Yes—Low-IQ Antisemitism Exists
Before Dan Bilzerian and I stopped being friends last week, I warned him that he was surrounded by low-IQ antisemites who would hurt his campaign. He told me he didn’t think low-IQ antisemitism was a real thing, that it was a “fed talking point.” I explained that it was very real, but he wasn’t having it.
The irony is that Dan was one of the handful of people who told me to pull back when I was at my most unhinged in 2024. But recently, the things he has been saying publicly have been just as unoptical and just as detrimental to him and his campaign. He doesn’t believe low-IQ antisemitism exists yet has become the epitome of it, like I once was.
Someone the other day asked me what high-IQ antisemitism is. I told them that high-IQ antisemitism is when you state uncomfortable, irrefutable truths about Jewish influence in the world, and individuals or organizations like the ADL call you an antisemite to shut you up. It’s a weaponized label used against people making arguments that cannot actually be refuted. Low-IQ antisemitism is the complete opposite—built on assumptions, disinformation, half-truths, outlandish conspiracy theories, and irrational conclusions driven by confirmation bias, with no accounting for nuance, the real complexities of political power, or how human social dynamics actually work.
Low-IQ antisemitism is unoptical by nature. It’s emotional. It’s a form of venting frustration dressed up as political activity, and it offers no solutions. It’s toxic because those who engage in it—and I am guilty of doing so—find themselves surrounded, encouraged, and validated by others who feel the same way, creating an insular clique of people who do nothing but complain that Jewish power brokers are making moves against their interests.
Low-IQ antisemites are incapable of organizing properly, incapable of self-reflection, incapable of controlling their emotions, and incapable of producing any viable path forward. All they have are memes, documentaries, rants, and “truths”—most of which are unverifiable claims recycled endlessly within the same closed circles.
That’s not to say everything that comes out of this space is false. But most of it is ineffective and actively detrimental to whatever objectives these people imagine they have—which, by the way, they don’t have. There’s no strategy. There’s no political vision. There’s only an appeal to history and grievance that would not translate into any practical framework applicable to the modern world.
Low-IQ antisemitism functions, ultimately, as Gestalt therapy for people who have accomplished very little but pride themselves on knowing “everything” and becoming celebrated figures within their internet circles, while they remain completely invisible and powerless in the real world.
And it’s not just about having bad ideas or spreading false information. Low-IQ antisemitism also means not caring about the quality of the people around you, chasing a fantasy of a big-tent revolution while having zero political strategy whatsoever. I tried this myself, tolerating people who I thought held utterly stupid beliefs, had insufferable personalities, and held contrary values to mine, thinking that I must work with them for the “greater good.”
The dream of this unity is always massive, and the execution always ends in disaster.
I began saying this publicly over a year ago. Stew Peters’ JPROOF scandal—a moment that, more than anything else, opened my eyes to what this JQ movement had become. When I saw that nobody cared, I knew I was in the wrong space. A movement that can’t police its own, that waves away scandal because the grifter was saying the right things about the right people, is not a movement; it’s a social club.
My own low-IQ antisemitism was mostly theatrical—emotional rants and stunts rather than misinformation—but that distinction matters less than I once thought. Looking and acting unhinged carries the same cost as spreading misinformation, because optics govern perception more than most people are willing to acknowledge. Bad optics repel exactly the kind of people you would need to build anything real. And when your optics are catastrophic, the only people you attract are antisocial freaks and failures. Your ranks grow; however, it makes the movement larger but less organized, louder but more impotent, more active but less productive.
The Charlie Kirk assassination illustrates the broader pattern perfectly. Before the blood had even stopped pouring of Charlie’s neck, nearly all the low-IQ antisemites in the JQ space had already decided Israel was responsible. Could it have been Israel? Theoretically. But the evidence doesn’t support it, the logic doesn’t hold, and the conclusion was reached before a single fact was examined.
These types, much like flat-earthers, begin with their answer and work backward to find evidence that fits. The case for Israeli involvement is circumstantial at best; the counter-evidence pointed toward Tyler Robison, who had a personal fixation on Kirk. But none of that mattered. To these people, it’s impossible that some freak who actually hated Kirk just went out and killed him. No! It must be more complicated than that. It just can’t be that simple!
These JQ influencers have never produced receipts proving any of their major claims, and yet they continue to operate as unimpeachable authorities within their own circles, dismissing everyone who disagrees as a shill, a plant, or a covert agent. I’ve done similar, stating my beliefs as facts. I’ve stopped doing this, and of course, this also makes me a plant.
Which brings me to what finally pushed me out.
I called out the people I had long predicted would take over this space—the most prominent figures in the low-IQ ecosystem—and the response was thousands of people accusing me of being a federal agent or a Mossad asset, especially after my fallout with Dan. In this world, anyone who disagrees with the consensus is automatically a plant, a shill, or a Jew. There’s no argument that can be made, no evidence that can be offered, no track record that provides immunity. Disagreement itself is proof of guilt. It’s an epistemically closed system, not by design of any external conspiracy, but by the psychological needs of the people inside it. A community that can’t be criticized can’t improve; it can only get worse. And it has, as I predicted.
That’s ultimately what the JQ movement has become: an epistemically closed, strategically bankrupt, talent-poor ecosystem populated by cryptocurrency scammers, con artists, frauds, antisocial freaks, degenerates, and anonymous accounts that have appointed themselves arbiters of truth without direct access to anything they claim to know. They repeat their conclusions in closed loops, celebrate each other for courage they don’t exercise in the real world, and have nothing—literally nothing—to show for years of activity beyond a growing library of content that persuades no one who was not already persuaded.
Is it any surprise that Jews continue to consolidate power? It shouldn’t be.
I’m not immune from the criticism. In fact, I help this low-IQ monster grow on a global level, and I feel obligated to help kill it so we can have cordial conversations about Jewish influence and Gentile incompetence in order to build bridges between communities before freaks start hurting or killing more innocent people.