In a forceful opinion column published Monday, Rich Lowry of National Review sounded the alarm over what he perceives as a rising tide of antisemitism within core segments of the conservative movement — most prominently through the actions of Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens.
Lowry argues that if this moment goes unchallenged, conservatism risks being morally and politically “poisoned.”
Lowry begins by highlighting Carlson’s recent interview on his podcast with Nick Fuentes, a white nationalist influencer who denies the Holocaust and openly admires Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin.
According to Lowry, the exchange — in which Carlson persistently avoided meaningful pushback — was less of a serious interview than a salutary platforming of extremist ideology.
In his words, Carlson “gave the 27-year-old Nazi sympathizer a tongue bath” and reflected, “I guess you won” when Fuentes claimed ideological victory.
The core of Lowry’s critique is that Carlson and Owens do not simply dabble in controversial opinions but are working to “make anti-Zionism and hostility to Judaism part of right-wing orthodoxy.”
The problem, Lowry warns, is not marginal: “If they succeed, they will poison conservatism, morally and electorally.”
The consequence, he argues, is two-fold: a betrayal of the Western heritage rooted in Judeo-Christian values; and the risk of alienating large swaths of potential support by aligning conservatism with fringe hatred.
Lowry does not spare the broader movement either.
While he acknowledges that the “MAGA”-wing led by President Donald Trump is “almost wholly defined by Trump … the most pro-Israel president the country has ever had,” he nevertheless cautions that unless traditional conservative institutions act, the movement’s identity may shift in ways few intended.
Lowry warns: the fever-swamp animus once relegated to obscure newsletters and internet message boards is now surfacing in mainstream conservative media.
He draws a chilling historical parallel to the 1930s, invoking figures like Father Coughlin and Charles Lindbergh, who used large platforms to assault the Jews.
Lowry argues: “We have returned to a version of the 1930s,” a phrase intended to jolt conservatives into recognizing the severity of the moment.
He warns that just because such rhetoric does not always come from elected officials, it “doesn’t mean it isn’t insidious and gaining traction.”
Lowry’s message is blunt: the defining question facing conservatives is whether to tolerate or confront this wave of antisemitic commentary. If it is tolerated, he contends, the conservative movement may lose its moral grounding, fracture electorally, and open itself to shameful historical comparison.
If it is confronted, there remains at least a chance of preserving a conservative identity rooted in classical liberalism, law, and pluralism.
Lowry’s column sounds a clear alarm: this is not a peripheral debate about free speech, but a fundamental fight for the soul of American conservatism.
He implores conservative leaders, influencers, and voters alike to act — lest they find themselves complicit in the very hatred they once opposed.
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
