NY Post's Lowry: Conservatives at Risk Over Antisemitism of Carlson, Owens
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.
Personally, I agree with Carlson for the most part. I don't for a minute think they hate any people. Like Carlson, I believe the leaders of the country of Israel are corrupt, and our leaders in the USA are full of corruption. Like Carlson, I don't believe anyone claiming to be America should claim dual citizenship. You should be either American, OR Israeli. Not Both! Like Carlson, I believe in free speech.
Disagreeing with the Israel government, does not make one Anti semitic. It makes one exercising free speech.
I see Jews as any other people. Some good, some bad. Like politicians here, most politicians in Israel stink ! If that make me antisemitic I plead guilty.
