Every year stopantisemitism.org holds a vote for who they believe deserves the title of "antisemite of the year". Candidates for the final vote in 2024 were Candace Owens, Greta Thunberg and Hasan Piker, and Candace Owens was the winner.
If no winner is selected for 2025 this market resolves N/A.
1,000People are also trading
Let’s consider four vectors of antisemitism
Individual level: some people hold hostile beliefs toward Jews (Fuentes is a clean example even without the exact “I hate Jews” sentence, because statements like “Jews are doing the work of Satan” express a negative, essentializing belief about Jews as a group—though Nick is also 2 and 3 below).
Meme level: antisemitic “packages” travel in forms that create plausible deniability: “globalists,” “Zionists,” “bankers,” “media,” “dual loyalty,” “cabal,” “child traffickers,” “who is funding this,” etc. The point is not that these are always antisemitic, but that they’re highly reusable templates that can carry antisemitic meaning while giving the speaker an escape hatch.
Algorithmic Capture/Ecosystem level: incentives select for the memetic form. If direct “I hate Jews” gets you banned/fired, the people who do hate Jews learn to speak in coded ways, and fellow travelers can amplify the code while insisting it’s “just politics” or “just questions.”
Harm level (materialization): the rhetoric → targeting → real-world effects: harassment, doxxing, threats, vandalism, discriminatory policy, exclusion, or physical violence. This is where it stops being “discourse analysis” and becomes measurable harm.
Some people occupy multiple vectors, some just one.
The arguments that I’m hearing, for the most part, are that vectors 1 and 4 are the only ones that should matter. I agree in terms of vector 4, however, I believe vector 1 matters least of all.
If someone just sits and home and hates Jews, but is otherwise law-abiding, I don’t really care. Their antisemitism has a low or negligible ”R naught.” It doesn’t spread or spreads little relative to the other vectors.
I’d associate vectors 2 and 3 with people like Cenk, Ana and Ms. Rachel. People will be quick to say most of that they do is criticize Israel or help children. I 100% agree there—that is most of what they do. This is one way plausible deniability works, and exactly how motte-and-bailey works.
Antisemitic memes (in the Dawkins sense) don’t care if most of what you do is help children. In fact, you will almost certainly be a better host for them if most of what you do is help children. You’ll create a memetic synergy (positive interaction effects) or “cultural epistasis.”
Take the below as an example. Ms. Rachel had a million other things she could say here to advocate for Gazan children without stepping near the “Jew killed Jesus” blood libel. Similarly, if she wanted to amplify a Palestinian journalist whose public work consistently treats Jewish lives as morally real while also advocating hard for Palestinians she could have picked Daoud Kuttab, Ahmed Shihab-Eldin or Rula Jebrea—rather than someone spouting dehumanizing moral arithmetic like Motaz Azaiza.
It fair to say that someone who unwittingly hosts antisemitic memes is perhaps different than your grumpy old uncle who uses phrases like “Jew down the price.” Perhaps a good way to encourage them to behave more wittingly is to make a list of people who exemplify such unexamined and epistemically irresponsible behavior, and they’ll have a great idea of how not to behave.
@CraigTalbert Is that the worst miss Rachel did? Tell the truth about what may happen to Jesus if he resurrected in Gaza right now? That explains the hate. For sure....
@CraigTalbert This is not an example of blood libel. You seem to just be using phrases without knowing what they mean. The blood libel is a false and antisemitic accusation that Jews murder non-Jewish people, particularly children, to use their blood in religious rituals.
The post you shared from Ms. Rachel is a straightforward repetition of Christ's exhortation in the Sermon on the Mount, that by giving food to the hungry, "Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me"
In no way did she claim the classic blood libel, nor did she claim that Jews killed Jesus.
You overcomplicate it with the crap about how Dawkins thinks memes have a life of their own, and helping children is actually just plausible deniability.
Occam's razor would dictate that we should choose the simplest explanation, and it seems like the simplest explanation is that this woman wants children in Gaza to not starve.
Personally I think that the antisemite of the year award should go to Kanye West for his song "Heil Hitler." That seems a little bit more antisemitic, to me, than a woman complaining that Jesus wouldn't approve of starvation in Gaza.
Maybe ms. Rachel is secretly antisemitic in her heart of hearts, I know not. But at least she didn't release a song called "Heil Hitler."
@TiredCliche The contest has a rule to avoid repetition from previous years, like if you can't give a second MVP to Michael Jordan because he already got it.
@MiguelLM And I am in my rights to complain about the rule. Regardless of him winning in 2022, he put in the effort to be the worst antisemite of 2025; an award-giving body ought to recognize this achievement.
Doesn't Jordan have six MVP rings, anyway?
@TiredCliche you are absolutely right to complain. I tried to highlight the absurd of the rule with the comparison.
Everything around this contest seems to be absurd: the purpose of the contest, the rules, the nominees selection, the expected result vs. the reactions, the lack of transparency about the voting and the "winner" selection, ...
@TiredCliche I should have just said “libel” rather than blood libel. “Jews killed Jesus” is a well-known antisemitic libel as in a defamatory false accusation.
Occam’s Razor tells us an explanation has to fit all the relevant facts (parsimony, not just simplicity). If she was reaching for words and analogies to advocate to children suffering in Gaza, why is it that out of all of the possible worlds and combinations of them to do this, she settled on the one that sounds a well-known libel? You would say, an accident? Random chance?
@MiguelLM Yes I’m very familiar with Jews for Racial and Economic Justice, Jewish Voice for Peace, the Satmar, Neturei Karta, etc.
The existence of dissenting or fringe in-group members does not logically immunize a claim from being antisemitic. Antisemitism is about the content, tropes (tropes are a kind of meme), and targets of the claim, not the what a curated list of in-group validators would say.
@MichaelTardibuono if Jesus was resurrected in Gaza right now I think he would suggest a few things: (1) teach your children to love your neighbor as yourself; (2) stop using house-borne IEDs and otherwise booby trapping civilian infrastructure; (3) money spent on rockets and tunnels would be better spent feeding and clothing the poor… I think it would be pretty awesome if it happened. One of the few things that could reliably put a stop to the conflict
@TiredCliche re: “You overcomplicate it with the crap about how Dawkins thinks memes have a life of their own, and helping children is actually just plausible deniability.”
An antisemitic trope is a memetic template. It gets copied and recombined with other templates and faces selection pressure based on status, outrage, coalition signaling, and deniability.
"An antisemitic trope is a memetic template. It gets copied and recombined with other templates and faces selection pressure based on status, outrage, coalition signaling, and deniability."
Dude, just say "ideas develop and spread based on how society reacts to them". Wrapping a truism with fancy jargon doesn't make you sound smart.
@ItsMe solid restatement, but calling it ‘just a truism’ is a dodge. Mocking precision does not answer the mechanism. The mechanism matters because bigotry survives via variation, recombination, and plausible deniability. Saying ideas spread is true, but not a counter-argument. The question is which ideas spread, why, and how they get laundered through ambiguity and social incentives. That’s what this award targets.
Glenn Greenwald said he voted for Ms Rachel, Marcia Cross and Guy Christensen.
@NzJack0n it will be really hard to find in a couple of years a single human being without the tag genocidal or antisemite attached to their name, given the current expansion pace of both terms.
Hilarious video, thanks for sharing.
Stew is the only one who publicly accepted Guy’s proposal for “a roundtable livestream with all the antisemites on this year’s lineup of anti-Zionists”. This is a signal he will also try to capitalize on his nomination.
https://x.com/realstewpeters/status/1996098834397581428?s=52
In Stew’s own words:
“Don’t forget that I was named the world’s #1 Anti-Semitic Influencer by the Center for Countering Digital Hate and the Jewish Council for Public Affairs after they conducted a year-long statistical analysis. Keep that in mind when casting your vote for Anti-Semite of the Year!”
https://x.com/realstewpeters/status/1996255530973610023
But this post was seen by 30k followers, compared to 670k in the Guy video.
@MiguelLM Stew peters is a genuine anti semite though. I hadn’t heard of Guy before this vote, from what I’ve seen he seems pro Palestine, but if he thinks stew peters is only an ‘anti Zionist’, Guy may be anti Semitic himself.
@Jack0 I’m on the age cohort that doesn’t have a TikTok account and I don’t follow many <=20 years old influencers, but my ignorance doesn’t imply they don’t have numerous and active audience. We may have nominees that are less popular in traditional media, but more exposed to Internet polls voters, I’m not sure.
@Jack0 Thanks for your insights, very valuable to me.
9 out of 10 nominees where unknow to me before this market, I don't live in the US. I only did a quick check of their public reactions.
If I do an uninformed Venn diagram, the conjunction of “popular in Internet” (Tucker, Guy, Ms Rachel) and “campaigns to win” (Stew, Guy), Guy is in both circles. It would be useful to know also about the circle “Perceived by the public as real antisemite?”. What is your view?
@MiguelLM I don’t have tiktok either. I had actually heard of everyone in this except Guy, Marcia and Calla before voting started. The 2 I know are anti semites are Stew and Bryce. I’m not sure on Tucker, and I don’t think the rest are, although I’m a bit undecided on Calla and Guy.
It’s hard to tell for me who’s voting, is it People who are voting for the worst antisemites, or for a joke, or for their favourite creators.
Yeah based on his tiktok audience, Guy seems a good chance, definitely of making it to the next round of top 3.
‘Perceived by the public as an antisemite’ Is hard because if ONLY pro Israel people believe you are anti Semitic I find it a bit hard to believe. For example, I’ve seen Jewish people defending Ms Rachel and Cynthia Nixon. And They just don’t come across as anti semetic at all, unless you think criticising Israel means you hate Jewish people.
Whereas I doubt Stew Peters would be defended from the Pro Palestine or Pro Israel side.