This Year, I’m a One-Issue Voter: Anti-JewThis Year, I’m a One-Issue Voter: Anti-Jewish Interests

The 2026 US midterm elections are rapidly bearing down upon us, with plenty of major implications for Americans and for the world. I want to take a moment here to offer my thoughts on this pressing matter, and maybe suggest a line of thinking for all those would-be voters out there.

As a writer, researcher, and former professor of political philosophy, I have spent much of the past three decades thinking hard about social and political matters—mostly about how we came to be in the present predicament, and how we might get out of it. Like most people, I have a lot of different issues that I worry about. I worry about the economy, gas prices, food prices; I worry about technology and super-AI; I worry about environmental degradation; I worry about governmental incompetence and corruption; I hate to pay taxes. Ideally, in a “free and fair election,” I would assess the various candidates on such issues, weigh their various pros and cons, and then make my choice. Sure, my one vote is all but inconsequential in my state of 10 million and in a nation of 345 million, but still, I typically (but not always) go through the motions and cast my vote.

With the upcoming midterm elections, though, things are different. Now, all my normal concerns seem to fade into second place, with one issue dominating and overwhelming all the others. It is what has long been called the Jewish Question: What should we do about the pernicious Jewish presence and influence in our society?

There are two pieces to this: First, the mere fact that Jews are a pernicious presence in Western society; and second, that there is something we can and should do about it. Let me briefly address both points.

I have long felt that Jews in America have been a detrimental factor in society—dating back to my college student days, at least. But for a long time, it was only a vague, ill-formed feeling, an intuition, that something wasn’t right about the Jewish role in the US. They were only a couple percent of our population, after all; why then did they have such an obviously outsized influence in politics, film, news, and academia? Why was Israel—a tiny nation of some 10 million people, ranking around #100 in the world by population, located more than 5,000 miles away—meriting continuous news coverage? How did Jewish Americans—who, in numbers, roughly equal Scottish Americans and Puerto Rican Americans—earn so much attention? (How often do you hear about Scotland in the news? The same should be true of Israel!) Why was the Holocaust—a disputed historical event now over 80 years old—receiving such frequent mention in the popular media? Any level-headed undergrad student could see that all this was true and problematic. But to what extent, and from whence it came, and what to do about it—all these things required more study.

Even at a young age, it was obvious to me that, in order to garner that much attention in a busy, crowded, crisis-ridden world, someone, somewhere, had to have a lot of influence. As I dug into the matter, it became clear that this disproportionate attention was a bad thing: that it was nearly always slanted in favor of Jews or Israel, and that it necessarily displaced other, more important matters. It also proved that Jews or their lackeys were effectively in charge of American media and academia.

And when I investigated why the government didn’t step in to remedy such imbalances, it became clear that government, too, was dominated by Jewish interests—in part by Jews themselves, in part by deluded Christian Zionists, but mostly by Jewish money that elected favorable politicians and dictated policy on many levels. I discovered the American system to be an entrenched, self-reinforcing, self-protecting system that nearly always functioned on behalf of Jewish or Israeli interests, which in reality meant counter to American (especially White American) interests.

As I say, this seems to be an intrinsically bad thing. Consider, if you will, how well things are going in the US today. Is our nation on the right track, generally speaking? No? If this is your immediate reply, then you are in good company. Public opinion surveys for at least the past two decades have consistently shown that between 55% and 75% of the American public believe that the country is on the wrong track. This is a high level of dissatisfaction, crossing both Republican and Democrat administrations. And it’s not merely a matter of one party dissatisfied when the other is in power; you can dislike the president but still feel that your country is generally doing well, and you can be dissatisfied even when “your guy” won the presidency—as is the case today with many Trump voters. So it is not just party-politics at issue; something deeper is at play.

Then consider this. There is one consistent political condition across the decades and across party lines: Jewish influence and Jewish control of government. It works on both Republicans and Democrats, and to a lesser degree on the Greens and other minor parties. It has long been known that Republicans get at least 25% of their total political funding from Jewish sources, and Democrats, at least 50%. This is astonishing, considering that there are some 13,000 lobbyists in Washington, all given money by various groups to influence policy; and yet, just one lobby—the Jewish Lobby—gives 25%, 50%, or more of all campaign donations. Once we learn this fact, it is not at all surprising that Jewish interests predominate.

So why don’t we make such donations illegal? Because the very people who would do this are the ones corrupted by the money in the first place. Jews naturally are quite happy with the system as it is, and they block any efforts that might reduce their influence. The system is, in effect, self-corrupting, and only radical action can change that.

Call me an anti-Semite if you will, but I see all this as an extremely negative situation—and I have for over three decades. If Jews are a 2%-minority in this country, and yet our government, our media, our academia, and our business enterprises consistently and demonstrably act in their favor, how can that be anything but malicious?

This situation is hardly new, by the way. In fact, it goes back well over 100 years—before wealthy American Jews pressured FDR into becoming involved in World War Two, before they pressured Woodrow Wilson to declare war on Germany during World War One, back at least to 1911, when an emerging US Jewish Lobby overcame President Taft’s wishes and “persuaded” a compliant Congress to cancel a longstanding US-Russia trade treaty. It is a long and sordid story.

Already by the 1920s, it was obvious to perceptive observers that Jewry had an excessive and detrimental impact on American society. Back in 1921, Henry Ford wrote the following in his paper The Dearborn Independent: “If you could put a tag marked ‘Jewish’ on every part of your life that is Jew-controlled, you would be astonished at the showing” (August 13). In 1921! That’s 105 years ago! And would you guess that the situation is better, or worse, today? Bingo.

The Last Straw(s)

As I said, all this had been obvious to me for decades. Equally obvious was the need to take action. As a faculty member at the University of Michigan, I was a leading voice for BDS action (boycott, divestment, sanction) of Israel, and I supported both student and faculty efforts to press this issue.¹ Unfortunately, my university is heavily Jewish—it has around 5,000 Jewish students, comprising about 15% of the total student population; this ranks U-M at #10 nationally for Jewish percentage, and #5 for total Jewish population. Concomitantly, it also has a large number of Jewish faculty and administrators, right up to the Board of Regents. Naturally, then, it has resolutely resisted all BDS-related actions (despite divesting from South African apartheid in 1988). Again, for anyone who was remotely paying attention, it was clear that Jewish power within the university was steering policy in its favor. And my university is obviously not alone in this regard; to date, no major American university has divested from Israel.

Then came the last straw: or rather, two last straws. The first was the aftermath of the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack, in which Israel, rather than finding and punishing the perpetrators, elected to decimate all of Gaza. Thus far, at least 100,000 Palestinians have been killed, and perhaps double or even triple that figure; and of the dead, some 60% are women, children, and the elderly.

For all those who were, for years, reluctant to act against Israeli apartheid, this should have been the last straw. On top of institutional apartheid, we now have outright genocide and mass-murder of innocents, broadcast to the world for all to see. It is not debatable, not in dispute; it is not a “grey area,” not justifiable self-defense, and certainly not justice. It is mass criminality committed by the Jewish state and supported by large majorities of Jewish civilians, both in Israel and abroad. Divesting from Israeli crimes against humanity is the very least that could be done.

In the three-plus years of this ongoing genocidal catastrophe, what has the American government done? It has aided the criminals. During the first 18 months under the Biden-Harris administration, absolutely no meaningful critical action was taken against Israel. To the contrary: Biden approved ongoing annual assistance of $3.8 billion to the Jewish state, and he authorized a special one-time “security package” of $14 billion in early 2024. Trump has likewise done nothing to penalize Israeli crimes, and has, like his predecessor, continued the flow of aid and weapons. It has been reported that more than $25 billion in total aid has gone to Israel since October 7, 2023, and another $33 billion in arms transfers.

What better proof could there be for Jewish control of US government than that two presidents as different as Biden and Trump are unified in their unconditional support for Israeli crimes against humanity?

As if that was not enough, look at the reaction to American protesters against the Gaza genocide. Students who protested on college campuses were harassed, arrested, fired from university jobs, and even expelled; and if they happened to be non-citizens, some were even deported. Working adults who protested, even if only on social media, were fired, fined, demoted, or otherwise penalized. Notable celebrities who were punished include Macklemore, Susan Sarandon, Melissa Barrera, Maha Dakhil, Sally Rooney, Bella Hadid, Mia Khalifa, David Velasco, and Zara Larsson; countless other lesser individuals also surely paid a price.

This was a particularly rude awakening for the traditional Left, who like to champion the rights of indigenous peoples, non-Whites, gays, the disabled, and others said to suffer from systemic discrimination. But the leftist Jewish sponsors were fine with “Black Lives Matter,” anti-“far right” actions, antifa-style actions, and so on; but when it came to defending Palestinians, the Jewish power structure attacked leftist and liberal protesters ruthlessly. Once again, this was a seminal lesson in Jewish power-politics: Jews rule in America, and if you run afoul of their interests, you will be attacked. Leftists and liberals thus discovered the hard way what those on “the right” have known for years.

Then we have the second last straw: The US-Israeli war on Iran, which began with an act of mass murder on February 28, 2026.² This war, now into its eighth month and showing no signs of resolution, is the quintessential “war for the Jews.” It is the paradigmatic case, in fact. It can hardly be clearer or more obvious that Trump initiated the war at the behest of Netanyahu and the American Jewish Lobby, who feared an increasingly powerful and influential Iran. Trump’s weak-to-nonexistent justification—that Iran was a “sponsor of terrorism” (as if the US and Israel were not) and that it was on the verge of developing nuclear weapons capable of reaching “US allies” (meaning Israel)—was always ludicrous and lacking in evidence. Every nation has a right to create enriched uranium, including to weapons-grade; there is no international law prohibiting this. And any violent actions sponsored by Iran over the years pale in comparison to American and Israeli terrorism.

This is clearly Trump’s “war for the Jews,” but the mass of Republican politicians support it, if only de facto. Of current Republican congressmen, only four senators have actually voted to end the war: Rand Paul, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, and Thom Tillis; in the House, a few have offered lip service to the idea (Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna introduced a bill in the House to prohibit military involvement against Iran without Congressional approval—supported by four Republicans (Tom Barrett of Michigan, Warren Davidson of Ohio and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania). Importantly, no one speaks out against the root cause of the problem: Israeli genocidal fanaticism backed by a malignant and disastrously influential American Jewish Lobby. None demand an end to all Israeli financial and military aid; none call for sanctions on Israel; none question the role and the power of the Jewish Lobby.

Democrats are little better—and predictably so, given their greater addiction to Jewish money. We see some slight progress from the much-abused Democratic Socialists of America, whose platform calls for an end to foreign wars, radically cutting military and Pentagon spending, withdrawing from NATO, and reducing or eliminating military aid to Israel. But even they will not discuss sanctioning Israel, let alone tackling the corrupting power of the American Jewish Lobby, let alone calling out Jews and Zionists for who they are.

These two “last straws” have surely served to awaken large numbers of new people, prompting them to shake off their prior reticence and to relook at world events. Now we need to mobilize them for action.

For any remaining skeptics, we need only point to the indisputable facts. Jews in fact dominate our major media corporations.³ Jews in fact dominate Big Tech.⁴ Jews in fact donate the lion’s share of all political funding.⁵ If you doubt me on these facts, take a few minutes and check them; if you don’t doubt me, then work toward change. We allowed this to happen, and we can change it.

My Body, My Vote

In light of all this, I can only conclude that nothing will improve in the US or in the American-lackey nations of Europe, until we break the back of Jewish power in this country. There are faster ways to do this (revolution, secession) and slower ways, like electoral politics, but now, in light of the looming midterms, we need to ask what we can do along this line.

For me, the conclusion is clear: Vote for the most anti-Israel, anti-Zionist, anti-Jew candidate that you can find. At this point in time, nothing else really matters.

If you are voting in some sort of Republican primary or single-party race, where all the candidates are Republicans, vote for the most anti-Jew Republican—because nothing else matters. If you are voting in a single-party Democratic race, where all the candidates are Democrats, vote for the most anti-Jew Democrat—because nothing else matters. If you are voting in an ordinary contested election, vote for the most anti-Jew candidate, regardless of party—because nothing else matters.

Case in point: In my home state of Michigan, I have a choice for senator between the Democrat Abdul El-Sayed and the Republican Mike Rogers.⁶ Now, I’m generally not inclined to vote for a liberal Muslim Democrat, but I will be voting for El-Sayed—because he is the most anti-Jew, and nothing else matters.

One other point to note here: Don’t be confused about the ‘Zionist’ versus ‘Jew’ issue. Nearly all Jews are Zionists of a sort, in that they support the existence of Israel as a Jewish state in Palestine as a global Jewish refuge. Some may wish to allow Arab citizens, some may also support a Palestinian state, but virtually all support the core existence of a theologically- and racially-defined Jewish state, and that is the essence of Zionism. For too many people, ‘Zionist’ is the polite term for Jew; but if we don’t call a spade a spade, then we risk looking too compliant and too timid. Current events demand brutal honesty.

Realistic Goals

Finally, we need to be clear and realistic about our goals here. The long-term goal is obvious: a total restructuring of the current Jewish-led social order. Short-term, though, and barring the more extreme options cited above, we need to keep in mind that the electoral process is slow and uncertain. In voting for anti-Jewish candidates, we don’t necessarily expect them to win; naturally, they will have massive Jewish funding directed against them, and in a crude, clumsy, mass-democracy like we have in America and Europe, money has its effect. Even if they win a few races, don’t expect them to act decisively; like most politicians, any winners would likely yield to Jewish pressure and quickly back away from their prior demands.

But for now, all this doesn’t matter. What matters is the rhetoric, the language, and the implicit assumptions: Simply by publicly taking even a mild anti-Jewish stance, such politicians open up the ground for new approaches to the Jewish Question. They make a critical perspective acceptable; they trigger new ideas and new thinking in people; and they incite a Jewish-led reaction that is helpful to our cause. All this is a huge step forward, as it prepares the way for stronger rhetoric, and stronger action, in the future.

As much as I hate to oversimplify a complex situation, I think current events have forced our hand. It is time to be a one-issue voter.

It is rational.

It is moral.

It is right.

On November 3, I will be voting anti-Jew. Join me.

David Skrbina, PhD, is a former professor of philosophy from the University of Michigan, Dearborn. He is the author or editor of a dozen books, including The Jesus Hoax (2^nd ed., 2024), The Metaphysics of Technology (Routledge, 2015), and Panpsychism in the West (MIT Press, 2017).