Jonathan Greenblatt (2:41)

Well, look, in the spirit of level setting, we'll just step back. So ADL is the oldest anti hate organization In America. It was founded in 1913, spurred on by the lynching of a Jewish man, Leo Frank. And ADL was created at a time when Jews in this country, you would describe them as being sort of systematically discriminated against. So Jews couldn't buy homes in many parts of the United States, Quotas artificially kept down their numbers at universities. If they were even admitted, they couldn't work in many professions. Right here in New York City, where we're recording this podcast, the Jews, Jewish doctors, founded a hospital that we now know as Mount Sinai, because the big hospital in town, what's now known as Cornell Weill, would not admit Jewish patients. So literally, a Jewish victim could bleed out on the street in front of the hospital, and they wouldn't treat that person. They wouldn't let him in the door. So Mount Sinai was founded as the Jews Hospital. And that situation was replicated in cities all over the country. And of course, there was rampant mischaracterization, stereotyping in the media. So in that era, in that time, the ADL was founded, and. And interestingly, the mission statement that they wrote for the organization was that its purpose would be to, quote, stop the defamation of the Jewish people and secure justice and fair treatment to all. So ADL, since its founding 113 years ago, has always had this view that the Jewish people will not be safe unless everyone is safe, that we won't be free unless everyone, the Jews aren't free, then everyone isn't free. That's sort of the general idea.

Adam (4:21)

Can you dive into this? Because I think this goes into some of the. I don't want to say controversy necessarily, but some of the contentious conversations about the positions that the ADL takes, and we'll get into that at some point, but can you put some more meat? Why is that the case?

Jonathan Greenblatt (4:40)

So look, in the 1910s and the 1920s and the 1930s, 1940s, ADL helped to overturn those quotas that kept Jews out of universities, helped to change the laws that prevented Jews from buying homes, helped to expose the discrimination that prevented Jews from getting hired or Jewish patients from getting treated and so on, and took on the stereotyping in the media and the mischaracterization I was talking about. ADL did all that and made America safer for its Jewish community. And then in 1953, ADL filed an amicus brief in a landmark case of the Supreme Court called Brown v. Board of Education, which, of course, is known as the case that desegregated America's schools. And at that time, Many people within ADL said, wait a second, why is ADL filing an amicus brief? A friend of the court brief on behalf of Thurgood Marshall, who was prosecuting on behalf of the NAACP legal defense on this case, to desegregate the schools. That's not a Jewish issue, people said at that time. And the leadership of ADL said, no justice and fair treatment to all compels us to fight all forms of discrimination, not just anti Jewish discrimination. And I think the leadership at adl, I'm not in their head, but I believe at the time they felt like the Jewish community had achieved so much in the recent decade. Now is the time for us to expand a bit and use this sense that we had to support other communities in need. Now, what's interesting about that is, of course, in the ensuing years, we fought for immigration reform in the 1950s. We commissioned President John Kennedy to write a book in 1957, actually published in 1958, called A Nation of Immigrants. It's a very famous book, one of only two books that Kennedy wrote. He wrote that, and Profiles and Courage. He wrote A Nation of Immigrants for adl. And I have, hanging on the wall of my office down the hall, one of the pens that LBJ President Johnson used to sign the 1965 Immigration act at Liberty island under the shadow of the Statue of Liberty, because ADL was very involved in that. And ADL fought for things like the LGBTQ community in the ensuing years and so on. But if I flash forward to today, to right now, 2025, what is indisputable, what is unmistakable, is we are dealing with the worst surge of antisemitism we have recorded since ADL started doing this work.

Adam (7:08)

So I want to ask you, before we jump to the current moment, because you gave us this impressive history that places American Jewry in the center of a lot of civil rights movements. And the ADL clearly historically saw it as part of its mission.

Jonathan Greenblatt (7:28)

It's sort of a classic liberal mission, I would say, Adam.

Adam (7:31)

And you know, there's this ancient debate about why does the American Jewish community just generally lean left. My boss, Jonah Goldberg, says, you know, this is an over determined phenomenon. There are so many causes, but it's clear that something in the Jewish mission and the Jewish identity has been intertwined with the American form of liberalism, of pluralism. Right. And I assume that this is part of the ideas that guided the ADL in more current years to make some of its alliances with the BLM movement.

Jonathan Greenblatt (8:10)

We never had alliance with the BLM.

Adam (8:11)

Movement expressed Some sympathies and support. I think there were some statements, expressions of solidarity when Donald Trump first came into office round one and issued them. You, I believe, came out with a statement saying that this Jew will identify or register as Muslim in solidarity. Right. Because it's all about seeing those connections. And yet now at this moment, where as you put yourself, we experience a heightened or probably the worst surge of antisemitism in our lifetime, most of these groups have abandoned Jews as allies. I'd say the majority of Muslim groups care, notably, but many others have.

Jonathan Greenblatt (8:56)

Care was never on our side. The one thing care doesn't do is care.

Adam (8:59)

Right. But many other Muslim groups after October 7 have turned the blame on the Jewish state and the Jewish community and the Jewish community at large. And we'll get to that distinction. More recently, there was the story of the nurse. This is not American jury, but there's the story of the nurse in Australia that was caught on tape saying that she would kill an Israeli patient if she had one, and she was suspended. But the majority of notable Muslim groups around the world rallied in her defense. It does not seem that this alliance, again, maybe not alliance, this solidarity following the idea that the Jews are free only when everybody else is free, is a two way street.

Jonathan Greenblatt (9:40)

Okay, so there's a lot to unpack in what you said and I think you conflated a lot of things. So let's just step back, right?

Adam (9:46)

Yes, please.

Jonathan Greenblatt (9:47)

So I do think it's like a classical sort of liberal view that all people are created equal, right? That we all have certain inalienable rights. And I do think the Jewish people, perhaps arguably more so than any other community, like the history of Western civilization, have been subjected to illiberalism where we have not been recognized as equal simply because of how we pray or where we're from or what they say our race, quote, unquote, is. I think Jews have been serially and systematically subjected to a kind of discrimination. And again, the hues may change, but the color is the same. Now, I think it is fair to say again, I can't put myself in the heads of the people who came before me. But I think that our mission has always compelled this organization to fight for justice and fair treatment to all. Not because we expected a quid pro quo, not because we thought we will scratch their back and therefore they will scratch ours. Hillel didn't say, if I am not for myself, who will be? If I am only for myself, what am I and what am I going to get for it? He didn't say that. So I think this is a very Jewish ethic, if you will, of being there for others and welcoming the stranger because we were once strangers. So I think it is a classic Jewish idea. It's like, I mean, look, the idea of Mitzvah is deeply embedded in the sort of the DNA of Jewish civilization, I would say, lifting up the less fortunate. And again, I think it's a classically politically liberal idea. But that being said, it is certainly true that what we've seen in recent years here in the United states and after 10, seven, have almost no historical precedent. Now, let me explain what I mean by that. It is definitely true, like I just said, that Jews are serially, systematically discriminated against. But in this country, where there has been so much focus on intersectionality and there's been so much focus on sort of shared struggle, anti Semitism, desperatism has increased over the last decade by upwards of 1,000%. I mean, incidents, acts of harassment, vandalism and violence targeting the Jewish people. Okay, and to be even more precise, like when I took this job in 2015, there are, I think, 950 some odd incidents that we tracked at ADL. Last year, we had nearly 9,000. There is no other community that I can tell you in the United States since we've been tracking this, that has seen such a meteoric, such almost algorithmic, if you will, rise in incidents. I mean, Jews are just 2% of the population. We are 10% of the overall volume of all hate crimes in the country. It's crazy. And four out of the past five years, we've hit new highs. So in a moment when the Jews are being overwhelmed by this tsunami of antisemitism, I have to look at my mission statement. But my mission statement, which we've already said it here, it is informed by our purpose, and the purpose is different. The reason why ADO was created, we said at the top, is because the Jews are being systematically discriminated against. Our core purpose, the reason why we were created, was to protect the Jews, to protect the Jewish people. Now, the mission statement is how they thought this organization would go about it.

Adam (13:14)

But you're saying that it is not out of a political idea of some kind of mutual solidarity, locking hands with different groups. More like almost the. The privilege of a group that believes in the righteousness of its general cause and the liberal method being able to help other groups when it is enjoying success. But right now, if we are regressing, if we are regressing, does that mean regression away from the overall pluralistic. I wouldn't use. Approach.

Jonathan Greenblatt (13:46)

Well, I wouldn't use the term regression. Right. I wouldn't characterize it like that. But I would say is that. Maybe I'll use an analogy. So this is an inferno, and the neighborhood is on fire, including the homes of people. The whole block is on fire, including the homes of the people next to us, some of whom I know and some of whom I don't know. Right. Neighbors who I see every day and neighbors who I never see at all. Before I help them put out their fire, their homes that are burning, I've got to put out my house first. I'm going to put out my house first. Where my wife lives, where my children live. I'm going to put out my house first. Here's what I would say to you, Adam. Again, we have a mission statement that was written to guide an organization that was created for the purpose of protecting the Jewish people. And in a moment where we are facing unprecedented anti Semitism and in a moment where we do not see allies lining up to help us, I have no trouble being very clear with you or with anyone about where my priorities are and where I'm going to allocate my scarce resources. It's on protecting the Jewish people. So again, to say that isn't a regression. To say that is simply a demonstration of, if you ask me, realism, priorities. Yeah. So much of this is talked about in the abstract. So much of this. So many of these activists, and I use air quotes like they live in this world of the theoretical, you know, oh, like, yeah, solidarity is strength. Or, wow, these crazy slogans. Like, I don't have time for slogans. I don't have the luxury of, like, philosophizing what I deal with at this organization. Every last year in 2023, we had more than 30,000 reported incidents here. More than 30,000 each one we investigate. So, like, I don't have the luxury of, like, pontificating, oh, wouldn't it be nice if I gotta help people whose kids are getting bul. Who are getting fired from their jobs, who are getting harassed at their homes, college students are getting assaulted, like, on the quad. So, like, I don't. These, like, kind of. This kind of silly talk. I don't have time for it.

Adam (15:51)

Would you think that now, looking back to some extent, the idea that the Jewish people can only be free when everybody else is free is in itself a slogan that we don't have the luxury of at this moment?

Jonathan Greenblatt (16:03)

Well, look, slogans are just that, they're slogans. And so I appreciate the ideal of it. I really do. And again, I think it is rooted in, as we talked about, this sort of, can I say it? This Hillelian. It's rooted in the teaching of the sages. It's rooted in this classically politically liberal idea. Not like conservative liberal, but like this liberalism. And yet in this moment, our house is on fire. And I've got to put it out right.

Adam (16:34)

The way I've been thinking about this recently is it's almost like the Jewish community has been playing. The American Jewish community specifically has been playing a different game than other groups. If the Jewish community has been playing the pluralistic, liberal American game, other groups have been training the self preservationist, protectionist, tribal game. And I wonder if at this moment the American Jews realize that we don't know what game we're supposed to be playing anymore.

Jonathan Greenblatt (17:08)

Interesting. I hadn't thought about it like that.

Adam (17:10)

And it's impossible to play the liberal game when you're the only one playing it.

Jonathan Greenblatt (17:13)

Well, look, sort of game theory, if you will. I have a background in economics. There's no such thing as a one player game. Solitaire isn't a thing in game theory. And if you're playing by one set of rules and the other guy's playing by the other. The challenge with this metaphor is that the Jewish community will never thrive if we don't have allies. As we said a few minutes ago, we're only 2% of the population.

Adam (17:39)

Right. So there is also the political interest of solidarity. Right?

Jonathan Greenblatt (17:43)

Yeah, yes. And so my point would be in saying that is, we may need to look for new allies or we may need to educate the allies we currently have. And we need to make the hard decision saying, you're just not working with us anymore. So let me just put that in stark relief. We worked with a lot of American Muslim organizations. Never care. I would never work with care. Care is, you know, is an alcohol of the Muslim Brotherhood. I would never do anything, show up on a stage, make any appearance, anything to do with them. Zero, nada, nothing. But there are other groups with whom we have worked in the past. I think about one group called Muslim Advocates, which formerly was very focused on a domestic civil rights agenda. We made common calls with them on issues like zoning for religious institutions, because there are certain municipalities which have passed restrictive zoning laws to prevent, for example, a mosque from being built in their town, which is a violation of religious, the laws against religious discrimination. So we worked with them on issues like that before. And there are a lot of opportunities for common cause. ADAM however, in recent years, and particularly since Sense seven, we're not really working actively with any of them anymore. And it breaks my heart to say that. It breaks my heart to say that another group that in theory would have some similar considerations to the Jewish community here, they think about things like ritual slaughter. They think about things like ritual circumcision. They think about things like, again, where their religious institutions can be built. You would think we would be able to work together, but I'm not willing to do a litmus test on Palestine to work with someone. But by the same token, if you see, I have a very simple rule, and everybody here knows it. At adl, I think it's our job to work, to talk to anyone, everyone, with just one rule. I won't humanize people who dehumanize others. I won't humanize people who dehumanize others. So if there's an organization that dehumanizes black people, says they're subhuman or whatever, I won't talk to them. If there's a group that dehumanizes Zionists, says they're all whatever, that includes me, by the way, I won't talk to them. If you dehumanize other people, then I don't want to do anything to do with you. But we have a pretty wide berth within that now. I think one thing that the Jewish community has often done, particularly liberal Jewish groups, and now, I mean, like, a little l. Okay, they've been very precious about with the organizations or the communities with whom they would ally. So, like, some groups are unwilling to work with segments of the evangelical community because there is a. Not. Because the groups are not aligned on every issue. But you know what? Like, I've worked with a lot of African American groups over the years, and we're probably not aligned on every issue. So I think the Jewish community in this moment needs to try to think hard about who our allies are, try to find ways to underscore for our existing allies why we work together, what our core issues are, and look for new allies who work with us and accept us for who we are and what we believe.

Podcast Host (Ad reads) (20:44)

Oura frames are my favorite gift to give. I gave one to my mother several years back, and I hear from her on a near daily basis that she loves seeing the pictures that I upload. But more than that, she loves seeing the pictures that her grandkids upload, and I get feedback about what she's observing in their everyday lives. What I really love is that aura. Frames comes packaged in a premium gift box with no price tag. It already feels like a thoughtful gift even before they open it. You don't have to wrap a thing, and I'm not one for wrapping presents. For a limited time, visit auraframes.com and get $45 off Aura's best selling Carver mat frames named number one by Wirecutter by using promo code dispatch at checkout. That's a U R A frames.com promo code dispatch. This exclusive Black Friday Cyber Monday deal is their best deal of the year, so order now before it ends. Support the show by mentioning us at checkout. Terms and conditions applied at Capella University.

Capella University Narrator (Ad) (21:49)

Learning online doesn't mean learning alone. You'll get support from people who care about your success, like your enrollment specialist who gets to know you and the goals you'd like to achieve. You'll also get a designated academic coach who's with you throughout your entire program. Plus, career coaches are available to help you navigate your professional goals. A different future is closer than you think with Capella University. Learn more at capella. Edu.

Adam (22:18)

Hi, I'm here to pick up my son, Milo.

Podcast Host (Ad reads) (22:20)

There's no Milo here who picked up.

Adam (22:22)

My son from school. Streaming only on PC. I'm gonna need the name of everyone that could have a connection.

Jonathan Greenblatt (22:31)

You don't understand. It was just the five of us. So this was all planned. What are you gonna do?

Adam (22:36)

I will do whatever it takes to.

Jonathan Greenblatt (22:38)

Get my son back. I honestly didn't see this coming.

Meta Ray Ban Narrator (Ad) (22:41)

These nice people killing each other.

KFC Narrator (Ad) (22:43)

All her fault.

Adam (22:44)

A new series streaming now only on Peacock. Let's look at those two things. So, new allies. I think the most controversial moment that the ADL got itself in, at least as far as the Twitter world is concerned, is that the ADL reviewed the Elon Musk gesticulation Nazi salute and concluded that the time is too fraught, I believe was the idea conveyed and the time is too fraught to make any judgment about this. Let's give people grace and the benefit of the doubt and basically said, as probably the most prominent American voice in adjudicating antisemitism said, that we're gonna let this slide.

Jonathan Greenblatt (23:29)

Well, I don't think we've cared like that. I think we said we didn't think it was a Nazi salute and we think at the same time we understood why people are on edge. And yes, therefore, let's all take a deep breath and give grace and try to find ways to come together.

Adam (23:45)

So my question is, do you think that you would have shown Elon Musk in that moment, that kind of Grace.

Jonathan Greenblatt (23:52)

On October 6, I was in touch with Elon Musk. I've been in touch with him for a number of years. So I would have given him that grace on October 6th. I would have, because I don't think that's what he was doing there. Now, look, on the same time, Adam, as you likely tracked two days later, he did this horrible kind of chatgpt style wordplay joke about Nazis. And I called him out for that. Cause I thought that was wrong. And it was a kind of Holocaust. You have Holocaust denial and then you have Holocaust distortion. It was kind of distortion. I didn't like it. And so I said as much. And I also spoke out, I think I retweeted Danny Dayan from Yad Vashem when he spoke to the AFD meeting that weekend. So look, I don't think Alain gets it right all the time, but in that moment, I thought it was important. What I missed in that moment, in all honesty, just again, being forthright, I don't think it was intended to be. On the other hand, a lot of people felt like it was and reveled in the fact that they thought it was. And a lot of people were upset because they thought it was. So I think sometimes, Adam, there is intent and there is impact. And so whereas I think we got it right on the intent side, I think we didn't appreciate just how profound the impact would be of that because that's how people saw it. And so I think if I were to do that statement again, I probably would have worded it a little bit more carefully, but I still would have ended up in the same place, which is we all need to show each other a little bit of grace. And I think we all benefit from taking a beat before we jump to a conclusion.

Adam (25:28)

So thinking about the Elon Musk bigger picture, we were talking about the Trump administration. We're talking about a new form of right wing politics that in some ways has become an ally of at least the Israel cause, if not the greater Jewish cause. I think the Trump administration has made several declarations about looking into antisemitism in, in the federal agencies as well as in universities. Are these the new sort of allies that we are trying to cultivate? That you are trying to cultivate?

Jonathan Greenblatt (26:03)

Look, we're a tax exempt organization. And so we're nonpartisan in our sort of incorporation. And irrespective of what the critics might say, like we're not political. So we will praise politicians from both sides or both major parties when they get it right and we'll call them out when we think they get it wrong. We worked with the Biden administration. I thought they did good stuff. Like the National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism. Really important. I think it was amazing when Joe Biden said he was a Zionist and went to Israel, like a couple weeks after 10, 7. I don't know exactly, but it was that month. And at the same time, we've shared criticism. We think they got it wrong, like not taking the stuff at the university seriously enough, for example, or like the inclusion of CARE in the. As one of the reviewers or whatever it was on the report. I can't remember what the exact. Something crazy.

Adam (26:53)

I think they removed CARE afterwards.

Jonathan Greenblatt (26:55)

They did, because people like us were like, I would never sign on to anything they cared in. Now, at the same time, I think the Trump people. Look, President Trump, God bless him, he said it was gonna be a priority and he's made it a priority himself. The executive order that he issued a week or two into office was really important. Leo Terrell is running this new task force out of the DOJ that's taking a more aggressive approach, which is important. They're talking about investigations at universities, which I think is really important. And he has been unequivocally in supporting Israel vis a vis the war against Hamas, saying Haas would need to come home. And I think. I don't know what Steve Witkoff's title is, Ambassador. I'm not sure what his title is, but Steve Witkoff has done really important work, I think, to kind of catalyze the process and to get hostages home. So all that being said, for me, I think as I think about new allies, I don't think the ADL has done much work with the Hindu community over the years or the Jewish community broadly, at least not that I'm aware of. And I think then there are groups like the evangelical community who have been there for Israel for a long time and we need to do more with them. And then there are groups like members of the LDS Church, which, again, we don't do that much with. We should do more. I think the bottom line is the Jewish community is in crisis. We need to deal with that crisis. That requires acknowledging when we get it wrong, as I'm doing, but it also requires innovation and new approaches. And I think this is fundamental to our kind of go to market plan at adl.

Adam (28:25)

So to bring some of these things together, a lot of the. With every ally, you encounter problems. Right. You mentioned the LDS Church wasn't it? 10 years ago, they were baptizing that they baptized Anne Frank.

Jonathan Greenblatt (28:38)

I mean, they were baptizing people who were murdered in the Holocaust.

Adam (28:43)

Baptizing Holocaust victims. Right. So with every such ally, you encounter problems. Sometimes it's even more grotesque. With the Trump administration, you have some of the performances in cpac. Steve Bannon making the Nazi salute more overtly. Ultimately, it does come down to a political calculation of priorities and which battles to fight when and against whom. I believe with whom and against whom.

Jonathan Greenblatt (29:08)

Look, look, I think, at least for me, and I think this organization as a whole, there is always the need to have a degree of balance where you are principled, but you are also pragmatic. Like, I'm not gonna change our principles, I'm not gonna change our mission. I'm not gonna change our belief in these things. These are essential to who we are. And yet I'm gonna be pragmatic and say, as I was saying earlier, in this moment, when the Jews are under siege, like, my job is to make sure that we are safe.

Podcast Host (Ad reads) (29:36)

Right.

Adam (29:36)

So this was actually my question. So putting this all into context of priorities, what actual priorities? What is the threat? Is it just a diffuse, multiple signals of rising violence, or can you focus where this threat is coming from? Why are we seeing this kind of surge? Because if we are going to prioritize our allies, we need to have a sense of where it's coming from. Unless it's just kind of a spiritual rise in antisemitism across the board, and we can't really pinpoint it.

Jonathan Greenblatt (30:03)

Well, no, I mean, so there are. I think there were two things here. Okay, so number one, why are we in this moment today? And then I think the second question is, so what are the specific threats? And they're not necessarily the same.

Adam (30:13)

Right.

Jonathan Greenblatt (30:14)

So first, like, why are we in this moment today?

Adam (30:16)

And taking that in the context of trying to figure out what the priorities.

Jonathan Greenblatt (30:18)

Should be and therefore how you prioritize. Right. So let's take. It's like a three part question. So the first part is, why are we in this moment today? I think the moment we're in where antisemitism has skyrocketed, where, by the way, attitudes we also. So the ADL has been tracking and responding to incidents since the 1970s, and we've been measuring and studying anti Semitic attitudes since the 1960s. And in the last five years, intense antisemitic attitudes in the United States as a share of the general population have more than doubled, from 11% to 24%, which is extraordinary. And by the way, when we did a study in 2024, something we saw for the first time, which is also now we've replicated this globally. It's younger people are more likely to have anti Semitic attitudes than older people. So there's like a demographic sort of time bomb of sorts, which is really quite terrifying. So how do you get in this position? Well, I think there are a few things going on. So I think, number one, I really think that as we kind of alluded to earlier, antisemitism is almost part of the human condition. Certainly in the west, we have been for thousands of years. There's this subpopulation living on the margins of a majoritarian society, speaking a different religion, praying a different way, eating different food, et cetera, dressing differently. And we have been easy for the king or the caliph to scapegoat and blame things on. And we're living in a moment today in this world where we're seeing systems failure at scale. Distrust. The Edelman Trust Barometer shows us distrust in institutions is higher than we've seen ever. Right. Distrust in judicial system, in the judiciary, in Congress or legislatures, distrust in business, distrust in media and distrust in law enforcement.

Adam (32:12)

Higher education.

Jonathan Greenblatt (32:13)

Higher education. And so, number one, when systems fail, oftentimes you see populists who will blame others for the problem. And so I think what we're seeing now is kind of scapegoating as a political strategy. And the Jews always lose, always lose. Whether it's the left or the right, doesn't matter. Islamists, the Jews always lose in that kind of game. That's number one. Number two, we have seen the coarsening of the public conversation in recent years. There's just no doubt. I'm not gonna tell you anything you don't know, But I think politicians on both sides of the aisle and public figures more broadly, the decorum that used to dictate sort of public behavior is kind of gone. That coursing of the conversation has allowed people to say things and do things that they just wouldn't before. Maybe some. It's also the Holocaust is in recession, right? It's receding from the collective memory. And so I think that course in the conversation has also been quite toxic for us. And then thirdly, I think social media has literally amplified everything. Social media is a super spreader of antisemitism. So I think these three things have really helped to a large degree to normalize antisemitism as a political tool, as a kind of like a rally the troops strategy, all of it. So then where are the threats today here in the United States? So look, I think, number one, and you have to acknowledge that there are different fronts in this sort of war, but there's no question that the seizure of so many of the institutions of culture by what I will characterize here today as the radical left is a lot to do with this problem. You see it on the college campuses, we see it in the K12 schools. We see it in certain areas, in elements of the workplace. We see it in large swaths of what we consider maybe like the mainstream media. And I think the seizure of institutions with this sort of woke ideology that reduces people, if you will, to identity and that's it. When we play the oppression Olympics, Saddam the Jews always lose. What are the threats? Number one, that is a threat we need to push back on this ideology and this sort of DEI industrial complex which has really supported it. Second threat, I think there's absolutely an Islamist threat. So we track antisemitism. We have seen the largest state sponsor of antisemitism I've said for many years is Iran, the Islamic Republic of Iran, because it is. And we see their language and their propaganda showing up on college campuses and we see it all over social media and we see it seeping into other spaces. I still believe that. I also increasingly believe that Qatar has a lot to do with the quandary we're in and that actually although we haven't done the analytics on this, and so I'm loathe to speculate about something that I can't substantiate with data. But Al Jazeera, I think, and we see this in our attitude numbers because we look at attitudes globally, Al Jazeera has had a corrosive impact on public opinion vis a vis Jews, not Israel Jews. Okay? And I think that is a big part of the problem as well. And I think the third part of the problem here in the United States is there's also an extreme right problem. It's safe to say that the blood tribe doesn't have chapters on college campuses like sjp. But that doesn't mean that the blood tribe isn't a problem. Or the Goyim Defense League or any of these horrible, or the Patriot Front or any of these really horrible groups that are pushing out. Like when you see these anti Semitic flyers on people's yards in public places or the stickering a lot of the vandalism, very often these are these right wing groups and the kind of lone wolves that they radicalize the threats. As I'm explaining to you, I think come from different directions and they are particularly different fronts. So what's our strategy to deal with it? At the highest level, it's innovation and partnerships. But my strategy is, number one, disrupt the extremists. So we are focused on disrupting the radical left, the Islamists, the far right. So we're doing things today again in the realm of innovation and partnerships. Like, for example, we launched something after 107 called the campus antisemitism Legal Line. I don't know if you know about this, but we saw these kids who didn't know how to file Title VI cases. So we partnered with the Brandeis center and Hillel International and we brought in some other groups like Stand With Us. And as I was explaining to you, we respond to incidents. People call, email, text, they fill out an online form when they experience anti Semitism. So we use that same tech. We created a system to handle incoming complaints about Title VI violations. Didn't exist before. And in the last whatever, 15 months, we've handled over 800 Title VI complaints. When I say we've handled them. We also partnered with a bunch of very big, prominent national law firms like Gibson, Dunn, Aiken, Latham and Watkins, Covington and Burling, and we trained hundreds of lawyers on Title Virginia. So now when a complaint comes in, it gets farmed out to an associate to review. If they think it's valid, it goes for a secondary review. If they still think it's valid, then it comes back in and we decide what to do with it. I can tell you Brandeis has filed a ton of cases. We filed a ton of cases. ADL has filed more lawsuits in the last 12 months than in our previous 110 years. So we're suing not just colleges and universities. We're suing K through 12 school districts for Title VI violations. So we're doing a lot now in ways we never did before. I'll give you a second example. We've amped up the work we do tracking the bad guys. So you're here at our investigative research lab where we're taping this. I mean, again, last year alone, ADL gave over 2,700 assists to law enforcement. We identified, again, threats against Jewish communities or Jewish people. So I'm talking about, again, an Islamist posting on social media, like that nurse in Australia. I will kill. I would kill an Israeli patient. She's been arrested, by the way. We're watching, monitoring, not doing anything illegal. But when we see a threat to our community, we're calling it out for Law enforcement.

Adam (38:20)

It sounds like the approach is offense.

Jonathan Greenblatt (38:24)

It's definitely offense. And I'll share. So one thing is disrupting extremists. Second thing for us is shifting from advocacy to activism. So one of the ways we did that was with our, I would say with the new product that we just launched. ADL launched on the New York Stock Exchange on Thursday, February 27th. The first ever exchange traded Jewish exchange traded fund or an etf. It's like a bundle of stocks where you buy, like the S and P, for example. You buy a set of stocks in an area like tech or CPG or retail. So I've been worried about the BDS movement. We saw 71 BDS campaigns, sorry, 80 BDS campaigns in the academic year 23, 24. We've seen companies like Google, Amazon, Starbucks, which is even in Israel, Caterpillar, Boeing, targeted by anti Israel activists. And we're seeing these, I shouldn't even call them activists, antagonists or anarchists or some other word. Really, they're hooligans, BDS hooligans. And we've seen Jewish employees marginalized and threatened inside some of these companies. So we launched an ETF. We've already raised over $100 million. You can see it on the NYSE under the ticker symbol TOV T O V. And so we're buying the S and P to support companies that are doing the right thing on antisemitism, that are doing the right thing vis a vis Israel. Now, what's materially about that is, is.

Adam (39:54)

It a system to support them or is it a direct investment tool? Is it like the ADL's ESG?

Jonathan Greenblatt (40:00)

You could think about it like that. But I'll tell you why it's important, because what I most. Look, our investment strategy is passive, but we are passionate about our advocacy. So what do I mean by that? Again, it's a passive tool. It's an etf. We're not activist investors. But what we are going to do is unlock the ability of people who buy shares in Tove to do shareholder advocacy. So when the BDS hooligans show up at the shareholders meeting for Google, we will be there. When they propose an anti Israel resolution at Amazon shareholder meeting, we will counter it. We will work out in front and behind the scenes because now we have a seat at the table and we will use it. So that's a good example of unlocking.

Adam (40:46)

So there is a component of corporate governance that ADL is approaching 100%.

Jonathan Greenblatt (40:51)

But the third thing is changing the narrative. How do we change the way we even talk about these issues. And that leads me to their campus report card.

Adam (41:00)

Let's talk about it. I think the headline was that you've seen improvements. I need that unpacked.

Jonathan Greenblatt (41:07)

We have 100. The first time we did this in 2024, we looked at 80 universities, colleges and universities on 21. It's very ADL. We're very data driven. So we looked at them against 21 different metrics. Okay. And so when I say we looked at them, we reached out to all the schools in advance. Some responded to us, most didn't, in fairness. But what we wanted to do was create an empirical evaluation objective.

Adam (41:34)

Can you give me an example of some of those parameters?

Jonathan Greenblatt (41:36)

So there are three different categories, one of which is Jewish life on campus, which is pretty straightforward. Hillel, chabad on campus, kosher dining, Jewish fraternities, and so on and so forth. Second one is a number of incidents.

Adam (41:49)

Is it the number of existing chapters or whether they're allowed to persist without interruption?

Jonathan Greenblatt (41:55)

So first thing, do you even have a Hillel, for example? And then the second set of criteria are incidents, anti Semitic or anti Israel, demonstrations, speakers, crimes, arrests, things like that. Again, things that we can entirely track. And then the third thing are policies and procedures. Like, for example, if you do mandatory whatever, sensitivity training, do you include antisemitism? Do you have a policy against bds? Again, everything was public. We didn't hide the ball. You could see all of the different criteria and the weighting. And we evaluated 80 schools, and a large number of very prominent schools got Fs. And by the way, we didn't grade on a curb. I should say it's really important. Like, the goal wasn't to fail anybody. I want everyone to get an A. I wanted to create a race to the top. And I thought that by being doing this in an objective manner and very transparent, schools would see what they had to do. Now, when we undertook this, Adam, I was told, or we were told this was a very bad idea, that schools would not work with us if we embarrassed them. And in fact, we reached out to Hillel directors to get their input. None of them worked with us the first time. When I say none of them, I mean zero. At the 80 schools we reached out to, they didn't want to work with us because they didn't like this idea.

Adam (43:08)

Interesting. What was the language? Because we were talking about schools at the height of. Of DEI and the logic of intersectionality. What was their rejection?

Jonathan Greenblatt (43:19)

I think they were afraid that we were going to be I don't know, like maybe not objective or that we would use subjective measures. I really, again, it's hard for me to tell you what they thought. But let me tell you the postscript. So we released it and in the ensuing year, 70% of the schools that we graded worked with us to improve their grades. How do we do an antisemitism training? How do we do an anti vds policy? How do we handle incidents when they happen, and so on and so forth. 70%. We decided we would do this on an annual basis. This time we went from 21 measures to 30 measures, from 80 schools to 135 schools. I told you before, 0hillel directors worked with us the first time. This time between Hillel and Chabad on campus, over 100 worked with us. And the good news is a number of schools did better. Overall, of the schools we originally graded, somewhere in the ballpark of 50% improved. I think a little north of 50%. 10% went up two grades and 40 some odd percent went up one grade.

Adam (44:29)

What I'm trying to understand is when these schools are working with you to look at some of these criteria, can you give me an example of where you saw the improvement? Because from my perspective, some of the problems are not just cosmetic or they're not accidental. They are the result of a pedagogy that exists in those schools. What you were mentioning, the two first threats, one being the radical left I think you called it, and the other one being Islamism, to some Qatari money and Iranian funding. A lot of this comes together in the pedagogy of American elite education, especially in some corners of the humanities and social sciences. These things are not the random disruptor. Those things come from a very profound baseline of intellectual beliefs in theories that conclude that Jews are oppressors without even bringing in Israelis, that Jews by their success in the Western meritocracy are the perpetuators of white supremacy, et cetera, et cetera.

Jonathan Greenblatt (45:42)

Yeah, I mean, look, I think, although it's certainly true that some quarters of the academy have been seized, as I'm saying, by this ideology. I don't think it's endemic to the entire institution per se. But I think the one thing that's very real is a lot of these university presidents and this was on full display through these congressional hearings. I mean, think about it. Dwight Eisenhower was once the president of, I think Columbia. Larry Summers was the president of Harvard. Now we have middling middle managers at these institutions. So there's not a lot of moral courage on the front lines. And so that lack of moral courage, when you have bureaucrats in leadership roles combined with, again, some radicals who've sort of captured the conversation is a very sort of toxic equation.

Adam (46:28)

I agree it's grim. But in lieu of moral courage and real intellectual leadership, who do you turn to to turn the tide?

Jonathan Greenblatt (46:37)

Well, I think what's happened is you've seen donors and alumni literally see this as a call to arms. They've mobilized in ways we've never seen before. The Mothers Against Campus antisemitism Facebook group has over 60,000 members, and it came together, in a manner of speaking, overnight. And you've seen people like Bill Ackman, Len Blavatnik, Mark Rowan, Dan Loeb, many other very prominent alum of Ivy League institutions who've used their reputation and their muscle to mobilize other alums. And on top of that, look, credit where credit is due. Again, although there's a lot of reason to criticize Congress generally, specifically, what the House Education Workforce Committee did in the last session was remarkable. Congresswoman Stefanik did in her grilling of the presidents of Penn, MIT and Harvard was remarkable. And I think it literally changed the course of this issue. So now what I'm seeing is universities like at Barnard. We had an issue at Barnard where these students flyered right Middle east studies class at the beginning of the year. You probably saw that they've been expelled. Imagine if that had happened when this started to manifest on October 8th, 9th and 10th. And maybe it's happening because of the pressure from Washington and the federal government. God bless.

Adam (48:00)

But you see, my thinking here is, if I'm correct and it is endemic, then a lot of these changes are merely cosmetic. And I think there's a lot of motivation among American Jews who really believe in the meritocracy and want to send their kids to the best schools to rehabilitate these institutions, which makes an assumption that they can be rehabilitated. Right. Like my dream when some of the madness on campus started was to see a version of the New School. The New School was originally formed by ex Columbia professors who rebelled against those campuses. I wanted to see Exodus University. I wanted to see all that money turning to build something new that says.

Jonathan Greenblatt (48:43)

We put that would have been a.

Adam (48:44)

Very clear those Jewish values. What ADL spoke about, like when Jews succeed, everybody succeeds. Paraphrasing and taking that. We are gonna create a new model for meritocracy that is led by this mission rather than rehabilitate these institutions that have abandoned us.

Jonathan Greenblatt (48:59)

Well, you did see, look You've seen things like the University of Texas at Austin, and you've seen you at the high school level, classic schools start to appear that are explicitly focused on teaching the Western canon in the great books, which I think is terrific. I mean, on the one hand, I also sort of. I sympathize with this idea of Exodus University. At the same time, I'm not willing to cede. I'm not willing to give up the Ivy League to the lunatics. So I do think the idea of reforming them, if you will, the idea of fixing them, I think it's a noble pursuit. Now, not everything can be fixed.

Adam (49:35)

We're having the reform versus abolish debate here, right?

Jonathan Greenblatt (49:38)

You know, my friend Daniel Lubecky of kind, you know, the founder of Kind Bars, he talks about this builders movement. I believe we need to be builders. I am an institutionalist. I run the adl, for goodness sakes. We're an institution. But I also believe. I'm a former entrepreneur and I believe in the value of building. I don't think it's either or. I think it can be both. And it's very possible that some schools cannot be saved. It's very possible that some will just fail the test. If you go back to the inception of the modern university, I think it's Humboldt University in Germany, which is considered the first original research university in what we now consider the classic mold. Humboldt University isn't even on the radar today. What was the pinnacle of world learning 150 years ago is. I think it's still there, but I don't think it's the best university in Germany, let alone in the world. It's very possible in 50 years the Harvards and the Penns and the MITs won't be what they are now and that we'll see a new crop of schools. You're already seeing it in some ways. Look at Vanderbilt, look at Washu. Those are two examples of schools which have always been good schools, but have done incredibly well in recent years. Because I think they're getting refugees who might have otherwise gone, if you'll excuse the term, to the Ivy League. And by the way, you're also seeing places like. I'm hearing these stories anecdotally. I don't know if it's true or not, and I haven't seen the data to back it up. But Southern state schools like Alabama, Tennessee, who have seen a massive Georgia, massive spike in enrollment and like applications, I should say so there may be the need to build some new institutions. There may be the need to reform other institutions. There may be the need to revitalize others that have potential and promise.

Meta Ray Ban Narrator (Ad) (51:24)

Introducing Meta Ray Ban Display the world's most advanced AI glasses with a full color display built into the lens of the glasses. It's there with when you need it and gone when you don't. Send and receive messages, translate or caption live conversations, collaborate with Meta, AI and more. Be one of the first to try Meta Ray ban display. Visit meta.com metaraybanddisplay to book a demo and find your pair.

Podcast Host (Ad reads) (51:53)

It's easy to see how payroll and HR tasks can quickly take over your time. I've seen how stressful it can be for small teams without the right tools, and I can only imagine how much tougher it is for bigger ones. Let's be real. No one launches a business because they're passionate about payroll or tax paperwork. You do it to build something meaningful and take care of your team. That's where Gusto makes all the difference, handling payroll, benefits and compliance so you can stay focused on what truly matters, growing your business and supporting your people. Gusto is online payroll and benefits software built for small businesses. It's all in one remote, friendly and incredibly easy to use so you can pay, hire onboard and support your team from anywhere. What's really appealing about Gusto is how simple they make everything. Payroll taxes, file automatically, direct deposits.

Adam (52:43)

Easy.

Podcast Host (Ad reads) (52:44)

And if you want to offer benefits like health insurance, commuter benefits or whatever, Gusto has options to fit almost any budget. And here's a big one. Unlimited payroll runs for one monthly price. No hidden fees, no surprises. You know exactly what you're paying for and that peace of mind really matters when you're running a small business. Plus, it's quick and simple to switch to Gusto. Try gusto today@gusto.com dispatch and get three months free when you run your first payroll. That's three months free of payroll@gusto.com dispatch one more time. Gusto.com dispatch.

Adam (53:24)

How do you think we should be having the anti Zionism versus Anti Semitism debate? And I just want to give it some more context. Like you. Obviously you've supported the definition of anti Zionism as a form of antisemitism as differentiated from just criticism of Israel. Anti Zionism as a movement assumes that the Jewish people have no right for self determination. The reason it gets difficult is because a lot of the opposition to the idea that anti Zionism should be included in the mission of fighting anti Semitism comes from the Jewish community. In fact, I believe that several members of the ADL have quit in protest of the ADL's position on anti Zionism. How do we have this conversation when there was a disagreement in the Jewish community about this point?

Jonathan Greenblatt (54:10)

Look, Jews have disagreed about. Look, Cain and Abel disagreed, right? Adam and Eve disagreed.

Adam (54:17)

Technically they weren't Jews yet.

Jonathan Greenblatt (54:19)

Fair, fair. When Moses led them out of Egypt, the Jewish people disagreed. Disagreement, debate, dispute. This is central to our tradition. So I think we need to recognize that. But to your point or as you led into about the debate about anti Zionism versus St. Simpson, there is no debate, there just isn't a debate. So if you are rooted in fact, it isn't a debate. Anti Zionism is anti Semitism. Again, if you believe in these classic. I suppose it's fair. If you don't believe in any notions of nationalism, it's fair. If you are a College student studying 19th century theories of the nation state or whatever, I think it's fair that you could define yourself as well, I don't believe in any nation state. I don't believe in Zionism. Okay, I think it's fair again in some abstract sort of manner. By the way, one of the things that the Jewish anti Zionist left to cite is oh, there was debate about forming the state of Israel in the United States. Like I think the Reform movement may have been against it. Like some very prominent American Jewish rabbis, the American Jewish Committee wasn't for it, you know. But it's not only is it unfair.

Adam (55:31)

In America generally it was the goyim that were more in support of the Zionist project than many in the Jewish community.

Jonathan Greenblatt (55:38)

Well, I don't know. Okay, so at least according to Walter.

Adam (55:41)

Russell Mead's, what I would simply say.

Jonathan Greenblatt (55:43)

Is that I think not only is that comparison unf. Not only is it fair, I think it's obscene.

Adam (55:49)

It's obscene in 2025.

Jonathan Greenblatt (55:51)

So flash forward to today. As I was alluding to at the beginning of this conversation, anti Zionism is this persistent form of bigotry and it's complex, it's different than different forms of hate. Again, there was a time when the hate against Jews was because ostensibly their religion was different and they didn't accept Jesus, they didn't accept Muhammad as the prophets and so it was like a religious based hate. And then after the Age of Enlightenment the scientific revolution was upon us and such then it became a science based anti Semitism. Well, oh, eugenics, right. Where a different. Hitler's famous quote was the Jews are definitely a race, just not a human one. And then after in the Wake of the Shoah, the eugenics was exposed as a fraud and racialized hate was revealed for its endpoint. Then it became again, if you will, like a political kind of anti Semitism. Well, we don't hate the Jews for their religion. We don't hate the Jews because they're a different race. We hate the Jews for their state. But these are all manifestations of the same pernicious, ugly antipathy toward Jews.

Adam (56:53)

So you, not unlike me, see this as part of the same genealogy, shape shifting creature that is anti Semitism or Jewish hate.

Jonathan Greenblatt (57:01)

All the historians who've studied this will tell you the same.

Adam (57:03)

Except that as we know, if you go out to the Upper west side, pick a random member of the tribe and ask them about it, they're more likely to disagree. And increasingly we see that younger Jews see this as a deeper fault line than before. And I'm not even bringing groups like Jewish Voices for Peace who often make a mockery of Jewish tradition itself. I'm talking about people who value their diasporic identity deeply.

Jonathan Greenblatt (57:31)

The diasporic identity that we enjoy is a privilege because of the state of Israel.

Adam (57:36)

It's a fair argument. But they see Israel as a blight and also as the cause of their trouble. They see the rise in local antisemitism as a response to Israeli militarism.

Jonathan Greenblatt (57:48)

Like if we'll just convert, maybe King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella will leave us alone. Right? If we'll just, you know, be patriotic Germans, maybe the Third Reich will leave us alone. You know, maybe the Stalin will leave us alone if we just swear our allegiance to the Communist Party like Jews have so often. It's interesting we were alluding to this before. Jews have always pursued their golden calf that they think will save them. And whether it's communism or whether it's a kind of fascism or whether it's a false religion, or whether now indeed it's this illusion that their anti Zionism will save them. It's unfortunate. Again, I think it's a historical condition of our community that we look for this golden calf. But as that golden calf was a fake idol, so is this pursuit of anti Zionism a different kind of idolatry? And I think it's incredibly not just wrong headed, it's unhealthy for us. Look, Zionism, I would say to you, and I would say to that Jew in the Upper west side or to that young person, Zionism didn't start in 1948 and it didn't start with Theodore Herzl in 1897 with the Juden Stadt, right, Zionism started 3,000 years ago. You can't open up a Sidur or a Jewish prayer book in any synagogue anywhere on the planet Earth. Flip a page, every page, you have references to Zion and to Yerushalayim and to Eretz Yisra' El and so on and so forth. Like there's a reason why every synagogue on the planet Earth, the altar, if you will, the Bima, you know, is facing east towards Jerusalem, like it is intrinsic to our tradition. And to try to suggest that, oh, I don't hate Jews, I just hate Zionism. I mean, one can certainly say that, one can certainly make that assertion. But it's like saying, I don't hate humans, I just hate people. I mean, it's illogical. And whether or not it is. So here's the important thing, Adam, and this is what's coming upon us as the ADL Jewish leadership, the State of Israel, like anyone, people with common sense, there needs to be much better education because again, remember you asked me about Elon Musk. Your intent as an anti, so called anti Zionist might not be to be anti Semitic. Maybe you somehow think this is a legitimate school of thought. But I am telling you the impact is antisemitism. I am telling you that's what it is. And we know this at ADL because we study it and we track it and we see it every day. So I guess one could say in some degree it's a come upon, you know, look, I don't run Hebrew schools, you know, and I don't run the education system. But we need to do a better job of educating young people about what these issues are so they understand that the issue. There is no debate about anti Zionist antisemitism. Anti Zionism is a 21st century form of anti Semitism and we need to treat it as such.

Adam (60:34)

This is the education to the Jews. What do you do as the ADL when you're presented with this debate and then you're put against a Jew telling you, well, I think anti Semitism they're not. But the difficulty for me here is as an organization that wants to make an offensive defense and some of these threats are being protected by other Jews, how do you navigate?

Jonathan Greenblatt (60:57)

Look, it's a fair question and it is definitely a challenge, but your identity doesn't exempt you from intolerance. You could be black and say racist things, and you could be gay and say homophobic things, and you can be Jewish and say anti Semitic things.

Adam (61:12)

So you would tell a Jew making this argument you are giving sucker to antisemitism, you are promulgating on that.

Jonathan Greenblatt (61:18)

I have told Jewish people that because it's the fact. And again, whether they. So again, back to the equation with Elon Musk, Intent and impact, they're certainly not always the same, but we need to recognize the importance of both. So whether that Jewish person intends to be doing self harm, whether that person intends to be promulgating antisemitism, I don't know. But that doesn't mean that that's not exactly what's happening.

Adam (61:45)

I want to give you the chance to talk about any other project that we should have our attention drawn to.

Jonathan Greenblatt (61:49)

We haven't talked about K through 12 schools. You asked me at the top of this conversation about civil rights. I now think we're moving to the field of education policy. So issues like curricula review, tenure reform, university governance, funding, academic funding, these are all things that we need to now be looking at. And we're beginning to look at them in a very serious way. So I mean, those frothing lunatics who are assaulting Jewish kids on the college campuses, they're not going to Goldman Sachs, they're not going to Google, they're going to grad school. And a number of them are in what we might call the social sciences. And we're seeing a lot of their ideas, if not the people themselves, seep into the curricula of these different school systems. And so we're certainly seeing things like ethnic studies and other sort of curricular interventions that politicize classrooms in ways that I think are incredibly unhelpful and flat out wrong and actually lay the path for the kind of problems we're talking about on the college campus. And I think classrooms should be places that are not poisoned by the politics of a particular individual. Kids should be able to learn all points of view. Kids should be able to not feel impinged upon because of their identity. But that's what's happening in places. We've got to tackle it.

Adam (63:13)

So it sounds like even now you're still prioritizing, promoting the pluralist mission, protecting the Jewish identity through the pluralistic ideal.

Jonathan Greenblatt (63:21)

Again, we have a core purpose here, which is to protect the Jewish people and the mission. The way we go about it is what I said at the top. That isn't changing. Again in this moment, we're prioritizing appropriately in light of the problem that we face.

Adam (63:33)

This is a question that I borrow from my other podcast, but I'm interested in your thoughts on this. What do you see as the blind spots as far as your field is concerned on the left and the blind spots on the right.

Jonathan Greenblatt (63:43)

I think the left, again, even in their intersectional frameworks, fail to grasp antisemitism as the multifaceted problem that it is. It's sort of a round peg in the square hole of American concept of race. Americans identify race by how you look essentially right, how you present. You were speaking about these Jews in the Upper west side, if you will. There are Jewish people who daven multiple times a day who are visibly, observably Jewish. And there are Jews who say I'm an atheist, so I'm an atheist, but I'm Jewish. So you're not religious. I'm a cultural Jew. Well, what does that mean? Because my wife is Iranian. Her culture is very different than a Jew from Argentina, very different than a Jew from Belgium. So what does that mean? Well, I'm ethnically Jewish. What does that mean? So I think Jews manifest and show up in all these different ways. And so it's complicated for someone who has a very one dimensional notion of kind of race and identity. Even though they say it's intersectional to handle a Jewish person who shows up and is dark skinned, it doesn't comport with the way we think about it. So I think the left has failed to grasp the nuances of the Jewish community like Jews of color or Mizrahi Jews. And I think the left has also failed to understand the relationship that Jews have to Israel. So often fails to grasp why anti Zionism is anti Semitism. They don't see that. And if you're not acculturated in it, maybe I can kind of give them a little bit of latitude if you don't understand this deep abiding relationship. So I think they need education there. What's the blind spots on the right? Look, I mean, if you think pardoning, if anyone thinks pardoning Oath keepers and proud boys and 3 percenters who participated in the criminal act on January 6th is a good thing. I don't know what your parents taught you or where you went to school. People who violently assaulted police officers. I understand that right now some may see them in the service of some higher purpose, but extremism of any kind is dangerous. It's combustible and it can turn on you like that. And so I worry a great deal about a world in which we have kind of validated armed militias. I'm not talking about people who believe in the second amendment. I mean violent armed militia members who've demonstrated propensity to commit acts of violence or white supremacists. You know, the guy who was wearing the Camp Auschwitz sweatshirt? Again, I don't care how you vote.

Adam (66:24)

That was on January 6th.

Jonathan Greenblatt (66:26)

Yes. I'm sorry. Yeah. And went to the Capitol. I don't care how you vote. I care what you value. And I think people who sort of soft pedal that or discount that, I think they do so at their own peril.

Adam (66:39)

Jonathan Greenbullet, thank you so much.

Jonathan Greenblatt (66:41)

Thank you, Adam. Nice to talk to you. It.