The torrent of disclosures regarding Jeffrey Epstein is difficult to process, much less respond to, because of their content and their scope. Repeated emails from and to Epstein on subjects like Jews’ superiority to “goyim” and the desirability of colonial wars for plunder offend the eye as well as even the battered assumption of human decency.

The presence in the emails of outsized public figures ranging from Noam Chomsky and Stephen K. Bannon to Lawrence Summers and Howard Lutnick shock because of their scope: the sheer number of prominent people who appear to have, temporarily or not, nullified their ideologies or their marriages or their images to spend time in Epstein’s circle. The analyst Thomas Karat has suggested, based on carefully parsing the timing and the discrepancies of the files’ release, that immobilizing the reader from a considered response may in fact be the release’s point. The Scottish constitutionalist and activist Sara Salyers made a version of Karat’s argument when she spoke about “the overwhelming feeling” of “hav[ing] woken up on an alternate, dystopian, universe” where “the scale of the insane evil…is so huge that it’s impossible to see how to begin putting anything right.”

Helpful responses to that question of “how to begin putting anything right” came from the British whistleblower Halima Khan, who said on X that Epstein “was involved in too much to be the work of one person”; that “Epstein is a project and the man we know is just the face and the fall guy”; and, in a subsequent tweet, that “we may not be explicit victims of Epstein but we are all implicit victims of Epstein.” These notions of broader networks of perpetrators and victims strike a chord. They are first of all demonstrably accurate, as shown by the investigative journalist Whitney Webb, who has written definitive books on Epstein’s connections to a network of “transgenerational organized crime interests…and major factions within both American and Israeli intelligence.” They are also deeply suggestive about the real “moral” of the Epstein story which powerful players may want obscured: how institutions that America uses to justify its global prerogatives have been corrupted by Epstein’s Jewish Zionist networks and their allies.

The clearest case of this corruption is also the heart of Epstein’s activity, “connecting” different “worlds” which formed the basis for his “success.” Namely, Harvard University: America’s beacon of education to the world since the 1630s; created by graduates of Oxford and Cambridge; and the seeder of America’s leadership class. Investigating Epstein’s role at Harvard and the players who made it possible shows that Epstein’s story isn’t confined to financial or intelligence networks, which many people reasonably consider intrinsically corrupt. It extends to an educational network which he and his backers have systematically corrupted in the name of power, profit, pleasure, and social control.    

In many ways, this story starts in the late 1960s, when the WASP arbiters of Harvard whose networks had directed its affairs since its founding were caught between a radical rock and a reactionary hard place. This was the result of Harvard students’ response to what they accurately called “Harvard’s undeniable ‘complicity’ with the military-political-intellectual machine…prosecuting the profoundly immoral war” in Vietnam. The counter-response of the WASPs, a crackdown on activists, had ended with police on campus and the apparent split of the Harvard community between “radicals” and “reactionaries” on the faculty and in the student body. To fix the problem, the Harvard Corporation, which oversees the university, brought in Derek Bok, a conciliatory WASP, as President. Bok brought in Henry Rosovsky (a Jewish Zionist economic historian whose wife, Nitza, was a member of one of the early and prominent Jewish settler families in Palestine which became one of the founding families of Israel) to serve as Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences: Harvard’s most powerful dean responsible for “more than 1,000 tenured, tenure-track, and non-tenure-track faculty; more than 7,000 undergraduate students; and thousands of graduate students.”

An instructive description of Rosovsky comes from the memoir of Martin Peretz, a Harvard lecturer and the publisher of The New Republic, which he remade into America’s most powerful Zionist magazine, as well as an admirer of Rosovsky, to whom he dedicates his memoir. In the memoir’s telling, Rosovsky “was essentially a conservationist, a builder” who “filled the gap left by the collapse of the Protestant veneer at Harvard”; “loved institutions, especially great universities”; and was successful because he “listened to everybody; he thought that they all had something to say.” Another way to say this is that Rosovsky was a fixer: appointed to put a kinder face on Harvard’s unwillingness to reform its connections to Washington’s military corporate complex that had been revealed by Vietnam. And this is precisely what Rosovsky did over the next 20 years. After his retirement, these efforts earned him a seat on the Harvard Corporation, a nearly unprecedented distinction for a member of faculty.

Rosovsky’s other, quieter legacy came in the area of personnel. Before Rosovsky’s tenure, no Jewish or Jewish Zionist faculty member had risen so far in Harvard’s administration. Since Rosovsky’s tenure ended in 1991, four Jewish American Zionists have been among the six presidents who occupied University Hall, and this is a reflection of broader university shifts. These shifts are elucidated in a telling passage from the memoir of Rosovsky’s close ally Peretz about the parties Peretz and his wife, an inheritor of the fading WASP elite, held at their Cambridge home for Jewish Zionists and their allies in Harvard’s environs:

Moshe and Michal Safdie, architect and artist…decided to get married…in our garden. Larry Summers would sometimes be there. Already he was a wunderkind, [a Harvard PhD] one of the youngest tenured professors in Harvard’s history…Jill and Yo-Yo Ma weren’t Jewish, but they were honorary Jews, which is what you become when you get really close to me…[Future United States Supreme Court Justice] Stephen Breyer, a law professor at Harvard…and his wife, Joanna…became friends of ours… Leon Botstein was not quite of this crowd but adjacent to it…[he] made a name for himself as the architect of Bard, a college in Annandale-on-Hudson…[helped] by the periodical contributions of George Soros, the most recent of which, pledged in 2021, was a half-billion dollars.

This intimate list of luminaries bears rewinding.

It was Moshe Safdie who, nine years after he married in Martin Peretz’s garden and not long after he “did the plans for [Martin Peretz’s] remodeled kitchen” commenced the designing of a new student center for “Harvard-Radcliffe Hillel, the Jewish student organization,” to be named after Henry Rosovsky. Financing for the project came from four donors, one of whom was listed in The New York Times as “Leslie H. Wexner, chairman of the Limited” and another “Jeffrey Epstein, president of Wexner Investment Company.”

It was Larry Summers, the “wunderkind” who in 2001 became Harvard’s president, who in 2003 would be described by Vicky Ward in her Vanity Fair profile “The Talented Mr. Epstein” as, along with Henry Rosovsky, part of Epstein’s Harvard “fan club.” According to Ward, Summers was also a key player in the inception of “the Epstein Program for Mathematical Biology and Evolutionary Dynamics” (later the Program for Evolutionary Dynamics) at Harvard, which included an office for Epstein at the university. According to the profile, Epstein was “reluctant” to attach his name to the Program until “Summers persuaded him” and after Wexner gave his approval.

And it was Leon Botstein who, according to The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times, “did not just pursue Mr. Epstein hoping to raise money” for Bard College, where he was president, but “did so repeatedly”: making “frequent visits to Mr. Epstein’s Upper East Side townhouse,” and hosting “Mr. Epstein and his entourage [when they] hopped by helicopter to Bard’s lush campus in the Hudson Valley.” In the process, Epstein connected Botstein to Woody Allen; Botstein helped one of Allen’s daughters secure acceptance to Bard; and Botstein “personally received $150,000 for consulting fees…from a foundation created by …Epstein” which Botstein “donated…to the college as part of a $1 million gift [Botstein] gave that year.”

These networks begat their successors. It was during Rosovsky’s tenure as dean that William Ackman, the son of the prominent Jewish Zionist New York developer Lawrence Ackman, attended Harvard and became a mentee of Peretz. Peretz, in the late 2010s, arranged to introduce the recently divorced Ackman, now a billionaire hedge fund manager, to the woman who became Ackman’s second wife. This woman was Neri Oxman, then an American-Israeli professor at MIT, whose Mediated Matter Research Group received, two years before her wedding, a $125,000.00 donation from Epstein, via the ministrations of MIT Media Lab president Joichi Ito. In return, Oxman “gifted” Epstein one of her lab’s productions, a “3D-Printed Marble.” After Epstein’s death raised scrutiny of this transaction, Ackman privately told MIT Media Lab president Joichi Ito that “it is very important that you don't mention [Oxman’s] name or otherwise get her involved” so that Oxman would not be “forced into a position where to protect her name she is required to be transparent about everything that took place at MIT with Epstein.”

For Ackman, solicitations toward silence are selective, and one-sided. He is a prodigious user of X, where he authors an output of tweets attacking Leftism and the government of Iran and defending "Israel", off the initial advice of his friend Steven Pinker who “recommended the platform” to Ackman “over dinner at Peretz’s house.” In turn, it was during Larry Summers’s tenure as Harvard president that Pinker, a renowned Jewish Zionist professor of evolutionary psychology, joined the faculty at Harvard, amid rumors that “Summers may have played an unusually direct role in persuading Pinker to come.” And it was Pinker who, in December of 2025, when “the U.S. Department of Justice released its first batch of files on…Epstein” surfaced via video clip “riding with Epstein on his now infamous private plane.”

Epstein’s “draw” for these most powerful of Harvard players and their intimates appears to have been that, perhaps because he never attended Harvard or graduated college, he was respectful of higher learning and perhaps particularly Jewish achievements in the area. More concretely, he was able, via his money management career, to connect Harvard administrators to New York donors and Harvard professors to New York operators. Leslie Wexner, Epstein’s patron who “handed [Epstein] sweeping powers over his finances, philanthropy and private life,” began his donations to Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, which eventually totaled an astonishing $42 million, in earnest around 2000: in other words, only after his “protégé” Epstein had established relationships with Rosovsky and Summers. Lisa Randall, the eminent Harvard physicist who recently surfaced in disclosures as a visitor to Epstein island and a regular correspondent of Epstein’s, was introduced to him in 2004 by her then-literary agent, John Brockman: a close connection of Epstein’s throughout Epstein’s career who also served as Epstein’s “in” with Joichi Ito at MIT.

Related News

Why Washington may attack Iran again

The blockade as global dictatorship: From contained extraterritoriality to worldwide extension

Besides money and connections, what Epstein brought with him into these circles appears to have been implicit or explicit permission for the men who populated them to engage in extractive, manipulative behavior toward women in a “socially acceptable way.” The nature of the relationship between Epstein and Summers, in emails in which the married Summers asked Epstein for advice on how to “get horizontal” with a junior colleague, is a microcosm of this dynamic:

“She must be very confused or maybe wants to cut me off but wants professional connection a lot and so holds to it,” Summers wrote in a March 2019…

[Later] Summers forwarded Epstein an email from [the colleague] asking for feedback on a paper. Summers mused to Epstein that it was “probably appropriate” to hold off on responding. “She’s already beginning to sound needy :) nice,” Epstein replied.

The nature of the relationship between Lisa Randall and Epstein, as disclosed in revealed emails, is its own kind of process of interior colonization, in which even a member of the “in-group” (Jewish Zionists) is reduced to an object based on her gender. Epstein, in private emails to others, felt comfortable identifying Randall, who from 1999 to 2004 was the most-cited theoretical physicist in the world by her peers, as “not a great physicist” but an “attractor.” In a joking email exchange with Epstein, Randall, who, on the evidence of the email,s felt alienated at Harvard, asked Epstein, “How come I never get Jew credit?” To Epstein’s reply, “Too pretty,” Randall responded, “Wow if that wasn’t a weasly maneuver I’d think it was a compliment.”

What has partly deflected attention from the fact that Epstein’s presence at Harvard was engineered by Jewish Zionists who had quietly come to arbiter the institution is the stature of other Zionists untainted by Epstein who surrounded lead players like Rosovsky, Summers, and Pinker. These include Peretz’s friends Yo-Yo Ma and Stephen Breyer, along with later generation players like the eminent professors of medicine and law Jeffrey Flier and Jeannie Suk Gersen. It was for example Yo-Yo Ma who, when Martin Peretz wrote a celebratory column in The New Republic about Larry Summers’s appointment as president of Harvard in 2001, supplied for Peretz this strange quote about Summers, described elsewhere with considerable support as an “intellectual imperialist” who “believe[s]… models of rational choice can explain all human behavior”:  “What I like about Larry is that he understands that nobody knows everything; not he, not you, not me…he makes so much room for the cultural and emotional sphere, even the irrational – that which is ultimately human.”

Just as the personal recommendations of these respectable actors serve to muffle suggestions of anything “untoward” at Harvard, so, too, do their much-publicized and repeated defenses of “Enlightenment”: the philosophy of governance favored by America’s elite which purports to use technical expertise to ensure material “progress” and freedom from interference, and which has served as the justification for colonial endeavors from Vietnam to Gaza. Harvard, the seat of institutional expertise in America, is in many ways the heart of this “Enlightenment” project, and investigating the thrust of its “Enlightenment” focus since Henry Rosovsky’s deanship and Jeffrey Epstein’s arrival reveals something disturbing. Under Jewish Zionists’ aegis, Enlightenment at Harvard has come to mean not just aristocratic WASPs tying the university to imperial governance in the name of technical skills. It has hardened into a project for minting a new and narrow professionalized elite which aims to claim power and aggressively use it to benefit a cohort of ethnic supremacists.

This project began with Rosovsky’s successful strategy to pacify the campus after its students revolted against liberal enlightenment empire in Vietnam. The strategy amounted to mass-produced professionalization in the name of staffing Washington D.C. policies that secured this agenda began with a reform of undergraduate education, which increased degree requirements while supplementing this new narrowness with a “core curriculum” which taught "a lot of neat little facts” at the expense of “methodologies.” They extended, especially at Derek Bok’s hands, to the growth of professional schools like medicine and law; and the expansion of the Kennedy School of Government. And they included the de facto re-creation of the African American Studies Department under Henry Louis “Skip” Gates Jr., who outraged black scholars with accusations of anti-Semitism while repackaging African American history for commercial and often sentimental appeal. Finally, they applied even more sweepingly to undergraduates: during Rosovsky’s tenure, economics degrees skyrocketed and “quantitative reasoning…[became] an essential element in undergraduate education.”

These emphases produced results, of a kind. Several years after Rosovsky left Harvard’s administration, the university’s dean of admissions thought that Harvard had recently secured its status as “America's University, a totemic institution,” because of “media hype, aggressive recruiting, need-based financial aid, the quality of the plant, and the Harvard-success connection” while “the superior quality of a Harvard education did not make the list.” These legacies of Rosovsky’s were continued by Larry Summers when he became president in 2001, under the aegis of “blur[ring]” the lines between applied sciences and the liberal arts in favor of “data-driven ways of knowing.” Indeed, Summers pursued these policies at such a heightened pitch and accelerated pace that the Faculty of Arts and Sciences successfully deposed him after a five-year tenure.

After Summers’ tenure, Jewish Zionists accelerated his and Rosovsky’s project further still using technology. In 2014, Bill Ackman donated $17 million to Harvard to “catalyze the work of the university’s Foundations of Human Behavior Initiative…to explore the psychological, social, economic, and biological mechanisms that influence human behavior.” This is a project, as I have reported in the past, “to fuse economics with biology and psychology to predict and influence human beings.” It is being headed by David Laibson, a Jewish Zionist economics professor and classmate of Ackman's at Harvard, who surfaced in The New York Times in 2005 as “among those leading the effort to collect the signatures of full professors throughout the university on a letter endorsing Dr. Summers's leadership” during the faculty vote of no confidence which ended in Summers’s removal. It is also a project that lines up with Steven Pinker’s “computational theory of the human mind,” which “holds that the mind is a naturally selected system of organs of computation” or, more straightforwardly, “an evolved computer.”

Another Jewish Zionist who embraced this notion at an even higher pitch is Jeffrey Epstein, whose $6.5 million donation to Harvard’s Program for Evolutionary Dynamics reflected his special focus: “to develop an improved super-race of humans using genetic engineering and artificial intelligence,” a plan which extended to proposals to artificially inseminate such nominal super-humans with Epstein’s sperm. According to the Left-wing magazine Jewish Currents, “with his insemination plan, Epstein conjured a eugenicist fantasy…that, in the context of his proximity to Jewish philanthropy, also feels like a crude parody of…the perspective of a megadonor.” Indeed, it was the “ethnically-focused philanthropy” of powerful Jewish Zionist financial operators like Leslie Wexner, people who, as I have recently reporte,d were by their own accounts obsessed with ensuring Zionist Jews’ continuing influence via breeding, which allowed for the rise of Epstein’s influence at Harvard.

This raw project of claiming power to engineer the lives of others in the name of “progress” or “Enlightenment” does not stop at Harvard. Among the figures sent from Harvard to Washington, D.C. or Silicon Valley by or with the help of these networks are Martin Peretz, via his influence at The New Republic; former Secretary of State Antony Blinken; former Ambassador to the United Nations and Administrator of USAID Samantha Power; former vice chair of Fannie Mae during the crucial years of 1997 to 2003 Jamie Gorelick; former Vice President Al Gore; Larry Summers, as Treasury Secretary and then Director of the National Economic Council; current U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer; former White House official and editor William Kristol; former United States Special Representative for Ukraine's Economic Recovery Penny Pritzker; Meta founder Mark Zuckerberg; and Jared Kushner.

At the feet of these players and their networks can be laid the bipartisan support for the War on Drugs and Crime of the 1990s; the subprime mortgage crisis of predatory lending and the 2008 financial collapse; interventions in Iraq and Libya and the “War on Terror” of the 2000s and 2010s; the war in Ukraine and the genocide in Palestine; the “raze-and-rebuild” of Gaza; and the rise and perfection of artificial intelligence which threatens to make, via brain implants, human computers of us all.

All of this is the collateral damage of the materialist-colonialist “Enlightenment” empire: the “rape” or “plunder” or “extraction” of lands and peoples for resources and profit. It’s damage accumulated by operators educated for the task and justified intellectually by the networks which educated them. Indeed, it is not a coincidence that the colonial objectification and devaluation of women, people of color, working class whites, and non-Jews that characterized both Epstein’s emails and American policy of the period was pushed more “respectably” from powerful media venues like William Kristol’s Weekly Standard and Martin Peretz’s New Republic. This “respectable pushing” amounted to the engineered debasing of groups which did not share the belief in top-down rule by a narrow elite. Its tactics ranged from animalizing black criminals into “super-predators” to geneticizing as inferiorly intelligent those groups (blacks, Latinos) at the blunt end of America’s military corporate complex, to labeling as psychologically warped (or “narrowed” by “grievance”) those working-class whites who support constitutional populism.

The elite educational networks which produced these players and arguments should not, on the evidence, be governing anyone, but they do not hesitate to act to preserve their prerogatives when they perceive them to be under threat. Indeed, it was Steven Pinker along with Jeannie Suk Gersen and Jeffrey Flier, with support from Larry Summers, who contrived in 2023 to indirectly supplement pressure Bill Ackman was already applying for Harvard’s first black president, Claudine Gay, to resign over what Ackman saw as her insufficient crackdown on pro-Palestine protests with private (and so plausibly deniable) advice to the Harvard Corporation.

The Harvard Corporation’s leader, its “senior fellow,” is Penny Pritzker: the sister of Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker, whom Martin Peretz, according to his memoir, began “to look after” when Pritzker was a boarding school student in Massachusetts at Pritzker’s grandfather’s request. Penny Pritzker is also the cousin of Thomas Pritzker, an avid investor in Middle East “rebuilding” during the Iraq War and a regular correspondent of Epstein’s.  

The result of this concerted pressure by Pinker, Summers, and Ackman on Penny Pritzker was the resignation of Gay after only six months as Harvard president and her replacement by Alan Garber. Garber, a Jewish Zionist economist and a close if fitful ally of Summers, is currently working with Robert Kraft, the Jewish Zionist owner of the Patriots and a longtime ally of Peretz’s, on an artificial intelligence project for online tracking of what Kraft calls anti-Semitism, which he conflates with anti-Zionism. Under Garber, Harvard is also de-emphasizing engagement with politics and secretly investigating students who worked successfully to remove Lawrence Summers from the classroom, where he had remained teaching young women even after revelations of his emails with Epstein.

So the Jewish Zionists who assumed authority over Harvard and staffed Washington the past four decades are manning the ramparts in response to the exposure of their cohort’s under-the-table activities, activities which lead to policies which, as Halima Khan so accurately said, extend beyond Epstein and make unknowing victims, explicitly or implicitly, of us all. Now that we do know what these operators are striving to keep hidden, it is our responsibility, as opponents of empire, to begin the process of “putting things right” by subjecting these networks to exactly that unrelenting scrutiny their members most fear.