When Tucker Carlson sat down with Nick Fuentes, some cheered it as a courageous stand for free speech—a willingness to entertain even the most controversial voices. But it wasn’t a defense of free speech. It was a signal that deeply corrosive, hateful 20th-Century ideologies are now being treated as viable options—as if the only question is whether we agree or disagree, not whether we are morally obligated to reject them outright. Make no mistake—these ideologies cost millions of lives just decades ago, and platforming them is playing with fire.
He gets a following by exploiting real frustrations with just enough half-truth to muddy the waters.
Nick Fuentes does not merely “ask tough questions” or offer “uncomfortable truths.” His worldview is soaked in the rhetoric of Holocaust denial, Hitler admiration, white racial supremacy, and systemic Jew-hatred. He is not critiquing policies or institutions; he is reviving the genocidal precepts of Mein Kampf and pretending they are edgy or misunderstood—they’re not, they’re atavistic ideas that have been thoroughly exposed and refuted. Unfortunately, he gets a following by exploiting real frustrations with just enough half-truth to muddy the waters.
And yet Tucker Carlson gave those views a platform, not as a curiosity, not to expose them and tear them down, but as a supposedly serious contribution to debate. That isn’t free speech—it’s normalization. Normalization of an ideology that half a million Americans died to defeat on the beaches of Normandy, at Anzio, at Bastogne, in the Pacific, and across Europe. We don’t honor their sacrifice by politely re-opening conversations they answered with blood.
Criticism of Israel, of Zionism, or even of the Talmud and its surrounding culture, is not antisemitism…But what Fuentes practices is radicalized hatred, denigrating Jews as a people.
Let’s also be clear about something too many people conflate: Criticism of Israel, of Zionism, or even of the Talmud and its surrounding culture, is not antisemitism. Any government should be subject to scrutiny. Any religion or philosophy should be open to thoughtful, good-faith critique. But what Fuentes and others like him practice is not critique—it is racialized hatred, denigrating Jews as a people, casting them as an enemy race, calling for their exclusion or worse. That’s not dissent. It’s bigotry.
The same applies to Darryl Cooper and Candace Owens, both of whom have waded into dubious historical waters—not merely questioning aspects of World War II or Allied strategy, but repackaging long-discredited revisionism that downplays the crimes of Nazi Germany or implies that Jews “had it coming.” Cooper has called Churchill the real villain of WWII, while Owens has suggested American intervention in the war was a mistake and toyed with Holocaust minimization. These aren’t harmless “alternative histories.” They are the exact talking points used by fascist sympathizers the world over.
A free society must never use government power to silence even the most repugnant voices.
The question isn’t whether you’re “allowed” to say things like this. You are. You should be. Free speech in America must remain absolute: let the fascists and the Marxists march, rant, podcast, livestream, and post. Let them reveal themselves in full daylight, not hide in secret clubs or encrypted chats. A free society must never use government power to silence even the most repugnant voices.
Free speech is not the same as equal speech. It is not an obligation for serious people to pretend all ideas are equally worthy of amplification.
But free speech is not the same as equal speech. It is not an obligation for serious people to pretend all ideas are equally worthy of amplification. Allowing someone to speak publicly is not the same as granting them a prime-time interview, a shared platform, or the moral legitimacy of being treated as if they are part of the broader American conversation.
To platform someone is to imply that what they’re saying belongs in the arena of serious ideas. That gesture doesn’t just “give them room to speak”—it confers dignity. It confers weight. It sends a message to the public: “This person is someone whose worldview can be debated, not dismissed.”
That is where the line gets crossed. That is the difference between respecting free expression and enabling the spread of deeply anti-American ideology.
True “America First” doesn’t entertain fascism as a respectable alternative. True America First rejects it—just as fiercely as it rejects communism.
True “America First” doesn’t entertain fascism as a respectable alternative. True America First rejects it—just as fiercely as it rejects communism. Both are rival totalitarian socialist ideologies, both seek to replace individual rights with the primacy of the state, and both have stacked mountains of corpses in their wake. We defeated both in the 20th century not by platforming them, not by validating their premises, but by refuting them—morally, politically, economically, militarily.
Those who argue today that we must “consider” or “hear out” the fascists in order to defeat the Marxists don’t understand America’s history—or its soul.
We didn’t win the Cold War by giving Stalinists equal time. We didn’t liberate Europe to see Hitler’s acolytes trotted back out as “thought leaders.” Those who argue today that we must “consider” or “hear out” the fascists in order to defeat the Marxists don’t understand America’s history—or its soul.
If you need fascism to fight communism, you’ve already lost. If you need racial supremacy to fight globalism, you’ve abandoned the very premise of America. If you need Hitler to save Western civilization, you’ve forfeited any claim to be a defender of it.
If you need Hitler to save Western civilization, you’ve forfeited any claim to be a defender of it.
There is a right way to fight destructive ideologies: intellectually, historically, morally, constitutionally: by refusing to amplify or mimic the very evils you oppose; by declaring with conviction. We can oppose Marxism without becoming fascists, oppose globalism without embracing blood-and-soil nationalism, defend religious freedom without treating one ethnic or religious group as inherently inferior.
That was the genius of the American project—that liberty and justice for all required vigilance, not compromise. True courage today is not platforming evil, but proclaiming truth in a world that’s forgotten what it looks like.
So let the Nick Fuenteses of the world speak—in the public square, where we can see them clearly. But never give them a platform like Tucker did.
Never allow exposure to become endorsement.
And never forget: we already beat these ideas once. We run the very real risk of having to relive the worst horrors of the 20th-Century if we forget who we are and compromise our founding values.
Kelly John Walker is an American statesman, senior writer, author, and entrepreneur. He is the Founder of FreedomTalk, Editor-in-Chief of FreedomTalk Magazine, and Co-Founder of Parents Demanding Justice Alliance. His work has appeared in The Washington Times, Gateway Pundit, The Epoch Times, Newsmax, Townhall, Law Enforcement Today, and more. He’s a frequent guest on national programs including Real America’s Voice, Bannon’s War Room, NTD Capitol Report, and more. Kelly holds degrees in English, Theology, and a Master of Science earned on a U.S. Department of Defense fellowship. In 2020, after being canceled and arrested for standing against government overreach, he became a leading independent journalist and advocate for liberty and parental rights.
