The Guardian (USA)

Tucker Carlson is not an anti-war populist rebel. He is a fascist

- Jason Stanley

Fox News has finally broken ties with its most popular star, Tucker Carlson. His ousting has been bemoaned by some commentato­rs, who have taken Carlson to be a rebellious anti-war populist, evading easy political characteri­zation. But is it really so complicate­d to classify Carlson’s political ideology?

In late February 2022, then Fox News anchor Tucker Carlson, in the face of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, began a pro-Russia monologue urging his audience to ask themselves the question: “Why do I hate Putin so much?” The gist of Carlson’s comments about Russia’s leader is that Putin should not be regarded as an enemy. Instead, the realenemie­s of America are those who call white Americans racist, those who teach so-called critical race theory in schools, business elites who ship jobs abroad, and those who imposed Covid lockdowns on the United States.

In short, Carlson urged, the real enemies of America are internal – racial minorities, doctors and politician­s, professors and educators, and large corporatio­ns who shift jobs to other countries. Carlson has been resolutely against US support for Ukraine. Insofar as Carlson has since that point gone to war, it has rather been against these supposed internal enemies.

So, is Tucker Carlson hard to classify? On the one hand, he spreads tropes central to neo-Nazi propaganda, such as “white replacemen­t” theory, suggesting that leftist elites seek to replace “legacy Americans” by foreign non-white immigrants. On the other hand, he denounces media, intellectu­al and political elites, as well as US interventi­on in Ukraine, platformin­g those who identify as the “anti-war left”, such as Jimmy Dore. How should we best understand this set of views? If Carlson has fascist sympathies, as do, quite inarguably, many of those who applaud him, how do we understand his firm stance against US military and financial support for Ukraine? Surely, historical­ly speaking, fascism is not compatible with the isolationi­st position Carlson has urged.

We should look to history as our guide here. But the history that best informs us in this case is not European history, but American history. Before the beginning of the second world war, all of America’s pro-fascist parties opposed US interventi­on on the side of its allies against Nazi Germany. Often, the opposition to the US supporting Britain against Nazi Germany was represente­d as “isolationi­sm”.

There were openly fascist organizati­ons during this time, such as the German American Bund. Somewhat more ambiguous was the America First movement. As the historian Bradley Hart recounts, in a packed America First rally in Madison Square Garden in 1941, the Montana senator Burton K Wheeler denounced “jingoistic journalist­s and saber-rattling bankers” who were pushing the nation into war against Germany.

While the agenda of some members of the America First movement at the time might have genuinely been pacifist, it’s quite clear that the main agenda was in fact support for Hitler. The America First movement had strong support from American fascist movements of various stripes. Its most prominent spokespers­on, Charles Lindbergh, published the following words in support of his anti-war position in an essay entitled “Geography, Aviation, and Race” in Reader’s Digest in 1939:

It is simply inarguable fact that American racial fascism has a clear

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States