On the Possibility of a New Elite

I am perhaps best known for documenting a hostile, highly influential Jewish elite in the U.S. and really throughout the West. But I think things are changing in a good direction. With some important exceptions.

Jews ascended to the heights of American society in several stages. In the early twentieth century they were important enough to get on Henry Ford’s radar. Ford noted their prominence in a variety of fields and their hostility to Christianity — see  my discussion of Henry Ford’s The International Jew published from1920 to 1922. Jews also had prominent roles in FDR’s administration, but it wasn’t until after World War II that anti-Jewish attitudes basically disappeared and they really entered the mainstream. Jews then led the 1960s counter-cultural revolution and became a dominant elite in the 1960s, deeply involved in the passage of the 1965 immigration law that eventually radically transformed the country, as well as civil rights legislation and the general ascent of the left to a position of dominance in American culture. Jewish ascendency was accompanied by the decline and eventual eclipse of the previously dominant WASP east-coast establishment.

The main sources of Jewish power since the 1960s have been: 1.) their ownership of media and their creation of media content as writers and producers; 2) their wealth and willingness to contribute to political causes—funding political candidates and establishing nonprofit organizations and lobbying groups able to influence public policy; 3.) their domination of academic culture, ultimately due to their influence in elite universities and trickling down to lower-tier universities and eventually the K-12 educational system.

Is this Jewish power structure still in place? Yes, but there appear to be important changes.

Media. When I was growing up (a VERY long time ago), there were three TV networks, all owned by Jews (CBS, ABC, NBC). These networks are still owned by Jews and the New York Times is still Jewish and reflects of the mainstream liberal-left Jewish community. But fewer and fewer people care.

If the 2024 election shows anything, it’s that the legacy mainstream media is distrusted more than ever and has been effectively replaced among wide swaths of voters, especially young voters, by alternative media, particularly podcasts and social media. Joe Rogan, a former liberal (wasn’t everyone?) has become increasingly conservative and Tucker Carlson has pushed the boundaries of conservative thinking, such as his interview with Darryl Cooper questioning the sacrosanct World War II narrative and his interview with Curt Mills that touches on the neocons and America’s disastrous wars in the Middle East. Another former liberal, Elon Musk, is gleefully taking a sledge hammer to the entrenched, overwhelmingly Democrat-leaning federal bureaucracy.

Just recently, Trump’s Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth evicted The New York Times, NPR, NBC, and Politico from their Pentagon offices to make room for One America News Network, The New York Post, Breitbart News Network, and HuffPo (which did not ask for representation). All of the ones replaced are decidedly on the left and replacements are conservative except HuffPo. None can be considered legacy media.

Thomas Edsall in the NYTimes has noted that “While both Democrats and Republicans have abandoned newspapers in growing numbers, … the drop among Republicans accelerated much faster than it did for Democrats in 2016, the year Trump first ran for president.”

Bottom line: Newspapers are a key source of information for Democrats but not Republicans.

Of course, a problem is that conservative media is slavishly pro-Israel even as they typically oppose liberal-left domestic political policies favored by the mainstream Jewish community, such as:

1. promoting high levels of legal non-White immigration, enabling illegal immigration, and stopping deporting illegals because they see them as future voters for the liberal left and diluting the power of White Americans;
2. promoting so-called hate speech laws and other attempts to rein in free speech on racial/ethnic issues, including especially criticisms of Israel;
3. advocating easy access to abortion, transgenderism, gay rights, etc.

Jews typically vote overwhelmingly Democrat and basically fund the Democratic Party. In the 2024 election they voted 71–79 percent for Harris, thus supporting the liberal-far left policies favored by the Harris campaign. Even though there was some shift to more conservative voting among groups of Jews, they are still on the left when it comes to domestic issues.

Jewish neocons were a long-time fixture in the GOP but bailed with the rise of Trump because of his professed distaste for foreign wars and likely because of Trump’s stated views on immigration and multiculturalism. Predictably, the neocons seamlessly defected to the Democrats where their liberal-left views on domestic policy fit right in. While in the GOP, they moved the party to the left on social issues while promoting pro-Israel wars in the Middle East and now the Ukraine war against Russia. Conservative media by and large support Trump (he “just keeps on winning”), and are thus anathema to most Jews.

The point being that even though conservative media is obsessively pro-Israel, it opposes the attitudes and policies of the mainstream liberal-left Jewish community on domestic policy. The legacy media, a main power bases of the mainstream liberal-left Jewish community, appears to be in terminal decline.

The rise of alternative media is critical. Under Elon Musk, X is clearly open to conservative  views, and indeed, when I go on there, all I see are conservative and even anti-Jewish posts (e.g., by @NickJFuentes and Ye, although I notice Ye’s recent posts appear to have been removed or limited). I recently returned to X under my real name (@realKevinMacDonald) and so far, nothing has happened. X has become a right-leaning media outlet that attracts young people and many others who reject the legacy media—during the run-up to the election it was great entertainment to see the replies to posts by the Harris campaign.

Funding the Left. What about funding the left? Jewish financial clout is certainly still in place, but we are seeing the rise of a very wealthy class of non-Jewish billionaires, prototypically Elon Musk (who reportedly gave Trump’s campaign north of $290 million). Wealthy non-Jews are thus quite willing and able to finance a competitive campaign like Trump’s. In a previous article I cited a survey showing that as of August, 2024, 21 of the top 25 donors to Trump were not Jews—not including Musk. Overall, Democrats ($880 million) spent about twice as much as Republicans ($445 million) on the 2024 presidential election, showing the Jews remain ready and willing to fund the left. But the Trump campaign certainly had enough money to run a credible campaign and even win despite the deluge of hate emanating from the legacy media.

Jewish money is thus not necessary to win, especially if the richest man in the world is on board. Even if Musk gave $300 million, it’s less than 1 percent of his wealth. Indeed, Musk could finance a presidential campaign all by himself—$1 billion would be more than even the Democrats spent on the 2024 presidential campaign, but Musk could easily afford that. As the Jews have known forever, money is power.

All this wealth supporting Trump 2.0  was apparent at Trump’s inauguration:

Here were America’s tech tycoons, members of his court, in a pantheon at his second Inaugural Address, directly across from the former presidents and in front of Trump’s presumptive cabinet. Many members of Congress, the actual elected government, were relegated to the cheaper seats.

The men who control Americans’, eyeballs and, often, emotions got the choicest seats; several have scarfed up big mansions in Washington to be closer to the Oval.

Elon Musk sat behind the vice president’s mother, pumping his arms and giving two thumbs-up when Trump said he’d put an American flag on Mars, where Musk wants to die (just not on impact).

Google’s Sundar Pichai was near Don Jr. and next to Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sanchez, who were near Ivanka and Jared. Shou Zi Chew, the TikTok C.E.O., sat next to Tulsi Gabbard, Trump’s intended director of national intelligence. Tim Cook of Apple was close to Barron Trump. Sam Altman, the head of OpenAI, was also at the inaugural but — perhaps because of his legal duel with Elon — was in the overflow room with Ron DeSantis, Eric Adams and Conor McGregor.

Most of these tycoons are likely just following the power, but this is a huge change from the 2017 inauguration and suggests that they are quite comfortable with the sea changes the Trump is pursuing.

Academia. And then there’s the university—definitely the hardest nut to crack because hiring is rigorously policed to make sure that new faculty and administrators are on the left. Academics who get out of line can expect a lifetime of harassment and hostility, and if they don’t have tenure, they will certainly be fired no matter how good their teaching and scholarship are.

As in other areas, Jews ascended the heights of the academic world after World War II and especially during the 1960s. Once they achieved prominence, they promoted the expansion of departments essentially composed of activists of the left, such as gender studies and various ethnic studies departments for Blacks, Latinos, Asians, Jews, etc., thus expanding the liberal arts faculty and creating a critical mass of leftist activists. This structure is still in place.

Since the Israeli war in Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon and Syria, there have been a great many protests on campus, but Jewish power has put a rather quick end to that (see “Massive Decline in Protests from Spring to Fall, 2024”): “The policies ranged from banning the erection of tents on campus grounds to limiting the times and places where students are allowed to hold demonstrations. While free speech experts agree that some time, place and manner restrictions are acceptable, they have branded some policy changes unconstitutional.” At UCLA, pro-Israel thugs were allowed to run amok among protesters while the police stood by. Ron Unz:

Even worse scenes took place at UCLA as an encampment of peaceful protesters was violently attacked and beaten by a mob of pro-Israel thugs having no university connection but armed with bars, clubs, and fireworks, resulting in some serious injuries. A professor of History described her outrage as the nearby police stood aside and did nothing while UCLA students were attacked by outsiders, then arrested some 200 of the former. According to local journalists, the violent mob had been organized and paid by pro-Israel billionaire Bill Ackman.

Obviously, these restrictions are a far cry from university responses to the BLM riots.

As Unz noted,

I’d think that most of these students were absolutely stunned at such reactions. For decades, they and their predecessors had freely protested on a wide range of political causes without ever encountering even a sliver of such vicious retaliation, let alone an organized campaign that quickly forced the resignation of two of the Ivy League presidents who had allowed their protests. Some of their student organizations were immediately banned and the future careers of the protesters were harshly threatened, but the horrifying images from Gaza continued to reach their smartphones. As Jonathan Greenblatt of the ADL had previously explained in a leaked phone call, “We have a major TikTok problem.”

So, yes, Jewish power in academia is alive and well.

The Trump administration is pushing back on the academic left but not against Jewish power in the universities, proposing to deport foreign students and professors involved in anti-Israel protests: “The new attorney general, Pam Bondi, created a task force to prosecute antisemitic acts, including on college campuses. The president’s order singles out last year’s university protests against Israel’s war in Gaza, which it says unleashed a barrage of discrimination against Jewish students. The order targets international students who participated in those protests with deportation.”

There is also a campaign to end DEI at universities. Christopher Rufo, interviewed by Jewish activist and New York Times columnist Michelle Goldberg,  stated: “‘If you have the full weight of the White House, the full weight of the Department of Education and a platoon of right-wing lawyers trying to use all of the statutory and executive authority that they have to reshape higher education, I think it could be a thing of tremendous beauty.’ Rufo wants to get rid of DEI in higher education and stop the practice the “‘rampant’ discrimination against white, Jewish and Asian students and faculty members, particularly through D.E.I. programs, which aim to boost the representation of groups deemed underprivileged.”

Trump’s attitude on foreign student protesters will put a further chill into what has already been happening with anti-Israel protests. But fighting DEI at universities will be an uphill struggle against an academic establishment that has devoted huge amounts of money and hired thousands of bureaucrats to administer DEI programs and will likely find ways to continue it even if it is legally prohibited, as they have with affirmative action admissions.

However, of the three main sources of Jewish power, academic influence is least important. Students will notice that DEI jobs are drying up and that spouting and living the old leftist political clichés is not a good route to social and career success. Women in particular are likely to shift political preferences when they see a shift in the status hierarchy, but men will also change their attitudes as they try to advance in the new hierarchy.

*   *   *

Conclusion: There is a real possibility of the rise of an essentially non-Jewish elite centered outside the traditional legacy media and with the financial resources able to mount successful political campaigns and fund compatible NGOs. Whether this could develop into an anti-Jewish elite is a completely different question—unlikely for the foreseeable future because of the deep personal ties and business relationships among elite Jews and non-Jews. Nevertheless, as noted, the domestic policies of the Trump administration for the most part depart dramatically from policies long favored by the mainstream liberal-left Jewish community. Already we see numerous Jewish organizations protesting any end to DEI or the deportations.

Although the present situation is in flux, it is quite possible that in the future the new elite described here could become far more than a possibility. This new elite may realize that Jewish support and Jewish power in American politics is not what it was and that there is no real need to support the policies favored by the mainstream Jewish community. Indeed, this may have already happened—with the important exception of pro-Israel attitudes that also appeal to some sections of the Republican base (e.g., knee-jerk support of Israel by mainstream conservatives and Evangelicals). Some parts of this new elite may be well aware of the role Jews have played in erecting the multicultural disaster that America has become—a position that was common on the American right for decades, at least until neocons pushed out traditional conservatives during the Reagan administration (here,  pp. 16 and 26) and William Buckley purged the conservative movement of critics of Jewish influence. And they may be well aware that the slavish support that America has  given Israel has been enormously costly in terms of lives and treasure without really serving American interests.

Musk is a good example. From a November 1, 2024 article:

Musk is increasingly off the reservation in his tweets: “The damage was done,” [holocaust activist] Deborah Lipstadt remarked about a Musk post on X. “The endorsement of the Great Replacement theory was very harmful.” Lipstadt added that she disapproved of what she saw as any attempt to “mitigate” Musk’s earlier tweet, without criticizing ADL head Jonathan Greenblatt directly. “You can try to mitigate, but once you open the pillow, it’s like chasing the feathers,” she said.

Musk was replying to a user who wrote, “Jewish communities have been pushing the exact kind of dialectical hatred against whites that they claim to want people to stop using against them. I’m deeply disinterested in giving the tiniest s— now about western Jewish populations coming to the disturbing realization that those hordes of minorities [they] support flooding their country don’t exactly like them too much.”

Musk responded, “You have said the actual truth.”

Greenblatt joined a loud chorus in condemning that post. Other Jewish groups, including the American Jewish Committee, harshly condemned it. Later in the same thread, Musk went after the ADL itself, saying the group “push[es] de facto anti-white racism.” He apologized for a lot of this and made the mandatory visits to Auschwitz and Israel, but it’s hard to believe that he now rejects these ideas.

As always, I am an optimist. I think that a lot of the figures on the right are quite aware of the deleterious effects of Jewish power and influence on the formerly dominant White America. And as I noted, “it’s hard to believe that [Musk] now rejects these ideas.”

And it’s hard to believe that Jews are able to retain their position as paragons of tolerance and virtue in view of Israeli actions in Gaza and the support these actions have received by the American Jewish community.

We can take our country back.