Restore co-founder ‘suggested Farage had been bought by Jews’ – as Restore stands accused of being ‘far-right in a suit’
Restore, the party founded by former Reform MP Rupert Lowe, is facing fresh accusations of antisemitism after co-founder Charlie Downes responded to a Nigel Farage social media post with an image seemingly implying Farage had been "bought" by Jewish supporters. Campaigners including Labour Against Anti-Semitism and the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism condemned the post as invoking an age-old antisemitic trope, adding to a pattern of controversy surrounding the party's leadership.
Downes replied to a February post in which Farage said "I can't be bullied. I can't be bought" with a wordless picture of Farage speaking at the launch of the Reform Jewish Alliance, a group representing Jewish members within Reform, standing beside a lectern bearing a Star of David logo. Alex Hearn of Labour Against Anti-Semitism said the image "insinuated" Farage had been bought by Jews and noted it was delivered without caption so nothing could be directly quoted, while also pointing to Downes' past comments defining Britishness by "indigenous British ancestry and Christian faith". The Campaign Against Anti-Semitism said the claim echoed historic conspiracy theories used by Soviets and Nazis, and called on Restore to clarify or apologise. Rupert Lowe dismissed the criticism as a "hit piece", while the row follows repeated controversies for Restore, including Downes recently branding a Sunday Telegraph editor a "traitor" after he criticised Lowe.
- Restore co-founder Charlie Downes accused of antisemitic "bought by Jews" insinuation
- Post responded to Farage denying he "can't be bought" with RJA meeting image
- Campaigners call Restore "far-right in a suit"; Lowe dismisses claims as a "hit piece"
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Responding to "I can't be bought" with an uncaptioned image of Farage at a Jewish event directly invokes the antisemitic trope that Jewish people control politicians through money, critics argue, a stereotype that echoes Nazi and Soviet propaganda. Downes' previous definitions of Britishness in terms of "indigenous" and "Christian" identity suggest a troubling ideological framework that contextualises the imagery within a broader pattern. The party's response of dismissing concerns as a "hit piece" rather than explaining the intended meaning fails to adequately address why such imagery is harmful.
The case against
The image simply documented Farage at a Jewish community event—a factual and routine subject of political observation. Without an accompanying caption to establish intent, the interpretation that it invokes antisemitic tropes depends on inferring hostile meaning from an ambiguous visual. Noting politicians' organisational relationships and support is standard political commentary; showing Farage's various associations is not inherently antisemitic merely because one involves a Jewish group. Making swift assumptions of antisemitic intent based on interpretation rather than explicit language risks weakening genuine accusations of actual antisemitism.