jerusalem, Athens and Rome.
The left’s war on the West isn’t purely one about silencing opposing views. It’s an assault on the beliefs that are the foundation of our civilization. The West cannot be defended by platforming and normalizing neo-Nazis and antisemites; that’s exactly how the left is seeking to destroy it. Being judgmental about hate isn’t weak or surrendering to political opponents. It’s time for conservatives, including those who are still traumatized by the intolerance of the left, to realize that defending their movement against hatemongers—which sometimes may require “gatekeeping”—is just as important as fighting against the insidious Marxist ideas of the left.
