The Daily Signal - Victor Davis Hanson: Confronting Conservative Antisemitism

Episode Date: November 10, 2025

Tucker Carlson’s interview with controversial right-wing podcaster Nick Fuentes has snowballed into a bigger conversation that has everyone asking: Does the Right have a serious issue with antisemitism?   Victor Davis Hanson explains how conservative icons like William F. Buckley once handled extremists, contrasts that with today’s platforms, and explores why some on the right are now flirting with the same rhetoric on Israel that echoes left-wing sentiments. How should the conservative movement handle this divide? Hanson breaks it down on today’s episode of “Victor Davis Hanson: In a Few Words.”   “I think the reason for the rise of antisemitism is an element, the isolationist base of the MAGA movement, felt that it was the driving force and that it was going to be isolationist and we were not going to get involved in the Middle East. And they were very suspicious of so-called, what they call neocons and what they call Christian Zionists. As Tucker said, he hates Christian Zionists over any other people. Even bin Laden? Al-Qaeda? ISIS? I don't know. But they were losing influence. Donald Trump proved that he is not a neoisolation. He's a Jacksonian. Targeted strikes to preserve and enhance U.S. deterrents.”   (0:00) Introduction (0:59) The Tucker Carlson-Nick Fuentes Interview (1:32) The Rise of Right-Wing Antisemitism (7:44) Left-Wing vs. Right-Wing Antisemitism (9:17) The MAGA Movement and Isolationism (11:09) The Importance of the U.S.-Israel Alliance (14:14) Conclusion   👉Don’t miss out on Victor’s latest short videos by subscribing to The Daily Signal today. You’ll be notified every time a new piece of content drops: https://www.youtube.com/dailysignal?sub_confirmation=1    👉Want more VDH? Watch Victor’s weekly, hour-long podcast, “Victor Davis Hanson: In His Own Words,” now! Subscribe to his YouTube channel, and enabling notification:  https://www.youtube.com/@victordavishanson7273?sub_confirmation=1    👉More exclusive content are available on Victor’s website: https://victorhanson.com     👉The Daily Signal cannot continue to tell stories, like this one, without the support of our viewers: https://secured.dailysignal.com/  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

There's been a lot of controversy recently about anti-Semitism. This time, it's not the well-known left-wing anti-Semitism. It's on the right. It came to the fore when Tucker Carlson had an interview with the known anti-Semite, and at one time, pro-Nazi, Nick Fuentes. Now, the problem was this was not in isolation. If you want to have an edgy guest, you have to be very careful. When William F. Buckley, on his famous firing line, had such people, he took a great risk.

But Buckley did something different than Tucker did, not to give them an unfiltered platform without counter-examination, but to show everybody that these ideas were not only dangerous, but could be easily refuted. So Buckley constantly cross-examine them, something Tucker didn't do, which poses another question. Hello. This is Victor Davis Hansen for the Daily Signal. There's been a lot of controversy recently about anti-Semitism and the threat that it poses to the United States at large. And it's been very controversial because this time it's not the well-acknowledged and well-known left-wing anti-Semitism. What we see on campuses where people are yelling river to the sea or they're chasing Jews into a library or they're tearing down pictures of the Israeli hostages, what we've seen for the last two years. It's on the right. And it came to the fore this week when Tucker Carlson on his platform gave an interview or had an interview with the known anti-Semite, and at one time pro-Nazi, Nick Fuentes, very young man, never written much. He's not an activist with anywhere the audience of Charlie Kirk, but he's well known. He's

glib, and Tucker had him on. Now, that caused an enormous controversy because of the things that Fuentes has said in the past. He's supported going after Jews, suggesting that they are behind many of the nefarious cabals or conspiracy that take place, that they're not really white people. He's attacked J.D. Vance's wife, Vice President Vance's wife, because she's Indian, and they named their children with Indian first names. I could go on and on. That record is well documented. Tucker chose, nevertheless, to interview him.

Now, the problem was that this was not in isolation. He had the World War II revisionist, Daryl Cooper. He wasn't a historian. Tucker said he was the most prominent in historian writing today in America. That was not true. He's never written an article or a book about World War II. But he is known for suggesting that a cabalian. ball in the United States, and you know who that is, had unduly influenced the Roosevelt

administration to ally with Russia over either keeping neutral or aligning as a later guest, David Cullum suggested, allying with Adolf Hitler and the Nazis. Many of the things that Cooper said, as I have addressed in writing and in podcasts, were demonstrably untrue. So there was a backstory there. So when people got, when Tucker had Nick Fuentes have this wide platform. He has a big audience. The question was, why are you doing this? And if you want to have an edgy guest, you have to be very careful, radical left or radical right. They get prominence because they're usually rhetoricians, they're orators, they're demagogues, and they're adept at speaking. And when William F. Buckley on his famous firing line had such people, he took a great

risk. Eldridge Cleaver, one of the founders of the Black Panther Party, a convicted felon, a serial rapist. Ditto U.E. Newton, who shot and killed someone on the show. William Shockley, the eugenicist, Buckley had on. George Wallace, the at one time segregationist. But Buckley did something different than Tucker did. The point was not to give them an unfiltered platform without disagreement or counter-examination or rebuttal, but to show everybody that these ideas were not only dangerous, but could be easily refuted. So Buckley constantly cross-examine them, something Tucker didn't do, which poses another question. He had an interview in the same format with Ted Cruz, a fellow conservative. At one time, they were very close. And yet Tucker used all of

his knowledge, his wit, his repartee, and cross-examine crews unmercifully, unmercously. And he came with data. He drilled him on the population of Iran. Don't you know that? What I'm getting at is, why would you give an interview with a conservative senator who agrees 90% with what you do and yet try to cross-examine him and interrupt him and make him look foolish? If that's what you want, it's a free country. But why not use that same technique at someone who is well beyond the limits of acceptable discourse, somebody who's called openly for racist punishment and for ostracism of blacks and Jews? And why not just show the world what Nick Fuentes was and is?

But he didn't do that. Why is this happening? Why are we having Candace Owens saying there's a ring of, of Jews in Hollywood. Why are we having Nick Fuentes get this sudden prominence? Why these World War II revisionist historians? I think part of it is the left has so mainstreamed anti-Semitism, as we see on college campuses, and really said, you know,

that if you're Jewish, you're for Israel, and if you're for Israel, you're for genocide, and demonize and threaten the safety of Jews, that people on the right felt, well, the left is sort of taken down the restrictions on what we can say and do, and we're going to take advantage of it and do what they're doing. We anti-Semites on the right are going to join the freedom, allow the anti-Semitism on the left. There's demography, too. The Jewish population is not as big as it is. It's only about 7 million, and a lot of Jews are non-observant, or they're part of the

melting pot, natural process of assimilation and acculturation. In contrast, the Arab and Muslim population is approaching three and a half or four million, and it's scheduled to take over from Jews, and they are located these populations in key electoral swing states, Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and a lot of people think, you know what, we have to give a certain leeway to anti-Semitic ideas expressed by this particular Muslim or Arab group because the Jewish so-called lobby is not as strong as it was. It's going the way of the Greek lobby. In other words, a very important group of Greek Americans used to ensure that Greece was treated fairly, and now they're intermarried and immigration has stopped from Greece. Maybe that's a reason as well. But there's one other key reason why we're seeing this really dangerous anti-Semitism emerge on the right. I want to say, first of all, there is a right-wing anti-Semitism different than the left-wing. Left-wing anti-Semitism is usually found among elites.

It's in the university. It has a lot to do with the Middle East and its current manifestations. And usually it's Marxist. In other words, that the Jews are sneaky middlemen that control the economy. It comes right out of the mouth of Karl Marx. And this was what the Soviets were, Joseph Stalin was an anti-Semite. So we know what that is, that they are settler colonialists, that there are white victimizers on this Marxist binary, the left is established.

The right wing is a little bit different. It persecutes and demonizes Jews on the grounds that, well, these are Christ killers. They are responsible for the death of Jesus Christ, or they are not completely white. They're of a different race. It's a little bit more virulent, a lot more virulent, but therefore it's more easily identifiable. The left is more insidious because it's probably. in a creed of the elite and the educated, supposedly. But there's this one key thing that's going on that is allowing these people to come forward.

And when they come forward and they're mainstream, then elected officials like Marjorie Taylor Green or advisors, former advisors like Steve Bannon, Candaceom, people get into the mix. and I think the reason for the rise of anti-Semitism is a element, the isolationist base of the MAGA movement felt that it was the driving force and that it was going to be isolationist and we were not going to get involved in the Middle East and they were very suspicious of so-called what they call neocons and what they call Christian Zionists, Tucker said he hates Christian Zionists over any other people, even bin Laden, Al-Qaeda, ISIS, I don't know. But they were losing influence. Donald Trump proved that he is not a neo-isolation. He's a Jacksonian.

Targeted strikes to preserve and enhance U.S. deterrence. Take out Soleimani, Baghdadi, take out the nuclear facilities in Iran, but one-shot deals where we're not involved in a forever war. And they felt that he was being unduly influenced the way in the past. Maybe Roosevelt or Truman had been unduly influenced by Jews, either to ally with Russia or to help found the state of Israel. And therefore, our relationship with Israel showed the influence of Jewish advisors. But when you look at the Jewish advisor, there's some of the most prominent, important, brilliant people in the MAGA movement. Stephen Miller, a special advisor to the president. Jared Kushner and Stephen Whitkoff were the architects of the Gaza ceasefire.

Howard Lucknick was very prominent in the campaign. He's Secretary of Commerce. I don't think we've ever had a better EPA director than Lee Zeldon. So there's not a secret cabal of Jews that are pulling strings. They're open, transparent. They're part of the mega movement. And let me just finish with Israel, this demonization that Israel is driving U.S. foreign policy. It's not. They always talk about the neocons and the Iraq war. Dick Cheney and George

Bush and Dom Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, Condolees-Royce. This was the inner circle of the Bush team, and they made the argument and went before Congress that we should take out Saddam Hussein preemptively. There was not any Jewish people that have authority to make that decision. Richard Pearl, David Fum, Max Boot, maybe they were advisors, but there was no neocon cabal. And then when you look at Israel, Israel opposed the Iraq War. They felt that it was a mixed direction in Western resources. The real enemy, if you were going to do something, and they weren't going to advise that, would be Iran rather than Iraq. If we look at Israel in conclusion, it's a constitutional consensual society in a sea of 500 Muslims that live under autocracy. There's two million Arab citizens

inside Israel. And they have the same rights as Israeli citizens. There's 180,000 Christians. There's more Christians inside Israel than anywhere in the West Bank, and probably more than anywhere in the Arab world, and they have full rights. Everybody says, these people on the Tucker program I'm saying Jewish state, it's a Jewish state. What you think that the 50-plus nations surrounding them are, they're Islamic states. But the difference is they're autocratic and on free. Israel is a liberal society. It's our best friend.

We would not have been able to take out the Iranian nuclear threat to the West. And by the way, it wasn't just Israel's idea. The Europeans were terrified of it. We were too. If the IDF's Air Force had not first neutral. neutralized, neutralized, the air defenses of Iran. And when you look at the people who have killed Americans, hundreds of them, it was Hezbollah blowing up the marine barracks in 1983, blowing up the U.S. Embassy. The Israelis took out and nullified and made inert Hezbollah.

We were attacking the Houthis independently. Israel has done more damage to them, the common enemy, than we have. So the alliance with Israel is not anti-U.S. interest. It's in our interest. Whether you're idealistic, and you should be, that we support fellow free nations that have constitutional government and treat their citizens equitably and fairly and protect their civil rights. Or you believe strategically that we have a small number of very important allies, allies that are. muscular, strong, and they have the similar interests as we do, both in Europe, Japan, South Korea, and that small number of allied nations, Israel is preeminent. Let me just conclude them. Empirically, there is no evidence that World War II we should have allied with the Germans or that we did something wrong in World War II. It was a heroic effort. We defeated fascism. We

defeated Japanese militarism. We defeated Nazism. The Axis killed over 30 million, million Russians, Chinese, Jews, Eastern Europeans, civilians, well aside the military lives that they were responsible for taking. So there's no need for World War to revisionism. There's no need to say that the wars that we've been in the past were prompted by Jews or secret cabals. There's no need to demonize, and by having, demonize Jews by having Nick Fuentes on a program without cross-examination. And what do we as conservatives on the right do? I think we have to speak out, according to our station, anytime we see this requedcence of anti-Semitism and say it's not founded on history, it's not founded on logic, and some of the most valuable

citizens in the conservative movement as well as the United States at large are Jewish Americans and we're very lucky to have such people. And the worst thing that the conservative movement, the Republicans in particular, would be allow this anti-Semitic virus, anti-Semitic virus. That's a term that they often use. But it's a virus, it's a disease, it's a morbidity. We cannot let it spread. And it's past time to stop it. Thank you very much. This is Victor Davis Hansen for the Daily Sea. Thank you for tuning in to the Daily Signal. Please like, share, and subscribe to be notified for more content like this.

You can also check out my own website at victorhansen.com.