4,039 words

Scott Howard
The Transgender-Industrial Complex
Quakertown, Pennsylvania: Antelope Hill, 2020

“If man will strike, strike through the mask!” — Moby Dick

In March, South Dakota Republican Governor Kristi Noem vetoed House Bill 1217, an act designed to “promote continued fairness in women’s sports” by prohibiting biological men from playing in girls’ sports leagues. In April, Arkansas Republican Governor Asa Hutchinson vetoed House Bill 1570, titled the Save Adolescents From Experimentation (SAFE) Act, which prohibits gender reassignment surgeries and the use of hormone blockers for minors. [1]

Transgender ideology is unpopular, especially with Republican voters, [2] so Tucker Carlson invited Noem and Hutchinson on his show to justify their actions. In his sardonic and relentless style, Tucker accused Noem of caving to pressure from the “NCAA, Chamber of Commerce, and Amazon.” [3] And, when Hutchinson explained with a smirk on his face that he vetoed the bill because it “was overbroad, it was extreme,” Tucker insinuated that the governor was lying and brushed aside the governor’s excuses, asking him instead if he had done so at the behest of Walmart.

Tucker has earned enormous clout as one of the leading conservative opponents of “radical Left” agendas like transgender ideology, which he criticizes as a “boutique issue” pushed by “rich people” and big business. However, by telling this truth, even Tucker is slipping his audience a lie.

For example, Hutchinson justified his veto because the bill represented “a vast government overreach” that would cause “legislative interference with physicians and parents.” A far more effective use of Tucker’s airtime might have been to ask Hutchinson how preventing child genital mutilation is a “vast government overreach,” while Hutchinson’s 2017 bill prohibiting the state from contracting with and investing in companies that “boycott Israel” is not. And, rather than asking Hutchinson if he had been approached by a nebulous corporate entity like Walmart, Tucker could have asked the staunch Zionist governor if he had perhaps been contacted by his largest donors, the Jewish Jacobs family.

In his attack on trans ideology, Tucker is ultimately obscuring the key figures and sponsors of this demented social agenda behind nebulous and amorphous corporate abstractions like “Walmart” and generalizations like “the rich” (a common phenomenon in the conservative media sphere). Trans ideology is not just a rich issue; as Scott Howard shows in The Transgender-Industrial Complex, it is a Jewish issue.

In The Transgender-Industrial Complex, Howard exhaustively documents the vast and dizzying constellation of figures and organizations spearheading the transgender cause. Howard’s study shows that the movement is not at all organic, but is rather a pet project of the perverse Western ruling establishment that has been artificially manufactured and propagated from the top down during the latter portion of the 20th century, and is intricately intertwined with “other [unpopular] agendas being implemented by the Establishment such as mass migration/’diversity,’ climate change,” etc. [4]

Demonstrating how the program works, Howard demonstrates that the implementation of the transgender agenda follows a predictive model also seen in other social activist movements and color revolutions. It begins with enormous amounts of money, or “so-called philanthropy,” from a series of billionaires and corporate sponsors who “launder millions of dollars to infuse [a panoply of activist] organizations with cash to [perform] behind-the-scenes machinations,” including everything from public advocacy work and astroturfing pressure campaigns, legal activism, influencing and buying elections, etc. [5]

It is an incredibly well-oiled machine, as LGBT strategists reveal: 

The LGBT movement maintains significant assets which it has been able to leverage for real progress, including engaged donors and funders; strong national organizations; and politically savvy, visible, and influential leaders across a variety of sectors, particularly the entertainment, media, and, increasingly, political arenas. Strategically, these assets have been deployed with a laser-like focus to address specific policy and legislative wins either nationally or in certain parts of the country. [6]

It is also noteworthy that the activities of LGBT activist organizations are supplemented by tremendously powerful institutional pressures from a variety of international organizations, among which are:

Conditional loans from organizations like The World Bank and the IMF 

These loans encourage developing nations to integrate with international legal frameworks like the Council of the European Union’s LGBT Toolkit and the Yogyakarta Principles. The Yogyakarta Principles, concerned primarily with transgender rights, are “a universal guide to human rights which affirm binding international legal standards with which all States must comply.” Affirmed as a global charter by the United Nations Human Rights Council in 2007, the Yogyakarta is essentially the “gay version” of the Magna Carta. [7]

Pressure from investors and investment banks to “diversify”

For example, firms like Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase are withholding investments from companies without diverse boards, and firms like BlackRock (Larry Fink) and State Street “are voting against directors at companies” without adequate diversity. As Goldman Sachs proclaims, “If the board has all white males, that’s a big negative”; “Being diverse is not optional; it is what we must be.” [8] [9]

Enormous grants from extremist transgender ideologues to educational institutes like Harvard Medical School

An excellent precis can be found here. This also coincides with generous grants and subsidies for gender reassignment “therapies” to provide very lucrative profit incentives for medical firms to offer these “services.” [10] Regarding a similar phenomenon caused by generous grants from such foundations, Howard points out that there is some $2,583 in funding available annually for individuals with HIV/AIDS, vs. a paltry $418 for individuals suffering from cancer. [11]

Boycotts from corporations and national organizations

For example, Kristi Noem implied that the NCAA would “bully” her state if she passed an anti-trans bill (the NCAA pulled several championship events out of North Carolina in 2016-2017, in response to the state’s anti-trans washroom bill), and there was also the implication that Amazon and other corporations might retract business opportunities from the state if the bill were passed. Similar forces were at work in 2016, when CEOs from more than 80 major corporations descended on North Carolina to rescind the state’s prohibition on transgender “women” from using women’s restrooms. That same year, “Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff said Salesforce would impose economic sanctions on Georgia if controversial religious freedom bill passes,” demonstrating a new form of corporate tyranny in which corporations do not need to lobby legislators but can simply threaten states with economic devastation should they not comply to their demands, like some sort of cutthroat, international transexual mafia.

Sanctions and regime change

If bribes from The World Bank and IMF don’t succeed, then the United States will leverage sanctions and other pressures against your country (for example, the Trump administration succeeded in pressuring Botswana to decriminalize homosexuality). As Howard notes, there is significant overlap between the military-industrial complex and the “diversity and inclusion” project, and NATO is “fully committed to spreading the gospel of tolerance at gunpoint.” [12]

So, in this regard, Tucker Carlson is right in that the transgender-industrial complex is very transparently a project of the oligarchs. However, as Howard connects the many pieces and entities comprising the vast transexual international network, a familiar pattern emerges. Just like with mass migration and a dozen other harmful, antisocial agendas being foisted on the West, the key figures of the transexual agenda — from its pseudoscientific pioneers to the private sponsors and philanthropic benefactors funding its implementation, from the activist organizations and NGOs to the judges and legal activists drafting landmark legal opinions — are Jewish.

At the top of the pyramid rests a series of charming Jewish billionaires like George Soros, Paul Singer, Dan Loeb, Seth Klarman, Jennifer Pritzker, David Gelbaum, Andrew Shechtel, Sheldon Adelson, Loren Schecter, Martine Rothblatt, David T. Rubin, and Mark Hyman, to name a few. Even Haim Saban, the infamous “I’m a one-issue guy, and my issue is Israel” donor, is connected through his Saban Research Institute of Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, which overlaps with various “prepubescent transgender” research programs. [13]

Many of these plutocrats might already be familiar to readers as hedge fund managers and vulture capitalists. Soros, who made billions short-selling currencies and profiting from market collapses, has achieved a comical bogeyman status with the Right, though there are also charming figures like Paul Singer, who built his fortune on the misfortune of others by buying the debts of countries like Argentina and then crucifying them in international court. During the court proceedings with Argentina, Singer had Ghana seize an Argentinian navy ship to use as leverage in his extortion of the Latin American country. Singer also destroyed the small, white Nebraska town of Sydney when his hostile takeover of Cabela’s cost the thriving town more than 2000 jobs. After making billions through antisocial financial activity centered around destroying and liquidating the livelihoods of ordinary people, these entrepreneurial Jewish business geniuses inject their stolen wealth into perverse social agendas like the trans movement to help demented transsexual perverts get access to your children.

In his popular piece on vulture capitalism, Kevin MacDonald noted how many of the financial vehicles and hedge funds used by these Jewish vulture capitalists are often “blankly nondescript.” Similarly, Howard summarizes how the sponsors of the transgender movement funnel their ill-gotten wealth through “donations” to nondescript and anonymous financial vehicles, foundations, and trusts, such as: 

• The Open Society Foundation


• The Pritzker Traubert Family Foundation


• The Walter and Elise Haas Fund and Evelyn and Walter Haas Jr. Fund


• The Zellerbach Family Foundation


• The Klarman Family Foundation


• The Adelson Family Foundation


• The Shack Sackler Foundation


• The Matan B’Seter Foundation (meaning “anonymous gift” in Hebrew) [14]

Additionally, note that essentially all of the foundations which were not directly founded by Jews have a significant Jewish presence. For example, the Arcus Foundation, one of the top donors to LGBTQ+ causes founded by the homosexual billionaire Jon Stryker, is managed by its Jewish Vice President of Social Justice Programs Jay Michaelson, who got his PhD in Jewish Thought from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. [15]

These funds then distribute large sums of money to hundreds of transgender activist groups, NGOs, legal funds, etc. One notable example is the abominable Drag Queen Story Hour event, which was created by RADAR Productions, a “queer literary arts organization” that is bankrolled by the Zellerbach Foundation and the Walter and Elise Haas Foundation. [16] Jews also happen to be overwhelmingly present within leading “LGBTQ-focused organizations” (which just happen to simultaneously “prioritize combatting anti-Semitism”), [17] among which are 

• Bend the Arc: A Jewish Partnership For Justice


• The J Street Education Fund


• The New Israel Fund 


• Keshet


• The Southern Jewish Resource Network for Gender & Sexual Diversity 


• The American Jewish World Service


• Carolina Jews for Justice


• The Asheville Jewish Community Center


• The National Council of Jewish Women 

Ad nauseum. 

Again, this is not notwithstanding the significant Jewish presence within non-explicitly Jewish LGBTQ+ activist organizations.

As Howard illustrates, the organizations constituting the transgender-industrial complex are essentially just smaller nodes within the massive spiderweb of international Jewish finance and shadow banking, and trans activism appears to be one of the pet projects of the Jewish community at large.

Of course, both bankrolling and leading antiwhite and transexual activist organizations is not the end of Jewish involvement within this agenda. Jewish figures have also been overwhelmingly overrepresented within the army of legal funds and activist lawyers fighting for the cause, right up to the creation of crucial landmark legal opinions at the level of the Supreme Court. For example, Kagan, Ginsburg, and Breyer opened “the transgenderism floodgates” with “the one-two punch of United States v. Windsor (2013) and Obergefell v. Hodges (2015).” (Kagan is also known for “queerifying Harvard,” and for introducing “transgender law courses” for training activist lawyers.) [18] Of interest is also the U.S. District Judge David Nye who recently blocked Idaho’s transgender sports ban on the grounds that it “stands in stark contrast to the policies of elite athletic bodies that regulate sports both nationally and globally.”

And finally, Jews have featured prominently amongst the supposed “doctors,” “researchers,” and “medical professionals” that pioneered the movement, beginning with the infamous Magnus Hirschfeld, whose infamous Institute of Sex Research preceded John Hopkins as the “sex change Mecca” of the world. [19] In Hirschfeld’s honor, the Magnus Hirschfeld medal has since been given to figures like John Money (whose horrific sex reassignment experiments on David Reimer caused Reimer to blow his brains out with a sawed-off shotgun), Money’s Jewish colleague Richard Green, who authored Transsexualism and Sex Reassignment, the Jewish Jonathan Ned Katz, who authored The Invention of Heterosexuality, and the appalling Jewish sex therapist Ruth Westheimer, i.e., Dr. Ruth. [20] Howard also has a chapter that traces elements of modern transgender ideology to the Boasian school of anthropology, which was a Jewish intellectual movement parallel to the Frankfurt School and Freudian psychoanalysis aimed towards the “undermining of white Gentile culture and solidarity.” [21]

Jewish organizations and leaders themselves admit that the Jewish community is the driving force behind the progressive LGBTQ+ agenda in the United States today; the Jewish Amy Dean writes that “Jews can claim a fair share of the credit for bringing Americans to a tipping point.” [22]

To contextualize, here is a series of headlines I have recently encountered from Jewish publications:

What is it with Jews and transgenderism? Howard identifies two motivations.

The first reason is pragmatic.

For example, as the Jewish LGBTQ+ activist Frank Kameny, who fought to remove homosexuality from the DSM in the 1970s, writes: “there is but a short step from prison sentences for homosexuals to gas ovens for Jews.” [23]

Or, as Diane Ehrensaft explains her involvement on the board of The Trans Teen and Family Narratives Project (among several other Jews): “I grew up in a very left-liberal Jewish household in Chicago. We understood what it was to be part of a minority, and [so] we were very focused on social justice.”

Or, as Alex Soros (son of George Soros, and Founding Chair of Bend the Arc Jewish Action), explains his father’s actions: “his philanthropy [is] ultimately an expression of his Jewish identity. . . The reason you fight for an open society is because that’s the only society that you can live in, as a Jew.”

However, as Howard notes, there is a further reason beyond the strategic advantage that secular Jews identify within diversity and intersectionality. In an eye-opening chapter, Howard also identifies precedents for gender ideology within Judaism itself (which has been embraced particularly within Reform Judaism).

For example, Howard brings attention to rabbi David J. Meyer, who writes that “Jewish legal tradition identifies no fewer than six distinct ‘genders,’” and that “the Jewish understanding of gender is neither binary nor even a grid into which every person must be forced to fit. . . rather, we see gender diversity as a spectrum.” [24] Further, the Reconstructionist Rabbinical College’s official position on transgenderism is as follows: “the Talmud also recognizes that an individual’s gender orientation does not necessarily match his or her sex organs. . . the mitzvah of healing is not limited to health professionals; it is incumbent upon every Jew. . . [and] supporting transgender people in who they are is part of that mitzvah” (mitzvah is Hebrew for a duty, or “good deed,” commanded by God). [25]

Additionally, as an interesting sidenote, Howard also finds in Jewish traditions the argument that “an erotic relationship. . . is what connects yeshiva students to one another and to their rabbi.” [26] I was immediately reminded of the “child-rape assembly line” within fundamentalist Jewish communities, and of which even secular Jews are not guiltless. For example, Sigmund Freud’s father Jacob Freud sexually abused his children, so one wonders to what extent the appalling theories of 20th-century Jewish sexologists were the product of child sexual abuse. [27]

So, Jewish involvement within the transgender movement is not motivated by purely cynical and strategic aims. Rather, to some extent, Jewish activism appears to reflect the sexual depravity inherent within the Jewish community itself.

For example, Bend the Arc Chief Executive Officer Stosh Kotler (who literally refers to gentiles as goyim) stated that she got into activism after table dancing for some fellow Jews at a sex club in Portland, who then invited her over for the Passover Seder feast. For Cotler, this event “marked my return to Judaism and the beginning of my conscious and proud identity as a Jew,” after realizing “that being Jewish was a revolutionary spiritual and political path.” [28]

In 2018, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs stated that “Trans Rights is a Jewish Issue.” [29] Indeed.

The Transgender-Industrial Complex is an excellent resource on both the transgender movement, and Jewish influence and power within revolutionary movements during the 20th and 21st centuries.

Its documentation of the various transgender ideologues and organizations is exhaustive, such that some chapters feel almost encyclopedic. Of course, these chapters can be overwhelming and require some perseverance to read through. In this regard, the text might have benefitted from rearranging certain sections of information into charts or diagrams to serve as visual aids. Additionally, some sections rely very heavily on quoted material, with several exceedingly extensive quotations that could be abbreviated. Generally, however, these issues are not shortcomings on part of the author, but the inevitable consequence of synthesizing such a comprehensive deluge of information. In any book attempting to document the transgender movement, some pages will read like a phonebook from Tel Aviv.

Howard more than makes up for the dry sections by interspersing the material with many interesting connections and observations. For example, Howard traces the “trans” concept within the Western world to a 1322 poem by the Jew Kalonymus ben Kalonymus, in which he refers to his penis as “a lasting deformity” and expresses the desire to be a woman. [30] Additionally, Howard finds links between the trans movement and the Irgun, the Zionist paramilitary that perpetrated the King David Hotel bombing in 1946, and weaves comparisons between the trans movement and other Jewish projects, from the demoralizing Jewish abstract expressionism movement in the arts, to other Jewish intellectual assaults on the Western intellectual traditions and on truth and beauty generally. [31] Additionally, Howard’s portrayal of the transexual movement as a way for Jewish oligarchs to “enact strange and perverse revenge fantasies on the Gentile population” [32] by empowering the transgender lumpenproletariat janissary class as shock troops in the war on traditional white society contains relevant parallels to other recent works, such as Josh Neal’s American Extremist: The Psychology of Political Extremism. Neal’s repurposing of Andrzej Łobaczewski concept of the “pathocrat,” the psychopathic and subversive technocrat who “cannot function in a healthy society, and feel[s] wronged by it,” is an excellent characterization of Jewish oligarchs and technocrats like Rachel Pritzker and Rachel Levine.

And finally, Howard situates the transgender movement within neoliberal imperialism by linking his narrative on the transgender movement to other projects of international elites, like The Great Reset, making it a comprehensive and useful study for understanding the broader strategies and objectives of capitalism and American imperialism in the 21st century.

Eustace Mullins likened the liberal internationalist world order to a Venetian masquerade ball, the success of which hinges on the fact that few participants know “which masque hides the face of the King, which costume is that of the Grand Vizier.” By dogmatically refusing to address the Jewish question and instead of blaming nebulous and faceless corporate entities for the massive transexual blitzkrieg that has been launched against the West in recent years, conservatives are playing along with the masquerade by further obscuring the issue. By attributing causes to unfalsifiable abstractions, they are effectively exonerating any individual actors of responsibility for their actions, or worse, from having any definite phenomenological presence within reality. Conservatives who claim to oppose transgender ideology while simultaneously refusing to broach the Jewish problem are running cover for the very same Jewish transexual mafia they claim to oppose.

As Howard writes, the system’s “very genesis, adoption, and propagation can all be traced to primarily Jewish or Jewish-connected figures”; “Without the Jewish role. . . the system would not actually exist.” [33] The transgender-industrial complex is a Jewish phenomenon. And as Greg Johnson writes, “one cannot defeat an enemy one will not name.”

The Transgender-Industrial Complex is a revolutionary work because it pulls no punches in exposing the hideous faces behind the trans agenda. A huge repository of research and analysis, it would make an excellent addition to any dissident rightist’s bookshelf, and will certainly be of interest to the researcher and to the general reader alike for years to come.

*  *  *

Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.

• First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)


• Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.

To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:

Notes

[1] Since then, several more governors have vetoed similar bills, including the Republican governor of North Dakota Doug Burgum. As usual, cited is “the prospect of businesses boycotting [their state] as a reason for rejecting the bill.”

[2] South Dakota and Arkansas are deep red states in which Republicans overwhelmingly control the state legislature, and these respective bills passed with overwhelming majorities in both the House and Senate. Similar anti-trans bills have been introduced in at least 25 states, as transgender ideology remains unpopular throughout the country, especially with Republicans. In fact, transgender sports bans are becoming a litmus test for Republican candidates, which is why Hutchinson and Noem’s actions were particularly strange. In fact, Noem’s veto has been described as “the veto that could undo Kristi Noem’s presidential ambitions.”

[3] In the principle of charity, one should note that Noem justified her actions on the grounds that “this bill would only allow the NCAA [implied alongside other organizations like the Chamber of Commerce and Amazon] to bully South Dakota” by depriving the state of opportunities. She claims to remain committed to the bill, but she is opting to issue executive orders and attempt to “build a coalition of leaders, athletes, and people who want to protect women’s sports” instead. Perhaps she is using this as an excuse to veto the bill and ingratiate herself with major donors, or perhaps she is being honest. Don’t hold your breath, though. As some of her conservative critics have noted, “politicians launch belated ‘initiatives’ for political theater and to create distractions,” and that her executive “orders are toothless.”

[4] Scott Howard, The Transgender-Industrial Complex (Antelope Hill Publishing, 2020), p. 209.

[5] 143.

[6] 138-139.

[7] 225, 509-510.

[8] 405-406.

[9] Note that BlackRock, State Street, and Vanguard — the “Big Three” — have eleven trillion dollars under management and are the largest shareholders in at least 40% of major public companies in the United States. Firms like BlackRock have the enormous power to single-handedly determine whether a company succeeds or fails, and have thus been referred to as “a fourth branch of government.” Additionally, these firms retain shares for extended periods of time and have the ability to exert influence over company management. According to Vanguard CEO William McNabb, “In the past, some have mistakenly assumed that our predominantly passive management style suggests a passive attitude with respect to corporate governance. Nothing could be further from the truth.” Much of “woke capitalism” therefore clearly originates with pressures from these investment firms. For example, note that “Boeing Co. has fired 65 employees and disciplined another 53 for racist, discriminatory and hateful conduct,” due to the “CEO stress[ing] diversity goals as investors press U.S. companies.”

Print