In a sharply worded column this week in The Telegraph, eminent British conservative commentator Charles Moore accused U.S. Vice President JD Vance of allowing "the oldest hatred" to take root on the American Right by refusing to confront the increasingly open antisemitism circulating in parts of his party's youth movement — and, critically, by declining to rebuke Tucker Carlson.

Moore, a member of the House of Lords who is Margaret Thatcher's authorized biographer, argues that the rapid rise of the Groypers — a white-nationalist, ultra-right online subculture centered around Nick Fuentes — mirrors earlier episodes of left-wing antisemitism in Britain under Jeremy Corbyn.

The columnist warns that this new generation of hard-right activists is beginning to shape the outlook of young conservatives in Washington, just as Corbyn-era radicals reshaped Labour's grassroots nearly a decade ago.

"Antisemitism is at their core," Moore writes of the Groypers, portraying them as overwhelmingly young men who use Christian rhetoric to launder extremist ideas.

Citing commentator Rod Dreher's estimate that 30% to 40% of Washington's conservative "Zoomers" now identify with Groyper ideology, Moore contends that these once-fringe activists are already achieving political influence.

And for the Groypers, Tucker Carlson is their hero.

Moore reserves particular criticism for Carlson, arguing that the broadcaster has become "a major influencer" whose program has repeatedly amplified figures hostile to liberal democracy.

That includes providing an hour-long appearance to Nick Fuentes, whom Moore describes — accurately reflecting widely reported statements — as a self-proclaimed admirer of Stalin and Hitler and an outspoken denouncer of what Fuentes calls "organized Jewry."

Carlson has long been criticized for rhetoric widely seen as antisemitic, including repeated suggestions that a powerful elite cabal of Jews manipulates American institutions — language echoing themes of classic antisemitic conspiracy theories.

He has also platformed guests who have minimized the crimes of authoritarian regimes or advanced narratives blaming Jewish influence for Western decline.

Moore cites this pattern as evidence of Carlson offering "hospitality to detesters of democracy."

Carlson's recent relocation to Qatar, which Moore calls "Hamas-friendly," has intensified scrutiny of his geopolitical positioning.

Yet, as Moore notes, the broadcaster is still credited with persuading Trump to name Vance as his vice-presidential pick in 2024, giving Carlson substantial sway within Republican circles.

According to Moore, this influence explains Vance's near-total silence amid uproar following Carlson's interview with Fuentes.

While Vance denounced antisemitism in general terms as "anti-American and anti-Christian," he rejected claims that the Republican Party faces a growing problem with it, calling such concerns "positively slanderous."

Yet, as Moore notes, Vance pointedly refused to criticize Carlson, the most prominent figure giving a platform to extremist narratives.

Moore argues that Vance's muted response reflects political calculation.

With Trump expected eventually to step aside, Vance is widely seen as preparing a future presidential bid — and maintaining Carlson's support is viewed as critical to that ambition.

Thus, Moore writes, the vice president appears to be following a Corbyn-era maxim: "No enemies on the Right."

Moore draws a direct parallel to Britain's Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn (2015–2020), when antisemitic activists flourished under a leadership unwilling — or ideologically unable — to confront them. Corbyn was never proven personally antisemitic, Moore notes, but his ideological blind spots and foreign-policy worldview created conditions where antisemitism metastasized in Labour's grassroots.

He warns that the Republican Party risks a similar trajectory if its leadership continues to evade responsibility for confronting extremist elements.

Antisemitism, Moore writes, is "the primordial example of political lunacy" — a conspiracy-driven worldview that inevitably undermines democracy and the rule of law.

Vance, he stresses, need not share any of Carlson's positions. But by refusing to distance himself from a broadcaster who regularly elevates figures like Fuentes, he signals a worrying tolerance for ideas that have historically led to catastrophe.

For a politician with ambitions to lead the American Right, Moore concludes, failing to lead is itself a choice — and one that demands explanation.