Tucker’s “Neocon” Theory
How an Old Myth Is Poisoning a New Generation
Compiling the research for The Truth in Love Declaration was not a pleasant experience.
The Declaration—signed by over 1,500 witnesses spanning Anglican, Baptist, Charismatic, Non-denominational and other traditions from the United States, Europe, and Israel—formally calls on Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, Nick Fuentes, and those following their lead to repent of using Jesus’ name for Jew-hatred and false witness. In preparing that document, our team waded through the vilest corners of the internet, tracking the origins of ideas now spreading rapidly through Christian conservative circles. Many a sleepless night was spent in those storm drains.
We documented Tucker Carlson extensively. With the United States now directly engaged militarily against Iran, one of the theories we uncovered has never been more relevant, or more dangerous. This is a good moment to pull it into the light.
The Most Sophisticated Voice in the Room
Tucker Carlson is, by our assessment, the most sophisticated and dangerous antisemitic voice among the three figures named in the Declaration. Unlike Nick Fuentes, who is overt, Carlson rarely states his conclusions himself. Instead, he provides the platform and the permission for others to draw them. He retains enormous capital of public trust, significant political connections (his son still works for the Vice President’s office), and bears direct responsibility for legitimizing both Candace Owens and Nick Fuentes within the Christian conservative mainstream.
StopAntisemitism named Carlson its Antisemite of the Year for 2025, for normalizing antisemitism by “platforming and praising Holocaust revisionists and Nazi apologists, while hiding behind irony and plausible deniability … By legitimizing extremist voices and weaponizing conspiratorial imagery at a massive scale, he has helped drag antisemitic ideas back into the mainstream.” On JNS, Hammer stated it even more bluntly: Tucker is the most dangerous antisemite in the history of the United States.
“I’m not an expert. I’m not a theologian. I’m coming from total ignorance.
Carlson has been increasingly willing to deploy his ostensibly Christian convictions as a weapon against the Jewish state. This is worth pausing on, because he has simultaneously and repeatedly confessed the limits of his theological standing: “I’m not an expert. I’m not a theologian. I’m coming from total ignorance. My father is not a preacher, to put it mildly.” He has admitted that he only began reading through the Bible for the first time in 2023, and that he found the Old Testament’s themes uncomfortable and “pretty shocking.” He falsely claims that forgiveness “is not the message of the Old Testament.” Yet from this starting point, he has declared Christian Zionism a “brain virus” and a “Christian heresy” that offends him personally — a theological verdict he extends over an estimated 400 million Protestant evangelicals worldwide.
This is the man whose theories are now shaping how young American Christians understand the war with Iran.
The Theory: Disloyal Neocons, the Israel Lobby, and “Private Ethnic Wars”
A primary theory driving Carlson’s commentary, and resonating deeply with his young conservative audience, centers on the claim that Jewish and Israeli “dual loyalists,” typically labeled “neocons,” wield undue influence over Washington and push the United States into wars that serve their ethnic interests rather than America’s.
This is not a new idea. It is a well-documented antisemitic trope with a centuries-long and lethal history: the “Dual Loyalty” accusation, which portrays Jews as inherently “unassimilable,” people whose true allegiance lies not with their country but with each other or with Israel. Historically, this trope has served as a deadly pretext for persecution, from the Dreyfus Affair to the Holocaust, by falsely casting Jewish citizens as an untrustworthy “enemy within,” to justify expulsions, the stripping of rights, and genocide. Framing Jewishness as the common denominator for perceived political ills assigns collective guilt and maligns the entire Jewish community as inherently subversive. It violates the biblical prohibition: “You shall not circulate a false report” (Exodus 23:1), and defies the principle of individual justice (Ezekiel 18:20). What is new today is its reach, its packaging, and its entry point into Christian households via one of the most trusted media personalities of the past decade.
The clearest window into how this works came in a pivotal 2022 interview, when Carlson hosted retired Colonel Douglas Macgregor and asked him to characterize Volodymyr Zelensky, a Jewish president whom Carlson has elsewhere described as “sweaty and rat-like,” “shifty,” and a “persecutor of Christians.” Macgregor responded that Zelensky “was picked and then blessed by Victoria Nuland and the State Department as their man,” attributing the entire conflict to U.S. interference rather than any Russian aggression.
When Carlson asked, “Who is Victoria Nuland?” (a question that served as the pivot) Macgregor explained her connections to Jewish figures Robert and Frederick Kagan and Antony Blinken, then delivered the central claim:
“These are people with this agenda … in the case of Russia, Russia has special appeal because I think these people have ancestors who came from that region of the world and have a permanent ax to grind with the Russians — which, of course, I don’t. I don’t think most Americans do, and nor do I think anybody in government should shape policy based on whatever unhappiness their ancestors experienced in a place like Russia.”
In plain terms: Macgregor attributed the Ukraine war to an Ashkenazi Jewish genetic vendetta. Rather than challenging this extraordinary claim, Carlson pressed further, asking why donors support the war. Macgregor replied:
“Well, first of all, you’ve got to go through and identify the donors. What’s their background? Where did they come from? And why do they feel the way they do? I think there are more personal issues here than we realize with many of them.”
Carlson sat with this. No pushback. No challenge.
What Carlson did not tell his audience is the full picture of Macgregor’s views. Elsewhere, Macgregor has stated:
“President Trump would not be in the White House today if it were not for wealthy Jewish billionaires allied with their friend Netanyahu … They want global financial hegemony. The United States is simply a tool in their toolbox … The people that are wealthy … are, as the Russians used to call certain individuals many, many years ago, ‘rootless cosmopolitans.’”
The term “rootless cosmopolitan” is a well-documented Soviet slur for Jews, deployed during Stalin’s antisemitic purges. Carlson featured this man as a credible analyst, repeatedly.
Source: Tucker Carlson, “Ep. 18 Into the abyss: Colonel Douglas Macgregor tells us why the Ukraine war must end now,” X, Aug 21, 2023:
“Just Asking Questions”
Understanding why this is so effective requires understanding Carlson’s method. He operates with two primary rhetorical shields:
“Just Asking Questions:” A tactic for introducing baseless conspiracies without bearing the burden of proof. By framing historical revisionism as mere inquiry, he casts any moral pushback as censorship, protecting the lie under the guise of intellectual freedom.
“Just Noticing Things:” Often called “pattern recognition” in these circles. This approach points to isolated anecdotes or demographics to imply a sinister, collective Jewish malice while pretending to make neutral observations.
These are not accidental rhetorical choices. They are a system. And they work.
Carlson has told a Turning Point USA crowd: “There are a lot of Americans who’ve served in the IDF. They should lose their citizenship.” He has stated on his platform: “It’s about not letting any other foreign country run your country. You can’t have that.” He links U.S. policy toward Israel directly to the destruction of Christian communities across the Middle East (in Israel, Gaza, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon) claiming this is happening “at the behest of Israel,” adding: “I don’t believe in collective punishment unlike some other countries like Israel, which is big on collective punishment.” He asks: “Why do American Christian churches send money to a government [Israel] that does this to Christians?”
As many serious scholars and journalists have documented, this inverts reality. The only place in the Middle East where historic Christian communities are not in active decline is under Israeli governance. The overwhelming driver of Christian persecution and demographic collapse throughout the region is fundamentalist Islam, including in areas under Muslim Palestinian control such as Bethlehem.
The “Israel Lobby” Theory
Carlson’s most consistent vehicle for these ideas is his repeated endorsement of Dave Smith, who leans on Mearsheimer and Walt’s 2007 book The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy to argue that pro-Israel groups like AIPAC and “neocons” pushed the United States into Middle Eastern wars to remake the region for Netanyahu, at the expense of American blood and treasure.
In October 2025, columnist Coleman Hughes debated Smith directly and systematically dismantled the argument. Hughes cited evidence that Ariel Sharon’s government actually advised against the Iraq invasion; that AIPAC’s lobbying expenditure was comparable to that of the dentists’ lobby; and that neoconservative policy plans were frequently misaligned with Israeli strategic priorities. The “Israel lobby drove America to war” thesis, Hughes demonstrated, does not survive contact with the historical record.
Carlson’s response to this debate? Nothing. He keeps throwing more theories at the wall and see what sticks for a while.
See all the sources for quotes on our “Supporting Evidence” page.
Why This Matters Right Now
With American forces now engaged against Iran, every element of this framework is being activated in real time. Young conservatives, many of them sincerely Christian, are being handed a ready-made interpretive lens: this is a Jewish war, fought for Jewish interests, against American and Christian interests, at the direction of disloyal dual-loyalists who have captured their government.
That is a lie. It is also an ancient lie, one that in living memory provided the ideological scaffolding for violence. It has been repackaged for a new generation by the most trusted voice in conservative media.
The work of The Truth in Love Declaration is precisely to name this dynamic clearly, from within the Church, for the sake of the Church. It is a public Declaration that you cannot claim to love the King of the Jews while reviling His kinsmen according to the flesh (Romans 9:3–5).
▶ If you haven’t signed, read the Declaration and add your name at ChristianCallToTruth.org.
—
John Enarson is an author and Christian theology student from Sweden. He has lived in the Middle East for over 25 years and currently serves as the Christian Relations Director at Cry For Zion. He is happy to receive input or questions about his articles.
Excellent article