Metaphysics of New World Order Revisited

…by Jonas E. Alexis and Eric Gajewski

Eric Gajewski holds an undergraduate degree in Business and a Master’s Degree in Business both from Franciscan University in Ohio. He exposes the new World order spearheaded by the Khazarian Mafia.

Eric runs tradcatknight.blogspot.com, the most comprehensive and followed traditional catholic website in the world (a top 20K website worldwide). You can subscribe to his Youtube channel tradcatknight.

Eric Gajewski: Tell us a little bit more about yourself, background and how you got involved studying the New World Order

Jonas E. Alexis: Let me begin by briefly discussing the second part of the question because people usually misrepresent what the New World Order actually is. Some people think that those who use the term are some kind of conspiracy theorists who have nothing to do but to espouse crazy and outlandish ideas. Not so. The New World Order is essentially a world in which practical reason in the moral and political order plays virtually no role.

That is the definition that I have been working on for the past four years or so. The New World Order’s most enduring legacy is contempt for morality and what Immanuel Kant calls practical reason in the comprehensible universe. Kant calls practical reason the categorical imperative.

Kant was indeed a genius because he was able to formulate the categorical imperative without appealing to religion or the supernatural. This is not to say that the categorical imperative is incongruent with religious or theological principles. In fact, Kant was well aware that the categorical imperative fits perfectly well with religion. And some writers have said that the categorical imperative was another way of saying “Do to others as you would have them do to you.”

What is essential to the categorical imperative is that it prohibits contradiction and irrationality precisely because it is based on the moral law itself. More importantly, the moment a person violates or denies or dismisses the categorical imperative, that person will soon find himself in a torrent of contradictions, illogical leaps, and intellectual chaos.

That’s what happened to Darwin, and to this very day his intellectual children have never recovered. That is another reason why movements like the Alternative Right are failing miserably and pathetically because their proponents have adopted Darwinian principles which metaphysically deny the categorical imperative.

People like David Duke, Richard Spencer, and Kevin MacDonald have all embraced Darwin as some kind of a liberator, but they have never been able to address the fundamental issues at all. These people are working with the premise that it is morally right to defend European culture, but Darwin, their intellectual father, categorically rejected morality!

What is so interesting about this issue is that Darwin himself said in The Descent of Man: “The difference in mind between man and the higher animals, great as it is, certainly is one of degree and not of kind.” Well, some of Darwin’s intellectual children are spending much of their lives hopelessly trying to establish the incoherent idea that Jewish behavior is biological!

The sad thing is that these people cannot see that they are essentially heralding their own moral and intellectual death. To be quite frank, I don’t think these people want to see things the way they really are because they wrap themselves around a worldview which does not allow them to think clearly.

This same ideology intellectually cripples them. I have addressed these issues numerous times in the past, and the response I got from people like David Duke is that I uphold some of my beliefs because, well, “he is black, and that’s his way of affirming himself.” Ad hominem attack and red herring are signs that an argument doesn’t hold water. A friend of mine asked me a few days ago about what I thought Kant would have said to people like David Duke, to which I responded:

“Oh, boy. Kant would have almost certainly seen Duke’s blatant contradictions and rejected them out of hand. If Darwin couldn’t understand Kant, perhaps that’s why people like Duke and MacDonald are having trouble establishing a coherent system. For the life of me, I just don’t know why a person like Duke cannot see that Darwinism completely destroys what he is trying to say.”

In any event, the categorical imperative states:

“Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.”[1]

That obviously throws Darwin out the window because Darwin denied a universal and moral law. Darwin and his followers clung to “survival of the fittest.” Keep in mind that this universal law does not depend on how you and I feel on a given day. It also is not contingent upon what we may think is right. This universal law is independent of our appetite and preference. In other words, we obviously did not make or invent this universal law; we just happen to discover it. This moral law states that raping children is ontologically wrong irrespective of what any human being feels.

The moral or universal law, says Kant, is what binds us all together as rational creatures. So, any system that seeks to dismiss that moral law must be wrong precisely because that system will inevitably be incoherent. Kant continues to say that for an action to be good, “it is not enough that it should conform to the moral law—it must also be done for the sake of the moral law.”[2]

This brings us to a key point here. The reason the New World Order is dangerous and indeed diabolical is because it categorically denies the moral law. It also replaces the moral law with an essentially Talmudic ideology, which always seeks to destroy anything rational or orderly. This Talmudic ideology basically says that double standards are perfectly fine. Israel can have nuclear weapons, but Iran cannot even have nuclear power plant.

Keep also in mind that this Talmudic ideology states that the Goyim are nothing but donkeys and jackasses. They Goyim were created, says rabbi Ovadiah Yosef, “to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world; only to serve the People of Israel. Why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi and eat.”[3]

When Yosef died in 2013, Benjamin Netanyahu declared that he was one of the “great halachic authorities of our generation. He worked hard to enhance Jewish heritage, and at the same time his rulings took into consideration the times and the realities of renewed life in the State of Israel. He was imbued with a love of Torah and his people. I very much appreciated his warm personality and his direct manner. The Jewish people lost one of the sages of the generation.”[4]

If Yosef and Netanyahu are right, then the Talmudic ideology is at war with the entire human race. This is not my perspective. This is what St. Paul himself has articulated. Those who have followed that Talmudic ideology, says Paul, “both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men.” (1 Thessalonians 2:15)

————————————-

Now, the first part of your question: how did I get involved in studying these issues? Well, it’s a long history. I’ll try to be brief again. I have always been interested in metaphysical issues. That’s how I got to study mathematics and philosophy. My first major in college was psychology, but I switched it within my second year because I disagreed with people like Freud, Jung, Adler, Maslow, Fromm, Rogers and others.

In 2006, I read E. Michael Jones’ Dionysos Rising: The Birth of Cultural Revolution Out of the Spirit of Music and Libido Donminandi: Sexual Liberation and Political Control, and they piqued my interest in ideological origins of political and cultural struggles. I have been enjoying Jones’ writings ever since.

Jones surprised me a bit when he published The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History in 2008. I bought the book in the summer of 2009 and began to dissect it during that same summer. After I read the first few chapters, I began to think, “Hmm… What is Jones up to this time? This is totally different from his other works and it completely challenges what I used to believe about Jewish subversive movements.” I also said to myself, “Jones probably misuses his sources or mischaracterizes the people he mentions in the book.”

Jones cites Jewish historiographer Heinrich Graetz throughout the Jewish Revolutionary Spirit, so I thought, “I’m going to buy Graetz’s six volumes of history and perhaps this will show that Jones is dead wrong.” Guess what I did? I bought Graetz’s works and read them all over a period of four months. I was completely stunned to realize that Jones was right on target. He did not misuse or abuse his sources. I also checked some of the other sources that he mentioned in the book, and he has never once misrepresented them. To make a long story short, it was then that I began to pay close attention to the New World Order and its agents.

Eric Gajewski: What are New World Order agents trying to accomplish?

Jonas E. Alexis: As I have indicated, New World Order agents are trying to establish a world in which practical reason is banned. As Jones has argued, Jewish revolutionaries play a key role in history precisely because they have metaphysically and categorically rejected Logos, which by the way provides the basis for a moral universe. As Jones puts it, “When the Jews rejected Christ, they rejected Logos, and when they rejected Logos, which includes within itself the principles of social order, they became revolutionaries.”[5]

They became revolutionaries or contrary to all men not because they have some kind of bad DNA. If that were the issue, then one must conclude that Christ and his disciples had some kind of bad DNA, for they were all ethnic Jews. This is another refutation of biological determinism. When Alan Colmes of Fox News raised a similar question to David Duke, Duke responded: “Certainly [Christ] spoke a doctrine that was diametrically opposed to what Judaism was and is…The Talmud is the core of Judaism. It is an extremely racist and ethnocentric religion.”

Precisely! The sad thing is that Duke could not see that his was undermining his own mines by saying that. Again, this just shows how incoherent these people really are, and it is intellectual dishonesty to just wiggle out of these blatant contradictions. I have invited them to defend their position rationally, and people like Kevin MacDonald simply remain silent.

Eric Gajewski: Who would you say are the main players today?

Jonas E. Alexis: In the political realm, the main players are the Israeli regime and the Neoconservatives in America and England. No exaggeration here. Think about it for a moment. The war in Iraq will cost Americans six-trillion dollars![6] And we all know by now that the war was based on colossal hoaxes, complete fabrications, and just plain lies.[7] The war is already responsible for untold misery in America and the Middle East. Think about Abu Ghraib.[8]

What’s so pathetic about all of this is that the Neoconservatives have never apologized for what they have done. In fact, when the Iraq war turned out to be a total disaster, Jonah Goldberg wrote in the LA Times that “Iraq was a worthy mistake.”[9] Francis Fukuyama argued back in 2006 that the Neoconservative movement is a continuation of the Stalinist/Leninist ideology which got its inception in Bolshevism.[10] Fukuyama was absolutely right.

Eric Gajewski: Why are so many people still ignorant of the atrocities of Israel?

Jonas E. Alexis: Many people are ignorant of the atrocities of Israel because Israel and NWO agents in the United States and England have been using the “anti-Semitism” card from time immemorial to silence anyone who dares to challenge the Zionist ideology. Even Neocon puppets like Ann Coulter are scared to death to tell the truth. When all the GOP candidates were talking about how good they were going to be to Israel if they got elected, Coulter twitted: “How many f—ing Jews do these people think there are in the United States?” She also said:

“How to get applause from GOP donors: 1) Pledge to start a war 2) Talk about job creators 3) Denounce abortion 4) Cite Reagan 5) Cite Israel…. How about Huckabee, Rubio, Kasich etc talk about Israel’s sturdy and effective border fence?”

The Jerusalem Post and the Daily Beast quickly denounced Coulter as anti-Semitic.[11] Coulter, of course, had to beg for mercy in order to get accepted by the Neocon gangs again. She had to declare:

“Anyone with a pulse knows I am pro-Israel and against the enemies of the Jewish people. I have a whole chapter in my current book praising Israel and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. It’s the people attacking me who couldn’t care less about Israel or Jews.

“The hypocrites who are mad at me are the ones who support anti-Israel college professors, who refuse to condemn Islamic barbarism, who supported the overthrow of Mubarak for the Muslim Brotherhood, who spread the deadly libel that Jews in America are only successful because of ‘white privilege.”[12]

But the anti-Semitism card is waning. Granted, the Zionist ideology is still powerful and strong, but people are waking up. When the late Israeli politician and minister Shulamit Aloni declared that anti-Semitism is “”is a trick; we always use it,” I think it was the death knell of the anti-Semitism ideology. Every serious person should ponder upon Aloni’s words here:

“When, from Europe, if someone is criticizing Israel, we bring up the Holocaust. When, in this country (USA), people are criticizing Israel then ‘they are anti-Semitic’. And the organization is strong and has a lot of money and the ties between Israel and the American Jewish establishment are very strong and they are strong in this country…

“They have power, money, media and other things and their attitude is Israel my country right or wrong… They are not ready to hear criticism. It is very easy to blame people who criticize certain acts of the Israeli government as anti-Semitic and to bring up the Holocaust and the suffering of the Jewish people and that ‘justifies’ everything we do to the Palestinians….”

Ex-Mossad agent Victor Ostrovsky, author of books like By Way of Deception, says the same thing.

Eric Gajewski: What resources can help someone investigate Zionism/New World Order more?

Jonas E. Alexis: If readers are interested in scholarly materials, then I would highly encourage them to pick up a copy of E. Michael Jones’ The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History. It sort of woke me up from my dogmatic slumber. Michael Hoffman’s Judaism Discovered is also informative. I spent two years reading the works of Albert S. Lindemann (Esau’s Tears: Modern Anti-Semitism and the Rise of the Jews, Cambridge University Press), Eric Haberer (Jews and Revolution in Nineteenth Century Russia, Cambridge University Press), Sarah Gordon (Hitler, Germans, and the “Jewish Questions,” Princeton University Press) Arnold Wiznitzer (Jews in Colonial Brazil, Columbia University Press), Bryan Mark Rigg (Hitler’s Jewish Soldiers, University Press of Kansas and Rescued from the Reich: How One of Hitler’s Soldiers Saved the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Yale University Press), Daniel J. Lasker (Jewish Philosophical Polemics Against Christianity in the Middle Ages, Littman Library of Jewish Civilization), Peter Schaefer (Jesus in the Talmud, Princeton University Press), Elliott Horowitz (Reckless Rites: Purim and the Legacy of Jewish Violence, Princeton University Press), Nathan Abrams (The New Jew in Film: Exploring Jewishness and Judaism in Contemporary Cinema, Rutgers University Press), Josh Lambert (Unclean Lips: Obscenity, Jews, and American Culture, New York University Press), Jay A. Gertzman (Bookleggers and Smuthounds: The Trade in Erotica, 1920-1940 (University of Pennsylvania Press), Douglas H. A. Hare (The Theme of Jewish Persecution of Christians in the Gospel According to St. Matthew, Cambridge University Press) and even noted Israeli scholar Israel Jacob Yuval (Two Nations in Your Wombs: Perceptions of Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages, University of California Press). Readers may not agree with everything these people say, but astute observers will get the impression that the issue is not as black and white as NWO agents have relentlessly perpetuated.

I also have written two books on the subject (Christianity & Rabbinic Judaism). Zionism vs. the West is coming out either by the end of this year or in March of next year. Mark Dankof and I have been working on numerous projects since last year, and I would also encourage people to listen to what Dankof has to say. He has done numerous interviews over the past few years, and all of them are insightful.

Eric Gajewski: Why can’t we trust the mainstream narrative of “events from times past and present?

Jonas E. Alexis: As I have suggested earlier, the Iraq war will cost America six-trillion dollars. Flash back to 2002. The mainstream media perpetuated the categorical lie that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. They beat the American people over the head with that colossal lie until a sizable number of the population finally gave up on fighting against the war.

Have the New York Times, Fox News, CNN, the Washington Post, etc., apologized for that debacle? Have they been honest even after the debacle? Aren’t they all asking Americans to side with the Israeli regime in finding monsters to kill in the Middle East? Why are we still in Syria at the present moment? Why are we supporting the so-called Syrian rebels, who by the way are in cahoots with ISIS and other terrorist cells?

No US official has been able to flesh out why the Trump administration is still sending American soldiers to die in the region. The reason is that the mainstream media and its producers are in bed with the Israeli regime. In fact, the scholarly sources tell us that the mainstream media is controlled by what Jewish writer J. J. Goldberg would have called “Jewish power.”[13]

Eric Gajewski: How close do you believe we are to the economic collapse and world war 3?

Jonas E. Alexis: I am not sure if we are close to World War III. I believe that both Solzhenitsyn and Hegel were right, that truth will triumph over falsehood in the end. I am not a pessimist. Granted, the forces of evil have never been so strong, but that is no reason to despair because you cannot fight against Logos and win. It ain’t gonna happen. Both Solzhenitsyn and Hegel came to the conclusion that reason will work itself out in history.

Hegel called this “the cunning of reason.” The cunning of reason is basically a “term for a hidden dynamic or dialectic which sums the consequences of actions in ways unforeseen by the actors.”[14] Summarizing Hegel’s point, Robert C. Tucker writes that history “fulfills its ulterior rational designs in an indirect and sly manner. It does so by calling into play the irrational element in human nature, the passions.”[15]

Hegel argues very clearly that this world “is not prey to chance and external, contingent causes, but is governed by providence.” He moves on to say that “the world’s events are controlled by a providence, indeed by divine providence,” and this “divine providence is wisdom, coupled with infinite power, which realizes its ends, i.e., the absolute and rational design of the world…”[16]

So, contrary to what Darwinists posit, history or the universe or even human beings are not meaningless or purposeless. There is a logos in history which can be apprehended by those who love the truth. If history is meaningless, then there is no ultimate reason to fight for what is right, to pursue the truth and to debunk myths and ideology. Hegel writes,

“That world history is governed by an ultimate design, that it is a rational process—whose rationality is not that of a particular subject, but a divine and absolute reason—this is a proposition whose truth we must assume; its proof lies in the study of world history itself, which is the image and enactment of reason.”[17]

I think Hegel is right.

First published in October 2017.

• [1] Emmanuel Kant, Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1959), 39.
• [2] Emmanuel Kant, Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals (New York: Torchbooks, 1964), 390.
• [3] Marcy Oster, “Sephardi leader Yosef: Non-Jews exist to serve Jews,” Jewish Telegraphic Agency, October 18, 2010.
• [4] “Netanyahu, Peres Remember ‘Torah Giant,’” Jerusalem Post, October 8, 2013.
• [5] E. Michael Jones, The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History (South Bend: Fidelity Press, 2008), 15.
• [6] Ernesto Londono, “Study: Iraq, Afghan war costs to top $4 trillion,” Washington Post, March 28, 2013; Bob Dreyfuss, The $6 Trillion Wars,” The Nation, March 29, 2013; “Iraq War Cost U.S. More Than $2 Trillion, Could Grow to $6 Trillion, Says Watson Institute Study,” Huffington Post, May 14, 2013; Mark Thompson, “The $5 Trillion War on Terror,” Time, June 29, 2011; “Iraq war cost: $6 trillion. What else could have been done?,” LA Times, March 18, 2013.
• [7] See for example Paul R. Pillar, Intelligence and U.S. Foreign Policy: Iraq, 9/11, and Misguided Reform (New York: Columbia University Press, 2011); John J. Mearsheimer, Why Leaders Lie: The Truth About Lying in International Politics (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011); John M. Schuessler, Deceit on the Road to War: Presidents, Politics, and American Democracy (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2015); Michael MacDonald, Overreach: Delusions of Regime Change in Iraq (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2014); Stefan Halper and Jonathan Clarke, America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004); Vincent Bugliosi, The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder (New York: Vanguard Press, 2008).
• [8] See for example Karen J. Greenberg, et al., The Torture Papers: The Road to Abu Ghraib (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005); Shadi Mokhtari, After Abu Ghraib: Exploring Human Rights in America and the Middle East(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011); Jameel Jaffer and Amrit Singh, Administration of Torture: A Documentary Record from Washington to Abu Ghraib and Beyond (New York: Columbia University Press, 2007); Seymour M. Hersh, “The General’s Report,” The New Yorker, June 25, 2007;  Julian Borger, “U.S. General Linked to Abu Ghraib Abuse,” The Guardian, May 22, 2004; Luke Harding, “After Abu Ghraib,” The Guardian, September 20, 2004; Luke Harding, “Focus Shifts to Jail Abuse of Women,” Guardian, May 12, 2004; Philip Gourevitch and Errol Morris, “Exposure: The Women Behind the Camera at Abu Ghraib,” The New Yorker, March 24, 2008; Michael Otterman, American Torture: From the Cold War to Abu Ghraib and Beyond (Australia: Melbourne University Press, 2007), see chapters 9 and 10; Philippe Sands, Torture Team: Rumsfeld’s Memo and the Betrayal of American Values (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008), 14-16; Jane Mayer, The Dark Side: The Inside Story of How the War on Terror Turned into a War on American Ideals (New York: Anchor Books, 2009); Maggie O’Kane, Teresa Smith, et al., “The Torture Trail: What Did General Petraeus’s Special Advisor, James Steele, Know?” The Guardian, October 23, 2010; David Leigh, “Iraq War Logs: Prisoner Beaten to Death Days after British Handover to Police,” The Guardian, October 28, 2010; David Leigh and Maggie O’Kane, “Iraq War Logs: U.S. Turned Over Captives to Iraqi Torture Squads,” The Guardian, October 24, 2010; Nick Davies, Jonathan Steele and David Leigh, “Iraq War Logs: Secret Files Show How U.S. Ignored Torture,” The Guardian, October 22, 2010; Mark Danner, Torture and Truth: America, Abu Ghraib, and the War on Terror (New York: New York Review of Books, 2004).
• [9] Jonah Goldberg, “Iraq Was a Worthy Mistake,” LA Times, October 19, 2006.
• [10] Francis Fukuyama, “After Neoconservatism,” NY Times, February 19, 2006.
• [11] Tom Sykes, “Trump Supporter Ann Coulter Slams Pandering to ‘F—ing Jews,” Daily Beast, September 17, 2015; “Conservative pundit Ann Coulter tweets about the ‘f—ing Jews,’ sparking controversy,” Jerusalem Post, September 17, 2015.
• [12] Quoted in Paul Bond, “Ann Coulter Calls Fury Over Jewish-Debate Tweet ‘Fake Outrage’: ‘I’m Pro-Israel,’” Hollywood Reporter, September 22, 2015.
• [13] J. J. Goldberg, Jewish Power: Inside The American Jewish Establishment (New York: Basic Books, 1997); see also Benjamin Ginsberg, The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993).
• [14] Martin Hollis, The Cunning of Reason (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), 5.
• [15] Robert C. Tucker, “The Cunning of Reason in Hegel and Marx,” The Review of Politics, Vol. 18, NO 3, July 1956: 269-295.
• [16] Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Lectures on the Philosophy of World History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975 and 1998), 35.
• [17] Ibid., 28.

Jonas E. Alexis, Senior Editor

Jonas E. Alexis has degrees in mathematics and philosophy. He studied education at the graduate level. His main interests include U.S. foreign policy, the history of the Israel/Palestine conflict, and the history of ideas. He is the author of the book, Kevin MacDonald’s Metaphysical Failure: A Philosophical, Historical, and Moral Critique of Evolutionary Psychology, Sociobiology, and Identity Politics. He teaches mathematics in South Korea.

• Read the Latest Posts from Jonas >>>
• Read Jonas’ Archives (2004-2015) >>>