American Antisemitism turns violent

[WORLD] Three times this year, Jews have been attacked with murderous intent in major US cities, their assailants invoking the plight of Palestinians in Gaza as justification. The latest, a broad-daylight firebombing in Boulder, Colorado, targeted peaceful demonstrators—many elderly—whose only “crime” was demanding the release of Israeli hostages. Violence shadowed by chants of “Free Palestine” now serves as a chilling new currency of American antisemitism—one that cloaks itself in activist slogans while targeting synagogues, homes, and even elderly peace demonstrators. America now confronts a strategic crossroads: tolerate this normalization of ideological extremism, and we risk unraveling the pluralistic DNA that’s made the US both a moral beacon and an economic fortress. What’s at stake? Not just the safety of Jewish communities, but the market confidence and global credibility forged through decades of social stability. “No one will scare me off because of my Jewish identity,” declared a Boulder survivor, her defiance underscoring a bitter truth—when firebombs replace debate, the cost isn’t measured in burns alone, but in the erosion of trust that fuels innovation and foreign investment.

“No one will scare me off because of my Jewish identity,” wrote one survivor, but the question for leaders is: will we let the extremes on left and right dictate the terms of our civic life—and our risk calculus?

Context: The Escalation of Ideological Violence

The United States has long prided itself on being a haven for religious and ethnic minorities, but recent events signal a dangerous erosion of that legacy. In Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, a US citizen broke into the governor’s residence on Passover, setting fire to the home while the family dined, their safety ensured only by quick-acting security. Weeks later, two Jewish Israeli embassy workers were murdered in Washington, DC, at an event focused on Gaza’s humanitarian crisis. The assailant, again a US citizen, reportedly sought out Jews to kill in retaliation for Israel’s military actions. The Boulder attack, perpetrated by an Egyptian national shouting “Free Palestine,” left a dozen peaceful activists—many elderly—hospitalized with burns.

These incidents are not isolated. According to the Anti-Defamation League, antisemitic incidents in the US surged by over 300% in the months following October 7, 2023, with many attacks explicitly linked to the Israel-Hamas conflict. The targets are not government officials or military installations, but ordinary Jewish Americans—often those publicly advocating for peace or humanitarian relief. “This is not about parsing legalisms of whether it is a legitimate protest to harm or kill civilians. It isn’t. Full stop,” as one commentator put it, underscoring the moral clarity required in this moment.

Strategic Comparison: The Left, the Right, and the Market’s Blind Spot

It is tempting to view this violence as a fringe phenomenon, but that would be a strategic error. The rhetoric fueling these attacks emerges from both ends of the political spectrum. On the far left, a delegitimizing ideology—rooted in the language of “settler colonialism” and the erasure of Israel—has created an environment where violence against Jews is rationalized as resistance. “The desire for erasure opened the floodgates to those who think they are being one of the team by killing with a slogan as their battle cry,” notes one analyst. Even when perpetrators lack formal ties to radical groups, the ambient rhetoric matters.

Meanwhile, the American right has weaponized antisemitism for political gain. Former President Trump and his allies have seized on attacks like Boulder to advance anti-immigrant agendas, often ignoring the victims themselves. “Trump’s destructive weaponizing of antisemitism to promote his own authoritarian agenda will not keep one Jew safe: in fact, it does the opposite,” as critics have observed. This cynical exploitation does nothing to address the root causes of violence and, if anything, exacerbates polarization.

For business leaders and investors, this is not merely a moral issue. Social instability and sectarian violence are leading indicators of market risk. The US has historically enjoyed a “stability premium” in global capital markets, attracting investment thanks to its robust civil society and rule of law. Erosion of that trust—especially if violence against minorities is seen as tolerated or politically expedient—poses a direct threat to the US’s economic standing and soft power. As we saw in past cycles, from the civil rights unrest of the 1960s to post-9/11 backlash, markets eventually price in social risk.

Implication: What Leaders, Investors, and Policymakers Must Do

The strategic imperative is clear: the US cannot afford to let ideological extremes—on either side—dictate the terms of civic engagement or public safety. For founders and business leaders, the lesson is to build organizational cultures that reject all forms of hate, regardless of political origin. Investors should factor social cohesion and reputational risk into their due diligence, especially when evaluating exposure to markets or sectors vulnerable to polarization.

Policymakers must resist the temptation to score points by exploiting tragedy. Instead, they should double down on bipartisan efforts to strengthen hate crime enforcement, invest in community resilience, and promote civic education that emphasizes pluralism. The left must reckon with the consequences of rhetoric that blurs the line between protest and incitement, while the right must abandon the politics of scapegoating and exclusion. As one survivor wrote, “We want to be safe. We want to be heard. We want to be seen in our diversity, as would any people.”

Our Viewpoint

The attacks in Harrisburg, Washington, and Boulder are not aberrations—they are warnings. When ideological fervor, left or right, becomes a license to dehumanize and attack, everyone loses: communities, markets, and the nation’s global standing. The strategic risk is not only to Jewish Americans, but to the pluralistic order that underwrites American prosperity and innovation. Leaders must reject the false binary that pits security against inclusion, or justice against safety. The only sustainable path forward is one that affirms the dignity and safety of all, refusing to let violence become the language of political expression. Anything less is not only a moral failure—it is a strategic blunder.