Antisemitism has historically adapted to the language and prejudices of its era. Today, two major strains, often intertwined, have found new energy online:
- Religious narratives that recast Judaism as evil or conspiratorial
- Racial or “genetic” narratives that deny or demean Jewish peoplehood
Since October 7, 2023, both strands have surged on social media: more than 1.8 million mentions have invoked genetics in the context of Israel or Judaism, a 188% increase compared to the previous two years. Religious antisemitism has grown more dramatically within the same period, with 5 million mentions of themes such as deicide, depictions of Judaism as satanic or evil, or distortions of the Talmud––a 296% increase from the previous two years.
Religious Antisemitism and Its Online Resurgence
The oldest form of Jewish hate is religious antisemitism. Sometimes referred to as theological antisemitism, this prejudice targets Jewish beliefs, practices, and sacred texts. It stretches back to at least the third century BCE in Egypt. While racial antisemitism rose to prominence in the modern era culminating in the Holocaust, religious antisemitism provided the earliest foundation for portraying Jews as inherently dangerous.
Today, many of these age-old narratives are being revived and reshaped on social media. After October 7, 2023, online conversations that likened Judaism to Satanism or described it as evil spiked sharply.
Social media mentions calling Judaism evil, satanic, or the devil
Religious Antisemitism Manifests Online
Religious antisemitism has historically appeared in multiple forms. The most prominent of them include, but are not limited to:
- Blood libels falsely accusing Jews of murdering Christian children for ritual purposes, fueling pogroms and suspicion
- Deicide accusations blaming Jews collectively for the death of Jesus
- “Synagogue of Satan” language casting Jews as agents of evil
- Attacks on the Talmud portraying Judaism as corrupt or subversive
All four manifestations have shifted and adapted over time, and all are prevalent on social media today. We have tracked over 340,000 social media posts using the phrase “Synagogue of Satan.” This language also reappears in comments calling Jews those who “turned their back on Jesus,” branding Jews as a “brood of vipers,” or replying to posts from Jewish people, organizations, or Jewish-related content with the phrase “Synagogue of Satan.” Mentions of this phrase have risen more than 300% over the past two years.
Deicide accusations, rooted in New Testament interpretations, are also resurfacing in casual online use. Phrases such as “Jews killed Jesus” appear alongside comments linking this claim to current conflicts in the Middle East. These tropes still circulate widely online, often in their original forms, and whether used as supposed historical fact or as contemporary insult, these statements reinforce the image of Jews as spiritually dangerous.
Blood libels, too, have adapted to modern times. While direct claims of ritual murder are less common, the underlying accusation survives through conspiracy narratives and sensationalized allegations about Israel or Zionists harming others. Online, this appears in comments suggesting a “Jewish ritual need for the blood of Gentiles,” or claiming that Israel kills children and civilians to harvest organs for profit.
Lastly, the Talmud, one of Judaism’s central texts, has long been a target of religious antisemitism, with antisemites portraying it as dangerous. Since October 7, 2023, we have observed 1.7 million mentions of “Talmud” on social media, a 352% increase compared with the previous two years. Historical works ‘exposing’ the Talmud laid the groundwork for narratives that persist online today. Three main themes dominate contemporary discussions: claims that the Talmud allows Jews to mistreat non-Jews, assertions that it is evil or satanic, and accusations that it promotes or permits pedophilia. Looking more closely at how “Talmud” and “Gemara” are discussed online, in the last two years, some of the most common accompanying phrases include “non-Jews are animals,” “serve the Jews,” “Jesus warned,” and “shocking moral teachings.” These phrases recycle long-standing distortions of Talmudic teachings, often taken out of context, and are used to cast Judaism as threatening.
Social media mentions aiming to ‘expose’ the Talmud, separated by category
Religious antisemitism remains alive online, with centuries-old tropes, from blood libel to Talmud attacks, reshaped for the digital age. These narratives not only perpetuate hostility toward Jews today but also provided a foundation for newer forms of antisemitism, including racial narratives that recast Jewish identity in terms of blood and biology.
How Genetic Antisemitism Has Evolved
While religious prejudice provided the earliest framework for antisemitism, the Enlightenment and 19th century marked a significant shift toward racial and genetic theories. Thinkers such as Voltaire described Jews as inherently corrupt, and race theorists began to argue that Jews were biologically distinct and inferior. These ideas laid the groundwork for a new form of antisemitism that defined Jews not by their beliefs but by their supposed bloodline. Out of this environment emerged two related but distinct strands:
- Narratives that deny Jewish peoplehood altogether
- Narratives that portray Jews as biologically defective
Denial of Peoplehood
One of the most persistent myths to grow out of these theories is the Khazar Theory. This narrative claims that Ashkenazi Jews descended from a medieval Turkic tribe that converted to Judaism and are therefore not “real Jews.” Initially introduced as a historical hypothesis, it was repurposed to deny Jewish ties to ancient Israel and continues to circulate widely. Online, the Khazar Theory has been mentioned about 1.5 million times over the past decade, with a sharp resurgence after October 7, 2023.
A more recent but highly visible denial narrative is the white colonizer frame. This rhetoric portrays Jews as Europeans with no authentic Middle Eastern roots, erasing the histories of Sephardi, Mizrahi, and Ethiopian Jews. Since October 7, there have been over 8 million mentions pairing “Jew” or “Zionist” with “white colonizer,” a 183% increase compared to the prior two years.
Another related trend that gained traction after the Hamas attacks in Israel is the effort to “disprove” Jews’ connection to Israel by questioning whether they are really “Semites.” Online, this often appears in posts claiming Jews are “not real Semites” or “fake Semites.” The rhetorical move works two ways: it attempts to delegitimize Jewish identity by redefining the meaning of “Semite,” and it provides cover for openly antisemitic statements.
Social media mentions of “real Semites” or “fake Semites” in conversations related to antisemitism, Jewish culture, and Israel
Another form comes from some groups of Black Hebrew Israelites (BHI), who argue that Black people are the “true Israelites” and that today’s Jews are imposters. These claims began circulating in the early 20th century and maintain a steady online presence today.
Finally, DNA conspiracies represent a modern adaptation of this denial. Misuse of commercial DNA test results fuels claims that Jews lack Middle Eastern ancestry, sometimes paired with assertions that Israel suppresses genetic research to “hide the truth.” Unlike the broader Khazar or colonizer narratives, these conspiracies appear in sporadic spikes rather than steady growth.
Claims of Inferiority
The second major strand of genetic antisemitism focuses not on denying Jewish identity but on portraying Jews as biologically defective. The Nazis pushed this ideology to its extreme. Building on the “outsider” trope, they argued that Jews were racially alien and dangerous, relying on ancestry charts, skull measurements, and eugenics to define Jews by blood rather than belief. This pseudoscience was central to their justification for persecution and, ultimately, genocide.
Echoes of this rhetoric still appear online, often in simplified and cruder form. A common example is the slur “inbred,” which adapts older pseudoscientific claims into an insult aimed at delegitimizing Jewish identity. Mentions of Jews as “inbred” have surged on social media in recent months, showing how recycled tropes of racial inferiority continue to find traction in digital spaces.
Social media mentions characterizing Jewish people as “inbred”
In the genetic antisemitism strand, ideas of denial and biological inferiority have similarly persisted, adapted, and multiplied in online discourse. Together with religious antisemitism, these twin engines of online antisemitism demonstrate how centuries-old prejudices have been retooled for the digital era, reinforcing each other and amplifying their impact. The combined effect is a contemporary antisemitic ecosystem that blends theological and racial myths, shaping both individual perceptions and collective narratives about Jewish people worldwide.
