James Lindsay's "Woke Right" Panic is Repackaging Marcuse's Repressive Tolerance

Lindsay is using Marxist tactics to silence his critics

If you value my work, please consider a $8/month or $80/year subscription. I’m funded entirely by you.

If you can’t financially support my efforts, please consider sharing my work with your friends and family to spread the message. I can’t do it without you.

---

In the 1960s, Marxist philosopher Herbert Marcuse wrote an influential paper called Repressive Tolerance. In it, he argued that society should be intolerant of ideas that oppose his vision of a “just and equitable” world.

Ironically, James Lindsay—a critic of Marxist tactics—has adopted this very framework to silence right-wing critics of Zionism. Through his application of Repressive Tolerance, Lindsay has created a framework where dissenting ideas are discredited, voices are silenced, and debate is stifled.

What is Repressive Tolerance?

Essentially, Marcuse's argument can be summed up like this:

• People who agree with my view of the world have good ideas and are always right. Their ideas should be openly discussed, encouraged, and amplified in polite society.

• People who disagree with my view of the world have bad ideas and are always wrong. Their ideas should be suppressed, excluded from public discourse, and never openly discussed in polite society.

Marcuse identified fascism, free-market capitalism, and ideas that uphold traditional societal norms as ideologies that deserved repression. For him, it wasn’t just about outright censorship—it was about leveraging psychological controls, cultural influences, and societal norms to marginalize and demonize anyone who advanced ideas outside the acceptable paradigm.

Marcuse believed that allowing harmful or oppressive ideas to spread unchecked would reinforce the status quo and prevent progress toward equality. As a result, he called for active measures to ensure such ideas could not gain traction or influence.

Ironically, James Lindsay is implementing this tactic in his war against the so-called “Woke Right.”

Today, former leftist critic James Lindsay is adopting Herbert Marcuse’s philosophy of Repressive Tolerance to demonize and exclude any right-wing commentators who are critical of Zionism.

Lindsay mirrors Marcuse’s tactics by labeling anti-Zionist voices as Marxist or extremist, effectively positioning them as threats to classical liberalism. This deliberate mischaracterization aligns with Marcuse’s strategy of controlling discourse by demonizing opposing views.

This approach seems tied to his organization, New Discourses, which has close connections to Israel.

For weeks, Lindsay has targeted various right-wing figures, such as Candace Owens and Christian Nationalists, using tactics that stifle debate in his crusade against the “woke right.” He’s repeatedly discussed this concept across various platforms, appearing on at least a dozen podcasts to elaborate on it. One notable example is his episode on Triggernometry, titled “What Is The Woke Right?”

Generally speaking, James Lindsay seems to use two main criteria to determine if someone belongs to the “woke right”:

1. They are not classical liberals and instead align with a more right-leaning political philosophy.

2. They are anti-Zionist and prioritize the United States over support for Israel.

In this, Lindsay is attempting to link the ideas of classical liberalism with pro-Zionism, making a critique of one the same as a critique of both. This is a tactic to protect Zionism by rebranding any opposition to it as fringe or extremist.

Think of when the left says all white people are racist - it’s the same idea, using labels to control people to get them to shut up.

Over the past few weeks, Lindsay has labeled dozens of influencers as part of the “woke right” and engaged in online feuds with many of them. One notable example is Candace Owens. Here’s just one instance:

Recently, Candace Owens interviewed an American veteran who served on the USS Liberty. The veteran shared a firsthand account of the ship being attacked by Israel, with the incident later covered up by the U.S. government to protect what it called “our greatest ally.” The interview included evidence to support these claims.

James Lindsay immediately responded with criticism, labeling the discussion as both anti-Israel and anti-American.

This is a clear example of Repressive Tolerance: James Lindsay has declared Candace Owens a bad person simply because she holds ideas he disagrees with. As a result, he argues that all of her ideas should be dismissed and repressed, even when they are supported by objective, unbiased evidence.

He’s employing psychological tactics and cultural influence, such as attacking her on podcasts, to dissuade others from even considering her perspective.

Moreover, this appears to be motivated by his financial ties to Israel.

Michael O’Fallon, who funds Lindsay’s website New Discourses, is a prominent Christian Dispensationalist. That means he believes that Israel and the Jewish people deserve special protections and considerations. This includes support like granting them land, involving Americans in their conflicts to fight their wars for them, and prioritizing financial aid to Israel over funding projects that directly benefit Americans.

O’Fallon’s theological and political priorities—especially regarding Israel—seem to align closely with Lindsay’s recent pivot. Public records and O’Fallon’s own statements reveal his dedication to promoting Zionism and influencing conservative discourse in the U.S.

Thank you to @ShrekTriad on X for these receipts.

James Lindsay is Michael O’Fallon’s attack dog.

Lindsay doesn’t have a problem with Christians. He has a problem with Christians who support an American identity over supporting Israel.

In Lindsay’s application of Repressive Tolerance, all pro-Zionist individuals are seen as good, and their ideas are amplified, while anti-Zionists are labeled as bad, with their ideas suppressed. To shut down debate, Lindsay often labels anti-Zionist ideas as Marxist—a tactic designed to discredit and silence dissent.

Ironically, It is Lindsay himself who is employing the Marxist tactic of Repressive Tolerance.

For example, he recently attempted to discredit Christian Nationalists by claiming he rewrote several pages from the Communist Manifesto, swapped a few words, and then successfully published it in what he called a "flagship Christian Nationalist" publication. This, Lindsay argued, proved that Christian Nationalists—the group he dislikes because of their support for American identity—are part of the “woke right.”

However, when people compared the article James Lindsay published to the Communist Manifesto, they discovered that he had rewritten about 90% of the document, retaining only the rhetorical structure. This means that the ideas published by the American Reformer weren’t Marxist at all, undermining Lindsay’s claim.

One especially weird aspect of this is that the American Reformer was not a “flagship” publication as Lindsay asserted - many people had never heard of it and were curious about why he selected the American Reformer. @Miisaakan on X provides us with the answers. Lindsay and Michael O’Fallon have been engaged in an ongoing feud with American Reformer co-founder Nate Fischer. This stunt appears to have been an attempt to embarrass him publicly.

The stunt backfired, with James Lindsay being called out by many prominent influencers for his dishonest tactics. Despite the backlash, he continues his podcast tour, attempting to rehabilitate his image after the disaster. Pro-Zionist influencers have eagerly stepped in to support him, offering softball questions and avoiding any meaningful pushback.

What those calling him out missed, however, is that Lindsay himself is employing Marxist strategies in his approach. This is James Lindsay’s version of Repressive Tolerance, a concept he knows well due to his extensive study of Herbert Marcuse.

As Lindsay often says, “the issue is never the issue.” In this case, he is attempting to silence all critique of Zionism and Israel by reframing it as opposition to classical liberalism or support for Marxism.

Ultimately, Lindsay’s goal seems clear: to stifle discussion of ideas that challenge him or, perhaps, to protect his financial interests tied to Michael O’Fallon.

James Lindsay Has Fallen

James Lindsay’s actions highlight a deep irony: the man who built his reputation critiquing Marxist strategies is now employing those same tactics to suppress dissent and silence voices he disagrees with.

By leveraging Marcuse’s concept of Repressive Tolerance, Lindsay has become what he once critiqued, creating a framework where critisim of Zionism is reframed as an attack on classical liberalism or an endorsement of Marxism, effectively shutting down meaningful discussion.

The issue isn’t whether someone supports or opposes Zionism—it’s the deliberate effort to use labels, cultural influence, and psychological manipulation to stifle debate and control the narrative. Lindsay’s shift from critiquing the left to targeting the “woke right” suggests that his motivations may be less about principles and more about financial and ideological ties to Michael O’Fallon and his dispensationalist agenda.

This isn’t just about Lindsay—it’s about the dangers of ideological gatekeeping. When debate is suppressed, and dissenting ideas are mischaracterized, it stifles the open exchange of ideas that classical liberalism relies on. The question for readers is this: can we truly defend free discourse if we tolerate these tactics, no matter which side employs them?

In the end, the real danger is not in disagreeing with Lindsay’s views but in the broader implications of his tactics. When discourse becomes dominated by the suppression of opposing ideas rather than engaging with them, we lose the ability to explore genuine truth. That is a risk worth examining—not just for those on the right or left, but for anyone who values open, honest debate.

---

Support My Work and Help Me Expose the Far Left

I’m 100% funded by you via small donations and with the help of a volunteer community to spread the word. If you don’t support my work, it won’t happen. Learn how here.