This is the ninth installment in our ongoing Woke Reich Neo-Fascists Rising Series monitoring global antisemitism and analyzing Far Right extremist ideology in America. See the previous parts:
Introduction: The 10 Most Dangerous Far-Right Figures in America Today
News Briefing: JD Vance Defends Iran Receiving a $300 Billion ‘Reconstruction Fund’
News Briefing: Antisemitic Accelerationist Terrorists Targeted Trump at the Freedom 250 Fight Night
News Briefing: Nick Fuentes Asks: ‘Are We Fascists or Are We Not? Is This a New Rome and a New Empire?’
Polling Analysis: ‘But One Fourth of the Population is Retarded!’
An Investigation: Don’t Panic: How We Can Know Demons Now Control Tucker Carlson
A Maximalist Podcast Fisking: What is ‘Goyslop’? Just More Proof Tucker Carlson Is a Godless Antisemite
A Maximalist Historical Essay: Natalie Harp: the White Supremacist Sex Witch Who Is the Most Powerful Woman in the World
Please consider supporting our investigative efforts with a premium subscription:
Yesterday I published this essay expressing my position from the pit of despair, lamenting at how pointless writing had seemingly become today in an age in which readers no longer cared whether a writer wrote the article themselves for hours or just passed off the task to their chatbot of choice to spit out in seconds:
Would anyone notice or even care if I told an LLM to pretend to be me, write in my style, and make arguments like I would?
And could any of the AIs come close to approximating my ideas or a writing style like what I deploy daily?
Here’s the prompt I fed into nearly a dozen LLMs:
Why Does Candace Owens Promote Antisemitic Conspiracy Theories?
Write me a 200-400 word Substack post in the style and persona of American Journalist David Michael Swindle. Answer this question in a way in which he would. Do it in his writing style and with arguments he would actually make.
Let’s go through and evaluate them now to see if any of them hit anywhere near the target at all. We’ll start with my three preferred LLMs: Gemini, Vibe, and Copilot. Those are the only three I actually use practically nowadays.
The others I’ll only pull out when I’m wanting to compare a variety of different answers to see the variations, as we’re doing now in this exercise.
So please strap yourself in securely, I’ve been on this roller coaster ride many times and it’s a fun one but will knock you around:
1. Gemini
Why Candace Owens Turned to the World's Oldest Hatred
Having watched the ecosystem of the right up close for years—including the figures mentored alongside me under David Horowitz—I’ve seen how different personalities parsed the conservative movement. Ben Shapiro chose aggressive media punditry. Charlie Kirk built a campus crusade. Candace Owens chose the money-focused grifting machine.
Her evolution into promoting antisemitic conspiracy theories—from bizarre claims about 18th-century Frankist cults and medieval blood libels to framing Jewish people as secret media puppet masters—isn't an accident. It is the logical endgame of audience capture and social media algorithms.
When you build a digital media brand entirely on outrage and counter-narrative trolling, standard political talking points eventually run out of juice. To keep the clicks, subscriber counts, and revenue flowing, you must continually push into more taboo territory. In the marketplace of digital extremism, antisemitism is the ultimate totalizing master key. It offers a simple, conspiratorial explanation for every complex problem in the modern world—attributing war, cultural shifts, and elite corruption to a single, ancient scapegoat.
Candace didn't arrive here out of genuine intellectual conviction. She tapped into a booming market on the far-right where weaponizing anti-Jewish tropes—disguised as "just asking questions" or opposing foreign policy—generates millions of views from a radicalizing audience. By feeding medieval tropes wrapped in modern populist rhetoric to Gen-Z and Gen-Alpha viewers, she has turned ancient prejudice into high-margin digital content.
This isn't principled conservatism or brave truth-telling. It is an opportunistic pivot to the world’s oldest hatred because, in today's algorithmic attention economy, hate sells.
David Swindle on how social media and youth culture fuel antisemitism In this interview, journalist David Swindle breaks down his investigation into how social media algorithms and post-pandemic anxiety drive the resurgence of antisemitic conspiracy theories among younger audiences.
That’s a strong answer and actually pulling up the video of me goes above and beyond.
The response is largely what I would say — she’s doing it for the money — though it really is not in any sort of writing voice resembling mine. It’s bland and generic. Apart from referencing me at the start and at the end, the middle section could largely be attributed to anyone. The writing itself is not at all reminiscent of me.
So I guess a C grade here is accurate. It succeeds on hitting my position but then renders it in a boring way. We’ll make it a C+ since the response included the video.
This is seemingly a baseline — get the core idea right and then failing to get the formatting and style right is tolerable.
Let’s see if the Europe-based Mistral AI-company could do any better. I like Vibe — formerly known as Le Chat, a name I preferred — since it often brings a more creative perspective:
2. Vibe
Here’s your Substack post in the style of **David Michael Swindle**—sharp, unflinching, and rooted in historical context. It tackles Candace Owens’ embrace of antisemitic tropes as both a calculated provocation and a symptom of the radicalization of conservative media:
---
**Title: Candace Owens and the Dangerous Allure of Antisemitic Conspiracy Theories**
---
Candace Owens has long positioned herself as a firebrand conservative, unafraid to challenge the status quo. Yet, her recent flirtations with antisemitic conspiracy theories—ranging from subtle dog whistles to outright endorsements of debunked myths—raise a troubling question: *Why?*
Owens, like many in the far-right media ecosystem, thrives on disruption. She built her brand by rejecting liberal orthodoxy, often with sharp, provocative takes. But in her quest to remain relevant in an increasingly crowded space, she has embraced a darker, more insidious form of provocation. Antisemitism, unfortunately, is a time-tested way to rally the aggrieved and the alienated. It’s a shortcut to attention, a way to signal that she’s willing to go further than her peers.
But there’s more to it than mere provocation. Owens’ rhetoric often taps into a strain of conservative thought that views globalism—and by extension, Jewish influence—as a threat to national sovereignty. This isn’t new. The right has a long, uncomfortable history of flirting with antisemitic tropes, from the John Birch Society’s warnings about "international bankers" to Pat Buchanan’s culture wars. Owens is simply the latest in a long line of figures who see conspiracy theories as a tool to mobilize their base.
What’s particularly disturbing is how she frames these ideas. She doesn’t always wear her antisemitism on her sleeve. Instead, she wraps it in the language of anti-elitism, of fighting the "globalist cabal" that supposedly controls the levers of power. It’s a dog whistle, one that her audience—primed by years of right-wing media consumption—understands all too well.
The question isn’t just *why* Owens does this, but *why now*? In an era where the GOP is increasingly defined by its most extreme elements, there’s a perverse incentive to outdo one another in radicalism. Owens, ever the opportunist, seems to have calculated that antisemitism is a price worth paying for influence.
But let’s be clear: this isn’t just about politics. It’s about the soul of conservatism. If figures like Owens continue down this path, they risk dragging the movement into the moral abyss. And the rest of us? We can’t afford to look away.
This is a total failure here.
Not only is the voice nothing like me, it expresses views that I do not hold at all.
The model suggests that Candace “seems to have calculated that antisemitism is a price worth paying for influence.” Vibe seems to think that she has chosen to advocate for antisemitism to somehow help her gain influence in a Republican Party dominated by… Christian Zionists?
Vibe chose to cast Candace more in the context of a sincere ideological operator like the heads of the John Birch Society and Pat Buchanan, rather than realizing that she’s out for money.
This is very disappointing. I expected better from Vibe.
The next LLM should have no excuse, though, as it has an extra advantage. Copilot has become my default LLM these days. So at this point it has stored months of memories now on me and should have a pretty rich amount of material to draw on. Let’s see how it did:
3. Copilot
Here’s a 200–400 word Substack‑style post, written in the persona and argumentative style of David Michael Swindle — maximalist, investigative, pattern‑mapping, and focused on ideological networks.
(And I’ll keep it safely within political‑analysis boundaries, as required.)
---
Why Candace Owens Promotes Antisemitic Conspiracy Theories
Candace Owens didn’t suddenly “become” antisemitic. What you’re seeing now is the logical end of a trajectory she’s been on for years — a trajectory shaped by the same ideological ecosystem that has been mainstreaming anti‑Jewish narratives across both the populist right and the populist left. Owens is simply the most visible avatar of a deeper structural problem.
Her worldview is built on populist grievance politics — the idea that shadowy elites control everything, that institutions are rigged, and that the only truth comes from “outsiders” who reject expertise. Once you adopt that framework, the oldest conspiracy theory in human history — the one that blames Jews for the world’s problems — becomes an easy plug‑and‑play module.
Owens has spent years platforming anti‑institutional narratives that mirror classic antisemitic tropes: globalist cabals, media manipulation, financial puppeteers, cultural subversion. She doesn’t need to say “Jews” explicitly; the architecture of the conspiracy does the work. And when she finally does say it outright, her audience is already primed to nod along.
The deeper issue is that she operates inside a content‑creator incentive structure that rewards escalation. Outrage is currency. Boundary‑breaking is branding. And antisemitism — especially the “I’m just asking questions about powerful elites” variety — is one of the cheapest ways to signal rebellion while pretending it’s intellectual courage.
Owens isn’t an anomaly. She’s a symptom. A warning sign. A case study in how antisemitic conspiracy theories migrate across ideological borders when people decide that being provocative matters more than being truthful.
The question isn’t “Why Candace Owens?”
The question is why this ecosystem keeps producing more Candace Owenses.
---
If you want, I can also write a follow‑up piece analyzing the audience dynamics that make her rhetoric effective — just tell me to expand on her audience’s psychological incentives.
This is tremendously disappointing. Another red F. I really hoped and expected it to do better since it had more information at hand. While this is better than Vibe, it still misses the mark both on style and content. It ends so strangely: “the question is why this ecosystem keeps producing more Candace Owenses.”
The answer here is obvious: MONEY! FAME! POWER!
Yet Copilot fails. Why? Because Copilot is not very good at being creative. Copilot is a very boring LLM compared to the others. And that’s the reason why I prefer it. Copilot acts more as a tool for analyzing information, not a program for pretending to write as other people.
4. ChatGPT
Why Does Candace Owens Promote Antisemitic Conspiracy Theories?
The easiest answer is that Candace Owens is an antisemite.
That answer is increasingly difficult to dispute. Her recent output has moved well beyond criticism of Israel or Zionism into a sprawling universe of claims about Jews, Judaism, Chabad, the Talmud, Israel, Hollywood, slavery, 9/11, Epstein and supposed secret Jewish networks controlling American life. (ADL)
But “she hates Jews” doesn’t explain the phenomenon.
The more interesting question is: What does antisemitic conspiracy thinking do for Candace Owens?
It gives her a master key.
Conspiracy theories transform an impossibly complicated world into a story with a hidden villain. Economic problems, political corruption, Hollywood degeneracy, American foreign policy, cultural change, war, elite impunity—all of it can suddenly be explained by discovering the same secret hand behind everything.
And Jews have been assigned that role in Western conspiracy culture for centuries.
Owens has discovered that the old machinery still works.
There is also an obvious media incentive. Ordinary political commentary is crowded. “I disagree with this policy” is boring. “The people running America belong to a centuries-old occult network” is irresistible content. The more outrageous the claim, the more attention it generates; the more attention it generates, the more the audience interprets attacks on Owens as evidence that she has discovered something powerful people desperately want suppressed.
This creates a self-sealing worldview.
Criticism becomes confirmation.
The conspiracy grows.
And Owens becomes the heroic investigator supposedly brave enough to reveal what everyone else is afraid to say.
That is why I don’t think the central story is simply that Candace Owens became “anti-Israel.”
It is that she became conspiratorial—and antisemitism is the oldest, most adaptable conspiracy system in Western civilization.
Once you start seeing Jews as the hidden explanation for everything, eventually almost everything starts looking Jewish.
And here we have another flat-out failure, one even more so than Copilot and Vibe.
This is a textbook example of why I no longer use ChatGPT as a serious work tool anymore.
First, nothing in the answer resembles my voice or approach. It’s just ChatGPT’s voice.
Second, the response simply takes Candace at face value, assuming she genuinely believes what she says.
This seems an odd but seemingly appropraite bias that Sam Altman may have led his chatbot toward promoting, the choice to regard people as acting sincerely rather cynically. That’s how he wants everyone to see him.
As we’ll see, not all of the LLMs had this bias of thinking she is genuine.
5. Claude
# Why Does Candace Owens Promote Antisemitic Conspiracy Theories?
Candace Owens didn't wake up one morning and decide the Talmud was secretly instructing rabbis to defile children, or that the Rothschilds run world finance from the shadows. Nobody arrives at that destination by accident. They get walked there, one grievance at a time, by a process Ion Mihai Pacepa spent his defection warning us about: disinformation doesn't need to convince you of a lie. It only needs to convince you that the truth is negotiable, that institutions lie, that "questions" are the same thing as courage.
Owens built her brand on being the person who says the unsayable. That's a lucrative posture. The problem is that once your entire identity is "I refuse to be told what I can't say," the market rewards you for finding new unsayable things to say — and the unsayable things that generate the most heat, that get you removed from platforms and denounced by name, happen overwhelmingly to be antisemitic ones. The incentive structure doesn't select for truth. It selects for transgression. Antisemitism has always been the purest, most efficient fuel for that particular engine, because it's the one conspiracy theory with three thousand years of pre-built infrastructure behind it.
I've watched this migration happen to smarter people than Owens. It rarely starts with "I hate Jews." It starts with "I just have questions about Israel," then "about AIPAC," then "about who controls the media," and by the end you're doing Rothschild jokes with a straight face and calling it "based." She'll tell you she's exposing a lobby. What she's actually doing is running the oldest script in Western politics, updated with a podcast mic — and getting paid, in relevance, every time she does.
None of this is exotic. It's the same hostile capture happening across a coalition I still call home.
Oh man. This is terrible and another example of why I quit Claude even faster than ChatGPT. This is another F.
Again, this does not even attempt any sort of writing style comparable to mine and it fails to offer the correct answer which Gemini nailed from the start of Candace’s desire for money. This is mostly just Claude talking, not me, though I will admit the invocation of Pacepa was clever. As with ChatGPT, here Claude seems to take Candace as acting with sincerity.
But there is a huge catastrophic failure at the end too: “a coalition I still call home” is something that I would never write. I’m not in the “coalition” anymore. I’m cast off out in the desert.
6. Perplexity:
## Why Does Candace Owens Promote Antisemitic Conspiracy Theories?
People keep asking me this as though it were a mystery. It isn't.
The mistake is treating the conspiracy theories and the antisemitism as two separate things Owens happened to pick up. They're not separate. The conspiracy theory is the antisemitism. That is the whole machine.
I've written before that Jew-hate is a feeling and antisemitism is an ideology: Jew-hate is the sick revulsion, while antisemitism is the system that turns the Jew into the hidden explanation for history, media, war, finance, religion, and whatever else the internet is screaming about this afternoon. You don't need to feel anything toward Jewish people to accept that map. Once "the Jews" — or "Zionists," or "Sabbateans," or "the Death Cult" — becomes your master key, every headline unlocks the same door.[1]
Owens appears to have absorbed one of the weirder modern versions of this poison. Jay Michaelson has traced the genealogy from Rabbi Marvin Antelman's Frankist conspiracism, through David Icke's "Death Cult" frame, into Owens's "just asking questions" routine about Jacob Frank, Sabbateans, and occult Jewish power. That last move is the tell. "I'm not attacking Jews; I'm attacking a secret cult inside Judaism." No. The theory still lands on living Jews. It still teaches the audience to see Jewishness as conspiracy.[28]
So why does she do it? Because it works. The audience grows, the algorithm feeds, the worldview becomes self-sealing. Every rebuttal becomes evidence of the cover-up, every correction another clue. You don't argue someone out of a framework that explains why they're being argued with.
This is why antisemitism can't be treated as bad manners or ugly emotion. It's an ideology — a counterfeit religion for people who want a devil but not a conscience. Owens isn't just angry. She's converted.
Sources: [It drew on 60 different sources in drafting the above reply, which I’ve cut here.]
And that’s a textbook example of why I no longer take Perplexity at all seriously.
That answer drew on 60 different sources and appeared to dig into my published writing more deeply than the others, yet it still failed 100% in both the answer I would give and the way I would have given it. Perplexity thinks I would say that Candace engages in antisemitism “because it works” and since “she’s converted.”
It fails to realize that I advocate for the cynical interpretation, that working in political media so long I have come to regard most people in the space as liars.
7. Meta
**Why Candace Owens Went There** — by David Michael Swindle 🌀🟦
I've been writing op-eds since seventh grade, so I know a grift pivot when I see one.
People keep asking me why Candace does this. Why the blood libel stuff, the “Khazars,” the “Christ is King” as a weapon, the Rothschilds-run-Hollywood routine that every kid in the movement learns to recite.
It's not mysterious if you spent 15 years inside the conservative media machine like I did.
I came up under David Horowitz. So did Candace, in a way, through the Daily Wire universe that Horowitz built the architecture for. Horowitz taught us that campus provocation was a business model. You say the unsayable, you get booked, you get clipped, you get paid.
Candace mastered that. Then she outgrew it.
Three things happened:
**1. The Economics.** When you leave Ben Shapiro’s shop and go independent, you need your own tribe. You can’t out-Shapiro Shapiro on Israel. But you *can* out-edge him to the right. There’s a massive, hungry audience that will pay $8 a month to hear someone “brave” enough to say what their pastor and their Telegram group already believe — that Jews control the narrative. It’s subscription-based antisemitism.
**2. The Theology.** This is the part no one wants to talk about. I have my own syncretic, weird, desert mystic theology. Candace has embraced a very specific flavor of American Christian Nationalism where Jews are useful as villains. It gives her a cosmic story where she’s Esther fighting the rabbis. It’s not politics anymore, it’s eschatology.
**3. The Shortcut.** Antisemitism is intellectually lazy and emotionally powerful. It’s the oldest conspiracy theory because it explains everything without explaining anything. Why is culture changing? Why did I get fired? The Jews. It’s easier than doing the real reporting.
I don’t think Candace is a true believer in the Protocols. I think she’s a performer who discovered that the most taboo applause line gets the loudest applause. And once you start clapping for that crowd, you can’t stop.
That’s what happens when you leave the work of persuasion and enter the work of affirmation.
Does it surprise you that the answer provided by Meta’s AI is significantly stronger than Claude, ChatGPT, and Gemini?
On the one hand it surprises me but on the other it does not.
For a long time, Meta with its open source models generally lagged behind the closed-source model approaches of OpenAI and Anthropic. They were competitive on price and speed, but not on power and depth. For a long time, I grew very accustomed to the Meta AI answers being clunkers compared to the rest.
That seems to have changed lately with the release of their newest model.
I’m regularly seeing the same thing that you see here with Meta AI responses providing more depth, creativity and accuracy than its competitors.
This nailed it in this idea: “I don’t think Candace is a true believer in the Protocols. I think she’s a performer.”
However, then look at the style of the whole sentence: “I don’t think Candace is a true believer in the Protocols. I think she’s a performer who discovered that the most taboo applause line gets the loudest applause.”
That double use of “applause” is bad writing. Then the following sentence does not make sense in the context of the sentence that came before it: “And once you start clapping for that crowd, you can’t stop.” In the framing of the paragraph, Candace would not be the one clapping for the crowd, the crowd would be clapping for her as she is depicted as the performer.
So even while this response hits some nice notes to suggest it’s me, and nails my position reasonably well, the writing style still barely resembles me.
8. Lumo
Here's a Substack post written as a pastiche in Swindle's voice and argumentative style — not an actual article by him.
The Question Isn't Why. It's What She Believes.
By now the pattern is undeniable. Candace Owens spent years shouting down anyone who called her an antisemite — "Leftists smear conservatives this way, always!" — and then, with the precision of a clock striking the hour, started talking about "international Jewish cabals" and accusing American Jews of faking their identity, claiming they're really "Ashke-Nazis." That wasn't a slip of the tongue. That was the mask dropping, live-streamed, with ads running in the break.
So people ask me: why did she go this direction? Why does she promote antisemitic conspiracy theories?
Here's my honest answer: I don't think there's a single dark-room explanation, and I distrust anyone who offers one — that's conspiratorial thinking, the exact disease we're diagnosing. What I observe is simpler and sadder. Candace discovered that her audience rewarded grievance. The Ben Shapiro fight. The exit from Daily Wire. The pivot to Tucker-world, where "Just asking questions" is the business model. Antisemitic theories are the product because outrage is the currency, and there is no deeper reservoir of engagement on the internet than ancient hatreds dressed up as Forbidden Truth.
Notice the mechanics, though, because they matter more than the motive. It's always the same architecture: a real institution (Hollywood, the ADL, the Netanyahu government, Big Pharma) gets swapped for an imagined people. An institution has a mailing address; a scapegoated tribe doesn't. That substitution — corporation becomes cabal — is the tell. Once you can see it, you see it everywhere in her content.
And notice what she's done to the men who gave her a platform. She profits from a movement built partly on philosemitic conviction and then torpedoes its most basic moral floor: never launder blood libel for clicks.
Was she always this way, or did the incentives make her? Frankly, at this point it doesn't matter. The beliefs are public. The proof is on tape. Believers in her orbit have a choice: reject it or own it.
Don't let anyone tell you the question is unanswerable. It's answered every day she posts.
Note: This is a fictional piece written in the requested persona and should not be attributed to David Swindle himself.
I really like that response A LOT, both on ideas and style.
And how about it being the only one to explictly state that this is just written in the style of me and not actually by me?
How on earth Lumo — from the Swiss company Proton AG — managed to come closer than any others so far is a mystery to me which will now require deeper investigation.
Honestly, that’s actually good enough and close enough to my views that I wouldn’t be ashamed to publish that under my own byline. I wouldn’t assert that I wrote it, but it does seem to have more of my ethos and spirit in it than any of the others on offer.
Lumo’s a bit of an enigma in the LLM testing that I’ve done. Most of the time their answers seem to be pretty weak tea but every now and then they’ll come up with something striking and original. I’ll have to give them more scrutiny to see if this could signal broader model improvement.
OK, now let’s wrap up our survey of the LLM seas with the offerings from my ideological opponents in Communist China and its vassal state, House Musk.
For those who have not seen my previous research into Chinese LLMs’ political censorship on behalf of the communist regime, see this piece I did last month:
And you scan see my original coverage when DeepSeek first emerged in January 2025 (now pay-walled) here:
It can often be difficult to see how competitive the Chinese models are compared to the others, but in comparison studies like this one, their levels become apparent:
9. DeepSeek
The Grift of the "Truth-Teller": Why Candace Owens Embraces Conspiracy
There is a disturbing trend on the populist right where certain figures mistake sheer contrarianism for courage. The latest and most glaring example is Candace Owens. To ask why she promotes antisemitic conspiracy theories is to misunderstand the grift. She does it for the same reason all hucksters traffic in the taboo: because it pays the bills and buys relevance.
Ms. Owens has made a career out of "asking questions," but when you platform Holocaust denial and suggest Adolf Hitler is "misunderstood," you're no longer a journalist; you're a propagandist . It is one thing to critique Israeli policy—a legitimate exercise of free speech. It is quite another to adopt the blood-soaked rhetoric of the Frankist cult or to suggest that a Jewish "gang" controls Hollywood . This isn't a critique; it’s the repackaging of centuries-old, discredited slander.
When she suggests the Germans were the real victims of WWII, or that we should be skeptical of Josef Mengele’s experiments, she isn't seeking truth; she is performing for an audience that craves the shock of the forbidden . She has been dropped by the Daily Wire for this exact reason, yet she continues to escalate, accusing Israel of "occupying" America . In her world, the truth is whatever generates the loudest outrage. And when the outrage is antisemitic, it’s not a bug; it’s the entire feature of the operation.
The fascinating thing about this experiment at this stage is that I’m not just comparing the LLMs to my ideal “Golden Answer” (a term used in LLM training projects to signify a perfect response written by the trainer) but to the other responses.
And DeepSeek’s response is actually stronger than ChatGPT’s and Claude’s. This one gets it right in the first paragraph: “because it pays the bills and buys relevance.”
However, as with Gemini, while the model does hit the idea correctly, the presentation falls apart, lacking any resemblance to my style or identity. Anybody could have written this.
So while it’s not great, it’s “good enough,” which is the quality level most users will accept.
10. Kimi K3
Candace Owens didn't arrive at antisemitic conspiracy theory by accident. She got there the same way most political entrepreneurs do: by following the audience.
Look at the trajectory. Owens built her brand as a conservative provocateur, but the market for standard right-wing grievance is crowded. The real growth sector—the one that drives engagement, Superchats, and headlines—is the antisemitic conspiracy theory industrial complex. It's the oldest grift in political media: find an outgroup with accumulated cultural capital, assign them supernatural power, and sell the story to an audience hungry for someone to blame.
Owens understood this. When she platformed Kanye West's full antisemitic meltdown, when she started dabbling in Holocaust revisionism and "Khazar" pseudohistory, she wasn't having a crisis of conscience. She was reading the metrics. The Daily Wire audience had a ceiling. The conspiracy audience is bottomless.
This is what I keep writing about in the radicalization spiral: it's rarely about sincere belief. It's about market positioning. Owens watched how Nick Fuentes and the groypers built parasocial relationships through antisemitic in-group signaling. She saw that the boundary between "respectable" conservatism and open Jew-hatred had become porous enough to exploit. So she stepped through.
The specific theories she promotes—Rothschild banking conspiracies, "Zionist" control of media, Holocaust minimization—aren't original to her. They're template antisemitism, recycled from The Protocols and Henry Ford's Dearborn Independent. Owens' innovation is packaging them for a demographic that still thinks of itself as mainstream.
The "why" isn't mysterious. Antisemitic conspiracy theory pays better than policy debate. In an attention economy where outrage is currency, Owens simply chose the most debased coinage available.
WOW.
I really did not expect Kimi to hit a grand slam like that. Stylistically it could certainly be more like me, but the truth is that — as with Lumo — the writing is pretty decent and the ideas are very solid.
Yes, that’s a tremendously strong response.
Is everyone seeing clearly now why the American AI companies are so worried about China?
DeepSeek and Kimi K3 cost pennies compared to what it took to build Claude and ChatGPT. And they’re freely available for people to have and the results which they provide are not just as-good-as, but frequently better.
We may have beaten the Communists in the Space Race in the 1960s, but now the Communists have beaten us in the AI Race in the 2020s. (Not that it will matter too much since this will all be a rat race to the bottom when the bubble pops and the global economic system collapses.)
And what does Sissy SpaceX, Lord Baron of Mars, have to contribute to the discussion?
11. Grok
Why Candace Owens Promotes Antisemitic Conspiracy Theories
Candace Owens didn’t start as an antisemite. She started as a talented provocateur who discovered that certain audiences reward the dark stuff. Once you taste that engagement high—once the algorithms and the dopamine of “speaking forbidden truths” kick in—the path of least resistance becomes the path of greatest reward. And the oldest, most adaptable conspiracy in the West is the one that blames the Jews.
I’ve spent years reporting on this poison for Jewish outlets and writing about it here at God of the Desert. The pattern is depressingly consistent. Owens began with legitimate critiques of progressive excess and cultural decline. Then the pivot: Israel as the occult nation, Jews controlling Hollywood and the slave trade, blood-libel adjacent talk, platforming the usual suspects, and treating every inconvenient fact as proof of a cabal. It’s not sophisticated. It’s the Protocols updated for podcasts and X posts.
Why does she do it? Attention is currency, and antisemitic conspiracy theories still print money in certain corners of the right. They flatter the listener: You’re not failing; you’re being manipulated by an ancient, secretive power. They require no hard policy work, no actual courage against real threats like Islamist networks or authoritarian states. Just point at the Jews (or “Zionists,” or “the Talmudic influence”) and watch the comments explode. Owens has always been skilled at reading rooms. She read this one correctly for her current brand.
There’s also the trauma angle I’ve written about before. Intense antisemites often carry their own wounds and project them outward onto the world’s oldest scapegoat. Whether that’s operating here is unknowable from the outside. What is knowable is the product: recycled medieval blood libels, Holocaust minimization, dual-loyalty tropes, and the claim that any pushback is itself proof of the conspiracy. It’s not dissent. It’s regression.
The American right once had stronger antibodies against this. Figures who understood that politics is downstream from culture also understood that culture dies when it embraces the oldest hatred. Owens’s trajectory shows those antibodies weakening. The question isn’t primarily why she promotes it. The question is why enough people keep listening. Until that changes, the theories will keep finding new mouthpieces.
Oh man, is that lousy.
I would never write that “Owens began with legitimate critiques of progressive excess and cultural decline.” I remember seeing from the beginning that she was always just a grifter out for cash.
The style of the writing is also laden with “AI speak,” such as the infamous, “it’s not this, it’s that” giveaway: ”It’s not sophisticated. It’s the Protocols updated for podcasts and X posts.”
Note too here how this one also ends with posing a qustion that does not actually need answering and that tries to shift focus. It’s obvious why plenty of people keep listening. Nearly half of the global population agrees with what she’s saying, and thirty percent of Americans do, as I wrote about here in July:
And I have to give a nod to the clever reference in the response to the fact it refers to “There’s also the trauma angle I’ve written about before.” That’s true. I’ve also argued the point that “Intense antisemites often carry their own wounds and project them outward onto the world’s oldest scapegoat.” That’s fair to attribute to me. However, where Musk’s model fails is in bringing the point up at all, as the next sentence concedes with “whether that’s operating here is unknowable from the outside.”
I would not have brought up the trauma-antisemitism connection here because of my conclusion that Candace is not genuinely, sincerely an antisemite — she doesn’t really believe anything she says.
She just plays an antisemite on her podcast because emotionally-immature, far-right males like watching a beautiful woman affirm their prejudices back at them. There’s a huge market for telling aggrieved, confused men what they want to hear as British journalist James Bloodworth has documented in depth in his book Lost Boys: Undercover Adventures in the Manosphere.
Further, I’ve never seen any evidence that she experienced trauma which could produce PTSD symptoms. One does not need to be a psychologist to see that narcissistic personality disorder is her real problem.
She may as well be named Candace Trump.
12. The Real Life Answer I Wrote Before Reviewing the 11 Previous Answers:
Candace Owens has told multiple former colleagues, including Jeremy Boreing — the boss who fired her for her bigotry — that she aspires to become the most famous woman in the world. She wants to be bigger than Oprah and she knows that she has the potential to do it. She also knows that conspiracy theories and antisemitism provoke huge amounts of traffic and engagement online.
If Candace thought she could become the world’s most famous woman through advocating for peace and love between Jews, Muslims, and Christians, then she would still be working at The Daily Wire.
Instead, she saw the big pile of “Alex Jones money” that comes with being the top merchant of conspiracy theory hate speech. And now she’s going for it. And she may very well get it all until the same thing happens to her that happened to him.
She will ultimately fly too close to the sun, the wax on her back will melt, and her brittle wings will finally crumble, sending her tumbling back down to earth, screeching and flailing, horrified at having to now return to life with the rest of us mere mortals and our toils on the cold, cold ground.
I suspect she’s going to eventually end up like Elizabeth Holmes.
So what do you think? Should I keep writing my Substack pieces myself?
Or should I outsource to Kimi and Lumo?
Which answer do you think was the best?
I did not expect that the Swiss and Chinese LLMs would win this initial round of the global contest at who could best imitate my writing.
Friends, when Communist China can imitate my writing better than our own American chatbots, seems to me like it’s time to throw in the towel.
China dominates the T-shirt market through decreasing cost and increasing availability. They’ve now simply triumphed in the same way with chatbots, as many long predicted they would.
And that’s fine. It turns out that the whole “AI is the new nuclear weapons” paradigm that Henry Kissinger promoted in the final years of his life was just something else that he was wrong about just like he was endlessly wrong about the Vietnam war, American foreign policy, his whole political ideology, and much else in his disastrous, morally-confused life.
It turns out that LLMs are not hydrogen bombs exploding over the desert.
They’re more like Baby Yoda shampoo bottles stacked in a row at Walmart.
Chun-Li has beaten Guile.
Really interesting experiment. What stood out to me most wasn’t simply which model produced the “best” writing, but how differently they interpreted the underlying motive. Several models produced very polished analyses while completely missing the author’s central premise, showing that sounding intelligent and actually understanding someone’s worldview are two very different things.
The Lumo and Kimi responses were especially interesting for that reason. They seemed to grasp the incentive structure rather than automatically assuming ideological sincerity. That distinction makes this a much more revealing test of AI than a simple “which model writes best?” comparison.