the Jew Yorker, at it again with a Jewish writer writing about a Jewish Monster, but his Judaism ain’t part of the story, as ALWAYS
Jerry Seinfeld bluntly tells activist ‘I don’t care about Palestine’ in awkward encounter
Ava Kofman
Staff writer
The frantic search to identify the draftsmen behind the Trump Administration’s intellectual blueprint can often seem like a fool’s errand—not least because the President is driven by whim and vendetta. Those around him, however, take ideas seriously, including the radical proposals of the neo-reactionary writer Curtis Yarvin.
Photograph by Carolyn Drake for The New Yorker
Nearly two decades ago, Yarvin began composing a sprawling apologia for an authoritarian takeover of the United States on his self-described “anti-democracy blog,” where he called for “liquidating” the government, abolishing the press, and putting a C.E.O.-king in charge of the country. In 2022, he presciently outlined a plan for Donald Trump to appoint a strike force of “ninjas” to parachute into government agencies and shut them down. But this mission would not be limited to D.C., Yarvin said. The organs of civil society—Harvard, the Times, N.G.O.s—would also need to be destroyed.
When I first heard about Yarvin, around 2015, from my roommate (a programmer who enjoyed reading political theory as a hobby; he has since become a historian), the blogger’s ideas seemed far-fetched, even comical. Now Vice-President J. D. Vance, the Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel, and the venture capitalist Marc Andreessen are among his most prominent fans. For a piece in this week’s issue, I spent dozens of hours in the past six months interviewing Yarvin—along with his family, friends, exes, former classmates, colleagues, and interlocutors—to better understand how a crankish software engineer, posting under the nom de internet Mencius Moldbug, became one of the country’s most influential illiberal thinkers. Yarvin often performs a pantomime of thinking, stitching his arguments together in a Trumpian fashion and jumping to conclusions that he proclaims as self-evident. A few weeks ago, he told me that “the right way for the international community to respond to Kim Jung Un” would be for Silicon Valley to buy North Korea for a hundred billion dollars—a deal that would be “done in a week, what an amazing property, it’s obvious when you think about it.”
Given the embrace of his ideas by some of the country’s most powerful figures, I expected to find Yarvin in triumphant spirits when I met him the weekend before Trump’s Inauguration. Instead, I was struck by the dismissive, almost contemptuous tone in which he spoke of the new Administration, as though a cult band he’d been following for years had suddenly gone mainstream. What many Americans view as a constitutional crisis, Yarvin regards as weak tea. Trump, he contends, has not gone nearly far enough.
Another Jewish Voice, Aaron, again, advocating for a two-state solution.
00:00 – Intro: Who Gets to Be a Truth Teller?
01:40 – Meet Aaron Maté: Journalist & Skeptic
03:25 – The War on Journalism & Narrative Control
06:10 – Independent Media vs Corporate Gatekeeping
09:45 – Syria, Douma & Media Complicity
13:05 – Investigating the OPCW Cover-Up
16:20 – Censorship and “Conspiracy” Labels
19:30 – Russiagate: What Really Happened?
23:15 – Trump, Russia, and the Media Circus
26:40 – Was the 2016 Election “Hacked”?
30:10 – Why Russiagate Helped Trump
33:05 – When Democrats Became Hawks
36:40 – Foreign Policy as Domestic Distraction
40:00 – Ukraine War and U.S. Double Standards
44:15 – How the Media Frames War
47:30 – Selective Outrage on Human Rights
51:00 – Israel, Gaza, and Media Silences
55:30 – The Myth of U.S. Moral Superiority
58:45 – How Censorship Works Today
01:02:00 – Lessons for the Left: Media & Messaging
01:05:40 – Being a Target: Smears & Character Attacks
01:09:00 – Final Thoughts: Truth, Power & Integrity
01:11:30 – Outro & Support Independent Media
In person, as in print, Yarvin expresses himself with imperious self-assurance. He is nearly impossible to interrupt. “When the rabbi is speaking, you let the rabbi speak,” Razib Khan, a right-wing science blogger and a close friend of Yarvin’s, told me. Even his friends and family, however, acknowledge that he has room to grow as a communicator. He talks in a halting monotone, rarely answers questions directly, and is prone to disorienting asides. In the middle of saying one thing, he is always getting distracted by something else he could be saying, like a G.P.S. that keeps suggesting faster routes.
Yarvin nearly ended up a libertarian. As a Bay Area coder and a devotee of Austrian-school economists in his late twenties, he exhibited all the risk factors. Then he discovered Hoppe’s book “Democracy: The God That Failed” (2001) and changed his mind. Yarvin soon adopted Hoppe’s imago of a benevolent strongman—someone who would govern efficiently, avoid senseless wars, and prioritize the well-being of his subjects. “It’s not copy-and-pasted, but it is such a direct influence that it’s kind of obscene,” Julian Waller, a scholar of authoritarianism at George Washington University, said. (Over e-mail, Hoppe recalled that he met Yarvin once at an exclusive gathering at Peter Thiel’s home, where Hoppe had been invited to speak. He acknowledged his influence on Yarvin, but added, “For my taste his writing has always been a bit too flowery and rambling.”) Hoppe argues that, unlike democratically elected officials, a monarch has a long-term incentive to safeguard his subjects and the state, because both belong to him. Anyone familiar with the history of dictatorships might find this idea disingenuous. Not Yarvin.
“You don’t ransack your own house,” he told me one afternoon, at an open-air café in Venice Beach. I’d asked him what would stop his C.E.O.-monarch from plundering the country—or enslaving his people—for personal gain. “For Louis XIV, when he says, ‘L’état, c’est moi,’ ransacking the state holds no meaning because it’s all his anyway.” Following Hoppe, Yarvin proposes that nations should eventually be broken up into a “patchwork” of statelets, like Singapore or Dubai, each with its own sovereign ruler. The eternal political problems of legitimacy, accountability, and succession would be solved by a secret board with the power to select and recall the otherwise all-powerful C.E.O. of each sovereign corporation, or SovCorp. (How the board itself would be selected is unclear, but Yarvin has suggested that airline pilots—“a fraternity of intelligent, practical, and careful people who are already trusted on a regular basis with the lives of others. What’s not to like?”—could manage the transition between regimes.) To prevent a C.E.O. from staging a military coup, the board members would have access to cryptographic keys that would allow them to disarm all government weapons, from nuclear missiles down to small arms, with the push of a button.
The German academic Hans-Hermann Hoppe is sometimes described as an intellectual gateway to the far right. A retired economics professor at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Hoppe argues that universal suffrage has supplanted rule by a “natural élite”; advocates for breaking nations into smaller, homogenous communities; and calls for communists, homosexuals, and others who oppose this rigid social order to be “physically removed.” (Some white nationalists have made memes pairing Hoppe’s face with a helicopter—an allusion to the Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet’s practice of executing opponents by throwing them from aircraft.) Though Hoppe favors a minimal state, he believes that freedom is better preserved by monarchy than by democracy
These fucking narcissistic and psychotic and perverse Jews must be sterilized. Look at this Jew Yorker journalist just go go go:
visited Lydia Laurenson, Yarvin’s ex-fiancée, in Berkeley. The two began dating in September, 2021, after Yarvin posted a personal ad on Substack, explaining that he’d recently lost his “widower virginity” and was looking to meet someone of “childbearing age.” Laurenson, a freelance writer and editor, replied the same day: “I have historically been a liberal but my IQ is really high, I want kids, and I’m incredibly curious to talk to you.” Yarvin went on Zoom dates with other women who answered the post—among them, Caroline Ellison, the ex-girlfriend of the now imprisoned crypto entrepreneur Sam Bankman-Fried—but he and Laurenson soon found themselves in an all-consuming romance. She told me that the ethos of her relationship with Yarvin was
“ ‘We’re going to be geniuses together and have genius babies.’ I’m making fun of it a little bit, but that really was it.”
Like Yarvin, Laurenson had been a precocious child who went to college early. She’d also maintained a blog with a cult following, where, under the pseudonym Clarisse Thorn, she wrote about sex-positive feminism, B.D.S.M., and pickup artistry. She and Yarvin fought often, sometimes about politics. Laurenson had moved away from the left, but she hadn’t fully embraced neo-reaction. When I asked her if she’d ever changed Yarvin’s mind about anything, she said she’d gotten him to stop using the N-word, at least around her. (He later told this magazine that he was not using the word in the spirit of “a Southern plantation owner.”)
The bigger source of tension, according to Laurenson, was Yarvin’s autocratic attachment style. When they fought, Laurenson said, he insisted that she provide a rational justification for ending hostilities. She felt that Yarvin’s slippery personal attacks resembled his manner in public debates. “He makes up explanations that seem reasonable, but are actually false; he attacks the character of the person who is trying to point out what he’s doing; it’s like a DDOS attack of the soul,” she told me in an e-mail, referencing the cyberattack strategy of overwhelming a server with traffic from multiple sources. James Dama, a friend of Laurenson’s who had his own falling out with Yarvin, recalled, “He would make a coarse joke about Lydia’s weight or looks, not get a laugh, and then get angry at Lydia for being too stuck up.” (Tanner, Yarvin’s first girlfriend, described a similar pattern of insults and demands.)
Laurenson and Yarvin broke up in the summer of 2022, while Laurenson was pregnant. He told me that his desire for closeness might have struck Laurenson as “overbearing and stifling,” and that he had a bad habit of making “a joke that’s sort of a barb,” but he denied that he was ever purposefully cruel during the relationship. (He added that, after the relationship ended, “my natural instinct was, I’m going to cut her down to size every time I can”—something, he noted, he was “very good at.”) A few weeks after their son was born, that December, Yarvin sued for partial custody, which he received. An ongoing family-court case remains acrimonious. “The parents are in disagreement about nearly every issue,” their mediator observed last year.
Now that they share a toddler, Laurenson spends a lot of time thinking about Yarvin’s own childhood. “He has this class-clown thing going on, where he very much craves attention,” she said. To her, it seemed that his embrace of a provocative ideology was a kind of “repetition compulsion,” a psychological defense that allowed him to reframe the ostracization he experienced growing up. As America’s most famous living monarchist, he could tell himself that people were rejecting him for his outré ideas, not for his personality. She wondered if he’d first adopted “the monarchist thing” as a kind of intellectual sport, a bit from Usenet, and then, like the parallel world in the Borges story, it had slowly taken on a reality of its own. “Is it just like you found this place where people admire you and allow you to troll as much as you want, and then you just live in that world?” she asked.
By Ava Kofman
And ten years earlier, again, the Jew Report by the Jew: Forgive My Father, For He Has Sinned: On the poetic struggle of two familial, and familiar, figures of speech By Ava Kofman, January 11, 2015
God, we are doomed with this Century of the Fucking Jew:
Ireland?
But the Jew World will continue to decay our heads
Letter from Gaza: The Nakba We Are Living Through
Fucking JEWS.
From The Depths of Hell
When the Israeli army forces us to move, they issue what they call “evacuation” orders. The Israeli army uses this to portray itself as an army that fights in accordance with international law—that distinguishes between civilians and combatants, that has no intention of harming children. This is far from the truth.
The Israeli military has invaded and besieged many areas before issuing these so-called evacuation orders, as has happened in Rafah and Shujaiya. Israeli invasions force people to flee to so-called “safe zones” under heavy bombardment, making their way through checkpoints with nothing but the clothes on their backs, unable to carry even a day’s worth of food, any documents, or a blanket to cover themselves at night. Many of the leaflets the army drops on civilians contain terrifying threats that amount to psychological warfare. And then, they bomb the safe zones anyway.
Anyone observing the conditions of the displaced people in Gaza can clearly see that the Israeli military doesn’t care about the fate of civilians at all. Israeli forces only tell them to flee—run!—and it doesn’t care where they will stay, what they will eat, or how they will live. Israel wants to force two million Palestinians in Gaza to cram into a tiny plot of land in the south—to live in tent camps with no infrastructure—where rivers of sewage run beneath their feet. Israel’s plan is to force people to leave their neighborhoods by labeling them “combat zones,” so they can destroy, bomb, and flatten everything to make them uninhabitable, even if the residents are ever able to return.
All Israel wants is destruction and ruin, more land to seize, and eventually to establish settlements and pave the way for so-called “voluntary” migration, which many will be forced to accept after being broken by repeated displacement.
Throughout this war, I never evacuated to the south, hoping to stay close to my home and return once the army retreated. I paid the price for that decision with injury and hunger. But now, for the first time, I am displaced in Deir al-Balah, staying at my aunt’s house. It’s the first time I have come south in some 15 years—since I visited my aunt when I was nine or ten years old.
I don’t know how long my aunt will be able to host us, or where we’ll go when we leave. I tell myself we’re just here to visit my aunt after a long time—that I’m on a retreat or vacation somewhere else in the world—just to avoid dying from heartbreak over what we have left behind.
The night we fled Jabaliya wasn’t the worst or most violent of the war. It was just another night from the depths of hell—like every night before it. But this time, we had no choice. We haven’t had a single peaceful night’s sleep since the beginning of the genocide. The deep, dark circles under my eyes are proof of that. Still, I refuse to accept this as normal. I haven’t gotten used to suffering. I just want to sleep one peaceful night before I die.
+—+
In As You Like It by Shakespeare, Rosalind asks Orlando: “Can one desire too much of a good thing?” …
Although previously accepted as the less toxic alternative, with low impact on animals, farmers as well as consumers who are exposed to residues in food, glyphosate chemicals are now increasingly controversial as new evidence from research is emerging. We argue that specific aspects of the history, chemistry and safety of glyphosate and glyphosate-based herbicides should be thoroughly considered in present and future re-evaluations of these dominant agrochemicals:
• Glyphosate is not a single chemical, it is a family of compounds with different chemical, physical, and toxicological properties.
• Glyphosate is increasingly recognized as having more profound toxicological effects than assumed from previous assessments.
• Global use of glyphosate is continuously increasing and residues are detected in food, feed, and drinking water. Thus, consumers are increasingly exposed to higher levels of glyphosate residues, and from an increasing number of sources.
• Glyphosate regulation is predominantly still based on primary safety-assessment testing in various indicator organisms. However, archive studies indicate fraud and misbehavior committed by the commercial laboratories providing such research.
We see emerging evidences from studies in test-animals, ecosystems indicators and studies in human health, which justify stricter regulatory measures. This implies revising glyphosate residue definitions and lowering Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) permissible in biological material intended for food and feed, as well as strengthening environmental criteria such as accepted residue concentrations in surface waters. It seems that although recent research indicates that glyphosates are less harmless than previously assumed and have complex toxicological potential, still regulatory authorities accept industry demands for approving higher levels of these residues in food and feed.
Kendra Klein, PhD., Friends of the Earth, discusses dangerous Roundup herbicide formulations.
New Roundup, New Risks
Friends of the Earth’s analysis finds that, on the fiftieth anniversary of its commercialization, Roundup sold to consumers is more toxic than ever before. Bayer pledged to remove glyphosate from Roundup products sold to U.S. consumers (which does not include agricultural or professional use Roundup) starting in 2023, in response to tens of thousands of lawsuits linking the weedkiller to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.
We found that Bayer replaced glyphosate with combinations of four chemicals, two of which are banned in the European Union. The new Roundup formulations are 45 times more toxic to human health following long-term, chronic exposures, on average. They also pose significantly greater risks to the environment. What’s more, we found that Bayer has failed to remove glyphosate from all U.S. consumer Roundup products.
Bayer’s failure to warn consumers about the new risks posed by its reformulation of Roundup is negligent and should be unlawful. The fifty-year history of Roundup shows that chemical companies like Bayer cannot be trusted to protect consumer health. It is essential that lawmakers and regulatory agencies, including a strengthened Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), take responsibility for ensuring that people.
+—+
A fascist AmeriKKKa, what’s that mean?
Clean thy brain of the Jews here: Anti-Imperialism and Indigenous methodologies w/ Sardana Nikolaeva and Masha Kardashevskaya
Paul Haeder, Author 