"Jewish people have put the interests of race over the interests of the American people... Jews are filled with more hatred and rage for our race, for our heritage, for our blood than perhaps you can imagine"

David Duke deploys a classic antisemitic trope of “dual loyalty,” casting Jews as an alien collective whose supposed group agenda conflicts with the nation’s interests. The frame relies on a false dichotomy: “the American people” versus Jews, as if Jews were not themselves Americans. That move both erases Jewish American identity and narrows “American” to a racialized in-group, implicitly white and Christian. By invoking “our race, our heritage, our blood,” he taps blood-and-soil rhetoric central to white supremacist ideology, transforming political disagreement into a biologized struggle for survival.

The claim that Jews are “filled with hatred and rage” is a sweeping essentialization of millions of people, imputing a unified, malevolent psychology to a diverse community. It functions as projection and dehumanization: attributing hostility to the out-group so that any animus from the in-group appears defensive or justified. The charge also invites conspiracy thinking, if a hidden, cohesive enemy hates “us,” then any social change or setback can be explained as sabotage, not as the product of complex forces or policy debates. The ellipsis and generalities leave room for listeners to insert whatever grievance they carry into the narrative.

Historically, this pattern of rhetoric, dual loyalty, blood rhetoric, vilification, has been used to rationalize exclusion, violence, and discriminatory policy, from quotas and nativist laws to pogroms and genocide. It rejects civic nationalism, where citizens share rights and obligations regardless of ancestry, in favor of an ethno-national project organized around imagined purity. Duke’s framing collapses pluralistic politics into zero-sum ethnoracial conflict, corrupting public discourse by recasting fellow citizens as implacable enemies. It is not an evidence-based claim about policy or behavior but a mobilizing myth designed to harden identities, polarize communities, and legitimate illiberal outcomes. Reading it critically reveals propaganda mechanics: inflate threat, erase complexity, moralize identity, and invite grievance to masquerade as patriotism.