July 30, 2025

If you’re starting college soon, congratulations! I hope it’s eye-opening, mind-expanding, brain-sharpening, soul-stretching, character-building and FUN. But beware. Unless you take charge, your campus debut will disappoint.

Today’s college orientation programs prove just how modern universities lost their way.  The University of South Florida Official Admissions Blog suggests “a few questions you might bring” – the word “bring” evokes consumer goods not thought-provoking queries good for brains or souls: “What support services are available if I struggle academically? How do I get involved in student organizations or leadership roles? What should I know about campus safety? What are some common first-year challenges and how do students overcome them?”

Sallie, the “first educational solutions company,” offers “college orientation tips you can’t live without,” including: “research courses” – makes sense – “Pack a comfortable pair of shoes … Bring a refillable water bottle … and “Eat a healthy breakfast,” while advising parents to “attend the orientation in person,” even “if your son or daughter” squirms.

Finally, over the last decade, many orientations degenerated into Woke U Boot Camps. In 2022, Speech First’s “Freshman Disorientation Report” noted that “only around 30%” of 51 leading universities “mention free speech or viewpoint diversity (30% and 33%, respectively) in their orientation programs, while 91%” push Diversity Equity and Inclusion. Most antiracism and sexism-awareness workshops students endured were heavy-handed. One University of North Carolina student reported in 2015, “Instead of showing that all people are equally deserving of human dignity,” the exercises caricatured a series of “villains” who were “either white, male, heterosexual, middle class or some combination of the four.”

Over the last decade, many orientations degenerated into Woke U Boot Camps. A 2022 report noted that “only around 30%” of 51 leading universities “mention free speech or viewpoint diversity while 91%” push Diversity Equity and Inclusion. 

In 2003, Shippensburg University students encountered a code proclaiming that Shippensburg’s “commitment to racial tolerance, cultural diversity and social justice will require every member of this community to ensure that the principles of these ideals be mirrored in their attitudes and behaviors.”

Unless you’re proactive, you risk being propagandized into becoming what my book on the Academic Intifada called “rampaging snowflakes.” Clearly, students should learn about resources offering academic and psychological support, avoid toxic behaviors, and get practical advice. Moreover, orientation should introduce you to fellow students, tour you around campus, and help you navigate the bureaucracy, to facilitate picking courses, clubs and comrades – the three “c”s central to successful campus living.

But never forget “the why” – which most universities neglect. College orientations should help students learn about their university, each other, and, most important, themselves. Universities should offer guided discussions with professors and older students about their educational mission to help first-years clarify their goals. Only by knowing where you’re going — or where you hope to get — can you figure out what path to take.

At a time when so many students demonize those who dare disagree with them, my ideal orientation would start with John Stuart Mill’s 1859 classic “On Liberty,” celebrating the free marketplace of ideas. When I read Mill my first year (admittedly in a seminar on the history of free speech), I recognized Freedom of Speech as the keystone freedom for successful democracies — and to being a good person while living a good life.

“Truth emerges from the clash of adverse ideas,” Mill exulted. That insight repudiates campus cancel culture and the modern educator’s tendency to wrap students in cotton to insulate them from uncomfortable, “triggering” ideas, attitudes, thoughts, realities. Demonstrating how much intolerance suffocates thought, Mill wrote: “To refuse a hearing to an opinion, because they are sure that it is false, is to assume that their certainty is the same thing as absolute certainty. All silencing of discussion is an assumption of infallibility. …” Shutting down others robs humanity of the possibility of learning what might be a corrective to today’s conventional wisdom.

Anyone who truly gets Mill – and Free Speech – won’t dismiss or disdain others because of any differences – of race, gender or creed. Mill urges us to learn from one another, respect one another, and create the kind of liberal democratic community resilient enough to cultivate consensus while tolerating dissent.

This essential approach can launch fresh, fertile, enriching college careers while helping save the university from itself. The Academic Intifada, and the antisemitic anti-Zionism rife on too many – but, beware, don’t exaggerate or overreact, not all – campuses – reflect this broader academic breakdown. I am not arrogant enough to claim that anyone who truly understands John Stuart Mill would never criticize Israel or never support the Palestinian cause. But no true Millian liberal would hesitate to criticize Palestinian terrorism, dictatorship, homophobia, sexism, mass-murder or Jew-hatred. And, certainly, no one who gets Mill would applaud the way professors, administrators, and students targeted, harassed and sometimes attacked Jews, Israelis and Zionists on campus.

Admittedly, no one expects students, in their first week, to revolutionize the university culture.  It took years to get derailed by excessive credentialism and job hunger – on the part of students, parents, and administrators alike — mushy psychobabbling, all-or-nothing woke identity politics, the hiring excess administrators, and an institutional gargantuanism more committed to preserving university reputations and budgets than cultivating young minds and souls.

But you can learn from these last few decades’ misfires, and from the strange, self-sabotaging mix of laziness and harshness blinding so many of your fellow students and recent graduates.

Seize the day. Take responsibility for your education and enlightenment. Start reading challenging books while finding fellow students who want to argue with you about them – after actually reading them! Learn from the entrepreneur Malcolm Forbes that “Education’s purpose is to replace an empty mind with an open one,” and from the journalist Sydney J. Harris that “The whole purpose of education is to turn mirrors into windows.”

As you thrive, outgrow the heavy-handedness of your previous educational experiences.  Embrace university as an opportunity to unlearn the worst educational habits instilled by our factory-like and now often highly-politicized elementary schools and high schools. And rediscover your inner child, who, as the philosopher Martha Nussbaum rhapsodizes, has a “love of play” and “questioning spirit” that needs “to be strengthened, not crushed.” 

---

Gil Troy, a senior fellow in Zionist Thought at the Jewish People Policy Institute, is an American presidential historian. His latest books, “To Resist the Academic Intifada: Letters to My Students on Defending the Zionist Dream” and “The Essential Guide to October 7th and its Aftermath” were just published. 

The rapid advance of artificial intelligence is transforming nearly every aspect of modern society, from the way we work to how we communicate, produce goods, and organize our lives. Yet, in the midst of this technological revolution, we must pause to consider the shape of the society we are creating—lest we find ourselves in an “i”-shaped world, where a thin and exclusive tier at the top controls nearly all wealth, while a broad base struggles to participate meaningfully in the economy or to achieve fundamental aspirations such as homeownership.

When we speak of an “i”-shaped society, we conjure the image of a tall, narrow column: a very thin dot at the top, representing those who possess extraordinary economic power, and a vast, undifferentiated lower base whose members have little opportunity for upward mobility. Unlike a healthy hourglass or diamond shape, where opportunity and prosperity are distributed more broadly, the “i” shape is synonymous with severe inequality and the risk of a permanent underclass.

This is not mere speculation. The risks are real—and they are already emerging. As AI-driven automation and data concentration increase, so too does the power of those who own the algorithms, the infrastructure, and the data necessary to train and deploy artificial intelligence. Left unchecked, these dynamics threaten to push us toward a society where a handful of people and companies accumulate unprecedented wealth, while the majority experience stagnation or even decline in their material well-being.

AI’s potential to deliver immense value is undeniable, but the way this value is distributed is far from guaranteed. The current trajectory favors those with access to capital, technical know-how, and control over the digital infrastructure. AI systems are expensive to develop and deploy; they require massive datasets and computational resources, both of which are out of reach for most individuals and even many enterprises. As a result, a small cadre of technology companies and their stakeholders have become the primary beneficiaries. This concentration of wealth is not just a matter of the rich getting richer. AI enables new forms of productivity and efficiency, but these gains increasingly accrue to those who are already at the top of the economic pyramid. As AI takes over tasks once performed by humans, especially those that are routine or repetitive—large segments of the population may find their jobs disappearing, wages stagnating, and economic agency slipping away.

Historically, wage growth and upward mobility for middle- and working-class individuals have depended on the ability of workers to negotiate for a fair share of productivity gains. In an AI-driven economy, this relationship is at risk of breaking down. If machines perform the bulk of productive labor, and if ownership of those machines is concentrated in private hands, then the link between work and reward is severed. This disconnect erodes the foundation of a healthy society, where individuals expect that hard work and skill will be rewarded, and where there is a tangible path to betterment. If most people are relegated to precarious, low-paying service jobs or find themselves entirely excluded from the productive economy, the result is the emergence of a permanent underclass which represents an outcome fundamentally at odds with the principles of fairness and shared prosperity let alone our Jewish values.

One of the starkest consequences of an “i”-shaped society is the decoupling of salary from the most basic markers of stability and inclusion, such as homeownership. For much of the twentieth century, steady employment and rising wages made it possible for many to buy homes, build wealth, and participate in the broader project of societal growth. Yet, as income growth for average workers has stagnated—while costs for housing, education, and healthcare soar—the dream of homeownership has become increasingly out of reach. AI, if not thoughtfully integrated, could accelerate these trends by further suppressing wages and increasing the premium on highly specialized skills. When the relationship between salary and affordability is severed, society divides into those who own and those who perpetually rent, those who participate in wealth creation and those who do not. Homeownership is not only a means of building equity, but also a signal of social stability and an anchor for civic participation. The risk is that entire generations will be shut out of this fundamental rite of passage further fueling resentment, social fragmentation, and a sense of futility.

Perhaps even more insidious than the concentration of wealth is the narrowing of opportunities to meaningfully participate in production. In an AI-dominated economy, value creation becomes the province of a technical elite: those who design the algorithms, interpret the data, and control the infrastructure. In simplest terms, if society fails to create avenues for broad participation in the new economy—through education, access to technology, and support for entrepreneurship—the overwhelming majority will be left out. They may consume the products of AI, but they will not participate in their creation, nor will they share in the benefits.

Work is not merely a means of survival; it is a source of purpose, dignity, and connection. The creation of a permanent underclass, deprived of meaningful work or advancement, risks fueling alienation, political instability, and the rise of destructive ideologies. 

As members of civil society, the choices we make today about technology, policy, and social structure will indeed shape the contours of our society for generations. If we allow AI to reinforce existing inequalities, we risk waking up in a world where opportunity is a memory and democracy is a facade. Beyond the economic consequences, exclusion from productive activity has deep psychological and social costs. Work is not merely a means of survival; it is a source of purpose, dignity, and connection. The creation of a permanent underclass, deprived of meaningful work or advancement, risks fueling alienation, political instability, and the rise of destructive ideologies. In the very near future when the effects of AI on the labor market can no longer be relegated to future discussion, we will come to the inevitable crossroads of which team we will align with and as they say, there is no “i” in team.

---

Lisa Ansell is the Associate Director of the USC Casden Institute and Lecturer of Hebrew Language at Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion Los Angeles.

The cold-blooded murders of Sarah Milgrim and Yaron Lischinsky in Washington, D.C. followed by the terrorist attack in Boulder, Colorado, and the torching of the home of the Governor of Pennsylvania are among the most recent and high-profile attacks on Jews – and that is just in this country.  

It is not just in the United States that these attacks are occurring.  Overseas in Australia, a restaurant owned by an Israeli Jew was ransacked and a historic synagogue was torched.  At a rock concert in England, a band led the crowd in chants glorifying the intifada and cursing the IDF.

These are not isolated events.  They are the tip of the iceberg, as there are countless other incidents, not all recorded, which are part of the dramatic increase in assaults on Jews.   

Enough is enough.  

It is time to get serious about addressing Jew-hatred.  No more parsing whether it’s “anti-Zionism” or “just criticism of Israel.”  No more equivocation as to whether there is a difference between attacks on Jews, Israel or Zionism.  Jew-hatred in any form must not be tolerated.

Eradicating this toxic obsessive hatred will not be easy.  It will require accountability, honesty, courage and action.  

Distorted narratives and ideological bias promulgated by the media, professors, pundits and politicians who spread harmful rhetoric about Jews, Israel and their supporters create an environment which makes Jews and Israelis legitimate targets.  When statements of sympathy or expressions of solidarity come from the very individuals who contribute to the climate that fosters hostility towards Jews, they are especially hollow and meaningless and offensive.  

When statements of sympathy or expressions of solidarity come from the very individuals who contribute to the climate that fosters hostility toward Jews, they are especially hollow and meaningless and offensive. 

No more excuses and no more sugar-coating.

Honesty demands that we recognize that much of the antisemitic rhetoric and actions emanate from radical fundamentalist Islamists intent on spreading hatred of Jews.  We need to reject the feeling that any time an antisemitic incident is condemned or the word antisemitism is mentioned we feel obligated to include the word Islamophobia.  There is no comparison between the number of assaults on the two communities.  Claiming that criticism of Islamic extremists is Islamophobia has the desired effect of shutting down legitimate criticism of their Nazi-like propaganda and avoids dealing with a problem that is real.

To quell the surge and ubiquitous hostility to Jews, Judaism and Israel I offer the following comprehensive plan of action.

The Media

Mainstream media outlets play a significant role in stoking hostility toward Jews and Israel. 

The disproportionate coverage of Gaza compared to other international stories, and how Israel is portrayed are major factors in stirring hostility toward Jews and Israel.  

False claims by Hamas, a terrorist organization that is known to manipulate facts, are accepted without verification.  Hamas’ uncorroborated and unsubstantiated accusations are reported, often followed by lame corrections days later, which do not mitigate the harm done by the initial report, or the damaging headlines.  The meek line, “Israel denies the claim.”  

Portraying Israel as solely responsible for suffering in Gaza, while omitting Hamas’ role in creating the situation, in its use of human shields, the scale of its brutality, and that its stated intention is nothing less than the genocidal goal of eradicating the Jewish state provides a distorted and incomplete picture of the conflict.  

People need to be informed and made aware that reporters in Gaza as well as “eyewitnesses” are not objective or free to report anything that portrays Hamas negatively or that conflicts with the message Hamas wants to project.  They use terror to exert control not just over Gaza, but how it is reported.  If a school or hospital is targeted by the Israeli Defense Forces, the public needs to know what was going on there that led Israel to act.  Hospitals that harbor terrorist operatives should be identified as such, and the public should be informed that in these instances, the assumption of neutrality is lost.  Tell the whole story.  

Telling the whole story entails including the deliberate targeting of Israeli civilians, and the suffering not just in Gaza, but of Israel’s people as well, tens of thousands of whom have been displaced and are dealing with the aftermath of the horror not just of what happened on Oct. 7, but the constant barrage of rockets.  Objective and balanced reporting doesn’t mean accepting information provided by a terrorist organization which is known to give false information and use lies to promote its message.  

The disproportionate focus on Israel and Gaza, while ignoring atrocities in Sudan, Syria and Yemen and human rights violations around the world contribute to the perception that Israel’s war against Hamas is the only international conflict deserving attention.

News outlets must take responsibility for their role in promoting and encouraging antisemitism and hostility towards Israel.  We need to demand that they objectively report the truth.

Social Media Platforms

Online platforms have become incubators and purveyors of hate.  Outlets such as X, TikTok, Facebook and Instagram allow Holocaust denial, blood libels, glorification of terrorism and virulent anti-Israel propaganda, often under the guise of “pro-Palestinian advocacy” to spread unchecked.

Content moderation must be enforced consistently. That means following their own guidelines, which would entail banning antisemitic accounts, removing terrorist propaganda, and promoting educational content on Jewish history and identity.  We now know the deadly impact and results of unbridled rhetoric and calls to “Globalize the Intifada” or “From the River to the Sea,” which leads people to act violently against Jews.  

Platforms should actively partner with Jewish watchdog groups to identify and respond to threats.  

Social media platforms must take responsibility for their role in promoting and encouraging antisemitism and enforce their own rules.  

Colleges and Universities

American universities have become breeding grounds for antisemitism. Jewish students are doxed, threatened, harassed and ostracized, often with the passive tolerance of administrators and the active support of faculty.  Groups assembling and blocking Jewish students from traversing certain areas, surrounding them while shouting antisemitic slurs and anti-Israel chants to intimidate Jewish students, must not be allowed.   

Universities must unequivocally condemn and act forcefully to curb antisemitism, not bury it under objections to “all forms of hate.”  Nonstudents, often financed and supported by forces hostile to Jews, come on campus and promote acts against Jews.  Rules against those who participate in unauthorized encampments and violent takeovers of buildings should be enforced and outsiders should not be allowed to lead the charge against Jewish students.  

Antisemitic threats and harassment should not be tolerated under the guise of free speech.  Faculty who discriminate or intimidate Jewish students, who promote or excuse violence against Jews, who teach false narratives or manipulate their curricula and subject matter in a biased and false way to negatively reflect on Israel, Jews and the history of Jews and Israel should not be given free rein, but should face consequences for their academic malpractice. 

Discriminatory acts and slanderous comments about Jews, Israel and Israelis would not be tolerated were they made about any other minority group.  The same standard should be applied to all.  Organized mobs chanting “Globalize the Intifada” and “From the River to the Sea” are not harmless expressions of free speech.  To help provide guidance colleges should adopt the IHRA definition of antisemitism and provide real protection to Jewish students, just as they do for other minority groups.  

Colleges must take responsibility for their role in promoting, tolerating and encouraging antisemitism and are obligated to protect Jewish students from anti-Jewish actions.

Elected Officials

When public officials accuse Israel of genocide and parrot Hamas’ talking points while ignoring the fact that Hamas broke the ceasefire and effectively declared war when it murdered 1,200 people and abducted over 250, they are giving succor to and encouraging the terrorists.  By contributing to this atmosphere of animosity they are enabling the rise in antisemitic rhetoric and attacks on Jews.   

Overlooking the billions of dollars given by the international community intended to better the lives of Gazans but that were stolen by Hamas to make their leaders millionaires and build their network of tunnels, as well as the sadistic nature of Hamas and its ongoing launching of rockets from Gaza into civilian areas in Israel, only emboldens and provides cover and encouragement to those who legitimize antisemitism.

Politicians who sympathize with Hamas must take responsibility for their role in promoting and encouraging antisemitism and must stop parroting Hamas propaganda.

The United Nations 

No global institution has done more to normalize and spread and promote antisemitism and to delegitimize Israel than the United Nations.  While real genocides rage in Sudan, Myanmar and Syria, and atrocities are committed by nations against minorities around the world, the U.N. repeatedly singles out the world’s only Jewish state for condemnation. There is incontrovertible proof that U.N. agencies like UNRWA have harbored terrorists and taught antisemitic content in schools, and that its employees participated in Hamas’ Oct. 7 massacre.

The U.N. Human Rights Council has passed more resolutions against Israel than against all other countries combined. Its obsession with demonizing Israel while ignoring Hamas’ crimes not only distorts reality, but fuels hatred toward the Jewish state. When international bodies obsess about Israel alone as guilty of violating human rights, they send a message to the world that Israel and Jews are the only people deserving of such approbation, thereby signaling that Jew-hatred is justified.

Appointing officials who have a track record of antisemitic statements to monitor and report on Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and alleged human rights infractions must not be allowed.  It is like having Dracula guard the blood bank.   

The United Nations must take responsibility for its role in promoting and encouraging antisemitism and change the way it focuses on Israel.

Local Public Schools and School Boards

In some districts, antisemitic and anti-Israel content has infiltrated curricula — especially in ethnic studies and DEI programs.  Jews are portrayed as privileged, as oppressors or colonizers despite millennia of persecution, and despite being an indigenous people with ancient roots in the land of Israel.  This is propaganda being used as indoctrination in the guise of education.  

School boards must rigorously review educational materials, prohibit antisemitic content and ensure Holocaust education includes discussion of modern-day Jew-hatred. Jewish parents must be included in conversations about inclusion and diversity.

Schools and administrators must take responsibility for their role in promoting and encouraging antisemitism and must keep antisemitism out of classrooms.

Rabbis

In times of crisis, Jewish spiritual leaders have a responsibility to educate, not to spread misinformation or virtue signal moral superiority by condemning Israel.  

Criticism has its place.  But when rabbis recite false claims of genocide or apartheid, they mislead their communities, lend credibility and fuel efforts to delegitimize Israel.  Their anti-Israel rhetoric causes lasting damage.  We need rabbis to help their communities understand Israel’s security dilemmas, the morality of its actions, and the security challenges and hatred it faces — not express hostility and sow doubts about its legitimacy.

As I have said to my colleagues – criticism of Israel dare not be louder than expressions of love.  

The current climate demands solidarity and clarity, not virtue signaling.  When Israel is criticized on the pulpit, rabbis should realize that it will not change the policy of the government of Israel, but it will affect how the people hearing that message feel about Israel.  And it will lead to discomfort which can often lead to alienation from the Jewish state, and not just from Israel, but ultimately cause listeners to sour on Judaism and the Jewish people.   

Jewish clergy must take responsibility for their role in promoting and encouraging antisemitism by their public critiques. Instead they should strive to foster positive feelings about Israel among Jews and others.  

How Should Jews Respond?

Jewish organizations and leaders must prioritize defending the Jewish people.  They should stand up for Jews and support actions taken to defend Jews that are not unconstitutional.  They should have a zero-tolerance policy towards antisemitism and anti-Zionism regardless of its source.

Individual Jews should lean into being Jewish.  Show up at synagogue and community events. Support Jewish organizations. Talk to your neighbors. Challenge antisemitism when you see it — whether it comes from the right-wing conspiracy theorist or the progressive activist group that won’t acknowledge Israel’s right to exist. If we don’t speak up for ourselves, no one else will.  Be open though to building coalitions with those who stand with us and accept the love and support of those allies who are willing to partner with us.  

Antisemitism is not just a Jewish problem.  The kind of widespread and intense hatred of Jews we are currently experiencing has historically signaled a deeper societal sickness, one that can ultimately destroy the society itself.  

Finally, the strongest response and antidote to efforts to intimidate Jews is to deny those who wish to eliminate Jews a victory.  The answer is Jewish pride, which entails being proud of who we are, of what Jews have given the world, and proudly living as Jews.  

In Conclusion

Fighting the “world’s oldest hatred” requires more than words.  It demands that each sector of society that fuels harmful impressions about Israel and Jews examine how they have contributed to the toxic environment that has led to hateful words and violent acts against Jews.  All segments of society need to take a good hard look at their statements and actions and commit to real change.  

All of us must all take responsibility for our role in promoting and encouraging antisemitism.

---

Rabbi Stuart Weinblatt is Chairman, Zionist Rabbinic Coalition