“The term ‘Esau hates Jacob’ symbolizes the world which Jews experience. It is deeply embedded in the Jewish folk tradition.”
    C.S. Liebman, “Myth, Tradition and Values in Israeli Society,” 1978.^[1]

“Increased rates of paranoid states are commonly found among migratory and immigrant groups.”
    Maizel et al., “Folie à trois among two Soviet-Jewish immigrant families to Israel,” 1990.^[2]

It surely isn’t coincidental that the two best twentieth-century novels on the theme of paranoia were written by members of the Jewish race. Although differing slightly in approach and direction, Marcel Proust’s In Search of Lost Time (1913–1927), with its focus on jealous paranoia, and Franz Kafka’s The Trial (1925), which emphasizes conspiracy-based paranoia, are probably unsurpassed in their dissection and communication of paranoid emotions and associated mental and social disturbance.^[3] Both authors, with their schizoid and labyrinthine visions, came to mind recently when I read that Jewish financiers and academics are developing artificial intelligence in order to ceaselessly scan the internet for “hidden antisemitism on social media.” Britain’s The Times reports:

Workers on the Decoding Antisemitism project will write algorithms to find codes such as “Juice” instead of “Jews” and look for anti-Jewish narratives, conspiracy theories and stereotypes that are harder to detect automatically than explicit racism. They hope to develop a tool that can scan websites and social media profiles for implicit antisemitism.

This strange venture is being staffed by a motley of Jews and grant-hungry Europeans, eager for some of the several million Euro donated by the German Jewish Alfred Landecker Foundation, an organisation that is as tragic-comic as its new pet project. The Alfred Landecker Foundation was established recently by the Reimann family, German billionaires who own controlling stakes in Krispy Kreme, Dr Pepper and other major players in the nutrition-devoid, diabetes-inducing goy-feed market. The Reimann’s will initially support the Foundation with an astonishing 250 million euros over the next ten years. The family is not Jewish, but, in what appears to be a new “reparations” tactic to fill the coffers of Jewish “defense bodies,” were subjected last year to what amounts to an international public relations blackmail by several influential Jewish journalists and organisations who highlighted the family’s National Socialist past. Devra First, for example, a Jewish journalist at the Boston Globe, led one of the early attacks with an article titled, “I found out Nazi money is behind my favorite coffee. Should I keep drinking it?”

The New York Times later reported that the campaign resulted in Reimann employees (there are over 180,000 globally) reporting that customers accused them of “working for Nazis.” A boycott campaign then followed, after which the family meekly announced that it was “relieved to have the truth come out” and that it would make large donations on behalf of Jews. In the end, the Reimann’s renamed their family foundation after a Jew “murdered by the Nazis,” handed over control of the Foundation to an “independent” (mostly Jewish) council, and promised it would henceforth be dedicated to fund projects that “honor the memory of the victims of the Holocaust and of Nazi terror.”

The international organized Jewish community thus found itself, after relatively little effort, with a ready-made, lavishly funded vehicle for their interests. A new website for the Alfred Landecker Foundation says its mission is to educate “about the Holocaust and the terrible price that is paid when intolerance and bigotry reign.” This extremely wealthy foundation now professes that it will employ its considerable financial arsenal against “populism and nationalism.” The Decoding Antisemitism project is merely the latest surreal twist in this rather sordid tale.

What exactly “Decoding Antisemitism” will, or can, achieve remains to be seen. The most that one can say at present is that it’s part of a larger problem. As Gilad Atzmon recently asked, “What is it that causes some to constantly measure how much they are hated?” Jews now not only constantly measure how much they are hated, in the form of the usual surveys and so on, but also dedicate themselves to the innovation of new techniques of measurement. The “Decoding Antisemitism” project is, by any estimation, a form of technologized eavesdropping. And, like most eavesdropping endeavors, it is unlikely to bring much in the way of relief or profit to the eavesdropper. As my mother used to say, “eavesdroppers never hear any good of themselves.” Jews fully expect to be hated, and they devote significant resources to proving it to themselves and others, before declaring that “something” must be done about it. This “something,” aside from pushing for mass migration and censorship, inevitably involves further surveys or social surveillance, and thus the cycle of expectation, confirmation, and renewed determination continues. The key to the cyclical nature of this process is the Jewish expectation of irrational and inexplicable hatred from the outsider. In other words, Jewish paranoia plays a significant role in the seemingly endless provocation of anti-Semitism. Paranoia among Jews is therefore surely worthy of some consideration.

Understanding Jewish Paranoia

Gaining an evidence-based understanding of mental pathology among Jews is surprisingly difficult. Victor Sanua has noted the fact that although “mental illness among Jews has been a subject of interest and controversy for centuries,” the “dearth of studies on the mental illness of Jews is striking when compared to the number of Jewish professionals in the field.”^[4] The reluctance of Jewish psychologists and psychiatrists to turn an analytical gaze inwards corresponds with the general pattern of Jewish interpretations of anti-Semitism, which is overwhelmingly portrayed as originating independently of Jews and their behavior. Jews are notable for their strong aversion to considerations of personal or group-level wrongdoing, and the fact that there are few studies of Jewish mental health is also confirmation of some of the findings of those studies that have taken place; namely, that Jews score significantly lower on guilt-associated pathologies, especially those involving self-criticism and suicide.^[5] In this area, Jews more closely resemble populations with higher levels of psychopathy, such as those in sub-Saharan Africa and the Indian sub-continent, rather than populations with higher levels of anxiety and conscientiousness like Europeans and East Asians.^[6]

Open hostility to the idea that Jews are particularly prone to certain mental illnesses is often conveyed within Jewish academia and psychiatry, something that further stifles discussion of the subject and the gathering of evidence. Sander Gilman, for example, an historian of medicine, has accused Jewish psychiatrists who studied Jews and mental illness of being self-hating Jews and complicit in the advancement of anti-Semitism:

In differentiating himself from the Jew as madman, the Jewish psychiatrist reified his own tenuous position in the power structure of medicine. The doctor and the patient are not to be confused, especially not by the doctor. The myth of the madness of the Jew can serve as a means of exploring how groups react to rhetoric aimed at them from their primary reference group.^[7]

Although presented in Marxist terminology, what Gilman is essentially arguing is that Jewish psychiatrists betrayed their racial origins by producing studies that agreed with what Gilman believes to be little more than racist tropes — the idea, current from the 1860s to the present day, that certain mental illnesses are more prevalent among Jews than other populations. The major problem with Gilman’s 1984 study is that it fails to explore even a fraction of the relevant literature, simply making the assertion that the early twentieth-century studies were prejudiced and proceeding from that to a sweeping narrative of internalized anti-Semitism.

This is not to say that certain historical medical beliefs about the tendency of Jews toward some mental illnesses were always rooted in reality. For example, in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century it was commonly believed that Jews were more predisposed to schizophrenia than Europeans, something that scholarship had reversed entirely by the 1930s.^[8] (In 2013 a genetic mutation was found that makes Ashkenazi Jews more prone to schizophrenia compared to other Ashkenazi Jews but this does not imply that Ashkenazi Jews are more prone to schizophrenia in general.) Misinterpretation, or poor cultural contextualization of data, has also led to the development of new tropes. For example, much of the scientific literature on an alleged link between Jews and hypochondriasis has been based on army recruitment data, with Jews and Italians noted as much more likely than Irish, British, or German recruits to report apparently non-existent illnesses or to exaggerate pain or incapacity.^[9] Hypochondriasis can hardly be considered an appropriate diagnosis in such a context, however, given the well-known, and deeply historical, tendency of some young men to wish to avoid military service through simple malingering. As discussed in Derek Penslar’s Princeton-published Jews and the Military, Jews have a very long tradition of malingering in order to evade serving in the militaries of host nations, including acts of self-mutilation. Thus the link in the psychiatric literature between Jews and hypochondriasis based on army recruitment data is extremely naive.^[10]

What does emerge from the existing literature on the mental health of Jews is a rather clear tendency towards forms of manic-depressive psychosis, a tendency toward paranoid siege mentality at the group level, and a generally very poor level of psychological adjustment to living among Whites. Ball and Clare (1990) found that Jews “are prone to suffer from affective disorders,” and added that “the possibility of a genetic contribution to the genesis of these illnesses must be considered.”^[11] Halpern’s very early study of Jews in Palestine (1938) also found manic-depressive psychosis and paranoia to among the most marked manifestations of mental pathology among Jews.^[12] Cooklin (1983) noted, like Ball and Clare, that there were significant differences in manic-depressive psychosis between Jews and non-Jews, and also made the argument that this difference was most probably genetic in origin.^[13] In 1999, Kohn et al. responded to counter-arguments from individuals like Sander Gilman who advanced arguments that there was no scientific basis for the belief that Jews differed from non-Jews in terms of mental health. After employing a historical review and meta-analysis, Kohn et al. demonstrated conclusively that Jews had at least a “20% greater risk for affective disorders than non-Jews.”^[14] In the recently-published Anti-Semitism and Psychiatry (2020), Loewenthal and Marcus add that “there is evidence that Ashkenazi Jews are more likely than others to possess genetic variations that may or may not predispose to heritable psychiatric syndromes such as bipolar disorder or schizophrenia.”^[15]

Some of the scientific literature also provides greater insight into the tendency of Jews towards conspiracy paranoia. This is certainly relevant because the received wisdom about the nature of anti-Semitism has, since the late 1950s, essentially embodied paranoid Jewish thinking about the conspiratorial nature of out-groups. A particularly interesting aspect of the work of the Frankfurt School is the way this thinking on the part of Jews was reflected back onto a supposedly pathological out-group culture. In fact, as Jay (1980) notes, in such works as Prophets of Deceit and The Authoritarian Personality, the Frankfurt School presented Jews as victims of “paranoid projection.” The work of the Frankfurt School stunned many socialist contemporaries because of the manner in which it abandoned classical Marxist theory in favor of an almost obsessional dedication to psychologizing the out-group:

The generally psychologistic orientation of the work as a whole led some observers to believe that the Frankfurt School had abandoned its Marxist past entirely. Moreover, nowhere in the work was an attempt made to see anti-Semitism in essentially class terms.^[16]

The available scientific literature strongly suggests that projection in fact operated inversely in this instance, with maladjusted Jews constructing paranoid narratives about non-Jews, in this case, European Americans. Rinder’s (1963) exploration of psychological adjustment in American populations, for example, found that Jewish “assimilation” only worsened the neuroses and mental health of Jews:

Every Jewish generation group scored lower in adjustment than the matched Gentile group on obtained Rorschach scores. The inner maladjustment of American Jews, on the basis of this evidence, seems to be greater than that of their Gentile peers, and the greater the Americanization, the greater the maladjustment.^[17]

Some of this Jewish maladjustment is expressed in what Maizel et al. (1990) describe as “socially shared psychopathology,” with the additional comment that “increased rates of paranoid states are commonly found among migratory and immigrant groups.”^[18] Jews have been noted as a unique “middleman minority” population that continues to behave culturally, economically, and politically, as if in a permanent state of transience. This is precisely the fertile context for socially shared psychopathology to develop.

Jews are also strongly ethnocentric, and their behavior in a diaspora condition corresponds closely with what Bar-Tal et al. (1992) found in their study of siege mentality among Israelis.^[19] In this study, it was discussed that paranoid siege mentality emerges when “a significant and influential part of the group believes that outsiders have intentions to do wrong to or inflict harm on their group. … the crucial focus of the belief is on the rest of the world or out-groups.^[20] This dovetails very well with the fact that Jews score very low on self-criticism or guilt-based emotions, and associated behaviors like suicide. This critical focus on the rest of the world or out-groups also explains the very strong reaction of Jews towards any sign of self-criticism within the group (e.g., accusations of “Jewish self-hatred”), and further explains the extraordinary tendency of Jews to obsessively develop theories psychologizing or pathologizing host populations, even in times of relatively peaceful co-existence, and to engage in endless monitoring of the attitudes of the out-group.

Paranoid siege mentality beliefs have serious behavioral implications, which in turn have very serious repercussions for intergroup relations. Bar-Tal et al. remark that “individuals and groups behave in ways which are consistent with their beliefs. … They may take drastic measures, even out of the range of the accepted norms for the intergroup behaviors, to prevent possible danger and avert the threat.”^[21] Such drastic measures are clearly in evidence throughout Jewish history where, in bids to obtain maximum profit or security, Jews have engaged in high-risk aggression towards European masses (e.g., requesting harsh punishments from monarchs, assisting enemy armies). These measures have only ever been successful for as long as Jews could maintain strong links with a powerful elite. In times of weakened reigns or transitional stages at the top level, Jewish fortunes have suffered significantly, in the form of outbursts of violence or expulsions.

That paranoid siege mentality is a driver of the cyclical nature of anti-Semitism is more or less suggested implicitly within the scientific literature. Sanua (1992), for example, found the psychological profile of Jewish political radicals in the United States to be “paranoid-masochistic” with “the expectation of victimization seen as justifying aggressive acting out.”^[22] The trend was also noted even among some Jewish psychoanalysts, with Stanley Rothman and Howard Stein suggesting that Jews, especially aggressive Left-leaning Jews, were beholden to group fantasies and had “developed a shared repetition compulsion rooted in the need for punishment.”^[23]

Especially interesting in light of the recent move by Jewish groups to create software in order to monitor even the most nuanced of discussions of Jews on social media, Bar-Tal et al. remark that a key feature of paranoid siege mentality is the development of “special sensitivity to cues indicating negative intentions emitted by out-groups.”^[24] There is probably no ethnic group on earth that has so finely developed its sensitivity to cues indicating negative intentions omitted by out-groups than the Jews.

Equally important to note is that this phenomenon is not indicative of low self-esteem on the part of the paranoid group. In fact, the trend again is towards low self-criticism and psychopathic levels of high self-esteem. Bar-Tal et al. explain:

Not surprisingly, Siege Mentality is related to Ethnocentrism. The belief that the world has negative intentions towards the group indicates its evil, malice, and aggressiveness. In this context, the group not only feels victimized and self-righteous, but also superior to the out-group.

Conclusion

One of the remarkable aspects of anti-Semitism is its repetitive nature. The surveyed literature offers some valuable insight into the etiological factors of anti-Semitism, especially the ways in which supremacist Jewish paranoia about anti-Semitism justifies, and operates in tandem with, aggressive behaviors against out-groups. This aggression then provokes real anti-Semitism, which consequently offers further impetus for the “shared repetition compulsion” to continue. Jews unquestionably differ from non-Jews in terms of their psychological profile, a fact that is increasingly being attributed to genetic differences, and they appear to remain significantly psychologically maladjusted to life among Whites. The continued dedication of “significant and influential” Jews to the close monitoring of out-groups, in the form of surveys, software, and government surveillance, and the intense involvement of Jewish groups in restricting the freedoms of host populations, suggests that Jewish paranoid siege mentality is in fact worsening, even entering the phase of “drastic measures” in an effort to obtain what is perhaps an unobtainable level of psychological comfort and security. Certainly these measures go “out of the range of the accepted norms for the intergroup behaviors.” A reasonable prediction, based on historical precedent, would therefore be that the further acceleration of this trend, and the ongoing neglect of the real causes of anti-Semitism, would lead to genuine intergroup conflict and the continuance of the cycle of Jewish history.

^[1] C.S. Liebman, “Myth, Tradition and Values in Israeli Society,” Midstream, 24 (1978), 44-53, 44.

^[2] Maizel S, Knobler HY, Herbstein R., “Folie à trois among two Soviet-Jewish immigrant families to Israel,” British Journal of Psychiatry (1990), 157, 290-292, 290.

^[3] Proust’s father was apparently native French. His Jewish mother, Jeanne Clémence Weil, was a descendant of wealthy Alsatian moneylenders. Harold Bloom comments that Proust’s “love for his Gentile father was real, but his passion for his Jewish mother was overwhelming.” See H. Bloom, The Western Canon: The Books and School of the Ages (New York: Riverhead, 1995), 369. Proust’s Jewish identity was complex but strong. See I, Ebert, “Le Premier Dreyfusard”: Jewishness in Marcel Proust,” The French Review, 67(2), 196-217; J. Hyde, “Proust, His Jews and His Jewishness” The French Review, 39(6), 837-848; and J. Brami, “Strange Jewishness: Essay on the Treatment of Jewish Identity in Proust,” in A. Benhaim (ed), The Strange M. Proust (New York: Routledge, 2009).

^[4] Sanua, Victor D. “Mental Illness and Other Forms of Psychiatric Deviance Among Contemporary Jewry 1.” Transcultural Psychiatric Research Review 29, no. 3 (January 1992): 197–233., 197-8.

^[5] Ball, R. A., and Clare, A. W. “Symptoms and Social Adjustment in Jewish Depressives.” British Journal of Psychiatry 156, no. 3 (1990): 379–83, 379, 381-2. Israel has historically had a very low suicide rate, in contrast to nations like Japan which have a culture high in self-criticism. Sanua (1992) found that Jews in Britain had a suicide rate roughly half that of British non-Jews.

^[6] Lynn, R. “Racial and ethnic differences in psychopathic personality,” Personality and Individual Differences, Volume 32, Issue 2, 2002, 273-316.

^[7] Gilman, Sander L. “Jews and mental illness: Medical metaphors, anti‐semitism, and the Jewish response.” Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences 20, no. 2 (1984): 150-159, 158.

^[8] See, Halpern, Lipman. “Some data of the psychic morbidity of Jews and Arabs in Palestine.” American Journal of Psychiatry 94, no. 5 (1938): 1215-1222, 1218. A survey of the literature found that international rates of schizophrenia (from highest) were predominantly northern European: Ireland, Norway, Scotland, Switzerland, England, Sweden, NY State, Denmark, Germany, Russia, and Finland.

^[9] See, Ball, R. A., and A. W. Clare. “Symptoms and Social Adjustment in Jewish Depressives.” British Journal of Psychiatry 156, no. 3 (1990): 379–83, 381.

^[10] Penslar, Derek J. Jews and the Military: A History. Princeton University Press, 2015. Malingering and service-avoidance are discussed on pages 11, 27, 29, 30, 31, 38, 45, 46, 48, 256.

^[11] Ball, R. A., and A. W. Clare. “Symptoms and Social Adjustment in Jewish Depressives.” British Journal of Psychiatry 156, no. 3 (1990): 379–83, 379, 381-2.

^[12] Halpern, Lipman. “Some data of the psychic morbidity of Jews and Arabs in Palestine.” American Journal of Psychiatry 94, no. 5 (1938): 1215-1222, 1220.

^[13] Cooklin, Ruth S., A. Ravindran, and M. W. P. Carney. “The Patterns of Mental Disorder in Jewish and Non-Jewish Admissions to a District General Hospital Psychiatric Unit: Is Manic-Depressive Illness a Typically Jewish Disorder?” Psychological Medicine 13, no. 1 (1983): 209–12, 211.

^[14] Kohn, Robert, Itzhak Levav, Stacey Zolondek, and Michaele Richter. “Affective Disorders among Jews: A Historical Review and Meta-Analysis.” History of Psychiatry 10, no. 38 (June 1999): 245–67, 261.

^[15] Loewenthal, K. M. & Marcus, B, “Jewish Stereotypes in Psychiatric Diagnosis and Treatment,” in Moffic, H.S. (ed) Anti-Semitism and Psychiatry: Recognition, Prevention, and Interventions (New York: Springer, 2020), 186.

^[16] Jay, Martin. “The Jews and the Frankfurt School: Critical Theory’s Analysis of Anti-Semitism.” New German Critique, no. 19 (1980): 137-49, 141-2.

^[17] Rinder, I D. “Mental health of American Jewish urbanites: a review of literature and predictions.” The International journal of social psychiatry vol. 9 (1963): 104-9, 108.

^[18] Maizel S, Knobler HY, Herbstein R., “Folie à trois among two Soviet-Jewish immigrant families to Israel,” British Journal of Psychiatry (1990), 157, 290-292, 290.

^[19] Bar-Tal, Daniel, and Dikla Antebi. “Beliefs about Negative Intentions of the World: A Study of the Israeli Siege Mentality.” Political Psychology 13, no. 4 (1992): 633-45.

^[20] Ibid, 634.

^[21] Ibid, 643.

^[22] Sanua, Victor D. “Mental Illness and Other Forms of Psychiatric Deviance Among Contemporary Jewry 1.” Transcultural Psychiatric Research Review 29, no. 3 (January 1992): 197–233., 212.

^[23] See, Stein, Howard F. “Judaism and the group-fantasy of martyrdom: The psychodynamic paradox of survival through persecution.” The Journal of Psychohistory 6, no. 2 (1978): 151; Rothman, Stanley (1978). “Group Fantasies and Jewish Radicalism.”Journal of Psychohistory 6:211–240.

^[24] Bar-Tal, Daniel, and Dikla Antebi. “Beliefs about Negative Intentions of the World: A Study of the Israeli Siege Mentality.” Political Psychology 13, no. 4 (1992): 633-45, 642.

For many on the dissident right, Fox News’ primetime anchor Tucker Carlson is a kind of hero.  He’s pro-Trump and anti-liberal.  He comes off as a true (“paleo”) conservative, and rails against the neo-con agendas of the dominant Right.  He calls out attacks on Whites, both physical and ideological.  He exposes lies and hypocrisy in the liberal mainstream media, especially at CNN and MSNBC.  He is blunt, funny, and smart.  What more could a White alt-righter hope for?

Lots, it turns out.

Night after night, Carlson manages to pull off a remarkable feat:  He manages to criticize the self-serving lies and hypocrisy of the Left with an opposing but, in its own way, often misleading and deficient presentation.  This is no small task.  He and his crew of scriptwriters must put in hours of work each day, to prepare for his nightly one-hour performances.  And surely they have their own in-house censors and ideological gatekeepers who must approve all final topics, themes, wording, and guest-lists.  But they succeed.  Carlson’s Fox team is to be congratulated on achieving their goals.  Much of what they produce is enlightening and important.  But unfortunately, they are to be equally condemned for all their implicit biases, shallow analysis, and vital omissions.  In what follows, I will attempt to dissect Carlson and his crew, in order to lay bare both the insights and the deceptions that he offers up each evening.

Let me start with his upbringing and family background.  Now, in general, I try to avoid assigning blame for an individual’s faults to his past or his family.  People are, for the most part, responsible adults, and must be held personally responsible for their own actions.  But in this case, Carlson’s family history reveals a fairly lengthy tale of woe, malfeasance, and assorted immoralities; surely this has some bearing on his beliefs and actions as an adult.  At a minimum, it helps us to better understand the man and his motivations.

Tucker Swanson McNear Carlson was born in 1969 in San Francisco to Dick Carlson and Lisa McNear Lombardi.  Both parents led troubled lives.  Dick Carlson was born in Boston in 1941, to a 21-year-old male and a 15-year-old girl—a situation that today would qualify as statutory rape.  Ashamed of her pregnancy, the girl gave baby Dick up for adoption.  At the age of two, he was adopted by the Carlson family and took their name.  Moving to California in his 20s, Dick became a freelance journalist, eventually becoming involved in a libelous story against the mayor of San Francisco.  In the 1970s, Dick tried his hand at banking, but was soon involved in a political patronage scandal and accusations of dubious lending practices.[1]  In the 1980s, after a failed run for mayor of San Diego, he was appointed chief propagandist (though of course they didn’t call it that) at the Voice of America radio station, under Reagan.  In 1991, George H. W. Bush appointed him ambassador to Seychelles.  Today, at age 79, he has settled into a comfortable retirement.

As for Tucker’s mother, Lisa, she was evidently a very—shall we say—flaky person.  She married Dick in 1967, had Tucker in 1969 and then another boy in 1973, and then simply abandoned the family in 1975, when Tucker was six.  Only a very disturbed woman would up and leave her husband and two young children for no apparent reason.  Lisa’s whereabouts since that time remain a mystery.

Dick would eventually marry another troubled woman, Patricia Swanson, in 1979, when Tucker was 10 years old.  Fortuitously, Patricia was an heiress to the Swanson Foods fortune, built up in the 1930s and 1940s by her grandfather, Carl Swanson.  Her marriage to Dick was her third; at 18, she married a Jew, Howard Feldman, only to divorce a year later, and a second marriage ended in 1975.  At any rate, Dick at least “married into money,” attaining by current standards a modest fortune.  As they approach 80, both will soon be passing along a fair amount of money to Tucker.

In any case, Tucker led a privileged life from birth, despite his parental troubles.  He grew up in the wealthy community of La Jolla, California, and was schooled in Switzerland and at the prestigious Trinity College in Connecticut, eventually earning a degree in history.  Drawing on his father’s connections, he held various reporting and journalistic positions, eventually gaining his first television stint with CNN in 2000.  Tucker jumped to MSNBC in 2005, and finally to Fox in 2009.  In 2016, he was given his own program at that station.

Thus, by all accounts, Tucker is doing quite well for himself these days.  His show on Fox recently earned the highest ratings ever for a cable news show.  His salary is in the neighborhood of $6 million per year,[2] and his net worth is variously estimated at $20 million to $30 million.  At least his critiques of the wealthy corrupt of our country are well-sourced, given that he is a member of the very club that he loves to lambast.

The Tucker Model

Carlson seems to have been a life-long conservative, even during his tenures at CNN and MSNBC, where he played the conservative foil to the dominant liberal voices.  So we need not doubt his sincerity on that matter, at least.  But like all TV figures, he quickly learned how to “play the game” in order to get his share of airtime.  The primary rule: never question, challenge, or ‘out’ your bosses; always stick to the party line.  This of course is true pretty much everywhere, but in the news media, when your very job is to be an honest, diligent, and brave presenter of the truth, it seems particularly appalling to have to sacrifice basic morals—both personal and professional—simply to keep your job.  Yes, much of the blame goes to the corporate bosses, who demand ideological conformity from their news teams, but blame also goes to the individual TV figures who allow themselves to be used and corrupted for the money and fame (an old story, I know).

This is particularly troublesome for the dissident right, because there are many who view Carlson as a real voice for their concerns, and as a courageous defender of the truth.  But all too often, his real concern seems to be for himself and his fellow members of the wealthy elite, and his version of “the truth” leaves much to be desired.

Let’s start with what Carlson gets right.  Yes, the Democrats are appalling hypocrites and liars.  In the whole Covid crisis, Carlson has made much hay by exposing their double standards on things like mask-wearing, quarantine, haircuts, and salon visits.  Yes, they will say and do nearly anything to defeat Trump and win the White House, and perhaps even Congress.  Yes, Joe Biden is a near brain-dead dupe of party operatives, lacking in anything like personal principles or convictions.  Yes, Miss AOC—or now, “Sandy” Cortez, as Tucker prefers—carries an outsized liberal influence and indeed has many “radical” policies she wants to implement.  Yes, Democrats feign being environmentalists of the highest sort, and yet when in power they do little or nothing—witness the eight years of Clinton-Gore in the 1990s, or the eight Obama years.  Democrats also claim to “support our troops” but find it impossible to end our hopeless foreign wars and bring the troops home, or to dismantle our global network of imperial military outposts that costs taxpayers upwards of $500 billion a year.

It’s a similar story on the media side:  Yes, Tucker’s competing news celebrities at CNN and MSNBC are appalling hypocrites and liars.  He rightly calls out the blatant stupidity and ethical lapses of people like Chris Cuomo and Don Lemon.  CNN and MSNBC both are utterly predictable in which stories they present and which they don’t present, and Carlson has a field day with this.  These are the kinds of things that rightly earn him praise from the alt- and dissident right.

But let’s look a bit more closely at Tucker’s universe.  In his world, things are relatively black-and-white.  There are good things, and there are bad things.  The Tucker ‘goods’ include:  America, the American way of life, God (of the Judeo-Christian persuasion, of course), a second Trump presidency, capitalism, free trade, personal wealth, and unrestricted freedom of choice.  These things are standard goods for conservatives, both paleo and neo-con, but not necessarily for the dissident right.  Many in the DR see America as a failed state, as a disaster—at least in practice, if not also in theory.  Many would like to see our present corrupt nation vanish into oblivion.  Few in the DR are rich.  Many see Trump as an embarrassment or worse, hardly worth defending.  And many are at least skeptical, if not downright contemptuous, of the Judeo-Christian hoax and its ridiculous sky-god Jehovah.[3]

More troubling are the Tucker ‘bads,’ which include:  racism, anti-Semitism, White nationalism, Black Lives Matter, Antifa,[4] riots and anarchy in the streets, unwinnable foreign wars like Afghanistan, the 9/11 attacks (involving “the Saudis”), Chinese global aggression (especially vis a vis Russian aggression), and climate change “alarmism.”  Clearly and obviously for those in the DR, many of these things are in fact not bad, and some are unconditional goods.  Let’s go down the list in a bit of detail:

• Racism, Tucker loves to repeat, is a great evil. “All men are created equal,” after all, according to his beloved Declaration.  Both of these assertions are, of course, utter nonsense.  The proper, positive reading of ‘racism’ is (a) to think in racial terms about all aspects of human society, and (b) to have an appropriate self-pride in one’s own race.  Any sane and rational person would likely agree with this definition.  Science, genetics, anthropology, and sociology all testify to the overriding importance of race or ethnicity in accounting for human values and behavior.  And to not be proud of one’s own race is akin to hating one’s own family; normal, well-adjusted people have a positive self-image, and this applies to themselves, to their extended family, and to all those of their kind.  Consequently, there is no meaningful sense in which all humans are equal—not in interests, abilities, values, predispositions, inclinations…nothing.  If anything, humans are radically unequal.  “Equal before the law” is trivial, relatively meaningless, and functionally-speaking not even true.  “Equal under God” is sheer absurdity.  Human equality is a fiction.  Thus, any thinking, intelligent, and morally-intact person ought to be a ‘racist.’
• Likewise, any thinking White is necessarily anti-Semitic, meaning, they recognize Jews as the primary threat to their collective well-being and indeed to the well-being of all humanity. To be openly and proudly anti-Semitic is to take a stand against the gang of criminals—the “planetary master criminals,” in the words of Heidegger—that have been plundering Western civilization for some two millennia.[5]
• White nationalism and White interests are of course the raison d’être of White activism. Whenever the topic crosses Carlson’s lips, however, it morphs into ‘white supremacy’ or ‘neo-Nazism’ and is explicitly or implicitly condemned.  Whites never have valid interests as Whites, in his mind.
• Antifa and BLM are motley collections of confused, self-hating, opportunistic, vicious, and mindless individuals, of all races (including Jews). They are loosely organized, if at all.  Isolated hit-squads, perhaps assembled for pay, leap into action under their banners and make a big splash; but for the vast majority of Whites and the vast majority of American cities, they pose no real threat at all.  Yes, they are contemptible, as Carlson says.  Yes, they should be jailed, or worse.  But no, they pose no existential threat to the DR movement.  (Carlson’s main concern with them seems to be that they often target the wealthy, which hits too close to home for his comfort.)
• Likewise, Tucker hates riots and anarchy because they threaten the comfortable order of the economic elites. But let’s get this straight:  There are plenty of good reasons to be rioting in the streets—but George Floyd is not one of them.  If we’re going to have riots, let’s do it, for example, over the American Judeocracy that has destroyed any semblance of fairness and justice in our society.  Or over the $1 trillion spent every year in this country to maintain a global military hegemony, much of it on behalf of Jews and Israel.  Or over the obscene accumulation of wealth by American Jews, amounting to as much as $50 trillion (see here).  It’s not the rioting per se that is wrong; it’s the motivation behind it that matters.  But Carlson will have none of this.
• Both Iraq wars (1991 and 2003) and the war in Afghanistan were Jewish-instigated neo-con wars on behalf of Israel—period. They had nothing to do with American security.  To this day, there are still some 5,000 troops in Iraq and about 7,000 in Afghanistan, fighting “terrorists” who might someday threaten Jews in Israel.  This is an utter disgrace, and even a crime against humanity.  It must end now, as Tucker says—though he will never speak the truth about these conflicts.
• As for the 9/11 attacks, suffice to say that, once again, they seem to have been conducted on behalf Jewish and Israeli interests. To demonize the Saudis, as Carlson does, is to distract from the real issues at hand.
• Distraction, too, seems to be his motivation for a focus on Chinese aggression rather than Russian. As a widely-detested global hegemon, the US naturally faces continual threats on many fronts.  To pick out one or the other of these threats is to distract from the deeper issues involved.  The short solution here is:  stop being a hegemon, and you will have far fewer enemies.
• Carlson claims to be an environmentalist, but it’s clear that he qualifies only as one of the shallow and instrumentalist types. By contrast, many in the DR have legitimate concerns about climate change and would like see this nation move toward less fossil fuels, while expanding protections for wilderness and undeveloped rural areas.  Dare I add that the original dissident right, the National Socialists, placed great value on nature.  Once again, Carlson seems primarily concerned with the potential hit to his bottom line, and that of his fellow elites.

Tucker and the Jews

Finally we come to the black hole at the center of Carlson’s galaxy.  And a supermassive one it is, too.  Of that most influential, most wealthy, most corrupt, and most destructive of minorities, he offers us precisely nothing.  Jews are all but invisible on the Tucker Carlson Show.

Correction:  Jews qua Jews are invisible.  He has plenty of them on his show, but they are almost never identified as such (of course not—because that would be RACIST!).  Carlson’s regular Jews include Dr. Marc Siegel, Rick Leventhal, Mark Steyn (part-Jewish), and Dave Portnoy.  The past few weeks have included several other Jewish appearances, including Glenn Greenwald, Alex Berenson, Seth Barron, Lester Friedman, and Dov Hikind.  As on every news outlet, left, right, or center, Jews are massively over-represented.  This is not an accident.  For his part, Tucker seems more than happy to give the Jewish voice yet more airtime.

Yes, he condemns the likes of Harvey Weinstein and Jeffrey Epstein, and of Jeff Zucker and Michael Cohen, but again never as Jews.  Their Jewishness is, for him, utterly irrelevant.  Those of us who know better can see consistent patterns of behavior, clannish in-group defense, masterful lying, and an absolute lack of morality in these individuals.  This is not a coincidence.  We are dealing here with genetic, in-born traits that reach their highest and most ruthless fulfillment in such men.  Wherever Jews number more than a fraction of a percent of the population, there will be Weinsteins and Epsteins, Zuckers and Cohens.

A typical Carlson viewer, however, could be excused for thinking that such people as Jews didn’t even exist—unless it involves calling attention to anti-Semitism and Jewish victimhood.  Apart from that, the word ‘Jew’ is virtually never uttered.  Not even when it is most relevant; and not even when it involves the very people he loves to criticize the most.  Consider the highly relevant and surely uncoincidental relationships between Biden, Kamala Harris, and the Jews.  Take Biden, who has long had a cozy relationship with Jews, dating back at least to his fond memories of meeting Golda Meir in 1973.  In early 2007, he famously stated that “I am a Zionist,” adding “You don’t have to be a Jew to be a Zionist” (true enough).[6]  This certainly helped his political future, considering that the Judeophile and Judenknecht Obama soon thereafter chose him as his running mate.

But what secured Biden’s support among the American Judeocracy was surely his family connections.  Joe had three children by his first wife: Beau, Hunter, and Naomi.  The wife and one-year-old Naomi were killed in a car crash in 1972, but the two boys lived to adulthood (Beau died of brain cancer in 2015).  Joe then had a fourth child, Ashley, by his second and current wife, Jill.  Ashley married a Jewish doctor, Howard Krein, in 2012.  Beau married a Jewish dry-cleaning scion, Hallie Olivere, in 2002; they had two children before he died in 2015.  After his death, Olivere (now Hallie Biden) shamelessly began an affair with the alcoholic and married younger son, Hunter—he of the Ukrainian Burisma scandal fame.  Hunter then divorced his first wife (Kathleen) to take up fulltime with the Jewess Hallie, but that relationship fell apart in 2018.  After getting a stripper pregnant, Hunter then took up with another Jewess, “filmmaker” Melissa Cohen.  They married in 2019 and had a boy in 2020.

Bottom line:  All three of Biden’s adult children married Jews, and he has at least three Jewish grandchildren.  This is remarkable, and surely not accidental.  Jews flock to power, and those in power, at least the most depraved and corrupt ones, are only too happy to cement their Jewish family connections.  The same holds, as we know, for the Clintons, Trump, and Nancy Pelosi, among many others.[7]

For her part, Kamala Harris married the Jew Doug Emhoff in 2014.  As the offspring of an Indian mother and a Black Jamaican father, and now married to a Jew, Harris is a poster child for the degenerate racial mixing that passes for normality in liberal-Democratic circles these days.  We can see why they praised her selection for VP.

But rest assured, you won’t be confronted with any of these ugly facts on the Tucker Carlson Show.  No sir!  Because that would be RACIST!

Perhaps the biggest Jewish problem, from Carlson’s standpoint, is the possible (likely?) Jewishness of his Fox corporate owners, the Murdoch family.  The family patriarch, Rupert, now 89, has managed to obscure details of his family background.  His mother, the former Elisabeth Greene (1909-2012), is claimed by some to have been Jewish.  Journalist Richard Curtiss stated as much in 2003 (see here).  There is a weird, possibly-doctored photo showing her looking quite chummy with an Australian rabbi (ibid.).  And Rupert’s sister, Anne, apparently married a Jew named Kantor.  Suggestive, but far from definitive.

But what is not in dispute is that the Murdoch empire has been relentlessly pro-Israel, pro-Jewish, and pro-Zionist for decades.  Whether for personal, religious, or commercial reasons, the Murdochs have found it in their interest to sidle up to the Jews.  This stance unquestionably works its way down the entire Fox media network, and thus we are unsurprised that the anchors avoid the whole topic whenever possible.  The Jewish Question is, as always, That Which Shall Not Be Spoken.[8]

It is particularly frustrating, though, when folks like Carlson actually provide cover and defense for the Jews.  On many occasions, for example, he has stated or implied that Jews are White—that they benefit from “White privilege” or that they are targeted “because they are White.”  Let me make this as clear as possible:  Jews are not White—not in any relevant sense.  Jews are White like Jessica Krug and Rachel Dolezal are Black; that is, only to the extent that it serves their interests to deceive.  Yes, Jews’ skin tone matches ours, but that is merely an unfortunate and superficial fact of biology.  To further obscure the issue, they use plastic surgery to hide the nose and to minimize the uniquely repulsive effects of Jewish aging.  This allows them to circulate in White society unnoticed.  But they are not White.  Neither are Lebanese, Syrians, Iranians, nor any other light-skinned Arabs or Middle Easterners.  ‘White’ refers only to the indigenous people of Europe, Ukraine, and Western Russia.  Jews are not White.

But Carlson seems unable to comprehend this fact, and thus he continues to perpetuate the “Jews are White” myth.  Apparently he is unwilling or unable to grasp the alternative, namely, that Jews are a distinct ethnicity with distinct genetics, and therefore with distinct skills, abilities, values, and group interests—many of which directly conflict with those of Whites.

His sins against Whites are compounded by the fact that he himself is White.  This situation is particularly galling to me and many in the DR.  We can at least understand the patent self-interest when Jewish anchors like Wolf Blitzer, Jake Tapper, Rachel Maddow (half), Chuck Todd, Ari Melber, Mark Levin, and John Berman offer us biased reporting or lies of omission that benefit Jews.  But for Whites and other non-Jews to do the same is disgraceful.  Carlson, at least, manages to salvage some dignity in his willingness to openly criticize Jews, even if without naming them as such.  But for left-leaning White broadcasters like Anderson Cooper, Chris Cuomo, and Chris Hayes to provide active cover and defense for Jews is utterly appalling.  They are among the leading and most damaging race-traitors in the mainstream media.  For them, no punishment can be too severe.

Despite all this, Carlson has a path to salvation.  Tucker, here it is:  Pick a random night in the not too distant future, and go off script, live, and tell the truth about the Jews.  You’re smart, you know the truth, just say it.  When the inevitable firing comes, take it like a man.  With $30 million in the bank, you’ve got more than enough for yourself, your kids, and your grandkids.  Then use your money and fame to become a real advocate for the truth.  Speak out against the Jewish monopolization of our power structure, and against Jewish malfeasance at all levels of society.

They say you might even run for president in 2024.  Imagine the commitment and support you would gain by speaking the truth.  But do it now.  There isn’t a moment to lose.  We’ll be waiting.

Thomas Dalton, PhD, has authored or edited several books, including a new translation series of Mein Kampf, and the book Debating the Holocaust (4th ed, 2020).  For all his works, see his personal website www.thomasdaltonphd.com

[1] Dick Carlson ended up being interviewed by Mike Wallace for 60 Minutes, as part of the larger scandal.

[2] Significantly less than his competitor, Anderson Cooper at CNN, who earns around $12 million per year.

[3] Nietzsche’s account of Christianity is particularly appropriate on this count; see here.

[4] Both the term and the ideology have long roots, having been founded in Germany in the early 1930s.  Only in the past four or five years has the concept assumed prominence in the US.

[5] For more on Heidegger, see my book Eternal Strangers (2020).

[6] On this and other related statements, see here.

[7] One wonders what the children of these power-elites are thinking.  What sane person would willingly marry into the lowest and most despicable minority on Earth?  And then have children with them?  Were they bribed?  Coerced?  Brainwashed?  The topic is surely worthy of a book-length treatment in itself.

[8] I’m tempted to call it “the elephant in the room,” but that would be an insult to elephants, so I won’t.