This morning, the President of the United States posted on Truth Social that “a whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.” He has given Iran until 8 p.m. ET tonight to agree to reopen the Strait of Hormuz or he says he will order the destruction of every power plant and bridge in the country. On Easter Sunday, he posted “Open the Fuckin’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell.” That same night he posted anti-Somali immigrant content set to “Mad World,” ranted about the Supreme Court at 1 a.m., and endorsed a California gubernatorial candidate at 2 a.m. Today, at least 18 Iranian civilians including two young children have already been killed in U.S.-Israeli airstrikes. Civilians are forming human chains around power plants. The conflict is spilling into the UAE.

Even Marjorie Taylor Greene — one of Trump’s most loyal allies — posted “25TH AMENDMENT!!! We cannot kill an entire civilization. This is evil and madness.” Congress has not voted to authorize this war.

Meanwhile, in this same country, a parent can be fired for leaving work to pick up a sick child. No deliberation. No 25th Amendment. No extended deadlines. Just gone. The person with the most power in the world has the least accountability. The person with the least power faces immediate consequences for being human. Accountability in America flows downward. It always has.

To government leaders: You have hours. The 25th Amendment exists. The War Powers Act exists. Use them. Every hour of silence is a vote for what happens next. History will not record your discomfort. It will record your action or your absence.

To corporate America: You wanted Citizens United. You argued that corporations are people with political speech rights. You spent billions exercising those rights when it benefited your balance sheets. This is the other side of that bargain. You don’t get to be a person when it’s profitable and a bystander when it’s hard. Gas is at $4.11 and climbing. The Strait of Hormuz closure is threatening global supply chains. Your employees are scared. Your customers are scared. If you have the political speech rights of a person, you have the moral obligations of one. Use your lobbying infrastructure, your access, and your influence to demand Congress act today. And if you don’t want that obligation — if the cost of political personhood is too high when the stakes are real — then give it back. Support overturning Citizens United. You can’t have it both ways.

To every elected official at every level: Your constituents are watching. Not next week. Right now.

Call Congress: (202) 224-3121. Before 8 p.m.

-----

On Easter Sunday, I posted a simple question to a local Facebook group in Bemidji, Minnesota: Can local Lutherans explain Luther’s blatant antisemitism?

It wasn’t a trap. It wasn’t a provocation. I’m not Lutheran. I’d only recently learned the full scope of what Luther actually wrote about Jewish people, and I was genuinely rattled by it.

Martin Luther’s 1543 treatise *On the Jews and Their Lies* runs 65,000 words. It called for burning synagogues, seizing Jewish property, forcing Jews into manual labor, and abolishing their freedom of movement (Luther, 1543/1971). The prevailing scholarly view since the Second World War is that the treatise shaped Germany’s treatment of its Jewish citizens for centuries, from the Reformation straight through to the Holocaust (Kaufmann, 2017). The Nazis displayed copies at Nuremberg rallies. Julius Streicher cited Luther at his own war crimes tribunal. This isn’t contested history. It’s the stuff that introductory seminary courses cover on a Tuesday afternoon.

And it raised a question I couldn’t put down: If this is the person whose name is on your church, whose theological framework shapes your community’s moral reasoning, shouldn’t that be worth at least a conversation?

What I got back wasn’t a theological conversation. It was a taxonomy.

Within hours, the comment section produced a near-perfect cross-section of how antisemitic rhetoric circulates in small-town digital spaces in 2026: the full-bore conspiracy theorist invoking Rothschild banking cabals and “deep state” control; the delegitimizer calling Jewish people “fake” and declaring Israel’s non-existence; the intellectual relativist normalizing Luther’s hatred as the predictable output of all evangelical religion; and the whataboutist pulling the Vatican into a conversation that never asked about the Vatican.

And at least one of them might not be a person at all.

-----

The Bot in the Room

Let’s start with the most striking commenter: a user with an Icelandic-presenting name who produced a single, dense paragraph containing every major antisemitic trope catalogued by the Anti-Defamation League. Jewish control of education. Jewish control of banking. The Rothschilds. The “deep state.” A closing call to “take control of the narrative” and build “an America that truly deserves to thrive.” The comment reads less like something a person typed on their phone at Easter dinner and more like something pulled from a template library.

This matters because it might be exactly that. The numbers on bot activity are no longer theoretical. In 2024, automated bot traffic surpassed human activity online for the first time in a decade, accounting for 51% of all web traffic (Thales, 2025). Let that sit: more than half of what you’re encountering online isn’t a person. Facebook has acknowledged that roughly 827 million accounts on its platform are fake, representing 4-5% of its active user base, and security researchers think the true number is significantly higher now that AI can generate convincing personas at scale (FraudBlocker, 2025). The U.S. Department of Justice disrupted a confirmed Russian government-operated bot farm in July 2024 that used AI to create over 1,000 fake American profiles, each designed to spread disinformation while passing as your neighbor (NPR, 2024).

Bot farms don’t just operate at the geopolitical level. They seed content into the exact spaces where Americans process their economic frustrations: community Facebook groups, local subreddits, neighborhood apps. A 2024 Cyabra analysis of accounts spreading disinformation after the Trump assassination attempt found that 45% were bots, reaching a potential 595 million people (KARE 11, 2025). And in one particularly revealing case, bot-driven disinformation artificially inflated anti-DEI campaigns, manufacturing the perception of widespread public opposition and pressuring major U.S. companies to roll back diversity commitments entirely (NAFO Forum, 2025).

That last point should stop you cold. Bot farms aren’t just spreading hate. They’re reshaping workplace policy.

-----

The Oldest Economic Conspiracy Theory

Whether the Rothschild commenter in my thread was a bot or a bored human in Beltrami County, the content itself is part of a tradition so old it has its own historiography. The Rothschild conspiracy theory can be traced to an 1846 French pamphlet written under the pseudonym “Satan” (points for subtlety) that falsely alleged Nathan Rothschild had manipulated the London stock exchange after the Battle of Waterloo (Britannica, 2026). The pamphlet was a massive hit, selling tens of thousands of copies, and it established the template for every “Jews control the banks” conspiracy theory that followed (Rothschild, M., 2023). The original author literally called himself Satan, and people still believed it. That tells you something about the demand side of this market.

The pattern is consistent across centuries, and the research on why is uncomfortably clear: economic anxiety produces conspiracy theories, and conspiracy theories require scapegoats. When inequality rises, so does conspiratorial thinking. People who feel economically precarious are more likely to attribute their circumstances to the deliberate actions of groups they perceive as hostile (Casara et al., 2022; Zeng et al., 2024). This isn’t a personality flaw. It’s a structural response to a structural problem.

Antisemitism has always been the conspiracy theory that bridges economic resentment to ethnic scapegoating. As author Mike Rothschild (no relation to the banking family) told *TIME* in 2023, medieval prohibitions barred Christians from lending money at interest, so Jewish communities were pushed into finance and then punished for being there. The tropes that emerged from that arrangement have proven remarkably durable: Jewish people are simultaneously too wealthy and too clannish, too powerful and too secretive, controlling everything while belonging nowhere.

The commenter in my thread was running that exact playbook: “Jews are in control of almost every aspect of life in this country including education and the bank system, the Rothschilds.” This is not an original thought. It’s a script. And it doesn’t matter whether the person typing it is a troll farmer in St. Petersburg or a retired guy in Park Rapids. The economic function of the myth is the same.

-----

Why This Is a Workforce Story

Here’s where the Work, Dignified throughline gets sharp. Because antisemitism isn’t just a hate crime statistic. It’s a labor market distortion with a measurable price tag, and the receipts are piling up.

The ADL recorded 9,354 antisemitic incidents in the United States in 2024. That’s a 5% increase over 2023’s already record-breaking year and an 893% increase over the past decade, the highest level documented since ADL began tracking in 1979 (ADL, 2025). Those numbers are bad enough. But the workplace-specific data is what should keep HR departments up at night.

A field experiment published by the ADL in December 2024 found that Jewish American job seekers need to send 24% more applications than Western European applicants to receive the same number of positive responses. Israeli American applicants needed to send 39% more. The study sent 3,000 identical inquiries to job postings between May and October 2024, varying only the applicant’s name and background signals (ADL, 2024). This is not attitudinal data. This is a controlled experiment measuring hiring discrimination in real labor markets.

Inside the workplace, the climate data is worse than most people think. A 2024 Clal report found that one-third of Jewish employees feel unsafe being “openly Jewish” at work. 44% don’t feel supported by their employer to express their Jewish identity. 42% don’t trust their employer to handle incidents of antisemitism. In nonprofits, 48% had experienced Jewish stereotypes at work (JLens, 2025).

Meanwhile, the ADL’s 2024-2025 survey of Jewish Americans found that among those who experienced antisemitism in a workplace context, 58% did not report the incident. The top reason? 43% didn’t think anything would happen (ADL, 2025). Read that again. The majority of workers experiencing religious discrimination at work have concluded that the systems designed to protect them won’t.

When workers can’t be themselves at work, when they’re hiding religious identity to avoid harassment, when hiring discrimination adds a measurable tax to job searches, and when reporting mechanisms are so distrusted that the majority of incidents go unreported, that’s not a cultural sidebar. That’s a structural failure.

Think about what these numbers actually mean for an individual worker. You’re Jewish. You live in a community where the local Facebook group produces Rothschild conspiracy theories on Easter Sunday. You go to work on Monday. Your coworker shared that post. Your manager liked it. The HR department that’s supposed to protect you has never once mentioned antisemitism in a training. You need this job. You have rent. So you take off your Star of David, you stop mentioning your holidays, you don’t correct the “joke” about Jewish people and money, and you slowly, methodically make yourself invisible in your own workplace. That’s not a culture war talking point. That’s a worker losing the ability to function with dignity in a labor market that was supposed to protect them.

That hypothetical isn’t hypothetical. It’s happening at scale.

-----

What Workers Are Actually Saying

The data tells one story. The workers themselves tell a sharper one.

A 2024 Hadassah survey of over 800 Jewish women found that 52% reported hiding their Jewish identity out of fear. 62% reported feeling physically or psychologically unsafe. One respondent said she no longer feels safe wearing a Star of David necklace in downtown Chicago. Another said flatly that no one she works with on campus knows she’s Jewish (Hadassah, 2024).

A rabbi in Houston wrote in *TIME* that after 24 years of wearing a yarmulke in public, he recently started removing it in certain settings. Not because he’d been threatened. Because the wariness of how it would be received was enough. For the first time in his career, he needed a security escort to walk home from Yom Kippur services (Strauss, 2024).

In the UK, a Pearn Kandola workplace study found that Jewish employees felt compelled to downplay their identity after October 7, including by removing their Stars of David. A separate Board of Deputies survey at the end of 2024 found that 64% of Jewish employees had experienced antisemitism at least occasionally, with healthcare the most frequently cited sector, followed by education and publishing (Board of Deputies, 2025).

The corporate cases are just as instructive. At Amazon, employees posted pro-Hamas messages and defamatory statements about released Israeli hostages in company Slack channels. United Airlines suspended a pilot who called the perpetrators of the October 7 attacks “brave people.” At Alphabet, 28 employees were fired after staging ten-hour sit-in protests, including in the Google Cloud CEO’s office, to protest cloud computing contracts with the Israeli government. Whatever your position on that geopolitical question, the downstream effect on Jewish colleagues watching their coworkers celebrate an attack that killed 1,200 people isn’t a matter of opinion. It’s a hostile work environment (JLens, 2025).

Perhaps the most revealing case came from Human Rights Watch. Outgoing senior editor Danielle Hass sent an email to coworkers on October 16, 2023, speaking out about how the organization had “surrendered its duty to stand for human rights of all.” When she named her constellation of experiences to a senior manager as feeling like antisemitism, she later recounted, the manager replied that she was “probably right.” He didn’t ask anything further. He didn’t do anything further (JLens, 2025).

And then there’s the survey nobody quite knows what to do with.

In November 2022, ResumeBuilder.com surveyed 1,131 hiring managers and recruiters about antisemitism in hiring. 17% said leadership had told them not to hire Jewish applicants, with the highest rates in education (30%), entertainment (28%), and business (26%). One in four admitted to being less likely to move forward with Jewish applicants. 33% said antisemitism was common in their workplace. 29% said it was acceptable. The top reason given for bias against Jewish candidates? A belief in their “power and control” (ResumeBuilder, 2022). The same Rothschild tropes from my Facebook thread, sitting in hiring managers’ heads.

The *Forward*, a respected Jewish publication, investigated and found the data shaky. Their primary critique: roughly half of respondents reported earning under $50,000, and more than half were under 35, a demographic profile that “doesn’t match typical hiring manager demographics” (Rosenfeld, 2022). The American Jewish Committee called the findings “alarming if accurate” and requested a methodological review before deciding whether to alert the EEOC (AJC, 2022). ResumeBuilder itself later acknowledged limitations in its methodology and announced plans to re-run the survey with improved data collection (ResumeBuilder, 2022).

Here’s the thing, though. That critique carries a class bias worth examining.

The average retail store manager in the United States earns $47,574. The 25th percentile earns $36,000 (ZipRecruiter, 2026). Entry-level assistant managers at Dollar Tree, Dollar General, and Family Dollar earn roughly $14.55 an hour, or about $30,000 a year (PayScale, 2026). The average food manager salary is $37,654 (Zippia, 2025). Entry-level food service managers earn about $14.45 an hour (PayScale, 2026). The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the lowest 10% of food service managers earn under $42,380 (BLS, 2024).

These are people who make hiring decisions. The person who decides whether you get the job at Subway, Dollar General, a community health center, or a small nonprofit IS a hiring manager. They’re 28. They make $38,000. And according to BLS data, there are hundreds of thousands of them. The *Forward*‘s critique assumed “hiring manager” means a white-collar professional at a mid-to-large firm. It dismissed everyone who didn’t fit that profile as implausible. But the workers most likely to encounter antisemitism from a hiring manager making $40K at a retail chain are also the workers with the fewest protections, the least access to HR infrastructure, and the lowest likelihood of formal reporting mechanisms.

The ADL’s controlled field experiment confirmed the direction: a 24% penalty for Jewish-sounding names, 39% for Israeli (ADL, 2024). A *Socius* study of 11,356 workers found that more than half of Jewish respondents had experienced discrimination at work, a higher rate than any religious group except Muslims (Fortune, 2023). The ResumeBuilder survey’s methodology may be imperfect. But the critique of that methodology reveals something just as important: we’ve defined “hiring manager” so narrowly that we’ve rendered invisible the very labor markets where discrimination does the most damage.

These aren’t edge cases. They’re the documented center of a labor market that has quietly accepted antisemitism as a cost of doing business. And the workers paying that cost are making rational calculations every single day about whether they can afford to be visibly Jewish at work, or whether the paycheck requires them to disappear.

-----

The Tropes Follow You to Work

The ResumeBuilder survey asked hiring managers *why* they discriminated against Jewish applicants. The answers weren’t original. They were medieval economic conspiracy theories in business casual: “too much power and control” (38%), “claim to be the chosen people” (38%), “too much wealth” (35%). When asked how they identified candidates as Jewish, some wrote in answers the checkboxes were too polite to include: “voice,” “mannerisms,” and “they are very frugal” (ResumeBuilder, 2022). That last one is a trope so old it predates the printing press.

These are the same tropes that showed up in my Easter Sunday comment section. “Jews are in control of almost every aspect of life in this country including education and the bank system, the Rothschilds.” The comment section and the hiring pipeline are running the same script. The conspiracy theory doesn’t stay in the Facebook group. It follows workers to the job interview, sits across from them at the hiring desk, and decides whether they get a callback.

What makes the industry breakdown so striking is that each sector maps onto a specific trope ecosystem. And each one has the receipts to match.

Education had the highest rate of hiring managers told by leadership not to hire Jews (30%). This isn’t occurring in a vacuum. Since October 7, 2023, the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights has opened over 100 investigations into antisemitism complaints under Title VI (U.S. Department of Education, 2024). The ADL recorded 1,694 antisemitic incidents on college campuses in 2024, an 84% increase over 2023 (ADL, 2025). The House Education and Workforce Committee launched a nationwide investigation into K-12 antisemitism in late 2025 (House Education and Workforce Committee, 2025). Universities aren’t just where students encounter hate. They’re massive employers. Every adjunct, staff member, custodian, and administrator navigating an antisemitic campus climate is a worker experiencing a hostile work environment.

Entertainment reported that 40% of hiring managers were less likely to move forward with Jewish candidates, and 28% said leadership told them not to hire Jews. The ADL launched a Media and Entertainment Institute in 2023 because, as MRC co-founder Modi Wiczyk told *Variety*, “The entertainment industry was once known as a safe harbor for Jews. That is no longer true. There’s been an alarming rise in antisemitism within our professional ranks, industry organizations and in our art forms” (Variety, 2023). In 2024, the Academy Museum’s own exhibit on Hollywood’s Jewish founders used language like “oppressive,” “controlling,” “frugal,” and “nepotism” to describe them. The institution built to celebrate Hollywood’s history couldn’t describe its Jewish founders without reaching for antisemitic tropes. An Israeli-American director on the museum’s inclusivity committee resigned in protest (LA Magazine, 2024). When the museum can’t get it right, the hiring managers downstream don’t stand a chance.

Business and finance reported that 38% of hiring managers in finance said their industry should have fewer Jews. The top reason for bias across all sectors, “too much power and control,” is the Rothschild conspiracy theory with a LinkedIn profile. This is where the oldest economic scapegoat meets the modern labor market, and the throughline from a 16th-century Lutheran treatise to a 2022 survey of American hiring managers becomes impossible to ignore.

The commenter in my Facebook thread who invoked Jewish control of banking and education wasn’t offering a fringe opinion. They were articulating the same beliefs that, according to this data, sit inside the heads of people who make hiring decisions in the American economy. Whether those beliefs arrived via a bot farm, a family dinner conversation, or a 500-year-old theological tradition, the labor market outcome is the same: Jewish workers pay a tax for existing.

-----

How They Know, and What They Do With It

There’s a question underneath all of this that deserves its own reckoning: How do hiring managers decide someone is Jewish in the first place?

The ResumeBuilder survey asked directly. Only 56% said the applicant told them. The rest were inferring. 35% assumed based on educational background, such as attendance at a Jewish school. 33% assumed based on last name. 28% flagged past experience with Jewish organizations. 26% made the call based on appearance. And then there were the write-in responses, the ones that reveal what the checkboxes were too polite to say: “voice,” “mannerisms,” and “they are very frugal” (ResumeBuilder, 2022).

The ADL experiment was designed to test exactly this mechanism. The resumes didn’t just change names. They changed context signals: Rebecca Cohen worked at a Jewish deli and majored in Jewish literature; Kristen Miller worked at an Italian restaurant and volunteered with an Irish American sports association. The Jewish and Israeli signals produced a measurable penalty at first contact, before anyone ever sat across a desk from the applicant (ADL, 2024).

And in at least one documented case, it went beyond inference. A federal court in Louisiana ruled that a college president denied a football coaching candidate a position based on what he called the applicant’s “Jewish blood.” The candidate, Bonadona, had even converted to Christianity. His birth mother was Jewish, and that was enough. The court ruled that Title VII could protect Jews not only as a religious group but as a racial one, recognizing that antisemitism “is often rooted in prejudice against a person based on his heritage/ethnicity without regard to the person’s particular religious beliefs” (Davis Wright Tremaine, 2022).

That’s identification without any visible markers at all. No Star of David. No kippah. No last name. Blood.

But identification is one thing. What happens after identification is another. And the answer, in at least one documented case, is a list.

At UCLA, Cultural Affairs Commissioner Alicia Verdugo texted her subordinates during the fall 2024 hiring cycle: “PSA lots of zionists are applying. Please do your research when you look at applicants and I will also share a doc of no hire list during retreat” (Ha’Am, 2024). That’s a written directive to identify and exclude Jewish applicants, distributed to staff, with an accompanying blacklist document. At a public university funded by taxpayer dollars.

The complaint filed with UCLA’s judicial board documented the result: every student who mentioned their Jewish identity in their application was rejected. None of the students accepted to the Cultural Affairs Commission during fall 2024 had discussed Judaism in their applications. Students who identified as Jewish without mentioning Israel, without referencing the war in Gaza, without expressing any political opinion whatsoever, were filtered out (Ha’Am, 2024).

The commission’s own written hiring policy listed Zionism as a fireable offense alongside white supremacy, homophobia, and transphobia. Antisemitism was not on the list (Jerusalem Post, 2024).

Verdugo resigned in February 2025, two days before she was scheduled to face a judicial board hearing on the discrimination allegations (Daily Bruin, 2025). In February 2026, the Trump administration sued UCLA for creating an “antisemitic hostile work environment,” with federal prosecutors citing the no-hire list evidence in their complaint (Free Beacon, 2026).

This isn’t a case study from the 1940s. This happened at a major American public university in the fall of 2024, inside an institution that employs thousands and trains hundreds of thousands more for the workforce. And it worked exactly the way discriminatory hiring has always worked: identify, classify, exclude, document nothing except the quiet absence of the people who were supposed to be there.

The workers who changed their names on delivery apps understood this. The rabbi who pocketed his yarmulke at the cafe understood it. The 52% of Jewish women who reported hiding their identity understood it. They weren’t being paranoid. They were reading the system correctly.

-----

The Normalizer Is More Dangerous Than the Bot

Back to the comment section. The commenter who worries me most isn’t the one spouting Rothschild conspiracy theories. It’s the one who called Luther’s escalating antisemitism “a normal progression of any cult” and concluded, with apparent sophistication, that “religion is a dangerous thing.”

This is the normalization move. It takes a specific, documented historical atrocity (Luther’s treatise was displayed at Nuremberg rallies; a Lutheran bishop published a pamphlet two weeks after Kristallnacht celebrating the burning of synagogues as the fulfillment of Luther’s vision) and diffuses it into a vague critique of “all evangelical religions.” It makes the specific generic. It makes the historical inevitable. And it lets everyone in the conversation off the hook.

The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America publicly rejected Luther’s antisemitic writings in 1994, calling them a source of “pain” and acknowledging they had been weaponized by neo-Nazi and antisemitic groups (ELCA, 1994). In 1998, the Lutheran Church of Bavaria stated explicitly that the church must “take seriously also [Luther’s] anti-Jewish utterances, acknowledge their theological function, and reflect on their consequences.” These institutional reckonings didn’t happen because Luther’s antisemitism was “normal.” They happened because it was exceptional enough to require formal repudiation.

The normalization commenter performs a different kind of labor market damage than the conspiracy theorist. Where the conspiracy theorist seeds explicit hostility, the normalizer creates permission structures. If Luther’s antisemitism was just standard religious behavior, then the antisemitism in your workplace Slack channel is probably just standard disagreement. If “religion is a dangerous thing” explains everything, then nothing requires a specific institutional response.

This is how hostile work environments are built: not through a single dramatic act, but through the steady accumulation of tolerance for rhetoric that should have been challenged on contact.

-----

Who Gets to Define the Workspace?

The digital commons where this conversation happened isn’t just social infrastructure. It’s an informal labor market. People use community Facebook groups to find jobs, recommend contractors, announce business openings, and build the social networks that economists call “weak ties,” still the single most important predictor of employment outcomes (Granovetter, 1973; Rajkumar et al., 2022).

When those spaces are saturated with conspiracy theories, the cost isn’t abstract. Workers who belong to targeted groups face a calculation every time they open the app: Do I engage? Do I correct the record? Do I quietly unsubscribe from the group where I found out about the job opening at the clinic?

Bot farms exploit exactly this dynamic. AI-driven bots create what CSIS called “the illusion of consensus,” making extreme positions appear more popular than they are, pushing genuine conversations to the margins (CSIS, 2024). When a small-town Facebook group appears to harbor significant antisemitic sentiment, the effect on Jewish residents isn’t theoretical. It’s a signal about workplace safety, community belonging, and whether this is a place where they can build a career.

The Brookings Institution’s Workforce of the Future initiative put it plainly in its 2025 year-end assessment: “Failing to manage transitions, technological, demographic, economic, is costly. It erodes trust, fuels populism, and pits workers against one another” (Brookings, 2026). The task, Brookings argued, is to “replace scapegoating with policy equal to the moment.”

-----

What Actually Happened

I asked a question about a historical figure’s documented bigotry. The comment section produced a conspiracy theorist who may or may not be a real person, a delegitimizer who called Jewish people “fake,” an intellectual relativist who normalized 500 years of targeted hatred as an unremarkable feature of religion generally, and a whataboutist who changed the subject entirely.

None of them answered my question.

And that, in a sentence, is how antisemitism functions as an economic weapon: it redirects every conversation away from structural analysis and toward scapegoating. Legitimate economic frustration gets attached to the oldest ethnic scapegoat in Western history. The labor market consequences are real and measurable: hiring discrimination, workplace hostility, suppressed reporting, and the quiet withdrawal of targeted workers from the community spaces that feed employment pipelines. The economy doesn’t have a Jewish problem. It has a structural inequality problem. And the people, or bots, in your comment section who keep pointing you toward the Rothschilds are making sure you never look at the actual numbers.

Nobody answered my question on Easter Sunday. But the responses told me something more important than any theological explanation could have. The rhetorical architecture Luther built in 1543, the scapegoating, the conspiracy thinking, the economic mythology, is still structurally intact. It’s in the comment sections. It’s in the workplace Slack channels. It’s possibly being amplified by machines designed to make you believe your neighbor agrees with it.

If your community’s moral framework was authored by a man who called for the burning of synagogues, the seizure of Jewish property, and the forced labor of Jewish people, that framework deserves scrutiny. Not cancellation. Scrutiny. The Lutheran churches that publicly repudiated those writings understood this. The question is whether the rest of us are willing to do the same work in our own communities, our own workplaces, and our own comment sections.

Because the workers who are paying the price for that silence? They don’t have the luxury of treating this as ancient history.

-----

*Tiffany M. Ryan, MA, is a workforce development practitioner and researcher. Work, Dignified examines structural barriers in labor market systems through an intersectional human rights lens.*

-----

Sources

American Jewish Committee. (2022, November 29). American Jewish Committee seeks clarifications of ResumeBuilder workplace antisemitism survey. https://www.ajc.org/news/american-jewish-committee-seeks-clarifications-of-resumebuilder-workplace-antisemitism-survey

Anti-Defamation League. (2024, December 17). Jewish and Israeli Americans face discrimination in the job market. https://www.adl.org/resources/report/jewish-and-israeli-americans-face-discrimination-job-market

Anti-Defamation League. (2025, April 22). Antisemitic incident data breaks all previous annual records in 2024 for the fourth year in a row [Press release]. https://www.adl.org/resources/press-release/antisemitic-incident-data-breaks-all-previous-annual-records-2024-fourth

Anti-Defamation League. (2025). Portrait of antisemitic experiences in the U.S., 2024-2025. https://www.adl.org/resources/report/portrait-antisemitic-experiences-us-2024-2025

Babchuck, E., & Leeman, R. (2025, January). Jewish at Work 2024. Clal - The National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership. https://www.jewishatwork.com/report-findings

Board of Deputies of British Jews, Jewish Leadership Council, & Work Avenue. (2025, April 3). Workplace Antisemitism Survey. https://bod.org.uk/bod-news/new-survey-finds-nearly-two-thirds-of-jewish-employees-have-encountered-antisemitism-in-the-workplace/

Brookings Institution. (2026, January 7). A look back at 2025 — and what’s in store for 2026 — from the Global Economy and Development program. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/a-look-back-at-2025-and-whats-in-store-for-2026-from-the-global-economy-and-development-program/

Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2024). Food service managers: Occupational outlook handbook. U.S. Department of Labor. https://www.bls.gov/ooh/management/food-service-managers.htm

Casara, B. G. S., Suitner, C., & Jetten, J. (2022). The impact of economic inequality on conspiracy beliefs. *Journal of Experimental Social Psychology*, 98, 104245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104245

Center for Strategic and International Studies. (2024, October 11). A Russian bot farm used AI to lie to Americans. What now? https://www.csis.org/analysis/russian-bot-farm-used-ai-lie-americans-what-now

Daily Bruin. (2025, February 5). USAC Cultural Affairs commissioner resigns amid antisemitism allegations. https://dailybruin.com/2025/02/05/usac-cultural-affairs-commissioner-resigns-amid-antisemitism-allegations

Davis Wright Tremaine. (2022, December). Being a light in a time of darkness: How employers may combat workplace antisemitism. https://www.dwt.com/blogs/employment-labor-and-benefits/2022/12/antisemitism-workplace-jewish-employees

Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. (1994). Declaration of the ELCA to the Jewish community.

Fortune. (2023, January 11). Almost 25% of American hiring managers don’t want to advance Jewish people in hiring processes, alarming survey on workplace antisemitism finds. https://fortune.com/2023/01/11/hiring-jewish-people-antisemitism-workplace-study/

Free Beacon. (2026, February 25). Trump admin sues UCLA for creating ‘antisemitic hostile work environment.’ https://freebeacon.com/campus/trump-admin-sues-ucla-for-creating-antisemitic-hostile-work-environment/

FraudBlocker. (2025). Facebook spam bots: How to get rid of annoying bots. https://fraudblocker.com/articles/facebook-spam-bots-how-to-get-rid-of-annoying-bots-2

Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. *American Journal of Sociology*, 78(6), 1360-1380.

Hadassah, The Women’s Zionist Organization of America. (2024, December 10). From fear to resilience: Women facing antisemitism [Report]. https://www.hadassah.org/press-release/hadassah-report-shows-antisemitism-affects-everyday-life-for-two-thirds-of-jewish-women-surveyed

Ha’Am. (2024, November 27). Evidence suggests Jewish students denied from Cultural Affairs, judicial board petition claims. https://haam.org/evidence-suggests-jewish-students-denied-from-cultural-affairs-judicial-board-petition-claims/

House Committee on Education and the Workforce. (2025, November 24). Chair Walberg launches nationwide investigation into antisemitism in K-12 schools [Press release]. https://edworkforce.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=412833

Hudson, M. (2026, March 4). Where do antisemitic conspiracy theories about the Rothschild family come from? *Encyclopædia Britannica*. https://www.britannica.com/story/where-do-anti-semitic-conspiracy-theories-about-the-rothschild-family-come-from

Jerusalem Post. (2024, December 4). UCLA student group accused of hiring discrimination against Jews. https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/article-831990

JLens. (2025, June 5). Jewish employee challenges in a post-October 7 workplace. https://www.jlensnetwork.org/jewish-employee-challenges-in-a-post-october-7-workplace/

KARE 11. (2025, May 14). Bad bots on the rise: What we found on our own social media accounts. https://www.kare11.com/article/news/local/kare11-extras/to-catch-a-bot-social-medias-growing-problem-with-aritificial-intelligence/89-d2dcdcb9-59cd-4300-9d2e-ae1aefe3a7ce

Kaufmann, T. (2017). *Luther’s Jews: A journey into antisemitism*. Oxford University Press.

Luther, M. (1971). On the Jews and their lies. In H. T. Lehmann (Ed.) & M. H. Bertram (Trans.), *Martin Luther’s works* (Vol. 47). Fortress Press. (Original work published 1543)

NAFO Forum. (2025, March 10). From click farms to AI empires: The rise of bot armies and the war for digital influence. https://nafoforum.org/magazine/from-click-farms-to-ai-empires-the-rise-of-bot-armies-and-the-war-for-digital-influence

National Public Radio. (2024, July 9). U.S. says Russian bot farm used AI to impersonate Americans. https://www.npr.org/2024/07/09/g-s1-9010/russia-bot-farm-ai-disinformation

PayScale. (2026). Food service manager hourly pay. https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Food_Service_Manager/Salary

PayScale. (2026). Retail store assistant manager hourly pay. https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Retail_Store_Assistant_Manager/Hourly_Rate

Rajkumar, K., Saint-Jacques, G., Bojinov, I., Brynjolfsson, E., & Aral, S. (2022). A causal test of the strength of weak ties. *Science*, 377(6612), 1304-1310.

ResumeBuilder. (2022, November 18). 1 in 4 hiring managers say they are less likely to move forward with Jewish applicants. https://www.resumebuilder.com/1-in-4-hiring-managers-say-they-are-less-likely-to-move-forward-with-jewish-applicants/

Rosenfeld, A. (2022, November 29). ‘Shocking’ survey about antisemitic hiring based on shaky data. *The Forward*. https://forward.com/news/526202/resume-builder-antisemitic-hiring-manager-survey/

Rothschild, M. (2023). *Jewish space lasers: The Rothschilds and 200 years of conspiracy theories*. Melville House.

Saval, M. (2024, June 4). Hiding in plain sight: How the Academy Museum relegated Hollywood’s Jewish founders to the ghetto. *Los Angeles Magazine*. https://lamag.com/film/academy-museum-hollywoodland-exhibit-fails-jews-ghetto/

Strauss, B. (2024, November 18). Expressing my Jewish identity should not feel so risky. *TIME*. https://time.com/7176312/jewish-identity-symbols-antisemitism/

Thales. (2025). *2025 Imperva bad bot report*. https://www.thalesgroup.com

U.S. Department of Education. (2024, May 3). Letter from Secretary Cardona regarding antisemitism on college campuses. https://www.ed.gov/laws-and-policy/education-policy/key-policy-letters-signed-by-the-education-secretary-or-deputy-secretary/050324-letter

Variety. (2023, September 12). ADL launches Media and Entertainment Institute to engage Hollywood insiders on antisemitism. https://variety.com/2023/biz/news/adl-antisemitism-entertainment-institute-greenblatt-1235720529/

Zeng, Z.-X., Tian, C.-Y., Mao, J.-Y., van Prooijen, J.-W., Zhang, Y., Yang, S.-L., Xie, X.-N., & Guo, Y.-Y. (2024). How does economic inequality shape conspiracy theories? Empirical evidence from China. *British Journal of Social Psychology*, 63(2), 477-498. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12689

Zippia. (2025). Food manager job outlook and growth in the US. https://www.zippia.com/food-manager-jobs/trends/

ZipRecruiter. (2026). Retail store manager salary. https://www.ziprecruiter.com/Salaries/Retail-Store-Manager-Salary

-----

## AI Research Assistance Disclosure

Research assistance for this article was provided by Claude (Anthropic, 2026), an AI language model, which was used for source identification, citation verification, data synthesis, and structural analysis. All editorial decisions, arguments, and conclusions are the author’s own. Web-based sources were accessed and verified during the drafting process on April 5, 2026.

**Anthropic. (2026). Claude [Large language model]. https://www.anthropic.com**

TL;DR + Action Items

For the people who need the point before they’ll read the proof. Full analysis follows.

The 30-second version

In 2008, xenophobic violence killed 62 people and displaced over 100,000 in South Africa. Researchers spent months figuring out why. What they found: the government created the economic crisis, then politicians pointed at immigrants and said they did it. It worked. Poor people attacked their neighbors instead of the system that made them poor.

I’ve carried that research in my briefcase since college. It took me this long to realize it wasn’t about South Africa. It was about us.

The same playbook has been running in the United States for 20 years. The Sensenbrenner Bill. The Minutemen. Arizona SB 1070. Trump’s escalator. The Muslim ban. Family separation. El Paso. “Poisoning the blood.” Mass deportation.

The rhetoric escalated because nobody built the infrastructure to stop it. The full piece breaks down exactly how it happened, and what the research says to do about it.

7 things that could actually prevent the next El Paso, according to researchers who already studied this

1. The actual enemy isn’t who politicians say it is. Here’s the thing researchers found in South Africa: the single biggest predictor of whether a community joined the violence or resisted it? Whether people had a way to understand why they were poor. Not a vague sense of getting screwed. An actual framework. “Immigrants took your job” is the cover story. The private equity firm that bought your employer, loaded it with debt, extracted the value, and left is the truth. Communities that understood that didn’t pick up machetes.

2. Movements keep building alone. It keeps failing. In South Africa, organizations that operated in silos collapsed the second the immediate crisis ended. The ones that had pre-existing relationships across different issues adapted and survived. Immigration rights, labor, disability justice, racial justice, economic justice: these aren’t separate fights happening to overlap. They’re the same fight wearing different hats. They need shared infrastructure. Not showing up to each other’s rallies once a year. Actual shared walls.

3. Xenophobic violence is a disability issue. Almost nobody treats it like one. ICE detention creates and worsens disabilities. Immigration judges routinely fail to recognize how neurological and cognitive disabilities affect testimony. And 32% of the entire direct care workforce in the U.S. is made up of immigrants. So when politicians talk about mass deportation, they’re not just talking about immigration policy. They’re talking about disability policy. They just don’t call it that.

4. The U.S. has opted out of every major international accountability system. On purpose. South Africa joined the International Criminal Court. Ratified the Refugee Convention. Brought a genocide case against Israel at the ICJ. Not perfect, but it submitted to systems that create consequences for state violence. The U.S.? We won’t sign basically any of them: not the treaty that lets the world prosecute war crimes, not the one protecting children’s rights, not the ones on gender discrimination or economic rights. We built a system with no outside check on what the government does to immigrants, then act surprised by what the government does to immigrants.

5. The philanthropy model is broken in a way that matters here. The nonprofit sector can hand out blankets but can’t ask why people are out in the cold. Grants prevent advocacy. Reporting requirements eat capacity. Funding cycles reward compliance over critique. Here’s the part that should make you angry: immigrants in the 1890s built self-governing mutual aid societies funded by their own dues. Democratic. Self-sustaining. We replaced that with a professionalized system that kept the exclusion criteria and dropped the self-governance.

6. The systems we’ve built to help assume everyone’s neurotypical and able-bodied. They’re not. Try navigating an asylum claim with PTSD. Try sitting through an immigration hearing with sensory processing differences. Try following a 47-page legal form when you have a cognitive disability. Every system we’ve built to respond to xenophobic violence assumes a user who processes information in one specific way. When someone doesn’t fit that assumption, they don’t get accommodations. They get lost in the system. That’s not an edge case. That’s a design failure.

7. South Africa already had the conversation we keep avoiding. Fourteen researchers. Fourteen studies. Each one examining a different piece of what went wrong and what to build instead. That’s what South Africa produced after 2008. The United States has produced think pieces and social media threads. We need the equivalent of that report for our own crisis. Not after the next mass shooting. Not after the next El Paso. Now.

Still from Children of Men (Cuarón, 2006).

The full analysis

I’ve carried a paper in my briefcase for over a decade. The briefcase was a graduation gift from my grandmother, and the paper is a collection of executive summaries from researchers who studied what happened after xenophobic violence swept South Africa in May 2008. Sixty-two people killed. Over 100,000 displaced. Entire communities emptied out in weeks, their shops looted and homes burned behind them.

I kept it because something about it felt unfinished. Not the research; the researchers did their jobs. What felt unfinished was the warning. The findings described a set of conditions and political maneuvers so specific, so mechanistic, that I couldn’t shake the sense I was reading a preview of something that hadn’t happened yet. Not in South Africa. Here.

I was wrong about the timing. It had already been happening here for years. I just didn’t have the language for it yet.

Now I do.

Read more

The stated justification: Iran could not be trusted with nuclear weapons.

Here’s the question nobody is asking: which country should the world actually be more worried about?

The United States possesses approximately 5,500 nuclear warheads. Iran possesses zero. Iran had, the day before it was bombed, agreed to never stockpile enriched uranium and to accept full international verification. Oman’s Foreign Minister called it a “breakthrough.”

Then the bombs started falling.

I’ve spent 14 years building a governance measurement framework — the Governance-Based Performance Evaluation (GBPE) — that scores governments and corporations on 11 dimensions of accountability, from rule of law to civil rights to democratic processes. The same rubric. The same scale. Every entity measured the same way.

When I scored the Trump administration and Iran’s government side by side, the results were jarring:

Trump administration (March 2026): 0.9/10 Khamenei’s Iran (1989–2026): 1.4/10

The country with the nuclear arsenal scores lower on governance than the country it just attacked for hypothetically wanting one.

This isn’t just about one man

Let me be clear about something: when I say “the Trump administration scores 0.9/10,” I don’t mean Donald Trump acting alone.

This score reflects a governing apparatus — a collective machinery of authoritarian acceleration that no single person could operate. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth renamed the Pentagon the “Department of War” and blacklisted an American AI company for refusing to build autonomous weapons. Secretary of State Marco Rubio held secret talks with Cuba’s ruling family while publicly threatening regime change. Vice President Vance dismissed Cuban forces killing four people on a Florida speedboat as something he “hoped wasn’t serious.” Speaker Johnson said the administration “should not be forced” to refund $160 billion in illegally collected tariffs after the Supreme Court ruled them unconstitutional.

This is not a rogue president. This is an administration — cabinet members, agency heads, congressional allies — that has collectively decided that the Supreme Court can be defied, that Congress doesn’t need to authorize wars, that federal agents can kill US citizens without accountability, and that American companies can be designated national security threats for maintaining ethical standards.

The score of 0.9 belongs to all of them.

What the numbers actually show

The GBPE Framework scores every entity on 11 dimensions, each rated 0–10 for both domestic and global governance. Here’s how the Trump administration and Khamenei’s Iran compare on the dimensions most relevant to the nuclear question:

Rule of Law: Trump 1.0/0.5. Khamenei 1.5/2.0. The Trump administration has now circumvented two of three constitutional branches in a single month — defying the Supreme Court on tariffs and bypassing Congress to launch a war. Khamenei’s Iran, for all its theocratic constraints, at least maintained formal institutional structures that functioned within their own framework.

Democratic Processes: Trump 0.5/0.5. Khamenei 2.0/2.0. Iran’s elections are constrained by the Guardian Council, but they exist, and factional competition within them is real. The Trump administration launched a war during a congressional recess, notifying the Gang of Eight minutes before strikes began. No debate. No vote. No authorization. The Constitution assigns Congress — not the president — the power to declare war.

Foreign Policy: Trump N/A/0.0. Khamenei N/A/2.0. This is where it becomes inescapable. The Trump administration scored a zero — total governance failure — on foreign policy. Two wars of aggression in two months. A head of state assassinated. A girls’ school destroyed, killing 148 people including at least 85 children. Nuclear negotiations sabotaged after a diplomatic breakthrough. Khamenei’s proxy networks caused real harm — but they also functioned as deterrence, and Iran demonstrated consistent willingness to negotiate when offered genuine diplomacy.

The overall pattern: on global governance — the measure of how a government treats populations that cannot hold it electorally accountable — the Trump administration scores 0.6/10. Khamenei’s Iran scored 1.55/10.

The country that just launched a war to “protect the world” governs the world worse than the country it attacked.

Full GBPE scores here.

Read more

Read more

Rafiq Badran lost four children in a single airstrike on Bureij refugee camp. No bodies were recovered. No fragments. Just blood spray on the walls.

“Four of my children just evaporated. I looked for them a million times. Not a piece was left. Where did they go?”

Two investigations published in the last two weeks — one by Reuters, one by Al Jazeera — answer different parts of that question.

Reuters revealed that the Biden administration’s own ambassador to Israel blocked five USAID cables documenting Gaza as an “apocalyptic wasteland.” Political appointees considered the humanitarian reports insufficiently “balanced.”

Al Jazeera documented what the weapons the administration continued to supply actually did: 2,842 Palestinians whose bodies were vaporized by US-manufactured bombs generating temperatures exceeding 3,500°C. Not an estimate. A count.

I’ve rescored the Biden administration under the GBPE Framework’s 11-dimension governance methodology. The results place Biden’s Electoral Accountability Gap at +5.0 — Strong domestic governance. 6.9 out of 10 at home. 1.9 out of 10 for populations who couldn’t vote him out of office.

This is not a partisan analysis. It’s a 2,500-year pattern. And accountability benchmarks already exist — Indigenous governance systems have been achieving what modern democracies refuse to for centuries.

Read more

Read more

Read more

• This article focuses on ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), but under the Trump administration’s 2025-2026 policies, Border Patrol agents are also conducting interior enforcement operations in cities like Minneapolis, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Portland—far from any border. Border Patrol shot two people in Portland the same wee…

Read more

Nicole Daniels as Nonprofit Boss on TikTok.

In Part 1, I laid out the paralysis: a “low-hire, low-fire” market where everyone’s frozen, plus what government and employers need to change to build a labor market where people can actually choose their own adventure.

But there are two more players in this story. One is an entire sector sitting on $1.68 trillion while its workers can’t afford rent. The other is you.

Since Part 1, the numbers have gotten worse.

The Chronicle of Philanthropy is now tracking nonprofit layoffs—at least 22,000 jobs lost since January, likely closer to 40,000. One in three nonprofits serving communities lost government funding in the first half of 2025. Among those hit, 21% were already serving fewer people within months, and 29% had reduced staff. Candid estimates 2.8 million jobs are at risk if federal cuts continue.

Which makes the math I’m about to share even harder to stomach.

Read more

Read more

## A real-time case study in what happens when establishment endorsements meet grassroots fury—and the money follows the fury

By December 2025, Representative Jasmine Crockett had become one of the most recognizable Democrats in America. Her viral takedowns of Republicans—particularly her memorable “bleach blonde bad built butch body” clapback—had made her a fundraising juggernaut and social media sensation. She’d raised $3.8 million in six months, making her the fifth-best fundraiser among House Democrats. When she announced her Texas Senate run, conventional wisdom said she’d cleared the Democratic primary field.

Then something unexpected happened. State Representative James Talarico, a 35-year-old Presbyterian seminarian from Austin, raised $6.2 million in his first three weeks as a candidate. That’s $295,000 per day—fourteen times faster than Crockett’s pace—almost entirely from small-dollar donors giving $5, $10, or $15 at a time.

The question wasn’t just how Talarico did it. It was why Crockett—with all her celebrity, all her name recognition, all her viral moments—couldn’t.

The answer reveals something fundamental about the fracturing Democratic coalition, the limits of performative politics, and what happens when you try to satisfy both party establishment and party voters on the one issue where they fundamentally disagree: Gaza.

Read more

Between 70% and 87% of AI projects fail to reach production—with over 80% of AI projects failing overall, twice the failure rate of traditional IT projects—with poor data quality identified as the primary culprit. According to the 2024 Wavestone Data and AI Leadership Executive Survey (formerly NewV…

Read more

Read more

An Interview with Claude, Anthropic AI as a Political Analyst

By Tiff Ryan, Adult Education Correspondent

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZP8AGduut/

-----

**TIFF RYAN:** Thanks for sitting down with me today. Let’s start simple. What are the “No Kings” protests actually about?

**CLAUDE, AI ANALYST FROM ANTHROPIC:** It’s right there in the name. Millions of American…

Read more

This report examines wealth and income inequality in the United States through multiple interconnected lenses: the concentration of wealth among the top 1%, effective tax rates versus statutory rates, racial wealth disparities rooted in historical injustice, disability-related barriers to wealth accumulation, healthcare access inequitie…

Read more

This analysis examines documented instances of US corporate involvement in supply chains that facilitated war crimes and crimes against humanity by Myanmar’s military junta between 2021-2022, during the Biden administration. While the United States is not party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), this investigation rev…

Read more

On September 8, 2024, the Ethical AI Alliance hosted a crucial webinar bringing together experts from technology, humanitarian, and legal sectors to address the growing gap between AI ethics rhetoric and real-world harms. The discussion, …

Read more

I’d like a concise bulleted list of all states that have not ratified, signed, or pulled out of the Rome Statute AND have also committed crimes that the court would try.

Compare their % of ICC related crimes to countries who have signed and/or signed and ratified and are still party. I’d like a concise comparison, less than 1 sentence.

Thank you. Can …

Read more