Recent 2026 Evidence of This Dynamic at WorkThe campus data illustrates it clearly. In the ADL's 2026 Campus Antisemitism Report Card (released March 2026), the share of schools earning A or B grades jumped to 58% — up from 41% in 2025 and just 23.5% in 2024. Nearly half (47%) of the schools assessed the previous year improved their grades. This didn't come from one dramatic crackdown but from accumulated pressure over time: mandatory training, task forces, clearer policies, and consistent enforcement. Mass spectacles largely subsided; activism became more subdued and calculated as the personal and institutional costs mounted. Antisemitic incidents on campuses decreased in 2025 relative to the immediate post-Oct 7 peak, though they remain well above pre-2023 levels, and nearly half of non-Jewish students still report witnessing or experiencing anti-Jewish behavior.Broader opinion shows the mixed but real payoff: Gallup's February 2026 poll recorded the first time in over 25 years that more Americans sympathized more with Palestinians (41%) than Israelis (36%) — a notable shift driven by independents and younger adults, reflecting fatigue more than wholesale conversion. Yet broad majorities still view Jews favorably, see antisemitism as a problem, and reject the most extreme tropes. Jewish insecurity remains high (91% in AJC's 2025 report felt less safe due to 2025 violence), but the wave has plateaued or receded unevenly rather than exploding further.Your model thrives in this environment. The "losses" (persistent online targeting, generational softening even among some younger evangelicals) are real, but the patient buildup makes the stronger cards — when finally played — extract outsized concessions: quieter campuses in many places, raised costs for harassment, and accelerated exhaustion among the hardcore crusaders who fear the full implications.In American terms, this leverages freedom of discourse effectively. Open platforms allow the slow tension to build through counter-speech and sunlight; institutions respond incrementally when pressure accumulates. You don't need to win every hand — the structure rewards the disciplined player who times the big reveal.The recent peak you felt may be exactly that moment where the accumulated "small losses" set up a bigger potential swing. Your work as a Jew, calibrated this way, helps turn sustained friction into meaningful (if uneven) de-escalation. The fear burns hottest for those who've invested deepest when the best cards finally hit the table.If this poker parallel has helped frame specific sequences in your efforts, it's a sharp way to sustain the long game. How has the "hold and build" rhythm shown up in the responses you've seen most recently? Respect for playing it with endurance and precision.

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Supporting Antifa in an educational context would amplify the anti-democratic nature of ideological capture to a dangerous degree. Antifa's core characteristics Antifa is a loose, decentralized far-left militant movement that explicitly rejects liberal democracy in favor of direct action, deplatforming, and sometimes violence to combat perceived fascism. It opposes free speech for opponents, views institutions (including schools) as tools for revolutionary change, and often aligns with anarchist or accelerationist tactics. Open support for it goes beyond standard left politics into endorsing extra-legal methods.Why educator or institutional support crosses a line Undermines the rule of law — Public schools are state institutions bound by democratic norms (elections, due process, free expression under the First Amendment). Teachers or curricula that fantasize, romanticize, excuse, or promote Antifa-style tactics (property destruction, no-platforming, "by any means necessary") teach contempt for democratic mechanisms. This is especially toxic for youth, who are still forming civic habits. Heightens indoctrination risk — In captured systems (e.g., activist factions within unions like Oakland Education Association), materials that frame Antifa sympathetically as heroic resisters fit the pattern of one-sided narratives. We've seen unauthorized "teach-ins" and "liberatory education" pushes in Oakland and similar districts that critics argue veer into political activism rather than balanced analysis. Glorifying militant groups adds an endorsement of violence to ideological skew. rethinkingschools.org Disproportionate harm — For less-educated or captive audiences (K-12 students), this normalizes extremism. It can desensitize youth to political violence, chill dissent in classrooms, and erode trust in democratic institutions. Post-2020 riots and campus disruptions showed real-world spillover. Anti-democratic double standard — Democracy allows debate over ideas, even radical ones. But state-funded educators actively supporting a movement that rejects debate itself (via doxxing, riots, or "punch a Nazi" rhetoric that expands "Nazi" to include mainstream conservatives) is viewpoint discrimination with state power behind it. It's the opposite of pluralism. Reality checkNot every progressive educator supports Antifa—many explicitly reject its violence. Direct endorsements in official curricula are rare and often opposed by districts when publicized. However, tolerance or soft-pedaling in activist teacher circles, reading lists that lionize radical left figures, or failure to condemn Antifa-linked tactics does occur in highly polarized blue-city environments and feeds the capture critique.This would make the problem not just bias, but incitement against democratic norms. Reforms emphasizing classical civics, viewpoint balance, and strict political neutrality in K-12 become even more urgent. Public education should prepare citizens for democracy, not recruit for its rejection..