JD Vance Calls Israeli Bid for Sovereignty “Weird” and “Very Stupid” (Judean Rose)

Generally, when dignitaries and officials visit Israel, they make a point of stopping at the Western Wall — the Kotel — and they refrain from invoking Jesus Christ. This is done out of respect for the fact that Israel is the Jewish State, something the United States has always recognized.

Over the years, the Wall stop has become almost a diplomatic ritual: a solemn photo-op that signals respect for Jewish history and friendship with Israel. To skip it is to make a statement.

The Making of a Statement

During his October 2025 visit, Vice President J.D. Vance made just such a statement. The official itinerary, released on October 21, listed a visit to the Wall and a joint press conference with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. But that is not what happened.

Instead, Vance went to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre — a Christian pilgrimage site — where he spoke openly about Jesus. “I know that Christians have many titles for Jesus Christ, and one of them is the Prince of Peace,” he told reporters. “And I’d ask all people of faith, in particular my fellow Christians, to pray that the Prince of Peace can continue to work a miracle in this region of the world.”

To many, his words might have sounded well-intentioned — a sincere call for peace. But in the context of the Jewish State, invoking Jesus in public remarks was tone-deaf and inappropriate. In diplomatic language, symbols matter. To skip the Wall and choose a Christian site, to publicly invoke Jesus in the Jewish State, is not a neutral act. One analysis noted that “Vance did not visit the Wall, and went instead to honor and pray at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre” — a move seen as a quiet rebuke to Netanyahu amid friction over Israel’s new sovereignty bill.

The truth is, I’m perfectly fine with Vance visiting a church instead of the Wall — especially since he did visit the Wall on a previous trip to Israel. But it seemed he was hammering home a point, and in doing so, crossed a line. Suggesting that people of faith — which presumably includes Jews — should pray to the “Prince of Peace” is, frankly, offensive to Jews.

He’s welcome to believe in any deity he likes. I only wish he respected our beliefs as much as I respect his right to believe in his. The visit to the church, coupled with a public call for Jews to pray to Jesus, felt off.

The Sovereignty Bill

What truly drove the point home, however, was Vance’s attitude toward Israel’s sovereignty bill. The Knesset had just granted preliminary approval to a measure ending the state of martial law in Judea and Samaria — a step many see as Israel finally asserting sovereignty over its own heartland.

Israel deliberately left the status of these territories vague after capturing them in 1967, hoping to keep the door open for negotiations. But after decades of failed peace processes, terror, and external meddling, many Israelis now believe it’s time to end the ambiguity. Declaring sovereignty, for us, is an act of self-preservation.

The world, after all, keeps declaring that our land is “Palestine.” Yet these are Jewish ancestral territories, won in a defensive war. There is no reason why Israel should not claim them formally as part of the Jewish State.

Vance’s Dismissal

Asked by reporters about the bill, Vance replied:

“That was weird. I was sort of confused by that… When I asked about it, somebody told me that it was a political stunt that had no practical significance. It was purely symbolic… If it was a political stunt, it was a very stupid political stunt, and I personally take some insult to it. The West Bank is not going to be annexed by Israel. The policy of the Trump administration is that the West Bank will not be annexed by Israel. That will continue to be our policy. And if people want to take symbolic votes, they can do that, but we certainly weren’t happy about it.”

If I’d been there, I might have asked him: What’s weird about Jews declaring sovereignty over land that rightfully belongs to them? Why would that confuse a Bible-believing Christian? Surely you know this is land God gave the Jewish people.

To call it “symbolic” is wrong. It was an act of survival. We see the writing on the wall: the world is preparing to carve up our land again and hand it to those who burned, raped, and murdered our people on October 7. Enough. It’s time we took control. It’s our land.

There is nothing “weird” about Jews who love their land enough to protect it.

Bibi’s Balancing Act

Prime Minister Netanyahu had little choice but to downplay the vote, calling it “symbolic” to placate Washington. In spite of Likud’s abstention, the bill still passed its first reading 25–24 — a small but historic majority.

I understand the realpolitik: during a fragile “ceasefire,” the timing looked bad to Vance. And yes, Arab states may have pressed the U.S. to rein Israel in. But Israel’s right to its land should never be a bargaining chip for diplomatic convenience.

What Vance said was shocking. “Very stupid”? “Insulting”? To whom, exactly? To say that a Jewish decision about Jewish land is meaningless or offensive — that is the real insult.

Trump Doubles Down

Trump later backed him up in an interview with Time Magazine:

“It won’t happen because I gave my word to the Arab countries. Israel would lose all of its support from the United States if that happened.”

Which is ironic, because just seven weeks earlier, U.S. Ambassador Mike Huckabee told Israeli media:

“The United States has never asked Israel not to apply sovereignty in Judea and Samaria. We respect Israel as a sovereign state and will not tell it what to do.”

Unlike Vance, Huckabee refuses to use the propaganda term West Bank. He calls the area by its proper geographical designation: Judea and Samaria. In 2017, he said:

“There is no such thing as a West Bank. It’s Judea and Samaria. There’s no such thing as a settlement. They’re communities. There’s no such thing as an occupation.”

Vance, by contrast, parrots the old Washington line, warning that annexation would “embolden extremists on both sides” and “undermine trust.” Someone should tell him that we cannot annex what is already ours.

Amb. Huckabee seated to the right of Vance

Language and Truth

Words matter. “Annexation” implies we are seizing something foreign. But Judea and Samaria are as integral to Israel as Safed or Jerusalem. The proper term is not annexation, but sovereignty — the right of a nation to rule its own land.

We Jews have waited millennia for this sovereignty. We have bled for it, prayed for it, and reclaimed it piece by piece. No American politician, no matter how high his office or how lofty his faith, has the right to tell us it “won’t happen.”

A Visit Full of Meaning

In the end, Vance’s visit was about symbolism — not just the church or the Wall, but the deeper question of whose faith and whose history command respect. To pray at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre while scolding Jews for wanting sovereignty over Judea is to miss the moral center of this land entirely.

Yet we would never ask Vance to believe as we do, or share our faith. We ask only that he respect our beliefs and rights — and stop presuming to decide what Jews may do in the land that God gave them.

Vance’s visit was full of symbols, and symbols often speak even louder than statements. Skipping the Wall for the church might have been meant as a gesture of faith, but to many of us it felt like a gesture of distance — from Israel, from Jewish history, from understanding what this land means to its people.

Faith, after all, is personal. But our connection to this land is not only a matter of belief — it is the story of our people, written into our prayers, our bones, and our history. That is what Vance failed to grasp: that our faith, our story, and our land are bound together, a holy bond that can never be severed and never surrendered — not even to Donald Trump and his vice president.

---

---

Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon! "He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024) PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

Read More

Confusing Delay with Defeat: Trump’s Surprise Iran-Israel Ceasefire (Judean Rose)

Disclaimer: the views expressed here are solely those of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.

They say the war is over. But if it’s over, why do I feel so nervous, like there’s something left undone, unfinished? Why don’t I feel safe?

I just want to feel safe—not only for myself, but for the generations that follow. Do I want my grandchildren to grow up listening for sirens, even if they rarely come? Do I want some future generation to live in fear of an Iran once again enriching uranium to the point of no return?

If Khamenei and his despotic regime remain in power, they’ll pick up right where they left off—with nuclear ambitions and terror by proxy. And when Israel defends itself, will President Trump once again scold her, as he did the other day? Iran launched missiles at Israeli civilians, and Trump called it “a little bit of a violation”—perhaps because this particular strike caused no damage. But just hours earlier, another missile killed innocents in a residential neighborhood in Beersheva.

I don’t feel safe because Donald Trump still believes—against all evidence—that the ayatollahs can be reasoned with, coaxed into peace, talked into laying down their weapons and picking up plowshares. Worse still, he seems to draw a moral equivalence between Iran—a regime that threatens Israel’s annihilation, funds terror proxies, and pursues nuclear weapons—and Israel itself. Unbelievably, he equates the victim with her abuser. He frames the conflict as playground roughhousing, erasing Iran’s aggression and Israel’s right to defend itself from a nuclear holocaust:

“They’ve had a big fight. Like two kids in the schoolyard—you know, they fight like hell, you can’t stop it. Let them fight for two, three minutes, and then it’s easier to stop them.”

If this is how Trump perceives Iran and Israel—if he truly believes Iran can be reasoned with—then he doesn’t understand the Middle East. Worse, he isn’t listening. Iran is telling him, plainly and repeatedly, that it will not stop. It will rebuild its nuclear facilities.

And they’re not even hiding it. Iranian nuclear chief Mohammad Eslami openly admitted as much: “We planned to avoid any interruption in the nuclear industry process. Preparations for the revival of the country’s nuclear program were foreseen in advance, and our plan is to not allow any interruption in the production and service process.”

Meanwhile, Iran’s parliament has announced it is suspending cooperation with the IAEA—the UN’s nuclear watchdog. Does that sound like a regime with nothing to hide? Like a nation ready to embrace a peaceful, nuclear-free future?

Why is Trump letting the Iranians get away with saying these things? And what about his betrayal of the Iranian people—those weary of living under Khamenei’s iron rule? Bibi encouraged them to be brave, reminded them that Israel has no quarrel with them, and wants them to prosper. Are we now meant to abandon them? Just as Obama did in 2009, when they rose up and the world turned its back?

And then there are the conflicting reports. Was Fordow completely destroyed, or wasn’t it? The administration can’t seem to get its story straight. Trump claimed Iran’s three main nuclear enrichment facilities were “completely and totally obliterated.” But later, JD Vance described Iran’s capabilities as merely “substantially set back,” insisting that had always been the goal.

As Vance put it: “That was the objective of the mission: to destroy that Fordow nuclear site and, of course, do some damage to the other sites as well. But we feel very confident that the Fordow nuclear site was substantially set back, and that was our goal.”

If Vance is to be believed, the goal had never been complete obliteration, but only a delay in what Iran will inevitably try to do once more. Which of course means that somewhere down the road, a new generation will have to live with the Damocles sword of a nuclear Iran hanging over their heads. And that is neither fair nor right.

And then there’s how the ceasefire came about. Trump’s surprise announcement apparently caught Israel off guard. It certainly caught me off guard—reading about the so-called truce from a safe room, while cowering from incoming missiles.

Bibi gave a victory speech, declaring that “Iran’s malicious intent to threaten Israel has been eradicated.” But has it? 

Eradicated? Obliterated, or only “significantly set back” as both JD Vance and Rafael Grossi, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), have said.

What bothers me most is the unspoken message: shut up and be grateful. And yes, I am grateful. But gratitude doesn’t mean silence, even when America deploys its bunker busters in a precision strike that was nothing short of extraordinary.

But as extraordinary as that military triumph was, it’s not enough. This regime has a singular goal: to destroy the West. Disabling Iran’s nuclear program means little if you leave the regime intact—especially when change for the Iranian people feels so close we can smell it.

---

---

Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon! "He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024) PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

 

Read More

We Chose Trump. He Chose America. That’s His Job. (Judean Rose)

Disclaimer: the views expressed here are solely those of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.

I try to be honest about politics. I can and did vote for Donald Trump, as is my right and privilege as an American citizen. I voted for him because he was far better for Israel than the alternative. Still, I won’t always like what the president does, and I won’t shy away from saying so. However, I will always qualify anything I deem contrary to Israel’s interests by saying that A) I prefer Trump to Biden, who funded October 7 and tied Israel’s hands when we tried to defend ourselves; B) I infinitely prefer Trump to Harris, who told people who wish me dead that they have a right to their “truth”; and C) Trump does what’s best for America, rather than for Israel, and this is only right. That is his JOB. To do what's right for America. And sometimes, as JD Vance put it, “we’re going to have distinct interests.”

I get it. But I still feel a pang of resentment when I think back to October, when Vance gave an exclusive video to the JPost, urging Israeli Americans to vote:

"Greetings to all of our friends in Israel who are American citizens and have the right to vote in American elections," said Vance. "You've got to make your voice heard. Donald Trump was a great ally and friend of Israel. Kamala Harris has been a total disaster, and if she becomes president, it's going to lead to broader regional war or maybe even worse."

"Get out there, check your registration, make sure you're able to vote, and please go out there and vote for Donald Trump"

"This election could be decided by just a few votes. Do you want Kamala Harris, or do you want Donald Trump? If you want Donald Trump, get out there and make it happen."

Rah rah sis boom bah and all that, but at times, I confess, I feel cheated.

As so often happens at times like this, when the interests of Israel and America diverge, we begin to hear voices that say, “Israel is not a client state. We stand up for our own interests. Thank you, President Trump, for reminding us that Israel is a sovereign nation.”

Among those voices were those of Yehudit Katsover and Nadia Matar, co-chairs of The Sovereignty Movement. In an open letter to the president, the two found a striking way to express gratitude to the president while serving to remind the Jews that it is not Trump who is in charge of Israel’s destiny:

 

Thank You, Uncle Trump

Instead of taking offense at the presidential skip over Israel’s capital, we should thank President Donald Trump for the historic message he conveyed through that very omission.

President of the United States, Donald Trump – friend of Israel and the Jewish people – we just wanted to say thank you.

Thank you for the years in which you supported, strengthened, empowered (and even helped us grow a little). Thank you for approving the delivery of weapons and military equipment to us. Thank you for the diplomatic embrace, and now, thank you for taking us – the people of Israel – to the next stage: the stage of grown-up, independent, and sovereign adults.

Some chose, for some reason, to be offended by your decision not to drop by for a diplomatic cup of coffee in Jerusalem during your Middle East tour. But in this choice of yours to skip over us, you gave us an important historical statement.

Without words, you delivered a sharp and clear message: “Israel is no longer powerless or helpless, in need of support and a guiding adult hand to cross the road. Israel is a technological powerhouse – a hi-tech, cyber, and medical superpower, a military and agricultural force. Israel is a wonder that is hard to comprehend, an unprecedented miracle that defies belief.”

And now, Uncle Trump, you told us in your unique way: “It is time for America to take care of itself, solve its problems, and focus on its own interests – while you, Israelis, stand tall and move on to the next phase: the phase of true independence.”

And you also told us, honorable Mr. President, with every step you took, every speech and handshake, every cup of coffee you drank (or didn’t) in your visits to the Arab capitals surrounding us, that Jerusalem can no longer – and should no longer – rely on Washington. You showed us how you’re collecting hundreds of millions from the Saudis and Qataris, turning a blind eye to the funding of terrorism.

We observed how you seemed to be taken in—perhaps even somewhat intoxicated—by the allure of Arab oil, how you drew closer to President Erdoğan, and even cordially shook the hand of a man who came to power in Syria following mass atrocities, and whose image not long ago appeared on WANTED posters in the United States, offering rewards for his capture.

We saw and understood the message. We here in Israel are here for you as a battlefield lab and a reliable and precise intelligence source. We will prove the effectiveness of the weapons you offer us on the battlefield, and the images of our victorious soldiers with your weapons will become part of the catalog at your next arms fair. That way, thanks to us, a few more hundred million dollars will flow into America's pocket, and a few more giant weapons factories will provide fruitful employment to tens of thousands of Americans.

We have internalized the message: from this point forward, Israel must wean itself from the American IV lifeline and begin to walk on its own, with full independence and sovereignty. We must invest in developing superior Israeli-made weaponry, cultivate a strong and independent economy, and rely on our own agricultural production without dependence on overseas grain reserves. We have matured, Mr. President, and we thank you for reminding us of that fact.

Thank you for your quiet yet resolute message to the Jewish people. Thank you for the steps that compel us to recall the enduring wisdom and resilience of our nation, to remember how we have risen from the gravest of crises, shaken off the dust, and moved forward. To remember that we are not driven solely by interests and political deals, but by the prophetic vision that has guided our people for generations, urging us onward toward future milestones.

Your appreciation of us is understandable and logical, Mr. Trump. We recognize that the time has come for you to focus on fulfilling your promise to your own nation: “Make America Great Again.” As for us—we will focus on our own unique challenge: to build a Jewish, Israeli, sovereign, and independent future in our G-d given Biblical Homeland.

It seems we have understood the message. Thank you.

Referring to President Trump as “Uncle Trump” was next level brilliant in my opinion. “Uncle” because Trump represents Uncle Sam, but maybe also because he’s not Israel’s parent in charge of feeding and clothing us and wiping up after our messes. It’s a more distant relationship than that, something like a kindly uncle.

“Yeah, the uncle is more like Uncle Sam, right?” said Nadia Matar when I approached her. “Like an uncle who's nice, but who's not a father, as you just say. And he also has his own stuff he has to take care of. At the same time, he will respect us if we respect ourselves, right? So the idea of uncle came more from the Uncle Sam side of things. America is called Uncle Sam, right? Okay.

“He will respect us if we respect ourselves,” said Nadia. “That's a very important thing. If we are strong and do what we do, that's that.”

Echoing my thoughts about our narrow escape from Kamala, Nadia said, “The main thing is that we don't have to have too many expectations of Trump. He's definitely much better than, if God forbid, Kamala Harris would have come to power. But we have to now have the guts, our leaders have to have the guts and the courage to do what is good for Israel.

“We believe, of course, that that's the application of Israeli sovereignty. That has to be done this year. And the more we stand firm the more we stick to our values the more we stick to the Torah the more God will bless us.”

---

---

Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon! "He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024) PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

 

Read More

Trump’s Cold Shoulder to Israel: Real or Rumor (Judean Rose)

Disclaimer: the views expressed here are solely those of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.

Donald Trump, during his previous administration, brought us the Abraham Accords and established a U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem. This time around, Israeli Americans voted for him in droves, there being a general feeling among us that Biden was bad for Israel and Trump the opposite of that. We were frightened for our hostages, needed weapons, and more importantly a strong voice in support of our war on Hamas. Trump appeared to tick all the boxes. We had high hopes.

It began so well. The president gave Israel carte blanche to do as it pleased in Gaza and helped us fight the Houthis. And though there was a feeling that the president was being wildly misled by Qatari puppet Witkoff, he was a good friend to Israel. We appreciated it and were glad we voted for him.

Then rumors of a rift began to flow, a narrative built from a sequence of events. The US would no longer help Israel fight the Houthis. Israel was excluded from the itinerary of Donald Trump’s Middle East tour. Trump accepted a very expensive private plane from Qatar. There was a secret US deal to free Edan Alexander that was in the works for months without Israel’s knowledge. The murmurs that Trump has turned against Israel have been gathering steam. Nobody I know wants to talk about it much, but there is thick nervous tension in the air.

That’s my sense, at least, though I keep looking for articles that prove me wrong. I don’t want to believe there’s a rift. But I don’t like the way Trump kept us out of negotiations for Edan Alexander and made us look weak, made Bibi look ineffectual, not in Trump’s good graces. I do understand that America and Americans come first, but in my view, the way this deal was done was really not cool.

It didn’t help that Edan Alexander’s mother Yael, pointedly thanked everyone but Netanyahu for freeing her son from captivity. Her failure to acknowledge him spoke volumes, especially since the deal was negotiated behind Israel’s back, making Bibi look sidelined.

Witkoff, of course, couldn’t help but rub it in, telling the hostage families that if only Israelis weren’t so divided, we’d be strong, the war would end, and the hostages come home. That was the sense of what he said anyway, if not his actual words.

But not everyone is worried. Ruthie Blum, senior contributing editor at JNS, for example, believes the buzz is baseless. In a recent op-ed, Is Trump Really Turning His Back on Bibi and Israel?, Blum says the gossip comes from two agenda-driven sources, isolationists and anti-Netanyahu Israelis. She also notes “conflicting versions of what is essentially gossip in disguise.”

Blum’s does an able job dissecting all the scuttlebutt. She paints a reassuring picture of how things stand between Israel and President Trump, and points to a recent meeting between Israel's Minister of Strategic Affairs Ron Dermer with several important members of the Trump team. "Another clue that Washington hasn’t turned its back on Jerusalem is that U.S. Vice President JD Vance, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio (doubling as interim national security advisor) and special Mideast envoy Steve Witkoff were present at the powwow [with Dermer]."

The meeting does suggest that the relationship remains strong. At the same time, JD Vance is a known isolationist, who in October said of the US-Israel relationship, “Sometimes we’re going to have overlapping interests, and sometimes we’re going to have distinct interests. And our interest very much is in not going to war with Iran. It would be a huge distraction of resources. It would be massively expensive to our country.”

I asked Blum if, as she contends, isolationists are responsible for the rumors of a rift, how do we know that JD Vance isn’t leading the charge and what does this portend for the future? Vance may very well be the next president of the United States.

“Had those leaning in an isolationist direction reprimanded Dermer, it would have been a bad sign. We know this didn't happen, however, since it would have been front page ‘news,’ given all the media mudslinging about Dermer's supposedly being "arrogant" and a source of irritation,”

“Nothing so far suggests that there's a rift between Washington and Jerusalem,” said Blum. “And the fact that Trump didn't make Israel part of his Mideast trip this week is actually a good thing. The last thing he needs is for it to appear that America is doing Israel's bidding in the region.”

Ruthie Blum, it seems, is betting on Trump playing a long game, not cutting ties. That makes a lot of sense. That does seem to be the way Trump operates.  

But there are other voices. An Arab political analyst, speaking on condition of anonymity, had a completely different take. “Trump is being played by the Islamists. Sadly, he has chosen to align himself with the bad guys. Many Arabs are convinced that he has thrown Israel under the bus and that he could be easily bought with their charm, hospitality and money. This does not bode well for the future of the region, especially because his actions and rhetoric embolden the radical Muslims.”

Wait.
Is Witkoff in Qatar's pocket?https://t.co/Lc80AIjpDx
andhttps://t.co/szajrm4H9S

— Yisrael Medad (@ymedad) January 16, 2025

I think it is true to a degree that Trump is being played by the Islamists. For me, the proof of that is Witkoff’s admission in March that he had been duped by Hamas into thinking they had accepted his proposal to extend the ceasefire when they had no intention of doing so. “I thought we had an acceptable deal. I even thought we had an approval from Hamas. Maybe that’s just me getting duped. I thought we were there, and evidently we weren’t."

Well, duh. Of course you were getting duped. Did you expect fairness and honesty from Hamas?

Witkoff is Trump’s guy on this. Trump trusts Witkoff knows what he’s doing. Ergo, when Witkoff is duped by Hamas, by default so is Donald J. Trump.

Has Trump turned cold toward Israel and its prime minister? Ruthie Blum says no. It’s only a mirage, stirred up by political vultures. Others say Trump is falling for Qatar’s charm and risking a regional firestorm by expressing a willingness to negotiate with Iran. It is unfortunate, but Donald Trump’s weakness for flattery could very well make him ripe for Qatar’s game. Let’s hope the president sees through all the ceremonial fawning and glitz, and understands that it is Israel, and Israel alone, who stands as America’s always faithful ally in the Middle East.

---

---

Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon! "He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024) PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

 

Read More

The moral logic of Trumpism: A structured framework and Jewish ethical critique

I believe that ethics is a critical framework for viewing the world. The proper question that should always be asked is not "is this legal?" or "is this consistent with my political party?" but the simpler question "is this right?"

The difficulty in examining Donald Trump is that his actions seem so chaotic and so inconsistent, and there is such a huge wave of actions he is doing, that most analyses get mired in looking at only a small slice of Donald Trump's philosophy.

What is often overlooked is that Trump does have a coherent philosophy. Trumpism is a political and moral philosophy that is as mature and complete as others like Machiavellian philosophy, Nietzschean philosophy or consequentialism. Whether Trumpism deserves to be called a philosophy in the traditional sense is debatable. What is beyond debate is that it operates as a guiding worldview for millions – and so must be treated as one.

The philosophy of the most powerful leader on the planet deserves to be studied and critiqued seriously. Those who mock it or distort it are not making the world a better place. After all, Trumpian philosophy is attractive to hundreds of millions of people. It means something. Not taking it seriously gives it power, and mocking it makes it more attractive to the people it wants to attract. 

One cannot critique a philosophy without defining it. Yet surprisingly few people have attempted to formally define the Trumpian way of thinking. Some conservatives will ably defend portions of his philosophy and some liberals will critique certain aspects but no one seems to have tried to describe it as a complete philosophy that deserves to be taken seriously.

Before we can determine the pros and cons of Trumpian ethics, we must define their axioms and rules. 

Here is my attempt. I am writing these rules as much as possible from the perspective of its adherents, not its detractors, because that is the only proper way to evaluate it. This structure is aspirational: it imagines Trumpism in its most coherent, enduring form, rather than just its current populist expression.

The Trumpian Philosophy

Trumpism has a mission statement and eight rules. 

Mission Statement:

“America First” is the central moral mission of the Trumpian worldview.
It defines the purpose of leadership as the protection, elevation, and restoration of the American nation – its economy, sovereignty, dignity, and strength. All decisions are justified by how well they serve this mission.

Rules:

1. The system is corrupt and rigged against the people; it must be dismantled and rebuilt.

America’s institutions — from bureaucracy to media, corporate leadership to foreign entanglements — serve entrenched elites at the expense of working citizens. Moral leadership begins with the recognition that disruption is not just justified, but necessary, to return power to the people.

---

2. Loyalty is the test of trust in a shared mission to restore national dignity and self-rule.

In a world shaped by betrayal, ideological hypocrisy, and institutional decay, personal loyalty is the clearest signal of alignment with the cause. You cannot reform a corrupt system with uncommitted or conflicted allies.

---

3. Narrative dominance is essential in a hostile and manipulated information environment.

Controlling the narrative is not just political survival – it is moral resistance against a media regime that distorts reality to protect power. Seizing attention, defining the conflict, creating new media outlets and publicly claiming victories are essential for retaining legitimacy.

---

4. Economic strength is national dignity.

A sovereign nation must be economically independent and self-sufficient to preserve its identity and pride. Trade deals, energy independence, industrial policy, and job creation are not merely economic choices – they are moral acts of restoration.

---

5. Strategy must be transactional and leverage-based.

Global diplomacy, domestic politics, and even alliances must be judged by outcomes, not ideals. Deals are good only if they benefit the American people now – strength, not sentimentality, defines strategic success. Avoid long term strategies that depend on factors out of America's control 

---

6. Institutional roles and norms must be tested and replaced if broken.

Bureaucracies, traditions, and diplomatic rituals have become defensive shields for failure. True reform requires irreverence: breaking rules that no longer serve the national good and rebuilding systems that do.

---

7. Momentum is moral – move fast, break what’s broken, and fix only what truly demands it.

Speed is clarity. Stagnation enables decay and resistance. Action – even disruptive action – is more moral than paralysis in a corrupted environment. There is always time for course correction later. 

---

8. Legal boundaries must be challenged when corrupted, but respected when legitimately upheld.

The law must serve the people, not protect those in power from accountability. Testing legal boundaries is justified when the law has become a weapon – but true rulings, once settled, are respected as part of the rule of law. (While adherence to final rulings is claimed, legal institutions themselves are often challenged as illegitimate when they oppose the movement’s goals.)

---

While Trumpism often resembles a personality cult, it has evolved. Its goal is to keep itself as the governing ethos in 2028 and beyond - it must survive Trump himself. So while some of the rules might today revolve around Donald Trump's own instincts and beliefs, as a philosophy it is meant to become a permanent part of the American scene. These rules were written from that perspective. 

This framework presents Trumpism as an internally coherent moral-political system, not a random series of actions. It treats disruption as ethical, loyalty as epistemic, and success as proof of legitimacy. It offers a theory of action, leadership, and national restoration that appeals deeply to those disillusioned with elite institutions and it provides a serious basis for philosophical critique. 

A Jewish ethical critique of Trumpism

With a personality as polarizing as Donald Trump, it is difficult to be truly objective. Yet objectivity is what is required to honestly evaluate Trumpism as a philosophy. The Jewish ethical framework I have been defining provides a perfect method to begin such an analysis without the enormous baggage of partisan politics. Jewish ethics is a timeless, sophisticated baseline through which any system may be analyzed, including Trumpism.

I input the first part of this essay into the Jewish Ethical Chatbot I have been building and refining, because it would be as objective as possible. 

Here are the assumptions I put into the analysis: 

- The critique is of Trumpism on its own terms, not on how successful it is or how well it lives up to its own standards.

- The critique is both from the perspective of Jewish personal ethics and Jewish national ethics.

- The critique is meant to highlight both what is good and what is bad about Trumpism as defined here.

- I am trying to show how Jewish ethics is a valuable means to analyze any and every other philosophy for both Jewish and secular audiences.

The resulting report is quite good and provides a rare, clear -eyed view of today's most consequential political philosophy.

__________________________

Ethical Summary of Trumpism Through Jewish Moral Reasoning

Overview:
Approaching Trumpism as a coherent moral-political philosophy—rather than a chaotic set of actions—opens the door for serious ethical evaluation. From a Jewish ethical standpoint, there are aspects of Trumpism that resonate with enduring values like national preservation, economic dignity, and realism about institutional decay. However, its framework also contains deep and troubling departures from essential moral commitments such as truthfulness, moral accountability, human dignity, and ethical leadership.

---

Affirmed Values:

1. National Sovereignty and Self-Defense: Trumpism’s emphasis on national strength, border control, and economic independence aligns in part with the Jewish value of preservation of life and sovereignty (pikuach nefesh and milchemet mitzvah). Jewish ethics affirms that a nation has a sacred duty to protect its people and culture.

2. Economic Dignity: Trumpism treats economic revitalization as moral restoration. Jewish ethics similarly links economic justice with human dignity, affirming the importance of protecting workers and preventing national economic decay.

3. Distrust of Corrupt Institutions: The suspicion of entrenched elites reflects the Jewish tradition of prophetic critique against power structures that abandon justice. The critique of bureaucracies, media bias, or unaccountable elites echoes the Jewish demand for transparent and just governance.

4. Action over Paralysis: Trumpism’s urgency and disdain for inertia has parallels in Jewish ethics’ prioritization of moral courage and proactive responsibility (lo ta’amod al dam re’echa). When systems are corrupt or dangerous, reform must not be indefinitely delayed.

---

Ethical Concerns and Departures:

1. Truth vs. Narrative Control:

   • Trumpism elevates “narrative dominance” as a moral weapon. In Jewish ethics, however, emet (truth) is sacred and cannot be subordinated to power. Manipulating perception for gain—even to counter media bias—undermines the moral bedrock of trust, justice, and dignity. There is no Jewish precedent for morally justifying distortion of reality in public life as a default strategy.

2. Loyalty over Principle:

   • Loyalty in Trumpism is cast as the supreme test of trust. While Jewish ethics values loyalty (brit), it never substitutes loyalty for accountability. Prophets like Nathan and Elijah confronted kings directly; rebuke was not betrayal—it was righteousness. A system that discourages internal critique is ethically unstable.

3. Personality Cult and Legitimacy by Success:

   • Jewish ethics strongly rejects the idea that power or popularity proves moral rightness. Leadership is a burden of conscience, not a validation of ego. Trumpism risks becoming a cult of success—a position Judaism condemns as idolatry of the self.

4. Justice Undermined by Transactionalism:

   • While Jewish diplomacy permits compromise, it cannot reduce moral duties to leverage. Trumpism’s deal-centric worldview erodes the ethical standing of principles like human rights, minority protection, and covenantal responsibility.

5. Disruption Without Reconstruction:

   • Jewish ethics supports institutional reform—but not indiscriminate tearing down. Lifnim mishurat hadin (beyond the letter of the law) urges moral restraint even in just causes. Breaking what is broken must be followed by responsible rebuilding, grounded in humility and care. Trumpism lacks this ethical safety net.

6. Legal Opportunism:

   • While challenging unjust laws is valid, Trumpism’s tendency to test legal limits for strategic gain risks instrumentalizing the law. Jewish ethics demands that law be a teacher of morality—not a tool of convenience.

---

Conclusion:
Trumpism  gives voice to real disillusionment with failing elites and offers a compelling, emotionally resonant vision of national revival. But its moral compass is selectively applied and structurally vulnerable to abuse. Jewish ethics calls for a nation rooted in justice, truth, humility, and compassion—not just strength, loyalty, and victory.

This recommendation reflects structured Jewish ethical reasoning. It does not constitute a halachic ruling. Complex or uncertain cases should be brought to qualified rabbinic or halachic authorities.

_________________

Disclaimer:  I came up with the rules of Trumpian philosophy but the description here was mostly written by AI. As stated, the critique was entirely written by my AI-based Jewish ethical chatbot. 

---

---

Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon! "He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024) PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

 

Read More

Terror Unleashed: The Dangerous Cost of Hostage Freedom (Judean Rose)

Disclaimer: the views expressed here are solely those of the author, weekly Judean Rose columnist Varda Meyers Epstein.

The night before the first three women hostages were released, Prime Minister Netanyahu addressed the nation. Attempting to placate a nation appalled at the prospect of another terrorist release, the prime minister made a promise [emphasis added]. “We have established that terrorists who have killed will not be released to Judea and Samaria; they will be expelled to the Gaza Strip or abroad, and we also decided in the cabinet on a very significant reinforcement of our forces in Judea and Samaria to protect our citizens,” said Bibi.

Because we have been lied to before, we didn’t really believe this declaration. But it didn’t much matter. The only difference between a terrorist who has killed and one who hasn’t, is that in the first instance, the victims died, and in the second, they lived. That is why the distinction isn’t much comfort to the 5,700 or so Jewish residents of Beit El. Of the first 200 terrorists released in this deal, 114 of them were sent to Ramallah, adjacent to Beit El.

One woman in my town of Efrat heard that a further 22 terrorists “who have not killed” were released to Hebron, quite close to us. I asked how she knows this, since everything about the mass terrorist release has been cloaked in mystery. It turns out her son’s friend is serving there. He said he would have been safer in Gaza.  

In truth, there is a general air of despondency here. Many assume that what we hear about the terrorist release is not true, or at least not the whole truth, because so little information filters down to the common man that it makes us suspicious. Others are more pragmatic. “I'm not sure it's a ‘lie’ as much as politics and hands tied and deals behind the scenes,” says Chani Ugowitz of Efrat.

Be that as it may, the lack of information has created an air of distrust. Victim families directly affected by the release have yet to be contacted by the government. Those of us who live in close proximity to locations where terrorists will now roam free, have not been briefed.

 “This is a crazy complicated situation. I am so against this "deal"/ blackmail but know so many people that are going with it because they feel we had no choice. We tried the other way and it didn't work. I don't know. Makes me mad, scared, and sad,” says Ugowitz.

“It’s incredibly painful,” said another Efrat friend, Rachel Schwartz, “Statistically, half of those will do another terror attack. 170 out of 200 hundred that were released had life sentences. Varda, it is so incredibly painful. I can’t stand it.”

I had heard the same figure regarding terrorist recidivism. But it seems this figure has been updated. Lt. Col. (res.) Attorney Morris Hirsch formerly of the Military Prosecutor’s Office, writes that [emphasis added], “[As] part of the cabinet discussion going into approving the deal, the head of the Shin Bet noted that 82% of those released in the Shalit deal returned to terrorism.”

In the frightening Hebrew-language article, Without you knowing: This is how Israeli terrorists will be released back to the country, Hirsch shares a further, little known but profoundly disturbing fact, “The list of terrorists who will be released as part of the deal includes no less than 73 terrorists who hold Israeli citizenship or residency. This means they will be released back to the country.”

“Of that list, 21 terrorists are serving life sentences – that is, murderers. Of these, eight terrorists are to be released to Israel (within the 1949 armistice lines), while the rest are to be deported, although at this stage it is not clear where,” writes Hirsch. “Five of the eight are affiliated with Hamas and the rest with Fatah. All eight were arrested between 2001 and 2003, during the terror attacks initiated by the PA, starting in September 2000.”

All in all, of the 73 Israeli terrorists to be released from prison, 45 will be released into Israel, writes Hirsch, “while the remaining 28 terrorists will be deported abroad, either temporarily (3 terrorists) or permanently (25 terrorists).”

We may not know nearly enough about the terms of this deal but one thing seems certain, exactly none of the terrorists slated for release will be deported to America. President Trump wants Americans to feel safe. He doesn’t want any more innocents killed, people like Jocelyn Nungary and Riley Laken. So Mr. Trump is having these criminal elements deported. He doesn’t want them in his country.

“And there they are deporting murderers and criminals,” said Chani Ugowitz of the new administration, “while forcing us to take them to our streets with our children.

“I've gotten very harsh in my views since the war and I don't like it but I don't like how the other side has pushed me to think in an "us or them" mentality. There is no partner on the other side of the negotiation table so it becomes blackmail on their end and force on ours.”

Then too, what does it say about Israel that we’re freeing murderers into the wind? Whatever it was that was held over Bibi’s head to agree to this deal, it’s hard to hear that it was worth letting these murderers roam loose. Why would anyone even ask us to do so? 

“How depressing that monsters like these are the price of getting innocent Israelis freed from the Hamas underworld,” remarked Arnold Roth, father of 15-year-old terror victim Malki Roth, murdered in a pizzeria. “and that there's no one so monstrous that Israel would keep him or her in prison if the blackmail demands were perceived as warranting an even more painful surrender.”

Meantime, outside of Israel, Jews are giving Trump's Middle East Envoy Steve Witkoff multiple ovations (!) for forcing Israel into accepting Biden’s May horrific deal. Yet he managed to get not a single American hostage released. 

What then, was the point?

I wonder if President Trump is aware that among the terrorists released or slated for release in this deal, are many who were convicted of murdering Americans. JD Vance begged us Israeli Americans to vote for Trump, and we did. Now we wonder at the betrayal of American Israeli victims of terror whose murderers we were leaned on to release.

Why was Israel pressed into this deal now, when we were ahead of the game, when we were winning, when we were no longer between a rock and a hard place because it was no longer Joe Biden threatening us, slow-walking arms, and supplying the enemy with cash dollars? Trump had won and could now push Hamas into releasing the captives with just a few threatening words. Why then force Israel to release murderers from Israeli jails into the wild? 

Will we ever know why we were compelled by Trump to sign a bad deal months after it had been rejected? Or why not one American hostage has yet been released since this ceasefire was implemented. As of this writing, Keith Siegel is not to be released in this latest batch of hostages, and we know he is fast fading. Emily Damari was so worried about Siegel that she offered to switch places and let him go first. Hamas refused.

Keith Siegel, an dual American citizen held captive in Gaza

So we watch as no Americans are released, but the murderers of Americans like Dr. David Applebaum and his daughter Nava, who were blown up in the Hillel Café on the night before what would have been Nava’s wedding are going free in this “deal.” 

Dr. David Applebaum, Nava Applebaum, murdered at the Hillel Cafe in Jerusalem

Member of the cell that killed them, released or about to be.

The same is true of the murderer of American citizen Asher Palmer and his baby son Yonatan, who were on their way to spend Shabbat with their family when their murderer stoned their car with boulders.

Asher and Yonatan Palmer, murdered when their car was stoned while driving to family for Shabbat

 

On the list of terrorists demanded by Hamas

Ditto the murderer of Tuvia Yanai Weissman, an American killed by a child terrorist in 2016 while shopping at a supermarket.

Out or about to be out and free as birds.

It was that last name that grabbed at my throat, as I finished scanning a new list of the terrorists to be released, this time in English, from Palestinian Media Watch (PMW). It was just before Shabbat, and I had to shut down my computer, but I remembered that one. I never could get Tuvia Yanai Weissman out of my mind, because of the photo that circulated of him with his young wife and infant son. He had such a beautiful baby face, and his wife’s face was so full of joy and light. How awful to lose her young husband with whom she was clearly smitten. I mentioned Tuvia at the Shabbat table, and my youngest son told me that Weissman’s wife is his friend’s sister.

Tuvia Yanai Weissman, a dual American citizen, murdered in a supermarket.

Every Israeli has multiple connections to multiple terror victims. Connections upon connections upon connections. That’s the way it is.

Ari Fuld, dual American citizen, murdered while talking to his wife on the phone

I wonder: does President Trump feel a connection to the American victims whose murderers are now being set free in this deal we were compelled by his man Witkoff, to sign?

Why don’t we hear President Trump threatening Hamas if they don’t release Keith Siegel, now? 

Why don’t we hear Witkoff saying to Hamas, “No. You can’t have the terrorists who killed American citizens. You can’t have the murderers of Americans Marla Bennett and Ben Blustein, exchange students killed in the Hebrew University Cafeteria,” or “No. You can’t have the terrorist who killed American citizen Ari Fuld while he was standing outside a supermarket talking on the phone with his wife,” or “No. You can’t have the murderers of David and Nava Applebaum, or the murderers of Asher and Yonatan Palmer. You can’t have the murderers of Tuvia Yanai Weissman.”

Ben Blustein, American exchange student

Marla Bennett, American exchange student, who along with Ben was murdered in the Frank Sinatra cafeteria on the Hebrew University Mt. Scopus campus

Instead, we hear none of this. We hear people say things like, “What if it were your family members being held in Gaza?” as if those of us who feel as I do, that this “deal” is a horrible, unjust, and dangerous thing, are heartless.

But two things can be true at once. We are joyous at the release of each hostage, and sick at the release of murderers of loved ones we tracked down, caught, and jailed. Where is the justice for the victims? 

How do you think their families feel?

And how would you feel if you lived in Beit El, and 114 murderers had just been released next door to your home?

---

---

Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon! "He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024) PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

 

Read More