Dr. Sean

2 On this Veterans Day, we stand united in profound gratitude for the courageous men and women who have selflessly served our nation. Their unwavering dedication, sacrifice, and indomitable spirit have woven a tapestry of freedom that blankets us all. To our veterans, we extend heartfelt thanks for shouldering the burdens of duty with honor and valor. Through the trials of conflict and the triumphs of peace, you have exemplified resilience, embodying the very essence of patriotism. Each veteran’s story is a testament to the enduring strength that emanates from the core of the military family. In the face of adversity, you stood tall, driven by a commitment to protect and preserve the values that define our great nation. Your sacrifices, often unnoticed, echo through the annals of history, reminding us that freedom comes at a price, paid in the currency of bravery. Today, we not only acknowledge your service but also recognize the families and loved ones who stood alongside, providing support and strength during times of separation and uncertainty. The legacy of our veterans transcends the uniform they wore; it permeates the very fabric of our society, inspiring future generations to uphold the principles for which you fought. As we express our gratitude, let us also commit to ensuring that the flame of remembrance continues to burn bright. May we honor our veterans not only with words but with actions that reflect the values they defended. Let us strive for a world where the sacrifices of our veterans pave the way for lasting peace, justice, and freedom. To the veterans among us and those who have passed on, we salute you with deepest admiration and eternal gratitude. Thank you for your service, your sacrifice, and your enduring legacy.

2 The Human Cost of Communist Regimes   Communism, an ideological and political system, has left a disgusting mark on the 20th century, shaping the destinies of nations and killing millions of lives. Since it is trying to make a comeback in America, it is time to scrutinize historical events associated with communist regimes and estimate the number of lives lost due to their policies and actions.   The Soviet Union:   The Soviet Union, under the leadership of Joseph Stalin, represents one of the darkest chapters in the history of communism, marked by widespread atrocities and loss of human life.   The Great Purge:   The Great Purge, also known as the Great Terror, unfolded in the 1930s as Stalin sought to consolidate power and eliminate perceived threats to his regime. Beginning in 1934, the purges targeted a wide range of individuals, including high-ranking Communist Party officials, military leaders, intellectuals, and ordinary citizens. The purges were characterized by show trials, where individuals were coerced into confessing to fabricated charges of treason, espionage, and sabotage.   The extent of the purges is staggering. According to archival estimates and historical research, it is believed that at least 1.5 million people were executed during the Great Purge. These executions were often carried out in a brutal manner, with victims subjected to torture and public humiliation. The notorious show trials, such as the Trial of the Twenty-One in 1938, exemplify the orchestrated nature of the purges, where prominent figures like Lev Kamenev and Grigory Zinoviev were falsely accused and subsequently executed.   The Holodomor:   The Holodomor, a man-made famine in Ukraine from 1932 to 1933, was a consequence of Stalin’s forced collectivization policies. These policies aimed to eliminate private farming and bring agriculture under state control. However, the implementation of collectivization resulted in the confiscation of grain from Ukrainian farmers, leading to widespread food shortages.   The Holodomor is estimated to have claimed the lives of millions of Ukrainians. While specific figures are contentious due to the lack of comprehensive records and Soviet suppression of information, conservative estimates suggest that the death toll exceeded 10 million. The famine was exacerbated by the denial of aid and the suppression of information by the Soviet government, which prevented the international community from grasping the severity of the situation.   Forced Labor Camps:   Stalin’s regime also established an extensive system of forced labor camps, commonly known as the Gulag, where political prisoners, intellectuals, and perceived enemies of the state were sent. Conditions in the Gulag were deplorable, with prisoners subjected to harsh labor, inadequate food, and brutal treatment by guards. Estimates of the number of individuals who passed through the Gulag system vary, but it is believed that, at minimum, six million were incarcerated, and a significant number perished due to the harsh conditions.   The Soviet Union under Stalin’s leadership witnessed a staggering loss of life due to the Great Purge, the Holodomor, and the brutal conditions in the Gulag. The cumulative impact of these events underscores the human cost associated with communist ideologies.   China under Mao Zedong:   The era of Mao Zedong’s leadership in the People’s Republic of China witnessed two major campaigns that had catastrophic consequences for the Chinese population: the Great Leap Forward (1958-1962) and the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976). These campaigns, driven by Mao’s radical vision for transforming China into a socialist utopia, resulted in immense human suffering and loss of life.   The Great Leap Forward (1958-1962):   The Great Leap Forward was launched in 1958 as an ambitious economic and social campaign aimed at rapidly transforming China from an agrarian society into an industrialized socialist state. Mao’s vision involved the collectivization of agriculture, the establishment of communes, and the rapid expansion of industry. However, the implementation of these policies was marred by gross mismanagement, unrealistic goals, and a lack of consideration for the complexities of agriculture and economics.   As a result, the Great Leap Forward led to a catastrophic famine that claimed the lives of millions of Chinese citizens. The forced collectivization of agriculture, along with the unrealistic production targets imposed by the government, resulted in widespread crop failures. Peasants were coerced into communal farming, and traditional agricultural practices were abandoned, exacerbating the food crisis.   Famine-related deaths soared as food production plummeted. The Chinese government, underreporting the extent of the disaster, failed to acknowledge the severity of the famine. Estimates of the death toll during the Great Leap Forward vary, but scholarly research estimate that the number of excess deaths start at 45 million people.   The Cultural Revolution (1966-1976):   The Cultural Revolution was another tumultuous period under Mao’s rule, characterized by political purges, mass violence, and the suppression of perceived counter-revolutionaries. Initiated to reassert Mao’s control over the Chinese Communist Party and eliminate perceived bourgeois elements within society, the Cultural Revolution unleashed chaos on an unprecedented scale.   Millions of Chinese citizens, particularly intellectuals, party officials, and individuals with perceived ties to the old order, were subjected to persecution, imprisonment, and violence. The Red Guards, composed mainly of young students and fervent Mao supporters, played a central role in carrying out the campaign’s violent excesses.   Schools and universities were shut down, historical and cultural artifacts were destroyed, and traditional Chinese values were dismissed as part of the old order. The chaos resulted in widespread social disruption, economic decline, and loss of life.   While it is challenging to quantify the exact number of deaths attributable to the Cultural Revolution, lowest estimates begin at 13.5 million. The impact was not only in terms of direct violence but also the psychological and social scars left on a generation of Chinese citizens.   The Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, as orchestrated by Mao Zedong, stand as dark chapters in China’s history, marked by immense human suffering and loss of life. The legacy of these campaigns continues to shape China’s socio-political landscape, underscoring the importance of critically examining historical events to understand

U.S. Federal Reserve System The U.S. Federal Reserve System, commonly referred to as the Federal Reserve or simply the Fed, is the central banking system of the United States. It was created in 1913 in response to a series of financial panics and banking crises in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, with the primary goal of providing a stable monetary and financial system. Structure of the Federal Reserve System: The structure of the Federal Reserve System is designed to be decentralized and composed of distinct components, each serving a specific role in the functioning of the central bank. Board of Governors: The Board of Governors is the highest governing body of the Federal Reserve System, headquartered in Washington, D.C. Established by the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, the Board consists of seven members appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed by the Senate. Each member serves a staggered 14-year term to ensure continuity and independence from short-term political pressures. However, the terms of the Chair and Vice Chair are set at four years. The Board is responsible for setting the overall direction of monetary policy and overseeing the activities of the entire Federal Reserve System. It conducts research on economic and financial developments, testifies before Congress, and issues regulations and policies governing the operations of banks and other financial institutions. The Chair of the Board, as the public face of the Federal Reserve, frequently communicates the central bank’s decisions and outlook to the media and the public. Federal Reserve Banks: There are twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, each serving a designated Federal Reserve District. These banks are located in major cities across the United States, including New York, San Francisco, Chicago, and Atlanta. Each Reserve Bank operates independently within its district, providing banking services to depository institutions and the U.S. government. Member banks, which are commercial banks and thrift institutions, hold shares in their regional Reserve Bank. However, ownership of these shares does not grant control or confer profit rights. The Reserve Banks are responsible for implementing monetary policy, supervising and regulating member banks, and providing financial services to depository institutions and the U.S. government. The Reserve Banks play role in the broader financial system. They clear checks, process electronic payments, and distribute and receive currency and coin. Additionally, they act as a lender of last resort, providing short-term loans to depository institutions facing temporary liquidity shortages. Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC): The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) is the body within the Federal Reserve System responsible for formulating monetary policy. It is composed of the seven members of the Board of Governors, the President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and four of the remaining eleven Reserve Bank presidents, who serve on a rotating basis. The FOMC meets approximately eight times a year to assess economic and financial conditions and determine the appropriate course of monetary policy. One of its primary tools is open market operations, whereby the Committee buys or sells U.S. Treasury securities in the open market to influence the federal funds rate. The federal funds rate, in turn, affects interest rates throughout the economy, influencing borrowing costs, investment decisions, and overall economic activity. Decisions made by the FOMC have significant implications for the U.S. economy, and its communications, including the Chair’s post-meeting press conferences and the release of meeting minutes, are closely monitored by financial markets and the public for insights into future policy actions. In summary, the structure of the Federal Reserve System, with its decentralized components – the Board of Governors, the Federal Reserve Banks, and the Federal Open Market Committee – is designed to ensure a balance of power and independence in executing its vital functions of monetary policy, supervision and regulation, and the provision of essential financial services. This intricate structure reflects a commitment to transparency, accountability, and the effective implementation of policies aimed at fostering economic stability and growth. Functions of the Federal Reserve System The U.S. Federal Reserve System performs multifaceted functions aimed at ensuring the stability and integrity of the nation’s financial system. These functions can be categorized into three main areas: monetary policy, supervision and regulation, and financial services. Monetary Policy: Monetary policy is one of the primary functions of the Federal Reserve, and it involves actions aimed at influencing the availability and cost of money and credit to achieve the broader economic objectives of stable prices and maximum sustainable employment. Open Market Operations: Open market operations are a key tool employed by the Federal Reserve to implement monetary policy. The Federal Reserve conducts regular open market operations by buying and selling government securities in the open market. When the Fed purchases securities, it injects money into the banking system, lowering short-term interest rates and stimulating economic activity. Conversely, when it sells securities, it absorbs money from the system, raising short-term interest rates to cool down economic activity. These operations influence the federal funds rate, which is the interest rate at which banks lend to each other overnight. Discount Rate: The discount rate is the interest rate at which banks can borrow funds directly from the Federal Reserve. By adjusting the discount rate, the Fed can influence the overall level of interest rates in the economy. A lower discount rate encourages borrowing and spending by making it cheaper for banks to obtain funds, while a higher discount rate has the opposite effect, acting as a brake on borrowing and spending. Reserve Requirements: Reserve requirements are the amount of funds that banks must hold in reserve against specified deposit liabilities. The Federal Reserve has the authority to adjust reserve requirements, influencing the amount of money that banks can lend and invest. A reduction in reserve requirements provides banks with more funds to lend, stimulating economic activity, while an increase in reserve requirements has the opposite effect. Supervision and Regulation: Another function of the Federal Reserve is the supervision and regulation of financial institutions. The aim is to maintain the stability and

The U.S. Selective Service System (SSS) The Selective Service System, established in 1917, is a federal agency tasked with maintaining a standby draft of American citizens who could be called upon to serve in the armed forces during times of war or national emergency. Historical Background: The origins of the U.S. Selective Service System can be traced back to the tumultuous period surrounding the United States’ entry into World War I. As the nation faced the need to rapidly mobilize its military forces, the Selective Service Act of 1917 was signed into law by President Woodrow Wilson on May 18, 1917. This landmark legislation marked the first peacetime draft in American history and laid the foundation for the establishment of the Selective Service System. The Selective Service Act of 1917 authorized the President to conscript men for military service, and it established local draft boards to oversee the selection process. These boards, comprised of community members, were tasked with evaluating the eligibility and fitness of registrants for military service. The criteria for exemption were specified in the law, considering factors such as age, health, and essential civilian occupations. By the end of World War I, the Selective Service System had overseen the registration and induction of over 2.8 million men into the armed forces. The successful implementation of the draft during this conflict demonstrated the government’s ability to rapidly raise a large military force when necessary. The Selective Service System was disbanded after World War I, as the nation returned to a peacetime footing. However, the lessons learned from the war and the recognition of the potential need for a rapid mobilization mechanism during future conflicts led to the establishment of a permanent Selective Service System with the passage of the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940. The Selective Training and Service Act, signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt on September 16, 1940, marked a significant expansion of the Selective Service System. It allowed for the conscription of men aged 21 to 35 for 12 months of military training and service. This legislation was a response to the growing global threats, particularly the expansion of fascist regimes in Europe and Asia. The Selective Service System, through a network of local draft boards, managed the registration, classification, and induction of millions of men into the armed forces during World War II. The success of the Selective Service System during World War II solidified its role as a component of national defense. The system continued to be active in the post-war era, maintaining preparedness for potential future conflicts. Subsequent historical milestones, such as the introduction of the draft lottery during the Vietnam War, further shaped the Selective Service System’s role in American military mobilization. Evolution of the Selective Service System: World War II and the Selective Training and Service Act (1940): The outbreak of World War II prompted the U.S. government to reassess its military preparedness. In response, the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940 was enacted, providing the legal framework for conscription during peacetime. This landmark legislation granted the President the authority to draft men into military service, marking a departure from the traditional American reliance on voluntary enlistment during peacetime. The Selective Service System rapidly expanded its operations to manage the massive influx of draftees required for the war effort. By the end of World War II, over 10 million men had been conscripted through the Selective Service, playing a pivotal role in creating a formidable military force. Post-World War II Era: With the conclusion of World War II, the United States faced the challenge of transitioning from a wartime to a peacetime military establishment. While conscription was suspended, the Selective Service System remained in place, reconfigured to function as a standby mechanism for future conflicts. The National Security Act of 1947 reaffirmed the importance of maintaining a selective service system during peacetime to ensure the nation’s readiness for potential future hostilities. Vietnam War and the Draft Lottery (1969): The Vietnam War presented unique challenges to the Selective Service System. As opposition to the war grew, so did resistance to the draft. In response to criticisms about the fairness of the conscription process, the Selective Service implemented a draft lottery system in 1969. This system assigned draft priority based on birthdates, with men born on certain dates selected earlier than others. The lottery aimed to introduce an element of randomness to the draft process, reducing the perception of bias and increasing equity in the selection of conscripts. The draft lottery was a significant departure from previous methods of conscription and reflected the government’s efforts to address public concerns about the fairness and perceived injustices of the draft system during the Vietnam War era. Transition to the All-Volunteer Force (1973): The mounting challenges and controversies surrounding the Vietnam War, coupled with the changing societal attitudes towards military service, led to a paradigm shift in the early 1970s. In 1973, the United States transitioned to an All-Volunteer Force (AVF), marking the end of conscription. The AVF aimed to create a more professional and motivated military force by relying entirely on volunteers rather than draftees. The transition to an All-Volunteer Force required a comprehensive overhaul of military recruitment strategies, compensation structures, and overall military culture. The Selective Service System adapted to its new role, becoming a contingency plan for reinstating the draft if necessary, rather than a regularly employed mechanism during peacetime. Post-Cold War and Modernization Efforts: In the post-Cold War era, the nature of military conflicts continued to evolve. The Selective Service System underwent modernization efforts to align with contemporary security needs. Despite the absence of conscription, the system retained its mandate to register and maintain information on potential draftees. Ongoing debates about the relevance of the Selective Service System in the modern era have led to proposals for reform. Discussions have included considerations of expanding registration to include women, recognizing the changing roles and opportunities for women in the armed forces. In summary, the evolution of

1 The United States Postal Service The United States Postal Service, established in 1775, is an integral part of the nation’s infrastructure, providing mail and package delivery services to individuals, businesses, and government entities across the country. Historical Development: The origins of the United States Postal Service (USPS) can be traced back to the early days of the American colonies. Before the establishment of a unified postal system, individual colonies had their own rudimentary postal systems, often relying on local taverns or other central locations as informal post offices. Recognizing the need for a more organized and efficient postal network, the Continental Congress took significant steps during the American Revolution. In 1775, the Second Continental Congress appointed Benjamin Franklin as the first Postmaster General. Franklin, a polymath and one of the Founding Fathers, brought his extensive knowledge and experience to the task. Under his leadership, the Congress established the United States Post Office and named Franklin as its head. The first post offices were established in major cities, and a standardized postal rate system was implemented, allowing for the efficient exchange of mail and information during a crucial period in the nation’s history. The development of the postal system was further solidified in 1787 with the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, which empowered Congress “To establish Post Offices and Post Roads.” This constitutional provision underscored the importance of a national postal network in fostering communication and unity among the states. During the 19th century, as the nation expanded westward, so did the postal service. The introduction of the Pony Express in 1860 provided a swift mail delivery system connecting the East and West coasts, reducing the time it took for messages to traverse the continent. The completion of the First Transcontinental Railroad in 1869 further accelerated mail transportation, marking a pivotal moment in the evolution of the postal service. The late 19th and early 20th centuries saw innovations that transformed the USPS. In 1863, Free City Delivery was introduced, allowing for the delivery of mail directly to residences in urban areas. The introduction of Rural Free Delivery (RFD) in 1896 extended postal services to rural communities, connecting even the most remote areas of the country. These initiatives reflected the USPS’s commitment to inclusivity and accessibility. The Postal Reorganization Act of 1970 marked a significant turning point in the history of the USPS. This legislation transformed the Post Office Department into the United States Postal Service, an independent establishment of the executive branch of the government. The goal was to create a more self-sustaining and business-like postal service, able to adapt to the changing needs of a rapidly evolving society. Over the years, the USPS has faced various challenges, including financial difficulties, technological disruptions, and shifts in communication preferences. However, its rich historical development has been characterized by adaptability, innovation, and a steadfast commitment to serving the American people. Today, the USPS stands as a testament to the enduring importance of a reliable and efficient postal system in maintaining the social and economic fabric of the United States. Organizational Structure: The organizational structure of the United States Postal Service (USPS) is complex and multifaceted, reflecting the diverse functions and responsibilities it undertakes as a vital component of the nation’s communication infrastructure. Postal Board of Governors: At the apex of the USPS organizational structure is the Postal Board of Governors. Established by the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970, this board consists of 11 members appointed by the President of the United States with the advice and consent of the Senate. Each governor serves a seven-year term, and the terms are staggered to ensure continuity. The Board is responsible for selecting the Postmaster General, approving the USPS budget, setting postal rates, and providing overall policy guidance. It functions as the governing body, overseeing the strategic direction of the USPS. Postmaster General: The Postmaster General serves as the chief executive officer of the USPS and is appointed by the Postal Board of Governors. This individual is responsible for the overall management and administration of the Postal Service. The Postmaster General sets strategic priorities, represents the USPS in dealings with Congress and other federal agencies, and plays a crucial role in shaping the organization’s policies. The Postmaster General is supported by a team of executive officers responsible for various aspects of the USPS’s operations. Executive Leadership Team: The executive leadership team works closely with the Postmaster General to implement policies and manage day-to-day operations. This team includes top executives overseeing key functional areas such as operations, finance, marketing, legal affairs, and government relations. Specific roles within this leadership team may include the Chief Operating Officer (COO), Chief Financial Officer (CFO), Chief Marketing Officer (CMO), Chief Legal Officer (CLO), and others. Operations: The Operations division is a critical component of the USPS structure, responsible for the physical movement and delivery of mail and packages. This includes the operation of numerous processing and distribution centers across the country. The Chief Operating Officer (COO) oversees this division, ensuring the efficient and timely processing of mail through automated sorting systems and transportation networks. Finance: The Chief Financial Officer (CFO) leads the Finance division, overseeing budgetary matters, financial planning, and accounting functions. The USPS, as a self-funded entity, relies on revenue generated from its services rather than taxpayer dollars. The Finance division plays a crucial role in managing the organization’s financial resources, setting rates, and ensuring fiscal responsibility. Marketing: The Chief Marketing Officer (CMO) and the Marketing division are responsible for promoting USPS services, developing pricing strategies, and enhancing customer relations. In a rapidly changing communication landscape, the Marketing division plays a pivotal role in adapting USPS services to meet the evolving needs of customers and competing effectively with private carriers. Legal Affairs: The Chief Legal Officer (CLO) heads the Legal Affairs division, providing legal counsel to the USPS and representing its interests in legal matters. This division is responsible for ensuring compliance with laws and regulations, handling contractual agreements, and addressing legal challenges that may arise during USPS

1 Antisemitism in Elite Educational Institutions There has never been a more dangerous time to be a Jew in America. Elite schools are often perceived as bastions of knowledge and progress, where the brightest minds come together to learn, innovate, and shape the future. However, recent incidents and reports reveal that antisemitism has been allowed to not only fester in these institutions but stoked by the administration and professors. Whether it is subtle forms of discrimination, overt acts of hatred, or microaggressions targeting Jewish students, these schools are failing to protect their community members. Microaggressions, Stereotypes, and Discrimination Antisemitism in elite schools is not limited to overt acts of hatred; it often takes the form of microaggressions, stereotypes, and subtle discrimination. These insidious behaviors can significantly impact the daily lives of Jewish students, creating an atmosphere where they feel isolated, unwelcome, and unable to fully engage in their educational pursuits. Stereotypes and Misconceptions: One of the most sinister aspects of antisemitism is the perpetuation of harmful stereotypes about Jewish individuals. These stereotypes form the foundation for microaggressions and discrimination. Some of the most common stereotypes include: Financial Stereotypes: The stereotype of Jewish people being excessively wealthy or controlling global finance is deeply rooted in antisemitic conspiracy theories. These harmful beliefs lead to assumptions that Jewish students enjoy privileges or have undue influence in academic settings. Appearance Stereotypes: Stereotypes about physical appearance manifest as comments about a student’s nose or physical characteristics that are associated with Jewish heritage. These remarks contribute to feelings of self-consciousness and discomfort. Intellectual Stereotypes: The stereotype of Jewish individuals being exceptionally intelligent result in high expectations and undue pressure on Jewish students to excel academically. It also leads to resentment and envy from peers. Religious Stereotypes: Antisemitic stereotypes intersect with religious beliefs, portraying Jewish students as clannish, secretive, or involved in secretive rituals. These assumptions cause feelings of alienation and mistrust. Microaggressions: Microaggressions are subtle acts that undermine and marginalize individuals based on their characteristics, such as their race, ethnicity, or religion. In the context of antisemitism at elite schools, microaggressions are distressingly common. Some examples include: Casual Jokes and Comments: Students and educators make seemingly harmless comments or jokes related to Jewish culture, holidays, or stereotypes. These comments are unintentional and creates a distressing environment. Exclusion: Jewish students experience exclusion from social events and gatherings due to a lack of understanding of their cultural or religious practices. Such exclusions causes feelings of isolation. Mispronunciations: Names, words, or phrases related to Jewish culture and heritage are consistently mispronounced and used inappropriately, leading to a sense of being ‘othered.’ Unsolicited Opinions: Unsolicited opinions on Israel and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a common microaggression, as students may be expected to represent or justify the actions of the Israeli government, which is an unfair burden to place on them. Discrimination: Antisemitism in elite schools escalates beyond microaggressions and stereotypes to more overt forms of discrimination. Examples include: Vandalism and Hate Symbols: Swastikas and other hate symbols are found on school property or personal belongings, forcing Jewish students to feel unsafe and targeted. Derogatory Slurs: Jewish students are subjected to derogatory slurs or insults, creating a hostile environment that interferes with their learning and emotional well-being. Selective Admissions Policies: Elite schools have policies and practices that discriminate against Jewish applicants, which perpetuate systemic antisemitism. Addressing these microaggressions, stereotypes, and forms of discrimination is essential for creating a more inclusive and tolerant educational environment. Educators, administrators, and fellow students must be vigilant in recognizing and challenging these harmful behaviors to ensure that all students, regardless of their background, can fully participate in their educational journey. Silent Bystanders: One of the most troubling aspects of the prevalence of antisemitism in elite schools is the silence of many bystanders, which effectively enables this hateful behavior to persist. This inaction not only allows the problem to fester but also contributes to a culture of impunity where perpetrators face little to no consequences for their actions. Reasons for Silence Fear of Reprisal: One common reason bystanders remain silent is the fear of reprisal. In many elite schools, the perpetrators of antisemitic acts may be well-connected, influential, or popular individuals. Speaking out against them can lead to social ostracism, harassment, or even threats, causing witnesses to prioritize their own safety over doing the right thing. Lack of Awareness: Some bystanders may not fully understand the gravity of antisemitic incidents. They may dismiss these occurrences as mere pranks, ignorance, or harmless jokes, underestimating the emotional and psychological toll they take on Jewish students. This lack of awareness can lead to indifference. Reluctance to Confront Peers: In close-knit school communities, students may be hesitant to confront their peers about their discriminatory behavior. The fear of damaging friendships or making situations uncomfortable deters individuals from speaking up, even when they know it’s the right thing to do. Belief in the School’s Reputation: Some bystanders may hold an idealized image of their elite school and believe that incidents of antisemitism simply cannot happen in such prestigious institutions. This cognitive dissonance forces denial and inaction when faced with the harsh reality. Consequences of Bystander Silence The silence of bystanders has significant consequences: Perpetuation of Hate: When bystanders do not intervene, antisemitic behavior goes unchecked, encouraging the perpetrators to continue their actions. This perpetuation of hate harms the targeted students and erodes the school’s moral fabric. Silencing the Victims: The silence of bystanders effectively silences the victims of antisemitism. Jewish students who experience discrimination become isolated and hesitant to seek help or share their experiences, escalating feelings of powerlessness and isolation. Normalization of Discrimination: Bystander silence normalizes antisemitism within the school community. Other students interpret the silence as acceptance or tacit approval of discriminatory behavior, which embolden offenders and create a hostile environment for Jewish students. Psychological Impact: For Jewish students, the silence of their peers can be emotionally devastating. It sends the message that their pain is inconsequential and their experiences are not valued, leading to feelings of alienation and

1 Understanding Mass Shootings: An In-Depth Analysis of Statics, Factors, and Prevention Strategies Authors note: Perpetrators names have been intentionally omitted from this paper. Mass shootings are a growing concern worldwide, impacting individuals and communities both emotionally and physically. Understanding the statistics of mass shootings is essential for identifying trends, risk factors, and potential strategies for prevention and mitigation. This paper explores key aspects of mass shootings, focusing on statistical analysis to provide a comprehensive overview. Definitions: Legal Definitions: Mass shootings are typically defined and categorized differently across various jurisdictions and research organizations. In the United States, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) employs a widely recognized definition of mass shootings. According to the FBI, a mass shooting is “an incident in which four or more people are shot, wounded, or killed in a single event, at the same general time and location, not including the shooter.” Other countries, such as Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom, have their own legal definitions for mass shootings, making cross-national comparisons more complex. For instance, Australia defines a mass shooting as an event in which five or more people are killed, excluding the perpetrator. Variations in Definitions: Even within the United States, there is no uniform legal definition, and states may adopt their own criteria. For example, California defines a mass shooting as an incident where three or more people are killed or injured by gunfire, excluding the perpetrator, whereas Washington state uses a definition that includes four or more victims, including the shooter. The variation in definitions leads to discrepancies in statistical reports, making it challenging to compare and analyze data consistently across different regions and are deliberately used to manipulate data so governments can install more gun control. Inclusion Criteria: In addition to the minimum victim threshold, there is variation in how these definitions categorize injuries. Some definitions include individuals who are injured by gunfire, while others only count fatalities. For instance, the Gun Violence Archive (GVA), a far left liberal, non-profit organization that tracks gun violence incidents, includes both fatalities and injuries in its data. Again, deliberately used to manipulate data to install more gun control. Exclusions: Definitions of mass shootings also often exclude certain types of events. These exclusions can vary and may relate to issues such as the involvement of law enforcement, gang-related violence, or domestic violence. For instance, the FBI’s definition excludes incidents involving law enforcement officers or incidents that occur during the commission of another crime. International Definitions: On the international stage, there is a lack of a universally accepted definition for mass shootings. Countries, regions, and organizations often use their own criteria, making global comparisons more challenging. For example, the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training (CEPOL) defines a mass shooting as an event in which four or more people are killed. Challenges of Varying Definitions: The diversity in definitions poses several challenges for researchers and policymakers. Researchers and authorities must be aware of these variations and adapt their analyses accordingly. To overcome these challenges, some researchers prefer to use broader terms such as “mass killing” or “public mass shooting” when conducting cross-national or cross-regional comparisons, which allows for more inclusive analysis without being bound by specific legal definitions. The definition of mass shootings is complex, varying not only between countries but also within regions and states. These variations impact the accuracy of statistics and complicate efforts to address this critical issue on a global scale. Researchers and policymakers must be mindful of these differences when interpreting and comparing data. Prevalence of Mass Shootings The prevalence of mass shootings, defined as incidents in which four or more individuals are killed or injured by gunfire within a single event or location, varies significantly by country and region. The United States has been a focal point for research and discussions on mass shootings due to its relatively high incidence compared to other developed nations. To comprehensively examine the prevalence of mass shootings, we will focus on data primarily from the United States while also considering global perspectives. Mass Shootings in the United States The United States has witnessed several mass shootings in recent decades. Mass shootings are a recurring issue, drawing national attention and sparking debates on gun control, mental health, and other related topics. The prevalence of mass shootings in the United States can be understood through various statistics and trends: Frequency: The Gun Violence Archive (GVA) is a widely referenced source for tracking mass shootings in the United States. According to GVA data, there were 608 mass shootings in the United States in 2021, with 2,767 total incidents in the 2010-2021 period. This data illustrates the alarming frequency of these events. Casualties: In the United States, mass shootings have resulted in a significant number of casualties. In 2021, these incidents caused 893 deaths and 3,647 injuries, according to the GVA. Location: Mass shootings in the U.S. occur in various settings, including schools, workplaces, public venues, and private residences. High-profile incidents such as the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting and the 2019 El Paso Walmart shooting have highlighted the range of locations where these events can transpire. Global Perspective While the United States experiences a significant number of mass shootings, these events occur in other countries as well, albeit with less frequency. The prevalence of mass shootings worldwide is influenced by factors such as cultural norms and societal stressors. Europe: European countries like France, the United Kingdom, and Germany have also witnessed mass shootings, often linked to issues like terrorism or ideological extremism. These incidents have led to increased attention to security measures and counterterrorism efforts. New Zealand: The 2019 Christchurch mosque shootings in New Zealand, carried out by a white supremacist, drew global attention and led to a renewed focus on addressing extremist ideologies. Limitations in Prevalence Data It is important to acknowledge that variations in the definition of mass shootings and reporting practices can influence the accuracy and comparability of statistics. Furthermore, the underreporting of incidents or the exclusion of certain

2 The Correlation Between the Rise of Mental Health and Mass Shootings in America Mass shootings have become an increasingly common occurrence in the United States in recent years. In fact, the United States has experienced more mass shootings than any other developed country in the world. There is a growing body of evidence that proves the rise of mental health plays a role in many of these tragedies. What is Mental Illness? Mental illness is a broad term that encompasses a wide range of conditions that affect mood, thinking, and behavior. Mental illnesses can be mild or severe, and they can be temporary or permanent. Some common mental illnesses include depression, anxiety, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder. What is a Mass Shooting? There is no single definition of a mass shooting. However, the FBI defines a mass shooting as an incident in which four or more people are killed by gunfire, excluding the shooter. The Correlation Between Mental Health and Mass Shootings A number of studies have found a correlation between mental illness and mass shootings. For example, a study published in the journal Psychiatry Research found that people with mental illness are 10 times more likely to commit a violent crime than people without mental illness. Another study, published in the journal Nature Human Behaviour, found that people with mental illness are more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators. However, the study also found that people with mental illness are at an increased risk of committing violence, especially if they have a history of violence or if they are experiencing a psychotic episode. Why is Mental Illness a Risk Factor for Mass Shootings? There are a number of reasons why mental illness may be a risk factor for mass shootings. One reason is that people with mental illness may have difficulty coping with stress and managing their emotions. This can lead to feelings of anger, rage, and despair. Another reason is that people with mental illness may have difficulty distinguishing between reality and fantasy. This can lead to delusions and hallucinations, which can make it difficult for the person to control their behavior. The evidence shows that there is a correlation between the rise of mental health and mass shootings in America. Additional Considerations In addition to the factors discussed above, there are a number of other factors that contribute to the correlation between mental health and mass shootings. These factors include: Social media and technology: Social media and technology can be used to spread hate speech and extremist ideologies. This can create an environment that is conducive to violence. Copycat effect: When one mass shooting occurs, it can inspire others to commit similar acts of violence. This is known as the copycat effect. Main Stream Media: people with mental illness may be more likely to be influenced by the media. A study published in the journal Psychological Science found that people who are exposed to news coverage of mass shootings are more likely to have violent thoughts and fantasies. Studies cited: Psychiatry Research: “Mental Illness and Risk for Violent Crime: A Review of the Literature” by James L. Tardiff, Ph.D. and Paula K. Sweatt, Ph.D. (2015) Nature Human Behaviour: “Mental Illness and the Risk of Victimization: A Global Meta-Analysis” by Seena Fazel, Ph.D. et al. (2016) Additional studies: Journal of the American Medical Association: “Mental Illness and Violence: Findings From the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions” by Jeffrey A. Swanson, Ph.D. et al. (2000) Schizophrenia Bulletin: “Mental Illness and Violence: Understanding the Relationship” by Michael T. Compton, M.D., M.P.H. et al. (2007) Annual Review of Clinical Psychology: “Mental Illness and Violence: The Contribution of Mental Disorders to Violent Acts” by Patrick W. Corrigan, Ph.D. et al. (2014) Jester Politics thrives on the generous contributions of people like you. Your support, regardless of the amount, fuels our mission to cultivate a vibrant platform for a community of passionate individuals who champion the importance of an enlightened society, if you like what you find here, please consider a donation. Donate

2 Perpetual Prejudice: An Examination of Antisemitism Across History and into the Present Antisemitism, the irrational hatred and discrimination against Jewish people, is a form of prejudice that has plagued humanity for centuries. This paper explores the origins, evolution, and modern manifestations of antisemitism, shedding light on the factors that have contributed to its persistence. From the ancient world to contemporary society, we aim to shed light on the underlying factors that have contributed to its persistence and current reemergence in America and across the globe. Antiquity and the Beginnings of Antisemitism The roots of antisemitism can be traced back to antiquity, with early instances of anti-Jewish sentiment evident in religious texts, literary works, and historical events. These early manifestations laid the groundwork for the evolution of antisemitism over the centuries. Negative Portrayals in Religious Texts The Bible, which includes the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) and the New Testament, contains passages that have been interpreted as portraying Jews in a negative light. In the New Testament some passages, particularly in the Gospel of Matthew, contain references to Jewish leaders and their involvement in the crucifixion of Jesus. This has contributed to a historical perception of Jews as “Christ-killers.” Such interpretations are used to justify anti-Jewish sentiments and actions in Christian history. Greco-Roman Antisemitism In the Greco-Roman world, especially during the Hellenistic period, negative stereotypes about Jews began to emerge. Hellenistic authors like Apion and Tacitus disseminated these stereotypes. Apion, a 1st-century Alexandrian grammarian, wrote the derogatory work “Against the Jews,” which included various anti-Jewish accusations, such as depicting Jews as misanthropic and refusing to worship Greek deities. Tacitus, the Roman historian, reinforced these stereotypes in his writings, labeling Jews as a “pernicious superstition” and insinuating that their religious practices were hostile to Roman customs. The Jewish Revolts and the Destruction of the Second Temple In the 1st century CE, the Jewish revolts against Roman rule played a significant role in escalating antisemitic sentiments. The First Jewish-Roman War (66-73 CE) culminated in the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem in 70 CE. This event had a profound impact on Jewish identity and fueled negative perceptions of Jews in the Roman world. Jews were often depicted as rebellious troublemakers, and their expulsion from Jerusalem contributed to a diaspora that persists to this day. Roman Imperial Policies The Roman Empire imposed several discriminatory policies against Jews. In 19 CE, Emperor Tiberius issued an edict expelling Jews from Rome, though it was not consistently enforced. Later emperors, such as Caligula and Nero, also instituted measures that oppressed the Jewish community, including heavy taxation and restrictions on religious practices. Jewish Diaspora and Dispersal As a result of the Roman conquest of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Second Temple, Jews were forced into the Jewish diaspora, dispersing across the Roman Empire and beyond. This dispersion, while preserving Jewish traditions and identity, also exposed Jewish communities to various forms of discrimination and antisemitism in different regions. Throughout the centuries, Jewish communities faced sporadic persecutions and expulsions, contributing to the endurance of antisemitism in various forms in Europe and beyond. Antisemitism’s origins in antiquity are deeply rooted in religious, cultural, and historical contexts. The negative portrayals in religious texts, the Hellenistic influence, the destruction of the Second Temple, and the subsequent Roman policies all contributed to the early manifestations of anti-Jewish sentiment. These early prejudices laid the groundwork for the evolution of antisemitism through the ages, demonstrating the longevity and complexity of this historical phenomenon. Understanding these origins is essential for comprehending the multifaceted nature of antisemitism throughout history and its continuing impact on Jewish communities worldwide. The Middle Ages and Religious Persecution The Middle Ages were marked by a significant upsurge in religiously motivated persecution of Jews, driven by a combination of theological differences, economic tensions, and political circumstances. This era, which spanned roughly from the 5th to the 15th century, was characterized by a deep-rooted hostility towards Jewish communities across Europe. Theological Differences A primary driver of antisemitism during the Middle Ages was theological conflict. Christian doctrine, deeply influenced by writings of early Church Fathers, often portrayed Jews as responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. This perception of collective guilt contributed to the widespread demonization of Jews. The concept of “deicide,” the charge of killing God, was central to this theological narrative. Blood Libel One of the most notorious and horrifying manifestations of antisemitism during this period was the blood libel accusation. This unfounded belief alleged that Jews kidnapped and murdered Christian children to use their blood in ritualistic practices. A notable case is the 1144 murder of William of Norwich in England, which led to widespread anti-Jewish violence. The blood libel persisted for centuries, leading to numerous massacres and expulsions. Expulsions and Restrictions Throughout the Middle Ages, Jews faced a series of expulsions from various European regions. In 1290, England expelled its Jewish population, a precedent that was followed by France in 1306. In 1492, the Spanish Alhambra Decree ordered the expulsion of Jews from Spain, resulting in the forced conversion or expulsion of hundreds of thousands. The rationale for these expulsions often revolved around religious intolerance, coupled with economic and political motives. Forced Conversions In addition to expulsions, Jews frequently faced the threat of forced conversions to Christianity. In many cases, these conversions were far from genuine and were often motivated by self-preservation. Jews who converted were labeled as “Conversos” or “Marranos” and were subjected to suspicion, persecution, and the scrutiny of the Inquisition. These forced conversions not only violated personal freedom but also deepened the religious divisions in society. The Inquisition The Spanish Inquisition, established in 1478, marked a significant turning point in the history of antisemitism. It sought to enforce religious orthodoxy, and its focus extended beyond recent converts to include families with Jewish heritage. Jews and Conversos were subjected to intense scrutiny, torture, and execution if they were deemed to be insincere converts or heretics. The Inquisition’s actions fueled an atmosphere of fear and suspicion that persisted

Globalization Of American Manufacturing The offshoring of American manufacturing is a multifaceted phenomenon that encompasses both economic and political factors. This paper critically assesses how political policies have influenced the migration of manufacturing jobs overseas and explores the ramifications of these policies on the American workforce and the economy. We argue that a critical examination is imperative for understanding the complex relationship between politics and offshoring. Historical Perspective To comprehend the historical evolution of American manufacturing offshoring, it is crucial to delve into the specific policies and events that have shaped the landscape. Here, we provide a detailed examination of key moments and decisions that have influenced the trajectory of American manufacturing. Post-World War II Economic Policies: The post-World War II era marked a significant turning point for American manufacturing. The Bretton Woods Agreement, established in 1944, laid the groundwork for a new international monetary system. It led to the creation of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, both of which aimed to promote economic stability and reconstruction in war-torn countries. These policies fostered an environment conducive to economic growth, including manufacturing. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT): The establishment of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1947 was a pivotal moment in the globalization of trade. The primary goal of GATT was to reduce trade barriers and promote free trade among member nations. This international treaty had a profound impact on American manufacturing as it facilitated access to global markets and allowed the U.S. to export its products more freely. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA): In 1994, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was signed into law. This landmark trade agreement linked the United States, Canada, and Mexico in a single trading bloc. While proponents argued that NAFTA would promote economic growth and job creation, critics contended that it incentivized American manufacturers to relocate production to Mexico due to lower labor costs. The net result was the displacement of domestic manufacturing jobs. China’s Entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO): One of the most impactful events in the offshoring of American manufacturing was China’s entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001. This event marked a significant shift in global trade dynamics. China, with its vast labor force and rapidly growing economy, became an attractive destination for American manufacturers seeking lower production costs. The WTO membership granted China preferential trade status, further encouraging the relocation of manufacturing facilities to the region. The Effects of the Plaza Accord: In 1985, the Plaza Accord was an international agreement among major economic powers, including the United States, to devalue the U.S. dollar against the Japanese yen and German mark. This devaluation aimed to address the U.S. trade deficit and boost American exports. While the Plaza Accord was intended to bolster American manufacturing by making exports more competitive, it inadvertently accelerated the offshoring trend. The policy change, coupled with the rising strength of the Japanese and German economies, incentivized American manufacturers to move production to countries with more favorable exchange rates. NAFTA’s Impact on the Automotive Industry: The impact of NAFTA on the automotive industry is a poignant example of how trade policies shaped the offshoring of American manufacturing. Under NAFTA, U.S. automakers established production facilities in Mexico, capitalizing on lower labor costs and the ability to import vehicles duty-free. This led to a significant decline in American automotive manufacturing jobs and the proliferation of Mexican-based production facilities. The historical perspective on the offshoring of American manufacturing highlights key policies and agreements that have significantly influenced the landscape. While many of these policies were intended to promote economic growth and stability, they have also had unintended consequences for domestic manufacturing jobs. Understanding the historical context is crucial for assessing the broader impact of political decisions on the shifting manufacturing landscape. Trade Policies Trade policies have played a fundamental role in the offshoring of American manufacturing. While the promotion of free trade is intended to enhance economic efficiency, it has often led to the outsourcing of manufacturing jobs to countries with lower production costs. Specific trade agreements and policies can be dissected to understand their implications in greater detail: North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) NAFTA, implemented in 1994, is a prime example of how trade policies can influence offshoring. While NAFTA aimed to create a robust trading bloc between the United States, Canada, and Mexico, it had unintended consequences for American manufacturing. Under NAFTA, tariffs on goods traded among these countries were eliminated or significantly reduced, encouraging cross-border trade. Impacts: Companies saw an opportunity to reduce labor costs by moving production to Mexico, where wages were substantially lower. The auto industry witnessed a significant shift, with American automakers relocating factories to Mexico to take advantage of cheaper labor, contributing to a decline in U.S. auto manufacturing jobs. Critics argued that the trade imbalance grew, as the United States imported more than it exported, leading to job losses in manufacturing sectors such as textiles and electronics. China’s Entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) China’s accession to the WTO in 2001 marked a significant turning point in global trade dynamics. While the aim was to encourage China’s integration into the global economy, it had far-reaching implications for American manufacturing. Impacts: China’s vast labor force and lower labor costs made it a preferred destination for American companies seeking to reduce manufacturing expenses. The flood of inexpensive Chinese imports into the U.S. market led to increased competition for American manufacturers, particularly in industries like textiles and electronics, ultimately leading to the closure of numerous domestic factories. Critics contended that China’s lax environmental regulations and lower labor standards put American manufacturers at a disadvantage, as they were held to higher regulatory and labor cost standards. The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) The Trans-Pacific Partnership, a proposed trade agreement between 12 Pacific Rim countries, including the United States, was aimed at promoting free trade and economic integration. Although the U.S. withdrew from the agreement in 2017, it