Although antisemitism has been an ever-present scourge for centuries, it has seen a sinister and widespread modern resurgence during the last few years.

One of the most sickening and obvious examples in recent memory took place on the morning of October 27, 2018 — the Holy Day of Sabbath for the Jewish people. Robert Bowers screamed “All Jews must die,” as he began shooting at the gathered congregation praying at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

He killed eleven people, wounding six others, with an assault rifle and multiple handguns. The names of who were killed are: Irving Younger, Sylvan Simon, Jerry Rabinowitz, Joyce Fienberg, Daniel Stein, Melvin Wax, Rose Mallinger, Bernice Simon, Richard Gottfried, Cecil Rosenthal and David Rosenthal. It was the deadliest attack ever on the Jewish community in the U.S.

So what has brought about this fresh wave of hatred? Deeper still, what has given these malevolent beliefs the encouragement to become murderous action?


The US Department of State defines antisemitism as “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.” adding that in modern times it has been used by “making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.”

The old anti-Semitic trope of Jews running the media is one small example of what has been absorbed by the culture and turned into an easy punchline, however, these reprehensible but seemingly benign elements have become part of a larger undercurrent of dangerously misguided common belief in the United States and beyond.

Even during the most recent Senate election in Georgia, Republican David Perdue released an attack ad on Jon Ossoff, who is Jewish, that purposefully made his nose larger and more pronounced. This is an obvious reference to an ancient anti-semitic trope.

These are specific instances, but there is a deep ocean of accepted hatred that runs underneath the everyday.

Looking to the cult of mass-delusion that is Q-Anon, we can clearly see parallels between the beliefs its followers cling to, and an anti-Semitic hoax that began in Russia during 1903.

“The Protocols of the Meetings of the Learned Elders of Zion” is a fabricated antisemitic text claiming to reveal a Jewish plan for global supremacy.

It alleges that a shadowy cabal is plotting to take over the world. Alongside global domination, they seek out and kidnap children in order to torture, kill and eat them. By doing this, they gain power from the contents of the children’s blood. They also control influential seats in government, the media, international finance and religious institutions. They promote homosexuality, pedophilia and a degradation of traditional values — all while crippling the white race through interracial breeding in order to weaken their power in the nation.

That description could easily have been a “drop” from the elusive figure known only as “Q”. As such, Q-Anon is simply a grotesque rebrand of “The Protocols of the Meetings of the Learned Elders of Zion” for the 21st century.

Long after its publication, the text was used by anti-semites globally to reinforce their prejudices and to darken the hearts of their followers. Henry Ford himself paid for 500,000 copies to be printed in the United States during the 1920’s, and the text was distributed widely throughout Europe — being especially popular in 1930’s Germany leading to a population that believed all Jews were involved in a plot to take control of their nation.

Now in 2020, Q’s followers in the United States are legion, and their radicalization primarily takes place not in a foreign desert, but on Facebook.

An entirely separate article would be required to properly outline the sheer amount of damage that Mark Zuckerberg and his morally bankrupt company have wrought on the psyche of the American people, but for now it is enough to say that, despite a deluge of evidence that Q-Anon and other hate groups were organizing on their platform, the social media giant was not only slow to action, but actively encouraged these members activities in order to increase user engagement.

We have only just begun to see the consequences of a future where hatred and technology are bedfellows for profit.

Q-Anon’s growth on Facebook is not an aberration, as the platform has sheltered and provided covering fire for multiple other groups.

Leading up to the 2016 election these groups were gaining confidence and after the election of Donald Trump their movements became unbridled. Following the 2016 result, the ADL released its annual 2017 Audit of Antisemitic Incidents. The report found that “the number of reported antisemitic incidents in the U.S. rose 57% in 2017, the largest single-year increase on record and the second highest number reported since ADL started tracking such data in 1979. There was a total of 1,986 incidents, which fall into three major categories: harassment, vandalism and assault.”

One of the primary groups to rear its ugly head was another uniquely Trumpian collective – The Proud Boys. The Proud boys, the far-right group that President Donald Trump told to “stand back and stand by” during a presidential debate, share many of the views outlined in The Protocols of the Meetings of the Learned Elders of Zion” and Q-Anon.

Founded in 2016 by Gavin McInnes, a far-right personality and co-founder of Vice media, the group originated as a “chauvinist” organization that believed “Western” values were being degraded by multiculturalism. Despite their overtly xenophobic and mysoginistic views, the group maintained that although it was advocating for western ideals, it was not against Jews. This claim was dubious at the time, and has only become more absurd as the group has moved more prominently into the national conversation.

The founder of a “tactical defense arm” of the Proud Boys, Kyle Chapman, said in a message on the encrypted app Telegram that he has staged a “coup” against Enrique Tarrio, the current leader of the Proud Boys.

“We will confront the Zionist criminals who wish to destroy our civilization,” Chapman wrote, “We recognize that the West was built by the White Race alone and we owe nothing to any other race.”

This all took place as The Proud Boys were preparing to flood the streets in order to protest Donald Trumps claims that the 2020 election is not legitimate.

As anti-semitism invades online discourse and bleeds into the streets, the larger danger is that it is now part of a political parties belief system.

The outgoing president has pathologically let loose racist dog-whistles targeting the black community, but he has also repeatedly found opportunities to incorporate antisemitic tropes into his rallies and oration.

Trump suggested that George Soros paid for protests against the confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

He also said that Soros was responsible for the arrival of a caravan of Central American migrants at the US border.

After the rally in Charlottesville, Virginia where groups marched through the streets screaming “Jews will not replace us”, Trump said there were “very fine people on both sides”.

He claimed that American Jews who vote Democratic were guilty of “disloyalty” to the country. For reference, Trump has constantly referred to Israel as “your country” when speaking with American Jews – an obvious accusation of dual loyalty, a recurring anti-semitic trope.

While it remains to be seen what will happen to these hate groups that have been spurred on by the highest office in the land, there s no doubt that anti-semitism is not an evil relegated to the pages of distant history.

It is here, now, and has been emboldened by a criminal, racist, xenophobic, sexist, incompetent authoritarian who only has one goal – to incite national division while he finishes the ultimate grift.

  • Woman documents her nephew’s late night culinary quests as the viral ‘Midnight Chef’
    Photo credit: @midnightchef_amir on InstagramAmir Jackson's late night cooking is going viral.
    ,

    Woman documents her nephew’s late night culinary quests as the viral ‘Midnight Chef’

    A 15-year-old cooking late night snacks is inspiring the Internet.

    One night in Apple Valley, California, Morgan Graham rose in the middle of the night. A smell had woken her up. It was pleasant, but at 11:28 p.m. she wasn’t expecting to smell delicious cooking. She went down into the kitchen to see her 15-year-old nephew, Amir Jackson, baking cookies.

    This was the first of several viral videos of Graham’s nephew cooking up a storm late at night. Jackson, who has been staying with his aunt during the summer, is taking advantage of her kitchen to whip up some sumptuous snacks.

    Birth of a Midnight Chef

    Nearly every night, Graham wakes up around midnight to the smell of cookies, cornbread, tacos, or whatever her nephew wants to prepare.

    “I don’t care,” said Graham in the initial video. “He’s very responsible. He’s not gonna burn the house down, so therefore, cook whatever you want.”

    Graham further explained in the video that Jackson looks at recipes daily. He also rummages through her pantry during the day to search for ingredients for his nightly cooking fest. 

    “In his world, he’s having the time of his life. In my world, I just want to stop waking up close to midnight to the smell of food,” Graham joked.

    Graham’s videos featuring her nephew have racked up millions of views on TikTok and Instagram. The commenters soon bestowed the nickname “Midnight Chef” upon Jackson, to general delight. In another video, Jackson explained he liked the peace and quiet of the night while preparing his dishes.

    “I was like, ‘Man, I could go for some cookies right now.’ I saw they had cookie dough, so I started just making them, just randomly,” Jackson told TODAY. “I was trying to make sure nobody was up. My thought process was just like, ‘Man, why not?’”

    Graham is encouraging her nephew to keep cooking even though it wakes her. In fact, Graham set up Jackson’s own Midnight Chef Instagram page for him to post his latest recipes.

    “I just want to experiment while I still got the chance to experiment. I’ll maybe like branch into different fields,” said Jackson. “Explore what I can do while I still got time to.”

    Why do we indulge in late night snacking?

    Jackson’s popularity has brought up a commonly asked question: Why do we crave food randomly in the middle of the night?

    Well, there’s actually a bit of science behind it. Turns out that late night snacking is a result of our circadian rhythm system. As part of our now-defunct survival mechanism, our ancestors would eat large meals at night to store energy in times of famine. This is also why most midnight snackers crave foods higher in fat, salt, and sugar compared to what they’d usually eat during the day. While there’s nothing inherently wrong with late night snacking, it could curb certain health goals if a person is trying to trim down.

    If you find yourself getting up in the middle of the night with a hankering for a snack, it may be worth taking a peek at Jackson’s videos. Who knows what kind of late night cooking it can inspire? Perhaps you’ll become a Midnight Chef yourself.

  • European Union enforces ban on destroying unsold fast-fashion clothing by major companies
    Photo credit: CanvaThe European Union hopes to reduce fast-fashion waste.

    A new rule adopted by the European Union is intended to reduce landfill waste while holding major clothing manufacturers accountable.

    Starting July 19, the EU prohibits large companies from destroying unsold clothing, accessories, and shoes under the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR). The regulations will expand to cover medium-sized companies in 2030.

    Fast fashion has become a major environmental concern. As retailers rapidly cycle through trends, unsold clothing often ends up in landfills or is destroyed to make room for new inventory. Many garments are made from synthetic fibers that can release greenhouse gases as they break down and shed microplastics that may contaminate soil and waterways.

    What’s the ban’s purpose?

    The ban is intended to reduce the amount of unsold clothing that large manufacturers dispose of. According to the European Environment Agency, between 264,000 and 594,000 tonnes of unused textiles are destroyed across Europe each year.

    Instead of destroying unsold clothing, companies will need to find other ways to keep those products in use. That could mean selling excess inventory at a discount, donating it to charities or social enterprises, or preparing it for reuse through repair, refurbishment, or remanufacturing. When those options aren’t feasible, the materials can be recycled.

    While the regulation is primarily focused on reducing the fashion industry’s environmental impact, the EU also hopes it will strengthen the economy by encouraging more sustainable business practices. The ban incentivizes companies to design products that are more resource-efficient, durable, reusable, and easier to repair or recycle. In turn, consumers should benefit from higher-quality products that last longer and generate less waste.

    Companies may destroy unsold clothing and footwear only in limited circumstances, such as when the items are damaged, unsafe, counterfeit, infringe intellectual property rights, or have been rejected by charitable organizations. Businesses relying on these exemptions must provide supporting documentation, such as test results or other records, to justify the destruction. Even then, they must follow the EU’s waste hierarchy, which prioritizes reuse and recycling over disposal. Companies are also required to publish annual reports detailing the unsold products they have discarded.

    National authorities will enforce the ban and may impose fines on companies that violate its requirements, including failing to maintain records for at least five years to support inspections. To help reduce the administrative burden, businesses may use existing customs and logistics codes when reporting the products they discard.

    Why recycling isn’t enough

    Recycling clothing can be a complicated and labor-intensive process. It often involves separating fabrics, dyes, synthetic fibers, and natural textile materials before they can be reused. That’s not to say it isn’t worthwhile. Instead of ending up in a landfill, recycled textiles can be turned into new clothing, home insulation, carpet padding, and other products.

    Still, recycling isn’t a cure-all. The EU hopes the new ban will encourage companies to keep usable clothing in circulation for as long as possible through resale, donation, reuse, or refurbishment before recycling becomes necessary. In doing so, the regulation aims to create a more circular economy rather than allowing piles of unused clothing to continue growing.

    This movement hopes to encourage clothing manufacturers to produce higher-quality products and reshape the industry as a whole. Making clothing from higher-grade materials with durable stitching that’s easier to repair can help reduce waste. While critics argue that doing so could reduce the number of garments sold each year, many say better-made clothing is worth the higher price—especially if consumers end up buying fewer replacement items over time.

    What can you do with old clothing?

    There are plenty of things you can do with old clothing around your home. If an item is too damaged to donate, its fabric can be repurposed for crafts or used as cleaning rags. And if you’re handy with a needle, there are countless ways to upcycle old clothes into new outfits, accessories, or other useful items with a little inspiration from the Internet.

    Giant corporations and everyday people alike can do their best to make the most of the materials they have, helping save money and reduce waste.

  • European Broadcasting Union offers guide to reduce sexualizing camera angles of Olympic women athletes
    Photo credit: CanvaA new guide has been introduced on how to respectfully broadcast woman athletes.

    Being an athlete is tough, especially if you’re an Olympian. They sacrifice their time and bodies in order to achieve peak physical condition. There is also the mental pressure to compete against the best. The last thing they should worry about is being objectified and sexualized online. 

    With this in mind, the European Broadcasting Union wants to help. They offered a booklet to broadcasters titled Raising the Bar: Guidelines for respectful media coverage in women’s athletics. The 23-page guide shows how camera placement choices and editing could potentially compromise an athlete. It also offers broadcasters guidelines for how to set up camera shots and show slow-motion replays that won’t sexualize or present athletes in undignified poses. 

    athletes, infographic, olympians, guide
    Screenshot

    Focusing on the sport, reducing harassment

    These guidelines come as multiple stories about women athletes being harassed online have surfaced. Many misogynistic posts about athletes have come from slow motion footage focused on certain parts of the athlete’s body. 

    “The sexualization of women athletes through selective camera angles and editing choices continues to be a significant concern across many sports broadcasts,” wrote Glen Killane, executive director of EBU Sport in the booklet. “Lingering shots on bodies, low-angle cameras that capture revealing views, and excessive slow-motion replays that serve no technical or storytelling purpose are among the issues observed in the media coverage of women’s athletics competitions today.”

    These new broadcast guidelines and suggestions are backed by Serbian long jumper Ivana Španović, British Olympic pole vaulter Holly Bradshaw, and Croatian high jumper Blanka Vlašić. Vlašić has spoken out regarding the equal visibility of women’s sports. Bradshaw has spoken out against the discomfort and sexualization of Olympic women athletes due to their tight-fitting uniforms.

    “I first-hand have received social media abuse and witnessed inappropriate videos online of myself and colleagues when slow motion content of us competing is captured,” wrote Bradshaw in the guide. “Athletes want to enjoy themselves doing the sport they love without feeling uncomfortable or anxious about the footage being shown live. Many athletes, myself included, have been in competitive scenarios where they are more focused on the cameras instead of their own performance.”

    What the guide provides

    The guide provides visual aids for broadcasters along with insights from the athletes to explain why certain shots would be preferred. Broadcasters are requested to avoid tight shots from the back of athletes. They’re also asked to avoid low camera angles from underneath. They recommend shots above the pelvis or ones that don’t linger onto commonly sexualized areas of the body. They recommend wider shots so the audience can see the technical ability being displayed by the athlete. Overall, the point is to focus on the athletic performance rather than close-ups of the athlete.

    Currently, there is no enforcement of these guidelines or penalties if a sports broadcast doesn’t adhere to them. However, there is value in knowing which broadcasts will focus on the athletic contests rather than an athlete’s appearance. This will help the competitors focus on how they do rather than how they look when the cameras are on.

Explore More Culture Stories

Fashion

European Union enforces ban on destroying unsold fast-fashion clothing by major companies

Film & TV

European Broadcasting Union offers guide to reduce sexualizing camera angles of Olympic women athletes

Culture

The summer concert state rankings: Which states pack more festivals, shows, and tours in 2026

Internet

The church fathers of early Christianity are showing their swag – on TikTok