Rachel Maddow Sparks Controversy by Linking “The Lord of the Rings” to Far-Right Extremism

On July 17, 2024, during an MSNBC broadcast, prominent commentator Rachel Maddow ignited a firestorm of controversy by claiming that J.R.R. Tolkien’s iconic trilogy “The Lord of the Rings” is a “favorite world” of far-right and alt-right figures in both Europe and the United States. Her remarks, highlighted in an analysis by the “Bongino Report Early Edition” hosted by Evita Duffy-Alfonso on Rumble on July 19, 2024, sparked heated debates about the cultural significance of this literary classic and its misuse in media narratives. Maddow specifically pointed to Senator J.D. Vance naming his venture capital firm “Narya” and Peter Thiel naming his company “Palantir,” both inspired by Tolkien’s work. This article examines the context, reactions, and broader implications of her statement.

Context of Maddow’s Remarks

During her MSNBC program, Rachel Maddow was discussing Senator J.D. Vance, the Republican vice-presidential candidate, and his connection to billionaire investor Peter Thiel. Maddow noted that both Vance and Thiel are fans of “The Lord of the Rings,” with Vance naming his investment firm “Narya”—one of the three Elven rings of power in Tolkien’s story—and Thiel naming his company “Palantir,” after the seeing-stones in the same series. Maddow argued that referencing “The Lord of the Rings” is a common trend among far-right and alt-right figures, suggesting that these names might carry deeper significance.

Notably, Maddow deliberately linked the word “Narya” to “Aryan”—a term historically misused by racist ideologies—by stating that “Narya” might be remembered because it sounds like “Aryan, but with the N moved to the front.” This comment, widely perceived as an attempt to imply a connection to extremist ideologies, immediately drew attention and criticism from viewers and commentators. The Rumble video by “Bongino Report” amplified the public’s outrage, accusing Maddow of distorting a beloved literary work to serve a media narrative.

Public and Media Reactions

Maddow’s statement triggered a strong backlash, particularly on social media platforms like X, where users expressed indignation and mockery. Many called her remarks “absurd” and “overreaching,” emphasizing that “The Lord of the Rings” is a globally cherished work that transcends political boundaries. For instance, one X user wrote, “Rachel Maddow calls loving Lord of the Rings ‘far-right.’ Guess the whole world is alt-right then!” (@Nerdrotics, July 19, 2024). Others criticized Maddow for her lack of understanding of Tolkien’s linguistic context, particularly her connection of “Narya” to “Aryan.” The account @MiddleearthMixr labeled it “reprehensible behavior,” asserting that Tolkien, an outspoken opponent of fascism, would never endorse such associations.

The media also quickly picked up the story. Fox News described Maddow’s remarks as an attempt to “smear” Vance and Thiel by linking them to extremist ideologies through a popular literary work. Reason magazine argued that “The Lord of the Rings” is beloved by people across the political spectrum, from conservatives to progressives, and Maddow’s attempt to assign it a political label was inaccurate. National Review even included Maddow’s statement in a list of efforts by the left to negatively label mainstream values like patriotism or fitness. Commentators, including Evita Duffy-Alfonso on “Bongino Report,” suggested that Maddow was deliberately stirring controversy to draw attention amid the ongoing Republican National Convention.

Cultural Significance of “The Lord of the Rings”

J.R.R. Tolkien’s “The Lord of the Rings” is one of the best-selling book series of all time, cherished by millions worldwide, regardless of political affiliation. First published in the 1950s, the story chronicles the battle against evil and celebrates universal values like friendship, courage, and sacrifice. Tolkien, a linguist and scholar, crafted a rich fantasy world with languages like Quenya, in which “Narya” means “red fire”—completely unrelated to any extremist ideologies.

Maddow’s attempt to tie “The Lord of the Rings” to far-right extremism raised questions about how pop culture works are co-opted into media battles. Some critics argued that Maddow overlooked the global popularity of the series to focus on a small subset of individuals who might have used Tolkien references for their own purposes. On Reddit, one user pointed out that loving “The Lord of the Rings” is common across political lines, and Maddow’s claim without concrete evidence was “baseless.” Others noted that bands like Led Zeppelin, which have no ties to the far-right, also drew inspiration from Tolkien, proving the work’s influence transcends political boundaries.

Broader Implications

Maddow’s remarks were controversial not only for their content but also for reflecting a broader trend in media: using cultural icons to frame political narratives. By labeling “The Lord of the Rings” as “far-right,” Maddow inadvertently damaged her own credibility, as some commentators pointed out. The “Bongino Report” video emphasized that such claims could erode public trust in mainstream media, especially when seen as distorting truth to serve an agenda.

Furthermore, the incident highlighted the growing polarization in how literary and cultural works are interpreted. While “The Lord of the Rings” has long been viewed as a story of universal values, tying it to a specific group shows how media can skew public perception. Articles in Reason and RealClearPolitics stressed that “The Lord of the Rings” is not a far-right text but a work open to interpretation by individuals in their own way.

Conclusion

Rachel Maddow’s comments about “The Lord of the Rings” on MSNBC on July 17, 2024, sparked a major controversy, with many criticizing her for linking a beloved literary work to extremist ideologies. Amplified by the “Bongino Report Early Edition” on Rumble, the incident underscored tensions in how cultural symbols are used in media. While Maddow aimed to highlight connections between J.D. Vance, Peter Thiel, and Tolkien references, her approach was seen as baseless and divisive. As the debate continues, it’s clear that “The Lord of the Rings” remains a timeless work, cherished by millions, and should not be reduced to a tool in media battles.