Become a VT Supporting Member Today

Please keep VT Radio and VT Foreign Policy alive! Donate today to make sure VT stays on the internet free and clear of Big Tech control! Donate today: 

Please Donate - Click Here



…by Jonas E. Alexis, VT Editor

During a press conference on November 19, President-elect Donald Trump criticized the Biden administration, claiming it has brought the world closer to World War III, particularly by allowing the Ukrainian regime to use nuclear weapons to attack Russia. “Nothing is more important than avoiding that nightmare,” Trump declared. He continued, “Everyday this proxy battle [Ukraine war] continues, we risk global war.” In order to stop this nuclear war, Trump said, there needs to be clear objectives, which should include a “total cessation of hostilities. All shooting has to stop. This is the central issue. We need peace without delay.”

In the same breath, Trump made reference to a “total dismantling of the entire globalist Neocon establishment that is perpetually dragging us into endless wars, pretending to fight for our freedom and democracy abroad, while they turn us into a third-world country and a third-world dictatorship right here at home. The state department, the defense bureaucracy, the intelligence services, and all of the rest need to be completely overhauled and reconstituted to fire the Deep Staters and put America First.”

Trump’s statement contains numerous problems and contradictions, far too many to address comprehensively here. One glaring issue is that you cannot advocate for an “America First” policy while providing billions of dollars to Israel, enabling the torture, maiming, and annihilation of Palestinian men, women, and children. This was a significant challenge during Trump’s first term, and it will likely remain a major obstacle for his presidency moving forward.

It is well-documented that Trump granted Israel virtually everything it sought during his four years in office. Furthermore, he has already surrounded himself with individuals whose primary loyalties appear to lie with Israel, not the United States—raising questions about the feasibility of a genuine “America First” policy.



In his statement, Trump inadvertently reveals something that should be evident to anyone familiar with Jewish revolutionary movements in the West and across the globe. Trump references the Neocons, but it is well-known that they are Jewish intellectuals and ideologues who began as Trotskyites and later transformed into proponents of a so-called “conservative” ideology in the United States.

For those who might dismiss this as mere conspiracy theory, I encourage you to consult Murray Friedman’s The Neoconservative Revolution: Jewish Intellectuals and the Shaping of Public Policy, published by Cambridge University Press. If that doesn’t suffice, consider this. Former neoconservative luminary Francis Fukuyama of Stanford (formerly of Johns Hopkins) compares the neoconservative movement to Leninism. Neoconservatism, according to Fukuyama, is the reincarnation to some extent of both Leninism and Bolshevism.[1]

Fukuyama’s observation makes sense when even Irving Kristol proudly admitted that the “honor I most prized was the fact that I was a member in good standing of the [Trotskyist] Young People’s Socialist League (Fourth International).”[2] Kristol was not just a former Trotskyist, but a former neo-Marxist, neo-socialist, and neo-liberal.[3] And this neoconservative movement, as Jewish writer Sidney Blumenthal has shown, found its political and intellectual ideology “in the disputatious heri tage of the Talmud.”[4]

Even after the birth of the neoconservative movement, many of its members such as Stephen Schwartz of the Weekly Standard and Joan Wohlstetter of the RAND Corporation still had a burning thirst for Lev Davidovich Bronstein, known as Leon Trotsky.[5]  This neoconservative movement gave us the war in Iraq, which was based on obvious lies and fabrications.

This revolutionary spirit has driven—and continues to drive—America and several Western countries into bloody and unnecessary conflicts, first in the Middle East and now in Ukraine and Russia. Let us give credit where credit is due: Donald Trump has indirectly exposed the Neocons as being behind the war in Ukraine.

In this context, Joe Biden is merely a puppet. His recent speech on climate change at the Amazon underscores his cognitive decline, as the 82-year-old president seemed disoriented afterward, wandering around the forest as though he needed assistance. Given his condition, it is implausible that Biden could orchestrate actions as significant as guiding Zelensky to use nuclear weapons against Russia. At this point, he is a lame duck. The true power behind him lies with the Jewish Neocons.

Yet, if you look at some of the news headlines, you might be led to believe that Joe Biden possesses some kind of superpower to command such a massive undertaking. Here are a few examples: Associated Press: “What does Biden’s decision to allow Ukraine to use longer-range US weapons mean?” The Christian Science Monitor: “After more than a year of lobbying by Ukraine, President Joe Biden in the final weeks of his term has approved Kyiv’s use of U.S. long-range missiles to hit inside Russia.” Newsweek: “Putin Ally Responds to Biden’s Ukraine Missile Plan: ‘This Is Already WWIII.’” MSN: “Biden greenlights Ukraine’s deep strikes on Russian soil.”

The simple fact is that Biden is politically incapacitated, leaving someone behind the scenes to make diabolical decisions while placing Biden in the spotlight to absorb the blame. During the Obama administration, we witnessed Jewish Neocons like Victoria Nuland openly boasting that the United States spent “over $5 billion” in Ukraine to overthrow a democratically elected president and install a puppet whose most notable achievement was being an actor.

Contrary to claims by writers such as Kent DeBenedictis—that Russia falsely believed the United States was attempting to orchestrate a color revolution in Ukraine[6]—the evidence shows that the U.S. actively collaborated with Ukraine to bring about such a revolution. This agenda was so blatant that Victoria Nuland openly dismissed any opposition to it. For instance, she infamously declared, “Fuck the E.U.,” reflecting her disregard for any organization or country that opposed the revolution.

While figures like Angela Merkel publicly criticized Nuland’s remarks, labeling them unacceptable, little to no action was taken. This inaction stemmed largely from European politicians’ fear of being accused of anti-Semitism—a tactic that has stifled meaningful critique or resistance.

It is abundantly clear that Nuland and her associates actively supported the Ukraine debacle, thereby fostering chaos in the region. Moreover, the American people never called for this war; instead, the Jewish figures behind both the Obama and Biden administrations unilaterally decided that it was somehow the “right” course of action.

Although Nuland is no longer in Washington, her departure has made way for figures like Antony Blinken, whom some might describe as political Satanists, continuing the same destructive policies. It was Blinken who “Authorizes Baltic Countries to Send US Weapons to Ukraine.” Blenkin said on Twitter in 2022:

“I expedited and authorized, and we fully endorse transfers of defensive equipment @NATO Allies Estonia Latvia Lithuania are providing to Ukraine to strengthen its ability to defend itself against Russia’s unprovoked and irresponsible aggression.”

“Russia’s unprovoked and irresponsible aggression”? Nothing could be further from the truth. Serious researchers are encouraged to explore the works of scholars like John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen F. Cohen on this very issue. In particular, Mearsheimer’s scholarly essay, “Why the Ukraine Crisis is the West’s Fault”, and Cohen’s book, War with Russia?: From Putin & Ukraine to Trump & Russiagate, provide in-depth analyses that challenge mainstream narratives.

Blinken’s misguided assertions seem to exist only in the minds of those whose agenda, often attributed to those who have rejected Logos in the moral and political realm, appears focused on perpetuating bloody and ongoing conflicts around the world. What is particularly interesting is that white nationalists, like Richard Spencer, have sided with Blinken. Spencer even declared that he voted for Kamala Harris, believing that she would continue to support the war by financially and militarily backing the Ukrainian government.[7]

In any case, Trump’s mention of the Neocons perpetuating the Ukraine war serves as an indirect but pointed revelation of the true power behind the throne in Washington. It likely wasn’t what Trump intended, but in hindsight, it turned out to be one of the most significant things he’s done.

The unfortunate reality, however, is that while his right hand exposes the Neocons, his left hand continues to support another destructive ideology in the Middle East—unconditional support for Israel. Trump is clearly in a dilemma, and it’s vital that he asserts his authority to the Jewish figures he has appointed to his cabinet, making it clear that he is the one in charge, not them or the Israelis. Will that ever happen? Only time will tell.

What people of reason need to understand is that the Jewish revolutionary spirit, as E. Michael Jones has pointed out in his comprehensive study, has been present throughout the centuries, producing one disaster after another. It began at the foot of the cross and has since spread through history. By rejecting Logos, Jews became susceptible to false messiahs, which gave rise to messianic ideologies—leading to a series of disastrous outcomes for much of the world.

Late philosemitic historian James Parkes writes, “All through the centuries under consideration false messiahs succeeded each other, and sudden rumours sprang up, now from the east, now from the west, that the Messiah had actually manifested himself. Rabbinical scholars, even the most eminent, gave themselves to calculations of the time of his coming, though there were some few scholars, equally eminent, who resisted the temptation. Three times, in the 11th, the 16th, and the 17th centuries, messianic excitement swelled to a climax which swept all through Jewry, from the furthest communities of the west to North Africa, Arabia, and Tartary.”[8]

These “messianic expectations,” as the father of Jewish historiography Heinrich Graetz noted, “were always certain of creating enthusiasts, who aimed at converting their silent belief into fact, and without exactly intending to deceive, attempted to carry away such of the crowd as were of like opinions, and to excite them to such a pitch that they would willingly sacrifice their lives.”[9] Those messianic enthusiasts were many, playing a deceptive role in Jewish history. At one point, one such man in Crete

“gained as adherents all the Jewish congregations of this important island, through which he had traveled in a year. He promised them that one day he would lead them dry-footed, as Moses had formerly done, through the sea into the promised land…This Cretan Moses was able to convince his followers so thoroughly of his divine mission, that they neglected their business, abandoned all their property, and only waited for the day of the pas sage through the sea. On the appointed day, Moses the Messiah marched in front, and behind him came the entire Jewish population of Crete, including women and children. From a promontory projecting out into the sea, he commanded them to throw themselves before them. Several of these fanatics met their death in the waves; others were rescued by sailors. The false Moses is said, however, never to have been found again.”[10]

Throughout the centuries, the Jewish people have been deceived again and again by false messiahs such as Shabbetai Zevi, Baruchyah Russo, and Jacob Frank. Simon Bar Kosiba, or Bar Kochba, was one of the first to be identified as “King Messiah” or “the star that comes forth from Jacob.”[11] Eighty-year-old Rabbi Akiba ben Joseph, who actively fanned the flames of Bar Kochba’s revolution, thought that Bar Kochba was “God’s anointed” or the “messiah.”[12] But his revolt against Rome, which began in AD 132, ended a mere four years later.

Around 1096, it was announced in France and Germany that the Mes siah had appeared in the east. “Men in Turkey said that they had met Elijah, returned in the flesh, and that he had promised that the Messiah was on the way. In the land of the Khazars seventeen communities abandoned their possessions and set out to meet the lost tribes who were said to be coming from the east to join him. Jews from all countries began to gather at Salonika to take ship to Palestine to him. In both west and east the more responsible leaders seem to have kept their heads; but twenty years later, when Benjamin of Tudela visited Germany, he found the Jews still in a ferment at the Mes siah’s expected coming.”[13]

Messianic expectations came and went, and when many were disappointed during the centuries, other expectations took their place. A proselyte named Obadiah claimed that the Messiah

“had been seen in Cordova; men had heard that in Fez he had declared himself. Then in Persia. Then in the Yemen. Always the Messiah was coming; and when hope died the calculations began afresh; fresh figures, fresh dates were examined; and, unheeded, the cautious warned against the belief that the time could be known. In the thirteenth century Nachmanides, taking the analogy of the demand of Moses to Pharaoh that he would release the children of Israel, proclaimed that when the Messiah really came it would be known because he would appear before the pope and demand the freeing of his people; and in 1280 the Spanish mystic, Abraham Abulafia, convinced that he was the Messiah or his forerunner, sought to visit Nicholas III. The pope ordered that, if he came, he should be seized and burnt at the stake. But on the very night Abraham arrived, the pope died suddenly, and Abraham was saved.”[14]

This messianic anticipation continued through the sixteenth century and beyond, attracting fresh leading figures who proclaimed to be the Jewish Messiah. Parkes writes that even Christians were beginning to be persuaded by these messianic expectations.[15]

The Messiah was again predicted to appear in 1648, but when that year passed without sign of him, “Christians accepted the date of the Jewish expectation, 1666; and waited with a painful intensity equal to that of Jewry.”[16] One who seemed to fulfill their messianic signs was Shabbetai Zevi, born in 1626 in Smyrna and a devoted student of Kabbalah.[17]

I have addressed these issues fully in the first two volumes of Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism. Suffice it to say, the challenges we face today did not begin in 2024. Their origins trace back to the very beginning of Christianity, as Christians throughout the centuries have grappled with these central issues. For example, Justin Martyr, who lived in the second century, addressed some of these concerns in his Dialogue with Trypho (Trypho being a Jew).

If the West seeks to understand what is truly happening, Western thinkers must return to the roots of the problem. Some individuals, such as Brother Nathanael Kapner, David Duke, and Kevin MacDonald, have attempted to obscure the real issue by appealing to biology and so-called bad DNA—concepts derived from the Darwinian ideology. These individuals have been given ample opportunities to make their views morally coherent and intellectually sustainable, yet none have produced a serious, systematic argument. Until they do so, we cannot take their claims seriously.

We will continue to give these individuals ample opportunity to express themselves in ways that are rational, moral, logical, and philosophical. Remaining silent will not suffice. Nor will making excuses like “I have never heard of Jonas E. Alexis,” which allow people to remain in a comfortable position where they don’t have to engage with his critiques of the Jewish DNA thesis.

If scholars and writers believe they must personally know their critics or hear about them in the media to respond to their ideas, then Kevin MacDonald’s books should be dismissed on the same grounds. Many of the individuals MacDonald cites are not only deceased but also unaware of his work. Furthermore, when did the West begin to embrace such a flimsy argument? Those who resort to such nonsense are trying to avoid addressing the real issues with their ideas and are retreating from meaningful engagement. We don’t blame them entirely, as their intellectual ancestors, like Darwin, employed similar tactics.[18]

This issue certainly brings to mind Richard Dawkins, who publicly declared that he would debate anyone on the subject of The God Delusion. Dawkins traveled the world, debating so-called pastors like Ted Haggard, but he consistently refused to engage in debates with philosophers such as William Lane Craig. In fact, he resolutely avoided a debate with Craig, an act of cowardice that even surprised fellow atheist philosophers like Daniel Came of Oxford University. Came wrote to Dawkins saying:

“The absence of a debate with the foremost apologist for Christian theism is a glaring omission on your CV and is of course apt to be interpreted as cowardice on your part. I notice that, by contrast, you are happy to discuss theological matters with television and radio presenters and other intellectual heavyweights like Pastor Ted Haggard of the National Association of Evangelicals and Pastor Keenan Roberts of the Colorado Hell House.”[19]

MacDonald has been engaging with individuals like Nathan Cofnas because it is widely understood that Cofnas’ arguments cannot withstand reasonable scrutiny. MacDonald seems to take pleasure in dismantling such arguments—perhaps rightly so—because they are essentially without merit. However, MacDonald himself has never been truly confronted with the serious problems in his fundamental ideology, problems that have been pointed out for years.

[1]  Francis Fukuyama, “After Neoconservatism,” NY Times, February 19, 2006.

[2] Stephen Halper and Jonathan Clarke, America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 43.

[3] Meir Soloveichik, “Irving Kristol, Edmund Burke, and the Rabbis,” Jewish Review of Books, Number 6, Summer 2011.

[4] Sidney Blumenthal, The Rise of the Counter Establishment: From Conservative Ideology to Political Power (New York: HarperCollins, 1998), 124.

[5] Craig Unger, The Fall of the House of Bush (New York: Scribner, 2007), 40-43.

[6] Kent DeBenedictis, Russian “Hybrid Warfare” and the Annexation of Crimea (London and New York: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2022), 41.

[7] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-MK4VBxQew&ab_channel=RollingStone.

[8] James Parkes, A History of Palestine, 174-175.

[9] Heinrich Hirsch Graetz, History of the Jews, 1:610.

[10] Ibid., 1:610-611.

[11] Oskar Skarsaune, In the Shadow of the Temple, 52.

[12] Solomon Grayzel, A History of the Jews, 182.

[13] Parkes, A History of Palestine, 175.

[14] Ibid., 175-176.

[15] Ibid., 176-177; see also Grayzel, A History of the Jews, 512.

[16] Parkes, A History of Palestine, 177.

[17] See Graetz, History of the Jews, 5:118-121; Parkes, A History of Palestine, 177.

[18] See for example John G. West, Darwin Day In America: How Our Politics and Culture Have Been Dehumanized in the Name of Science (Wilmington: ISI, 2014). I have addressed these issues in Kevin MacDonald’s Metaphysical Failure.

[19] Tim Ross, “Richard Dawkins accused of cowardice for refusing to debate existence of God,” Telegraph, May 14, 2011. See also: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYLWgx9Ynt4&ab_channel=Birdieupon; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RC1xgS1XGSg&t=97s&ab_channel=Birdieupon.