Opinion | Conservatives Once More Rally to Defend Nazis
Tucker Carlson's recent controversy is deeply intertwined with longstanding issues within the right.
TroibNews 
Tucker Carlson has once again sparked controversy by hosting a two-hour podcast with Darryl Cooper, whom he described as “the best and most honest popular historian in the United States.” On the podcast, Cooper made the shocking assertion that it was Winston Churchill, not Adolf Hitler, who was the “chief villain of the Second World War,” and claimed that the Holocaust was largely accidental.
These statements led to outcry among mainstream conservatives. Mark Antonio Wright, the Executive Editor of National Review, emphatically responded, “No, Winston Churchill was not the ‘chief villain’ of the Second World War.” Liz Cheney added, “No serious or honorable person would support or endorse this type of garbage.” Writer Bari Weiss attributed such revisionist history to ideas like those presented in Pat Buchanan's 2008 book "Churchill, Hitler, and The Unnecessary War."
Carlson's engagement with such controversial topics aligns with a broader pattern among some right-wing figures who have incorporated populist-nationalist themes, occasionally aligning themselves with extreme elements of American politics. This trend was evident when Candace Owens, a prominent MAGA influencer, claimed that Israel was supplying arms for a “Christian Holocaust” just months prior, and when Donald Trump had a dinner meeting with white nationalist and Holocaust denier Nick Fuentes at Mar-a-Lago, though Trump later claimed he did not know Fuentes’ identity.
The affinity within the America First movement for antisemitic views and Holocaust denial traces back further than Donald Trump and Pat Buchanan, reaching deep into a faction of the radical right that has long harbored hostility towards democracy both domestically and internationally. These groups have often painted liberals as communists, drawing from narratives that predate even their modern proponents. Trump, for instance, has referred to Vice President Kamala Harris as “Comrade” Kamala Harris.
Historically, the effort to whitewash Nazi atrocities began in the late 1930s with the America First movement, which was led by figures like Charles Lindbergh and supported by politicians such as Herbert Hoover. These individuals depicted Nazi Germany as a stabilizing force in Central Europe and argued that Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal posed the real totalitarian threat.
Post-World War II, this ideology persisted among certain influential journalists, businessmen, and politicians who sought to minimize Nazi war crimes and opposed the Nuremberg war crimes trials. For instance, isolationist GOP Senator Robert A. Taft criticized the trials as a miscarriage of justice, and businessman Walter Harnischfeger, a financial supporter of Senator Joe McCarthy, deemed them “worse than anything Hitler did.”
In this environment, antisemitism was rampant. Activist and businessman Merwin K. Hart equated Jews with communists and criticized the influence of "international Jewish groups" over U.S. foreign policy. Another notable figure, Colonel Robert R. McCormick, expressed disdain towards "international Bankers in New York" and published essays that questioned the motivations behind the U.S. entry into World War II.
Publisher Henry Regnery, who studied in Nazi Germany, helped pioneer Holocaust denial through his publishing house, which produced works that portrayed communism as the true danger to the West. His books sought to shift the focus from Nazi atrocities to alleged crimes by the Allies, such as the bombings of Dresden.
The resurgence of interest in revising historical views on Nazism and the Holocaust suggests a continuing pattern among some conservatives to challenge established historical narratives. For instance, JD Vance, recently declined to denounce Carlson's podcast content, stating that although he does not share all views presented, he supports open "free speech and debate."
This series of events underscores the persistent influence of extreme right-wing elements within certain factions of the Republican Party and the ongoing challenges in confronting these ideologies.As the conversation around historical revisionism gains momentum, it raises critical questions about the boundaries of acceptable discourse in political and media circles. Carlson’s platform, with its vast audience, has the potential to normalize narratives that many had thought relegated to the fringes of right-wing ideology. This phenomenon aligns with a broader trend where certain topics once seen as taboo have been increasingly scrutinized, debated, and in some instances, even valorized.
The reluctance of key figures within the Republican Party to condemn or even interrogate Carlson’s actions reflects a concerning trend toward acquiescence in the face of extremist sentiments. This environment suggests that ideas once considered out of bounds are gradually finding a foothold in mainstream political discourse. JD Vance's stance is particularly illustrative of this shift; by prioritizing "free speech and debate" over a clear repudiation of antisemitism and Holocaust denial, he provides tacit approval for those sentiments to proliferate.
The revival of isolationist and authoritarian sympathies, reminiscent of the interwar years, also highlights the ongoing prevalence of hostility toward immigration and the disdain for democratic norms. The rhetoric surrounding these issues is often cloaked in populist language that appeals to grievances felt by segments of the population who perceive themselves as marginalized or overlooked.
This re-emergence of extremist views poses a fundamental challenge to the integrity of American democracy. The normalization of antisemitic tropes and the valorization of figures who espouse such beliefs threaten to undermine the foundations of a society built on pluralism and mutual understanding. It cultivates an atmosphere where historical fact is obscured by ideology, leading to a dangerous rewriting of the past that can have real-world consequences.
Moreover, the media plays a critical role in shaping public perception. Carlson’s engagement with figures like Cooper invites scrutiny regarding the broader implications for journalistic integrity and responsibility. As such narratives gain traction, it raises questions about how mainstream media outlets will respond. Will they engage in a robust counter-narrative? Or will they risk further entrenching these ideas by failing to challenge them adequately?
The lessons of history weigh heavily in this context. The post-World War II era and the vital importance of confronting historical inaccuracies are reminders of the dangers that arise when ideologies go unchecked. The resurgence of long-refuted ideas about Nazism and the Holocaust underscores the need for vigilance and active resistance against attempts to rewrite history for contemporary political gain.
As conversations about these topics continue to unfold, the responsibilities of both political leaders and civil society become increasingly paramount. It is essential to foster an environment where historical truths are upheld, antisemitism is categorically rejected, and the importance of defending democratic values is reinforced. Allowing extremist narratives to persist unchallenged not only compromises our understanding of history but also endangers the democratic principles that underpin society.
In the coming months, as campaigns heat up and discussions intensify, it will be crucial to monitor how these themes are articulated within the political arena. The responses from Republican leaders and media figures will be telling of the party’s direction and its willingness to confront the rising tide of extremist rhetoric disguised as free speech. How these conversations evolve may very well shape the social and political landscape for years to come.
James del Carmen for TROIB News
These statements led to outcry among mainstream conservatives. Mark Antonio Wright, the Executive Editor of National Review, emphatically responded, “No, Winston Churchill was not the ‘chief villain’ of the Second World War.” Liz Cheney added, “No serious or honorable person would support or endorse this type of garbage.” Writer Bari Weiss attributed such revisionist history to ideas like those presented in Pat Buchanan's 2008 book "Churchill, Hitler, and The Unnecessary War."
Carlson's engagement with such controversial topics aligns with a broader pattern among some right-wing figures who have incorporated populist-nationalist themes, occasionally aligning themselves with extreme elements of American politics. This trend was evident when Candace Owens, a prominent MAGA influencer, claimed that Israel was supplying arms for a “Christian Holocaust” just months prior, and when Donald Trump had a dinner meeting with white nationalist and Holocaust denier Nick Fuentes at Mar-a-Lago, though Trump later claimed he did not know Fuentes’ identity.
The affinity within the America First movement for antisemitic views and Holocaust denial traces back further than Donald Trump and Pat Buchanan, reaching deep into a faction of the radical right that has long harbored hostility towards democracy both domestically and internationally. These groups have often painted liberals as communists, drawing from narratives that predate even their modern proponents. Trump, for instance, has referred to Vice President Kamala Harris as “Comrade” Kamala Harris.
Historically, the effort to whitewash Nazi atrocities began in the late 1930s with the America First movement, which was led by figures like Charles Lindbergh and supported by politicians such as Herbert Hoover. These individuals depicted Nazi Germany as a stabilizing force in Central Europe and argued that Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal posed the real totalitarian threat.
Post-World War II, this ideology persisted among certain influential journalists, businessmen, and politicians who sought to minimize Nazi war crimes and opposed the Nuremberg war crimes trials. For instance, isolationist GOP Senator Robert A. Taft criticized the trials as a miscarriage of justice, and businessman Walter Harnischfeger, a financial supporter of Senator Joe McCarthy, deemed them “worse than anything Hitler did.”
In this environment, antisemitism was rampant. Activist and businessman Merwin K. Hart equated Jews with communists and criticized the influence of "international Jewish groups" over U.S. foreign policy. Another notable figure, Colonel Robert R. McCormick, expressed disdain towards "international Bankers in New York" and published essays that questioned the motivations behind the U.S. entry into World War II.
Publisher Henry Regnery, who studied in Nazi Germany, helped pioneer Holocaust denial through his publishing house, which produced works that portrayed communism as the true danger to the West. His books sought to shift the focus from Nazi atrocities to alleged crimes by the Allies, such as the bombings of Dresden.
The resurgence of interest in revising historical views on Nazism and the Holocaust suggests a continuing pattern among some conservatives to challenge established historical narratives. For instance, JD Vance, recently declined to denounce Carlson's podcast content, stating that although he does not share all views presented, he supports open "free speech and debate."
This series of events underscores the persistent influence of extreme right-wing elements within certain factions of the Republican Party and the ongoing challenges in confronting these ideologies.As the conversation around historical revisionism gains momentum, it raises critical questions about the boundaries of acceptable discourse in political and media circles. Carlson’s platform, with its vast audience, has the potential to normalize narratives that many had thought relegated to the fringes of right-wing ideology. This phenomenon aligns with a broader trend where certain topics once seen as taboo have been increasingly scrutinized, debated, and in some instances, even valorized.
The reluctance of key figures within the Republican Party to condemn or even interrogate Carlson’s actions reflects a concerning trend toward acquiescence in the face of extremist sentiments. This environment suggests that ideas once considered out of bounds are gradually finding a foothold in mainstream political discourse. JD Vance's stance is particularly illustrative of this shift; by prioritizing "free speech and debate" over a clear repudiation of antisemitism and Holocaust denial, he provides tacit approval for those sentiments to proliferate.
The revival of isolationist and authoritarian sympathies, reminiscent of the interwar years, also highlights the ongoing prevalence of hostility toward immigration and the disdain for democratic norms. The rhetoric surrounding these issues is often cloaked in populist language that appeals to grievances felt by segments of the population who perceive themselves as marginalized or overlooked.
This re-emergence of extremist views poses a fundamental challenge to the integrity of American democracy. The normalization of antisemitic tropes and the valorization of figures who espouse such beliefs threaten to undermine the foundations of a society built on pluralism and mutual understanding. It cultivates an atmosphere where historical fact is obscured by ideology, leading to a dangerous rewriting of the past that can have real-world consequences.
Moreover, the media plays a critical role in shaping public perception. Carlson’s engagement with figures like Cooper invites scrutiny regarding the broader implications for journalistic integrity and responsibility. As such narratives gain traction, it raises questions about how mainstream media outlets will respond. Will they engage in a robust counter-narrative? Or will they risk further entrenching these ideas by failing to challenge them adequately?
The lessons of history weigh heavily in this context. The post-World War II era and the vital importance of confronting historical inaccuracies are reminders of the dangers that arise when ideologies go unchecked. The resurgence of long-refuted ideas about Nazism and the Holocaust underscores the need for vigilance and active resistance against attempts to rewrite history for contemporary political gain.
As conversations about these topics continue to unfold, the responsibilities of both political leaders and civil society become increasingly paramount. It is essential to foster an environment where historical truths are upheld, antisemitism is categorically rejected, and the importance of defending democratic values is reinforced. Allowing extremist narratives to persist unchallenged not only compromises our understanding of history but also endangers the democratic principles that underpin society.
In the coming months, as campaigns heat up and discussions intensify, it will be crucial to monitor how these themes are articulated within the political arena. The responses from Republican leaders and media figures will be telling of the party’s direction and its willingness to confront the rising tide of extremist rhetoric disguised as free speech. How these conversations evolve may very well shape the social and political landscape for years to come.
James del Carmen for TROIB News
