PDF Archive

Easily share your PDF documents with your contacts, on the Web and Social Networks.

Share a file Manage my documents Convert Recover PDF Search Help Contact



The Jewish Question an Empirical Examiniation Ideas and Data .pdf



Original filename: The Jewish Question_ an Empirical Examiniation _ Ideas and Data.pdf

This PDF 1.4 document has been generated by Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_13_6) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/74.0.3729.169 Safari/537.36 / Skia/PDF m74, and has been sent on pdf-archive.com on 23/09/2019 at 00:36, from IP address 47.184.x.x. The current document download page has been viewed 74 times.
File size: 4.3 MB (36 pages).
Privacy: public file




Download original PDF file









Document preview


6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

1/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation
APRIL 24, 2018APRIL 27, 2018
This post will be about the Jewish Question. Specifically, I am going to empirically document the
following claims:
Jews are vastly overrepresented in positions of power and cultural influence
Jewish elites are far to the left of gentile elites and have moved shifted the distribution of political
opinion among American elites from centrism to leftism
Jewish leftism and success can partly be explained by their mean IQs, living in large cities,
personality traits, and possibly certain cultural values, but ethnocentrism also plays an important
role that should not be ignored.
After documenting these claims, I am going to spend some time on what implications can be drawn
from them, and how people interested in White identity politics should act in light of them.

A Brief Word on Jewish History
The exact origins of the Jewish people are somewhat unclear, but it began somewhere around Israel
more than three thousand years ago. Since then, Jews have migrated out of Israel numerous times,
creating a diaspora. Through this process, a fairly large number of Jewish populations have existed
throughout history in places as far from Israel as China. Today, most of these populations only exist in
Israel, with more than 95% of the worlds non-Israeli Jews being Ashkenazi Jews, a group which
migrated from Israel to central and northern Europe sometime before the year 600 AD.
In 629 AD, King Dagobert of France expelled Jews from his kingdom. Following the Norman
Conquest of 1066, some Jews moved to England, but they were expelled in 1290. The same occurred in
Austria in 1298, France in 1394 and in Germany sometime in the 1400s, Spain in 1492, Naples in 1493,
Portugal in 1496, and all Papal states but Rome in 1569. Having been expelled from Western Europe,
the Jewish people moved to Eastern Europe. By the late 1800s, however, the Russian empire had
begun the pogroms, and 50 years later the Nazis got going. This all caused an immigration wave of
Jews moving to Anglo nations worldwide, South America and, later, Israel.
Two facts immediately standout about Jewish history. First, Jews still exist. This itself is noteworthy. It
is difficult to keep a population genetically isolated for over a thousand years in a foreign land. To do
so multiple times over, across as wide a range of nations of the Jews have lived in, is truly remarkable.
Jews accomplished this feat by genetically and culturally isolating themselves from the populations
they lived among. The second thing that stands out about Jews is that anti-Semitism seems to follow
them everywhere they go including, most recently, the middle east. Anti-Semitism is in part the result
of the economic success of Jews, but it is also related to the first noteworthy fact about Jewish history,
their isolation from the populations they live among. Thus, the long history of the Jewish people
works as a kind of preface for an analysis of what Jewish people have been up to in the last hundred
years or so.

Jewish Elites
Anti-Semites are fond of pointing out that Jewish people control various industries or are vastly
overrepresented in various positions of power. As it turns out, empirical data strongly supports these
claims. (I eventually stopped citing stuff in this section. Unless otherwise noted, it all comes from
Lynn, 2011 (https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0071Q8DDM/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?
_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1), which one can find a free pdf of online).

https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

2/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

Finance and Wealth
In the late 19th and early 20th century in northern continental Europe, the Jewish elites most often
talked about were those in finance. Lynn (2011) compiled data from this time and place showing Jews
being heavily over-represented in finance-related occupations.

The mean factor of overrepresentation in this table is 25.
Lynn (2011) also reviewed a mountain of data from around the world on the socio-economic status of
Jews and showed them to be overrepresented among wealthy, well educated, individuals, and
underrepresented among blue collar workers. This was shown to be true all over continental Europe,
the British Isles, South Africa, Australia, North and South America, as well as Israel. These differences
were often large with Jews often being overrepresented among high SES individuals by factors of five
to twenty.
As we might expect, the degree of overrepresentation was stronger the more elite the category looked
at was. For instance, in the 19th century Jews were overrepresented in Britain among those who had
100,000 pounds or more of wealth by a factor of 8.6 – 10.5 but were overrepresented among
millionaires by a factor of roughly 28 (Lynn 2011).

Similarly, in the early 20th century in Germany Jews were found to account for 22% of millionaires
and 31% of multimillionaires (Table 10.6).

In most countries, these gaps were present and large by the late 19th century. However, in several
Anglo nations, the SES of Jews relative to gentiles increased in the mid-20th century. For instance, it
wasn’t until the 1950s that Jews in Canada had higher incomes than gentiles.

The same can be seen by looking at occupational class:
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

3/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

Similarly, the rate of overrepresentation of Jews among white-collar professions in South Africa was
much greater in 1960 than it was in 1936 (Table 16.3).

And in the United States the SES of Jews was lower than those of English, Scottish, and Irish,
Americans in 1900, but was considerably higher by 1980 (All these tables are from Lynn).

Similarly, in the early 20th century there was a literacy gap between Jews and Gentiles in the US that
favored Gentiles (Table 19.5).

Furthermore, Jews weren’t overrepresented among members of Americans “Who’s Who” until
sometime between the 1940s and 1970s.

Turning the very richest members of society, an analysis of the 29 richest families in Germany in the
years 1908 – 1911 found 9 of them, or 31%, to be Jewish. An analysis of the US upper class in 1945
found that Jews accounted for 22% of members, corresponding to an RR of 7.3. A 1982 survey of the
40 richest individuals in the United States which revealed 40% to be Jewish (All from Lynn, again.).
Similarly, a 2009 analysis (https://www.jta.org/2009/10/05/fundermentalist/at-least-139-of-theforbes-400-are-jewish) of Forbes list of the 400 richest Americans found that 35% were Jewish while
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

4/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

40% of the top 50 were Jewish. This suggests, once again, that Jewish presence among American elites
grew through the 20th century.

The Media
Jews have also been notoriously tied to journalism and the media. An analysis of 5 data sets on those
th
working in journalism from early 20 century Northern Continental Europe reveals a mean factor of
overrepresentation of 10.

Page 309 of Lynn (2011) reports on 5 analyses of Jewish representation among media elites in
contemporary America:

The figure in the first row is taken from an analysis by W. D. Rubenstein published on page 61 of his
1982 books The Left, The Right, and the Jews. Rows 2 – 4 report the results of 3 analyses published in
Forbes. The first defined elites as those who worked in the new divisions of the three largest tv
networks and PBS, the three largest news magazines, and the four biggest newspapers. In row 3, the
criterion is directors and producers of Hollywood TV shows while in the 4th-row the criterion used is
directors and producers of Hollywood movies. Row 5 is an analysis of a vanity fair article that listed
the 23 most important media people. The mean factor of overrepresentation across the table is 19.
In the 1988 book The Media Elite: America’s New Powerbrokers
(https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Media_Elite.html?id=aU4Ff-8AKN0C), Litcher,
Rothman, and Litcher report on a representative survey of 238 journalists from America’s top new
organizations which found that 59% of respondents were Jewish.
A 1990 list of the top 10 US entertainment companies published in American Film found that Jews
accounted of 8 of their ten CEOs (Lynn, 2011). The companies were Time Warner, Paramount, CBS,
Fox, Columbia Pictures, Viacom, ABC, and MCA Inc.
Thus, claims such as “Jews run the media” are plausibly more true than untrue. When one utilizes the
most elite criteria for defining members of the media, more than half seem to be Jewish.
Part of the reason people have a problem with the media is that it is left-leaning. As will be seen later,
Jews are more left-leaning than average, and elite Jews are more left-leaning than elite gentiles. Given
these facts, Jewish presence in media has probably caused it to be more left-leaning than it otherwise
would be.

Academia
Jews have also been said to have a great deal of power within academia. Returning again to northern
continental Europe in the eastly 20th century, across 5 data sets from Lynn (2011) we see a mean factor
of overrepresentation of 7.

https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

5/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

When looking at more elite accomplishments, the degree of overrepresentation becomes much more
extreme. When analyzing Nobel prize awards per capita, Lynn (2011) finds that Jews overrepresent
gentiles by factors ranging from 6 in the case of Britain to 320 in the case of Italy. The mean factor of
over-representation is 70.

In Britain, Jews have been overrepresented among members of the Royal Society by a factor of 8.

In 1985, it was estimated that 4.3% of British academics were Jewish, giving a factor of
overrepresentation of 7.2 (Lynn, 2011) Finally, in 2006 Jews accounted for 4.3% of University Heads,
giving a overrepresentation factor of 6.6 (Lynn, 2011).
More extremely, an analysis of elite Australians found Jews to account for 15% of academics, giving
them a factor of overrepresentation of 26.8 (Lynn, 2011)
In America, an analysis in 1990 found 3.7% of (male) academics to be Jewish Males and 2.3% to be
Jewish females, giving factors of overrepresentation of 3.7 and 2.3. By the year 2000, these figures had
decreased to factors of 2.1 for Jewish males and 0.8 for Jewish females (Lynn, 2011).
Jewish overrepresentation in America becomes more extreme when we look at more elite categories of
academics. Zuckerman (1977) (https://books.google.com/books?
hl=en&lr=&id=HAHCzJfmD5IC&oi=fnd&pg=PR13&dq=scientific+elite+zuckerman&ots=5Q22CK7Au2&sig=uWZA8KHpoQWn9pkyaYbkUhe2Pc#v=onepage&q=scientific%20elite%20zuckerman&f=false) found Jews had a factor of
overrepresentation of three when looking at all university faculty, but that figure jumped to seven
when the analysis was restricted to elite universities. Below are the results broken down by subject for
fields that Jews were heavily represented in:

https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

6/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

Finally, Kadushin (1974)
(https://books.google.com/books/about/The_American_intellectual_elite.html?id=NJ_1bKUriF4C)
analyzed the authors who were recently published in the top 20 academic journals in America and
found that Jews accounted for 50% of intellectuals (RR= 18.5), 56% of social scientists (RR= 20.7) and
61% of humanity scholars (RR= 22.6). Thus, if you use a sufficiently elite criterion there is a sense in
which certain fields in academia could be described as being mostly or largely controlled by Jews.

Politics
Jews have also been said to yield greater than average political power. Again, this largely seems to be
true. In 1939, Jews accounted for 63% of the USSR’s NKVD, Stalin’s militaristic police force with
which he conducted his great purge (RR= 35).
Turning to a democratic context, in 1950 Jews accounted for 4.5% of British MPs (RR= 5.4) and in 2000
they accounted for 3.2% (RR= 7.1).
Another analysis found Jews to account for 8% of US senators between 1989 and 1991 and 9% of US
supreme court justices between 1900 and 1990, corresponding to factors of overrepresentation of 3.6
and 3.0 (Table 19.10). Today, Jews comprise 5.6% of the US house of representatives, 9% of the senate,
and 38% of the supreme court (PBS, 2017 (http://www.pbs.org/weta/washingtonweek/blogpost/jews-america-numbers)). Since Jews account for 2.2% of the population, this corresponds to
factors of overrepresentation of 2.5 for the house, 4 for the Senate, and 17.27 for the supreme court.
Jews are even more present among political donors. In 2012 (https://www.timesofisrael.com/jewishdonors-prominent-in-presidential-campaign-contributions/), Jews accounted for 20% of the top 5
GOP donors and 40% of the top democrat donors. In 2016 (https://www.jta.org/2016/10/26/topheadlines/5-top-donors-to-clinton-election-bid-reportedly-are-jewish), Jews accounted for all 5 of he
top Democrat donors. One analysis (http://www.jcrcny.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/TheJewish-Vote-Political-Power-and-Identity-in-US-Elections.pdf)finds that, of the top 50 donors in 2016,
Jews accounted for 40% of mega-donors in total, 25% of Republican donors, and 79% of Democrat
donors.

The Elite Jewish Left
Many would argue that Jewish intellectuals have had a larger impact than Jewish politicians, and that
this impact has largely been to the benefit of leftism. This too seems to correspond to the empirical
record.
In 1969, the Carnegie Commission on Higher Education issued a survey filled out by 60,000 American
university faculty members. 6,000 respondents identified as ethnically Jewish. This survey is reported
on in Lipset and Ladd (1971) (http://www.jstor.org/stable/23605311?
seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents). Though this survey asked about religion, its sample includes
atheistic Jews because it asked people about the religion of their parents rather than themselves. 29%
of the Jewish sample reported that their religion as none.
By breaking this data down by age, it can be shown that Jewish representation in Academia had
increased dramatically in the decades preceding the 1960s. Among academics over the age of 65, Jews
accounted for only 3.8% of the sample. Among those under the age of 25, they accounted for 11.9%.
When the sample is restricted to only elite universities, the change goes from 9.3% among those over
65 to 20.6% among those under 29.
In 1969, Jewish professors were much more concentrated in the social sciences, law, social work, and
medicine, than they were in other disciplines:

https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

7/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

This study also demonstrated that, in 1969, the majority of Jewish academics identified as liberal of
leftist (74.5%) while a majority of Catholic faculty (55.3%) and Protestant faculty (59.3%) did not.

Thus, Jewish academics have moved the mean political views of academics to the left in virtue of their
own political leanings.
Even better data comes from Lerner, Nagai, and Rothman (1989)
(http://www.jstor.org/stable/2749125?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents) who reported on what they
describe to be a random sample of 1,340 American elites drawn from the following groups: “highranking military officers, corporate business leaders, corporate law partners in major law firms,
upper-level federal civil servants, journalists working for leading news media, prime-time television
producers, directors, and writers, major motion picture producers, writers, and directors, and leaders
of public interest.”
Jewish people were defined as those who said they were ethnically or religiously Jewish, and those
who said they were raised Jewish. In total, 28% of the sample was found to be Jewish.
Analyzing elections between 1968 and 1980, Lerner et al. find Jewish elites to much more likely than
non-Jewish elites (and non-elite Jews) to vote for Democrats. In two of the elections, gentile elites
voted for on net for Democratscrats and in two they voted for the Republican, suggesting a centrist
outlook. In all four elections, Jewish elites overwhelmingly voted for the democrat.

On average, gentile elites voted for the Republican candidate by a margin of 3.75 points. The general
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

8/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

public did so by an average margin of 7.75 points. Jewish elites, by contrast, on averaged for the
democrat canditate by a margin of 67.25 points. Because Jews accounted for 28% of the total sample of
elites, we can estimate that Jews pushed the “elite vote” an average 18.83 points to the left per
election, moving the totality of American elites from the right to the left.
Political ideology data was consistent with voting data. 43% of the general public, 42% of gentile
elites, and 12% of Jewish elites described themselves as conservative, while 74% of Jewish elites, 37%
of gentile elites, and 21% of the general public described itself as liberal. For the total sample of elites,
48.48% described themselves as liberal while just 33.6% described themselves as conservative. Thus,
the influence of Jewish elites switched mean ideological bias of elites from conservative by a margin of
5 to liberal by a margin of 15.

Lerner et al also analyzed specific policy questions. On the economy, they found “A minority of
Jewish elites but a majority of the non-Jewish elites think that less regulation of business is a good
thing. Fewer members of the Jewish elite believe that private enterprise is fair to workers, and fewer
also believe that government should not guarantee jobs. Likewise, more than two-thirds of the Jewish
elite but less than half of the non-Jewish elite agree that the government should reduce the income
gap between rich and poor.”
Differences were smaller on social issues. For instance, the overwhelming majority of both gentile and
jewish elites supported abortion rights. However, some large differences did emerge: 20% of Jewish
elites said that homosexuality was wrong compared to 49% of gentile elites, only 15% of Jewish elites
thought that courts gave too much concern to the rights of criminals compared to 64% of gentile elites,
and a majority, 58%, of Jewish elites agreed with the statement “special preference in hiring should be
given to Blacks” while only a minority, 44%, of gentile elites did.
Finally, Lener et al found that Jewish elites continued to be to the left of gentile elites after controlling
for the specific occupation they were in, as well as the respondents sex, age, socio-economic status,
and whether they were from the south.
These studies paint a picture: in the 60s and 70s the gentile American elite was reasonably moderate.
A huge influx of Jews in the mid 20th century pushed it to the left. I think it not unreasonable to
suggest that this initial push set up a situation in which there were enough leftists among the
American elite to discriminate against conservatives, leading to a cycle by which American elites
became ever more liberal over the last few decades.
This is consistent with what is, to my knowledge, the only data on how the political views of social
scientists have changed with time, which shows psychologists becoming gradually more liberal in the
mid 20th century and then rapidly more liberal in the last few decades:

(Duarte et al. 2014
(https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/816d/3b80a48fc337f0562103ffa7a5cf6bffaa6a.pdf))
If this is accurate, then it is no exaggeration to say that the extreme leftist bias of contemporary
American elites can be blamed largely on Jews. Giving that Jews represent roughly 2% of the
American population, for them to have such an influence would be truly extraordinary.
Moving away from American history, consider these three lists analyses:

The Washington Post (http://racehist.blogspot.com/2015/08/ethnic-origins-of-washington-postshttps://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

9/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

top.html) made a list of their top 28 communists of all time and 32% were Jewish.
Forbes (http://racehist.blogspot.com/2015/03/the-25-most-influential-liberals-in-us.html) created
a list of the 25 most influential liberals in US media and 56% were Jewish. Only 4, or 16%, were
Gentile Whites.
The Nation (http://racehist.blogspot.com/2015/04/ethnic-origins-of-nations-fifty-most.html)
published a list of the 50 most influential 20th-century progressives at 14% were Jewish.
The Audacious Epigone
(https://web.archive.org/web/20160424030837/http://anepigone.blogspot.com/2007/12/demographicprofile-of-us-100-most.html) analyzed the Telegraph’s 2007 lists of the 100 most influential U.S.
liberals/conservatives and found that 24% of influential liberals were Jewish compared to 23% of
influential conservatives.
To supplement these existing analyses with more names and to compare the relative rates at which
Jews were influential right and left wing thinkers, a few years ago I went through ten pages of google
results for lists of influential American liberals and conservatives giving me a list of 133 names from 9
sources (https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/03/01/jewish-overrepresentaiton-amonginfluential-liberals-and-conservatives/).
Among influential conservatives, 8.3% were Jewish. Among influential liberals, 29.3% were Jewish.
This gives Jews a factor of overrepresentation of 4 among the elite right and 15 among the elite left.
Jews are 3.5 times more likely to be an influential liberal as an influential conservative (1).
Thus, it is fair to say that Jews have played a very large role in leftism. This is not quantitative, but I
will note that my impression is that influential Jewish liberals, such as Marx, Noam Chomsky, and
Steven Jay Gould, as well as Jewish conservatives like Bill Kristol, Charles Krauthammer, and David
Brooks, tend to be more culturally leftist than the average important thinker on their side of politics.
Given what is known about the political views of Jews in general, this would not be surprising.

Political Views of Jews
Here, I’ll review data on Jewish opinion on 6 political topics: immigration, affirmative action, free
speech, sexual politics, other social issues, and the economy.

Immigration
An article (http://thealternativehypothesis.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/PDF-FORRYAN.pdf)featured on The Alternative Hypothesis website (which was not written by me nor Ryan
Faulk) contains an analysis of Ipsos and Reuters data for 34 immigration questions. In the majority of
cases, Jewish opinion did not significantly differ from those of gentile Whites. However, roughly one
in three of the comparisons showed Jews supporting a more liberal view than Whites, and in only six
percent of the cases was the opposite pattern found. Thus, if you average across all 34 questions, Jews
would come out being moderately more liberal than gentile Whites on immigration.
The author of the article displays to a series of graphs with the introduction: “The following graphs
represent some of the most striking examples of Jew and gentile similarity in attitudes on
immigration”, but in 75% of examples shown, Jewish opinion was to the left of Gentile opinion, but
the difference was not statistically significant.
What this means is that even though Jews answered in a more liberal way than gentiles the
differences were not so large that there was less than a 5% chance of them being due to sampling error
given the sizes of the samples being utilized. Such cases were taken in the paper as evidence against
the view that Jews hold liberal immigration views, when actually they are evidence in favor of this
proposition, just not especially strong evidence.
For instance, an example pointed to in the paper as showing Jews having the same views as Whites
asked participants if they favored increases in the deportation of illegal immigrants. On net, Jews
supported this view by a margin of 25 points while Whites did so by a margin of 42 points. (Note: this
survey was taken in late 2014 and early 2015, before the rise of Trump.) This is a large difference
consistent with the view that Jews hold more liberal views than Whites on immigration, but it was
counted as evidence against said hypothesis because the small sample of Jews rendered this difference
statistically insignificant.
Moving to other data, The inductivist analyzed (http://inductivist.blogspot.com/2008/06/did-911make-americans-think-twice.html) General Social Survey data from the 90s and found that a plurality
of Jewish Americans thought that immigration should be decreased. However, this was smaller than
the plurality favoring this view that was found among the general population, suggesting that Jews
are to the left of gentiles on immigration.
Next, consider the following data from a 2009 AJC poll (https://www.jta.org/2010/10/12/newshttps://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

10/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

opinion/united-states/poll-jewish-support-for-obama-falling) of 800 Jewish Americans which found
that Jews favored an Arizona low which gave police the power to ask people to verify their residency
status by a margin of 6 (52 to 46). I compared this margin to the margins by which the public
supported this law in polls done by Pew (http://www.pewresearch.org/facttank/2012/06/21/majority-approves-of-arizona-immigration-law/), Gallup
(http://news.gallup.com/poll/127598/americans-favor-oppose-arizona-immigration-law.aspx), and
CBS (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/poll-most-americans-think-arizona-immigration-law-isabout-right/), and found Jews to be to the left of the general public, and White Americans, on this
law.

Polling done by the Center for Immigration Studies (https://cis.org/Religious-Leaders-vs-MembersExamination-Contrasting-Views-Immigration) comes to the same conclusions:

A more recent PPRI poll (https://www.prri.org/research/poll-immigration-reform-views-onimmigrants/) found that most Jewish Americans favored liberal views on immigration reform and
did so at a higher rate than did the general American public.
Finally, the 2017 Survey of Jewish American Opinion
(http://www.jewishdatabank.org/Studies/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=3621) found that 77% of
American Jews disapprove of how Trump is handling immigration.
Though this evidence is not 100% consistent, I think in totality it clearly favors the view that American
Jews hold moderately more liberal views on immigration than do Whites.
To get at international Jewish opinion, I analyzed data collected between 1995 and 2009 by the World
Values Survey. In total, I had data on 503 Jews and 184,203 gentiles who were asked to chose between
four possible views on immigration: let anybody in, let people in as long as there are jobs, impose
strict limits on immigration, and completely prohibit people from coming in (Variable 124).
12% of the general population and 19% of Jews favored open border, 40% of the total sample and 50%
of jews favored allowing immigrants so long as there were jobs, 37% of the total sample and 25% of
Jews favored strict limits on immigration, and 11% of the total sample and 6% of Jews favored closed
borders.

Thus, Jews globally seem to be to the left of most people on immigration. There is, however, a catch:
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

11/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

Jews in Israel tend to be far less welcoming of immigration.
For instance, a poll reported on by the Times of Israel (http://www.timesofisrael.com/poll-showsfew-israelis-willing-to-take-in-syrian-refugees/) found that Israelis opposed Israel taking in Syrian
refugees by a margin of 69 points, but these same respondents favored Europe taking in these exact
same refugees by a margin of 8 points.
In fact, Pew Polling (http://www.pewforum.org/2016/03/08/israels-religiously-divided-society/)
finds that a plurality of Israeli Jews favor not only immigration limitations, but the forced deportation
of Arabs.

Finally, consider this (https://www.timesofisrael.com/most-israeli-jews-agree-africans-are-acancer/): “Fifty-two percent of Jewish Israelis identify with the statement by MK Miri Regev last
month that African migrants are “a cancer in the body” of the nation, and over a third condone antimigrant violence, according to the Israel Democracy Institute (IDI) Peace Index for May 2012.”
Affirmative Action
Some of the best data on how Jews view affirmative action comes from Tom Smith’s analysis of GSS
data spanning from 1972 to 2002, published by the AJC in Jewish Distinctiveness in America
(http://www.jewishdatabank.org/studies/details.cfm?StudyID=617). Here are some relevant findings from
that document:
When asked about the government providing special help for Blacks, 47% of Blacks, 19% of Jews,
and 17% of the public were found to be in favor.
When asked if Black-White differences are due to discrimination, 65% of Blacks said yes compared
to 41% of Jews and 37% of the general population.
When asked if Black-White differences are due to lesser black ability, 11% of Blacks said yes, as did
11% of the general public, but only 7% of Jews.
When asked if Whites can segregate their neighborhoods, 84% of the general public said no
compared to 88% of Jews and 90% of Blacks.
When asked if school busing should be used for desegregation, 33% of the general public said yes
compared to 32% of Jews and 58% of Blacks.
When asked if Blacks should get a preference in hiring 16% of the general public said yes
compared to 44% of Blacks and 15% of Jews.
When asked if there was too little government spending on the conditions of Blacks, 33% of the
general public said yes compared to 40% of Jews and 76% of Blacks.
In sum, for most questions, Jews were more likely than Whites to support affirmative action and to
endorse an affirmative action friendly worldview, but there were clear exceptions to this general
trend.
More recently, a 2009 Quinnipiac University Poll (https://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-andevents/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=1307) asked if affirmative
action programs that give preferences to Blacks and other minorities should be continued the general
public favored abolishing such programs by a margin of 19 points while Jews favored continuing such
programs by a margin of 4 points.
When asked if affirmative action policies were worth pursuing even if they resulted in fewer
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

12/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

opportunities for Whites, the general-public said “no” by a margin of 30 points. Jews said “yes” by a
margin of 9 points. Note that the general public increased its opposition to these programs when it
was specified that Whites would be hurt by affirmative action and Jews actually did the opposite.
The poll also asked participants whether they favored affirmative action in hiring, promotions, and
college admissions, for three groups, Blacks, Hispanics, and White women, in order to increase
diversity. The general-public opposed this by a margin of 28 points in the case of Blacks, 30 points for
White women, and 35 points for Hispanics. Jews favored such policies by a margin of 7 points for
Hispanics, and 13 points for Blacks, but opposed it by a margin of 8 points for White Women.
Next, consider a New York Times/CBS poll (http://www.nytimes.com/1987/04/12/us/poll-findsjews-are-tough-critics-of-reagan.html) from the 1980’s which found that Jews favored affirmative
action in hiring for Blacks by a margin of 3 points, and for women by 10 points. The NYT article
doesn’t give numbers, but it notes that this is greater support for affirmative action than the poll
found among gentile Whites.
Pew Polling (http://www.pewforum.org/2013/10/01/chapter-6-social-and-political-views/) also
shows that Jews consider discrimination against most groups, except for Christians, to be more
prevalent than does the average American:
Jews in Israel also support affirmative action… but not for a minority. Rather, Pew Polling
(http://www.pewforum.org/2016/03/08/israels-religiously-divided-society/) finds that 79% of
Israel Jews think that Jews should get preferential treatment in Israel.
To sum up, the data here is clear: Jews are more likely than average to support affirmative action,
especially for themselves.
Free Speech
The General Social Survey (http://www.unz.com/akarlin/future-for-aclu-children/) asks
participants if racists, anti-religionists, homosexuals, communists, militarists, and Muslim clergyman
preaching hatred of the US should be allowed to speak in public. In each case, the majority of Jews say
yes and by a larger margin than any other ethnic group. The rates at which Jews endorse free speech
range from roughly 95% in the case of homosexuals, to 55% in the case of Muslims and 65% in the
case of racists.
This is the only data on this topic I am aware and straight forwardly supports the view that American
Jews are abnormally pro free speech.
Israel, on the other hand, scores slightly below average
(http://www.pewglobal.org/2015/11/18/appendix-a-3/) on measures of national freedom of
expression. Whether this is a difference reflects the differences between the types of Jews who live in
Israel and the types of Jews who live in the US on the one hand, or a difference between what Jews
want to have occur in their own nation and other people’s nations, on the other, is not knowable on
the basis of this data.
Sexual Mores
Jews have relatively liberal views on sexual morality. Data reviewed by Smith from the General Social
Survey reveals the following (remember, this data was collected between 1972 and 2002):
4% of Jewish Americans say premarital sex is always wrong compared to 26% of the general
public.
52% of Jews say that extramarital sex is always wrong compared to 78% of the general public.
18% of Jewish Americans say homosexuality is wrong compared to 59% of the general public.
(Keep in mind this data is several decades old).
17% of Jews think pornography should be illegal compared to 37% of the general public.
77% of Jewish Americans favored allowing abortions for any reason compared to 40% of the
general public.
Other Social Issues
Using Smith, again, as a source:
29% of Jewish Americans favor easier divorce laws compared to 22% of the general public.
74% of Jewish Americans and 62% of the general public disagreed with the idea that families work
better if the man works and the woman tends to the home.
78% of Jewish Americans and 66% of the general public agreed with the view that a mother
working does not hurt children.
41% of Jews favored legalizing weed compared to 25% of the general public.
More recently, Ipsos and Reuters (https://anepigone.blogspot.com/2018/04/most-people-havefavorable-view-of-nra.html) data shows that 54% of the general public and 14% of Jews have a
favorable view of the NRA, which probably tells us something about Jews views on gun control.
The Economy
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

13/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

The GSS asked respondents whether the government spends too little on a diverse set of services.
Mazur (2007) (http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?
doi=10.1.1.514.2587&rep=rep1&type=pdf) compared Jews to the general public and to a set of collegeeducated Whites from big cities (controls) on several such questions:

As can be seen, Jews consistently favored more spending than the general public except for when it
came to social security and the treatment of drug addicts.
More recently, a 2013 Pew Poll (http://www.pewforum.org/2013/10/01/chapter-6-social-andpolitical-views/) found that Jewish Americans would prefer a bigger government to a smaller one by
a margin of 16 points. The general American public prefers a smaller government by a margin of 11
points.

Similarly, a 2012 PPRI poll (https://www.prri.org/research/jewish-values-in-2012/) found the
following:
“American Jews are not anti-wealth nor anti-Wall Street, but overall nearly three-quarters (73%) say
that the United States’ economic system unfairly favors the wealthy.
Nearly two-thirds (64%) of American Jews agree that the government should do more to reduce
the gap between the rich and the poor, while roughly one-third (35%) disagree.
More than 8-in-10 (81%) favor increasing the tax rate on Americans earning more than $1 million a
year, compared to 17% who oppose this policy.”

In sum, the evidence clearly suggests that Jews have economic views that are to the left of the general
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

14/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

public.

Jewish Voting Patterns
In the United States, Jews reliably vote to the left of the general public. This has been true in every
election of the last 100 years. This has not always meant that Jews voted overwhelmingly for
Democrats, however: in the 1910s and 1920s a large proportion of the Jewish vote went to American
socialist and progressive parties rather than the Democrats.

(Weisberg 2012 (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12397-012-9093-z), Stone 2012
(https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/07/jewish-voter-exit-polls_n_2084008.html), Smith and
Martinez 2016 (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/how-the-faithful-voted-apreliminary-2016-analysis/))
Comparing them to other US racial groups
(http://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/11/11/the-role-of-race-in-trumps-victory-andthe-2016-election/), we can see that Jews vote democrat by larger margins than do Hispanics and
Asians, but by smaller margins than Blacks.

Across this 44-year period, the average net democrat vote was 77 points for Blacks, 43 points for Jews,
33 points for Hispanics, 15 points for Asians, and -16 points for Whites. Data from Fisher (1979)
(http://www.jstor.org/stable/2150158?
casa_token=eEDxmdMLUXsAAAAA:lgYGsid99_Ry7VGz4n0zK3bcYPHBCQwxhiBYg5iKyU7BkkdXixA5fBdEHEipVKvC6Sj2evpOLwfUR4T7MOp3YGHBdg
suggests that in earlier decades Jews voted for democrats at roughly the same margins as Black
people:

https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

15/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

In the 19th century, Jews were not a solid democrat block. For instance, Lincoln won the Jewish vote
in 1868 (Sandra, 2012
(http://www.brandeis.edu/hornstein/sarna/contemporaryjewishlife/JewishVoteInPresidentialElections.pdf)).
Of course, back then Blacks voted democrat too. American Jews, then, vote like non-White minorities
do.
Looking at this phenomenon in other nations is difficult because it requires an understanding of many
international political parties. I will get to some international examples below, but first: I analyzed
data from 5 waves of the World Value Survey on a question that asked people around the world to
place themselves on a political orientation scale from 1 to 10 where 1 is most left and 10 is most right.
On average, 1,858 Jews rated themselves as being .27 SD more liberal than the total sample of 237,229
respondents did.
Though this is true globally, this is most certainly not true in Israel. Astonishingly, Pew Polling
(http://www.pewforum.org/2016/03/08/israels-religiously-divided-society/) finds that a mere 8%
of Israeli Jews describe themselves as being on the left while 55% describe themselves as centrist and
37% as being on the right. This is radically different from Jewish opinion in any other nation.
With the US and Israel, which account for the vast majority of all Jews on earth, taken care of, let’s
turn to Britain. Following Brexit, a poll of 1,000 British Jews (https://www.timesofisrael.com/brexitpoll-jews-voted-2-1-to-remain-in-eu/) published in The Jewish Chronicle found that British Jews
voted to stay in the EU by a margin of 28 points. Obviously, this is to the left of the public, which
voted to leave. On the other hand, Jews in Britain (http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/236905/howthe-jewish-vote-may-have-helped-decide-the-uk-election) are far more likely to vote conservative than
labor. In the UK, journalists have attributed this voting pattern to the British Labor party’s association
with anti-Semitism.
Similarly, Jews in Canada (https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/how-the-political-shiftamong-jewish-voters-plays-in-canada/article4199522/) are more likely than the general population to
vote for the conservative party. This is said to be a recent change in Canada and writers have
attributed this to the conservative party being perceived as more pro-Israel.
In France, Jews used to vote largely for the Socialist Party. These days, however, Jews are overrepresented (https://forward.com/news/breaking-news/205670/why-are-so-many-french-jewsvoting-for-front-natio/) among voters for the center right party the UMPS and underrepresented
among voters for the far right, and sometimes anti-Semitic, party the National Front. This shift is said
by some to reflect Jewish opposition to mass Muslim immigration which in turn is fueled by antiSemitism among Muslims.
It would seem forced to not interpret this pattern of data as being motivated by what Jewish people
perceive to be in their ethnic interest. In many nations, Jews used to vote left, and they still largely self
identify as more liberal than average, but they vote for center right parties due to a growing embrace
of Islam and anti-Zionism on the left, while still being underrepresented among voters for far right
wing parties due to fears of anti Semitism. Even in populations where Jews vote right wing, Brexit
showed us that Jews will still come out to vote for the left when an issue tied to immigration, and
therefore “racism”, is directly on the ballot. Unless the Jews in question live in Israel, in which case
they will overwhelming favor far right immigration policies, and not identify with the political left
92% of the time.

With respect to the United States, I think the key to understanding Jewish political opinion is to
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

16/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

understand that Jews perceive the religious right to be extremely anti-Semitic. This is obviously false,
the religious right is extremely pro-Jewish in its ideology, but a 1998 survey
(http://www.jewishdatabank.org/studies/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=2538) of Jewish Americans
found that 48% considered many of most of the religious right to be anti-Semitic. In fact, American
Jews were more likely to say that very few or no anti-Semites were present among Muslims (9%) than
they were the Religious Right (8%). Several
(http://www.jewishdatabank.org/Studies/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=3676)other
(http://www.jewishdatabank.org/Studies/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=3677)iterations
(http://www.jewishdatabank.org/Studies/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=3679)of the same survey found
the same result, while others found that Muslims were considered more anti-Semitic, but the religious
right was still regarded as highly anti-Jewish.
This is consistent with 2012 polling (https://www.prri.org/research/jewish-values-in2012/#.VfEaYBHBzGc) which asked Jews to rate how much they liked various groups on a scale of 1
to 100 and found that they rated Muslims (41.1) more highly than the Christian right (20.9).
Similarly, Pew data (http://www.pewforum.org/2017/02/15/americans-express-increasingly-warmfeelings-toward-religious-groups/) shows that Jews have a negative view of Evangelical Christians. In
some years (http://www.pewforum.org/2014/07/16/how-americans-feel-about-religiousgroups/pf_14-07-16_interreligiousrelations_all/), Pew finds that American Jews rate Muslims more
highly than they did Evangelicals:

Finally, consider that an analysis (http://thealternativehypothesis.org/wpcontent/uploads/2017/12/PDF-FOR-RYAN.pdf) of Jewish voting in five nations, Canada, the UK,
France, Australia, and the US, found an astounding -.95 correlation between the prevalence of
Christianity in a country and the rate at which Jews voted to the right. Based on the linear trend found
in this data, you would predict that, of these five countries, the US would be the only one in which
most Jews vote to the left, and that is exactly what reality bares out.
Thus, I think it is plausible to attribute Jewish political opinion outside of Israel largely to fears about
anti-Semitism, with an irrational emphasis on Christian anti-Semitism.

Jewish Ethnocentrism
Also note that in both of the religious favorability rating charts displayed above, within the 99 ratings
displayed on each chart the highest, in both cases, is the Jewish rating of Jews. This is evidence in
favor of the next hypothesis I want to advance: that Jews have above average levels of ethnocentrism.
Consider the following four survey analyses reported on by the blog The Inductivist:
First (http://inductivist.blogspot.com/2011/04/racial-identification-among-whites-by.html), the
MIDUS study (n=4,088) asked participants “How closely do you identify with your race” on a 4 point
scale and the mean Jewish score was .20 SD above the mean.
Secondly (http://inductivist.blogspot.com/2009/12/more-on-jewish-ethnocentrism.html), the
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

17/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

Inductivist got data (N=2,119) that asked people to rate on a 4 point scale how important their
ethnicity is to who they are with 1 being very important and 4 being not at all important. Jews mean
score was .29 SD below the mean, indicating greater ethnocentrism than average.
Thirdly (http://inductivist.blogspot.com/2010/02/race-ethnicity-and-attitudes-toward.html), The
Midlife Development in the United States Study asked Americans how important it is for members of
their ethnic group to marry inside their group. Here are the percentages who said “very important” or
“somewhat important” (N = 4,881): Jewish 47.4%, Asian 42.3%, Amerindian 37.3%, Black 34.6%,
Hispanic 33.8%, English 28.4%, French 19.7%, Italian 19.1%, Scottish 18.5%, Irish 18.3%, Polish 16.3%,
German 16.0%, Swedish 15.8%, and Norwegian 15.2%.
Fourthly (http://inductivist.blogspot.com/2010/02/preferring-ones-own-ethnic-group-among.html),
From the Inductivist analysis of GSS data, the following proportions of people said that they did not
prefer the company of their own ethnic group at all: French 53.4%, German 50.3%, Swedish 45.9%,
Norwegian 42.7%, Scottish 41.3%, Irish 38.5%, Russian 37.5%, English 32.8%, Italian 28.5%, and Jewish
20.2%. Thus, Jews are more likely than various white ethnic groups to prefer the company of their coethnics.
The analyses done or reviewed by the Inductivist often had small samples of Jews and they differ in
terms of whether they define Jews ethnically or religiously. However, they consistently reinforce the
notion that Jews are more ethnocentric than most White people.
Higher than average ethnocentrism is also evidenced by Jewish patterns of marriage. Jewish people
make up only 2% of the US population, but most Jewish people are married to fellow Jews. This was
true for nearly all of US history, but has recently begun to change
(http://www.pewforum.org/2013/10/01/chapter-2-intermarriage-and-other-demographics/):

Similarly, an analysis of infants born to Jewish mothers in Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia, found that
an average of 21.2% of them were of mixed origins between 1958 and 1968. When analyzing the
period 1988 to 1993, this figure rose to 50% (Lynn 2011, page 211).
On the other hand, an analysis of Jews in Australia found that they were marry gentiles at a rate of
22% in 1921, 7% in 1961, and 8% in 1971 (Lynn 2011, page 39).
Globally, the pattern is clear: Jews display an ethnocentric bias for marrying within their group,
though this bias is lessening with time. In most nations, Jews are less than 2% of the population, but
nowhere does the rate at which Jews marry fellow Jews even come close to approaching this figure. Of
course, in part this is because Jews tend to live near other Jews, but this itself may partly be the result
of a degree of ethnocentrism.
Years of survey data also show that Jews make friends with fellow Jews are disproportionate rates,
and explicitly regard being Jewish as very important.
For instance, the 2000-2001 National Jewish Population Survey
(http://www.jewishdatabank.org/studies/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=1490) found that 52% of Jews
say that half or more of their close friends are Jewish, 41% contribute money to a specifically Jewish
cause, and 52% regard being Jewish as very important.
In 2013, Pew Polling (//www.jewishdatabank.org/Studies/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=3088) found
that 80% of Jews said that being Jewish was either somewhat or very important. Figures from the
Annual Survey of American Jewish Opinion put that figure at 79% in 2016
(http://www.jewishdatabank.org/Studies/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=3429) and 80% in 2017
(http://www.jewishdatabank.org/Studies/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=3621).

That same Pew Polling (//www.jewishdatabank.org/Studies/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=3088) also
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

18/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

found that 75% of American Jews have a strong sense of belonging to the Jewish people, 63% say they
have a special responsibility to care for Jews in need, 32% of Jews say that all or most of their friends
are Jewish, 45% say some are Jewish, and 21% say hardly any or none of their friends are Jewish.
A 2012 poll (https://www.prri.org/research/jewish-values-in-2012/#.VfEaYBHBzGc) finds that
“More than 4-in-10 (42%) American Jews say that being Jewish is either very important or the most
important thing in their lives. Approximately 3-in-10 say being Jewish is somewhat important (29%),
and approximately 3-in-10 (29%) say being Jewish is either not too important or not at all important in
their lives.”
Finally, consider that The National Jewish Population Survey of 1971
(http://www.jewishdatabank.org/Studies/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=1449) found that 71.7% of Jews
reported being happy to be Jewish and 84.6% of Jews agreed with the statement “It is important that
there should always be a Jewish people”, while only 4.2% disagreed.
To my knowledge, the only empirical challenge to the claim that Jews, on average, possess higher
levels of ethnocentrism than Whites, was mounted by the previously referenced article on The
Alternative Hypothesis website. Again, this article was not written by Ryan Faulk, nor was it written
by me. As of now, the author of the paper is anonymous.
The article seeks to inform people interested in White identity politics on how they should view Jews.
To this end, it attempts to refute what it calls the “separatist hypothesis” which it defines the
hypothesis as the view that “Jews have no white identity and no sense of kinship with or preference
for Europeans” and “Jews are so highly predisposed to ethnocentrism that they can never be
assimilated into gentile societies.”
This is an extreme view that I have no interest in defending. What I will do, however, is explain how
the evidence offered in this article does not refute the view that Jews are more ethnocentric than
Whites. Specifically, I’ll comment on six lines of evidence:
1. First, the paper shows that Jewish people score higher than average on measures of general trust
and this is interpreted as suggesting that they don’t feel alienated from society. I would count this
as weak and indirect evidence, and also note that different groups may have different
interpretations of the answers used in trust scales. Moreover, to the degree that Jewish people tend
to live near other Jews, they may mostly have Jewish people in mind when they think about the
trustworthiness of others.
2. Secondly, it is brought up that Jewish people date and marry White people. This is true if you
consider Jews white, but, as already noted, most of these White people are Jews.
3. Thirdly, it is mentioned that Jewish people sometimes stop being religiously Jewish. This is true,
but can only be taken as a sign of assimilation if they are converting to a popular branch of
Christianity. Jews becoming atheists are not assimilating into White American culture.
4. Fourthly, it is shown that Jewish people self-identify as “White” on racial surveys even when
“other” is an option. This is true but tells us nothing about degree to which Jewish people value
their ethnic group or perceive the interests of their ethnic group as being at tension with the
interests of other White people. The Nazis would have self-identified as White, but were also
German supremacists who engaged in ethnic conflict with Slavs. Many French Canadians wish to
separate from Canada but would still surely identify as White. Explicitly anti-White SJWs also selfidentify as White. In fact, some of them, like Tim Wise, are anti-White Jewish intellectuals who
write books with titles like “White like Me”.
5. Fifthly, it is shown that about half of Jewish people say they feel close to White people, as do
roughly half of White gentiles. Interpreting this point is difficult in light of the fact that Jews
consider themselves to be White and so may be thinking of themselves to some extent when they
think of White people. Furthermore, it is possible to feel close to your racial group, at least relative
to other racial groups, and still care a great deal about your particular ethnicity. Regardless, I think
Jewish patterns of mating and friend making, support for anti-White political policies while
supporting ethnic-nationalist policies in Israel, and their bizarre perception of Christians as crazed
anti-semites, tells us more about how Jewish people relate to White people than does this sort of
polling question.
6. Finally, the Alt Hype article mentioned that 1/5 of Jews raise their kids to have no Jewish identity.
Unfortunately, this tells us nothing about their relative level of ethnocentrism. To do that, we
would need to compare this figure to the rate at which gentile Whites raise their children without
enforcing any sort of ethnic identity.
Taking these six lines of evidence together, I think they offer very weak evidence against the view that
Jews are more ethnocentric than gentile White people. The evidence I previously referenced seems to
me to more directly address this question and, as a result, I think the totality of the evidence strongly
favors the view that Jews are relatively ethnocentric.

Jewish Ethnocentrism and Jewish Leftist Politics
At this point I want to advance the view that Jewish ethnocentrism is linked to the policies Jews
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

19/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

advocate for. We have already seen some evidence for this by noting the differences in the policies that
Jews advocate for Jewish and non-Jewish states and by noting that journalists explicitly explain Jews
voting for right wing parities in several Western nations by noting that Jews perceive this to be in their
ethnic interest. And in America Jews seem to dislike the right because they think he religious right is
anti-Semitic. This is but the tip of the iceberg in terms of evidence linking ethnocentrism to American
Jewish leftism.
For one thing, if you simply ask Jews they will explicitly tell you that fighting for “social justice” is
part of their ethnic identity. For instance, a PPRI poll (https://www.prri.org/research/jewish-valuesin-2012/#.VfEaYBHBzGc) conducted in 2012 found that:
“Seven-in-ten (70%) Jews cite the immigrant experience in America, and approximately two-thirds
(66%) say that being a religious minority in America has a somewhat or very important influence on
their political beliefs and activity.When asked which qualities are most important to their Jewish
identity, nearly half (46%) of American Jews cite a commitment to social equality, twice as many as
cite support for Israel (20%) or religious observance (17%). Fewer than 1-in-10 say that a sense of
cultural heritage and tradition (6%) or a general set of values (3%) are most important to their Jewish
identity.”
Similarly, Pew Polling (http://www.pewforum.org/2013/10/01/jewish-american-beliefs-attitudesculture-survey/) finds that “Large majorities of U.S. Jews say that remembering the Holocaust (73%)
and leading an ethical life (69%) are essential to their sense of Jewishness. More than half (56%) say
that working for justice and equality is essential to what being Jewish means to them.”
In 2004 (http://www.jewishdatabank.org/Studies/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=2250), 2003
(http://www.jewishdatabank.org/Studies/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=2486), 2002
(http://www.jewishdatabank.org/Studies/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=3679), 2001
(http://www.jewishdatabank.org/Studies/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=3677), 2000
(http://www.jewishdatabank.org/Studies/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=3676), 1998, 1997, and 1995
(http://www.jewishdatabank.org/studies/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=2538), surveys by the
American Jewish Committee asked respondents to select a quality they considered to be most
important to their Jewish identity from a list of 6 possible choices (including “something else”).

On average, roughly one in five Jews said that a commitment to social justice was the single most
defining feature of their Jewish identity.
This data comes from a series of report issues by the AJC called the Annual Survey of American
Jewish Opinion. Using data from eight years of this survey, I’ve found that Jews who describe being
Jewish as very important to them identify as Democrats rather than Republicans by larger margins
than do Jews who describe being Jewish as fairly important or not very important to them.

It is unfortunate that the AJC binned “fairly important” and “not very important” together. Had they
not, I suspect we would see an even stronger difference.
Several of these reports also asked respondents whether immigration levels should be increased,
decreased, or kept where they are. In the 2002 report, a plurality of Jews who said that being Jewish
was either fairly or not very important favored decreasing immigration (45%). By contrast, the
plurality of Jews who said being Jewish was very important favored immigration remaining where it
was (45%).
The 2003 report found the same result with a plurality of the less ethnocentric Jews saying that
immigration should be decreased (44%) while only a minority of highly ethnocentric Jews said so
(39%).
The 2006 (http://www.jewishdatabank.org/Studies/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=3680) and 2007
(http://www.jewishdatabank.org/Studies/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=3680) reports asked
respondents the following question:

“Which comes closest to your view of what government policy should be toward illegal immigrants
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

20/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

currently residing in the United States? Should the government deport all illegal immigrants back to
their home country, OR allow illegal immigrants to remain in the United States in order to work, but
only for a limited amount of time, OR allow illegal immigrants to remain in the United States and
become U.S. citizens, but only if they meet certain requirements over a period of time?”
In both years, the majority of Jews selected the most left-wing option and their views did not
significantly differ by the importance they attached to being Jewish, so that data does not support the
hypothesis I am advancing.
In totality though, the data from these reports support the contention that there is a link between
Jewish ethnic identity and left-wing politics, especially when it comes to immigration. It does not,
however, tell us how much of Jewish leftism can be accounted for by ethnic identity. While I think that
ethnic identity is an important variable in this equation, I doubt that it can explain all of the Jewish
tendency towards leftism in US politics.
For some Jewish intellectuals, fears of anti-Semitism have obviously played a large role in their leftist
politics. This is well documented in Kevin MacDonald’s book the Culture of Critique. On the other
hand, many important left-wing intellectuals, such as Noam Chomsky and Karl Marx, have been high
profile critics of either the Jewish state or the Jewish people as a whole. For them, ethnic identity did
not play a direct role in their politics. However, it is plausible, though certainly not proven, that their
politics were the result of Jewish norms of critique, skepticism, and a feeling of being outside of
European society, which evolved over the long course of Jewish history and experience. Regardless, as
I have said, I don’t think that Jewish ethnic identity is the whole story here, but I do think it is the
most important factor.

Ethnocentrism and Jewish Success
There is also some evidence that Jewish ethnocentrism contributes to their success in various
domains.
For instance, Perreault et al. (2012) (http://expertise.hec.ca/chaire_entrepreneuriat/wpcontent/uploads/2007-02social_capital_business_performance.pdf) analyzed data on 600
entrepreneurs from four ethnic groups: Chinese, Italian, Jewish, and Sikh. Though they engaged in
less ethnocentric behavior than other immigrant groups, Jewish business owners still reported that
25% of their employees were Jews, as were 25% of their customers, which is highly disproportionate
to the proportion of the Canadian population that, in any city, is Jewish.
This study also finds that the degree to which a firm employs coethnics negative correlates with its
performance. This makes sense, in general working with people on the basis of ethnicity rather than
merit is a bad idea. However, when members of your ethnicity are sufficiently above average in traits
like intelligence, it is plausible that ethnic nepotism may be an efficient heuristic. Thus, ethnic
nepotism may help Jews, who score well above average on intelligence, in a way that it would not
help most ethnic groups.
There are also studies linking the degree to which Jews are involved in Jewish communities with their
economic success. For instance, Berner and Gainer (2001)
(https://www.ryerson.ca/content/dam/cvss/files/new-WORKINGPAPERS/WP13%202001(1)%20Jewish%20Identity,%20Social%20Capital%20and%20Giving.pdf) find a
correlation of .17 between household income and embeddedness in Jewish communities.
Similarly, Hartman and Sheskin (2011) (http://www.jewishdatabank.org/Studies/details.cfm?
StudyID=713) analyzed 19,000 Jewish households across 21 communities and found that various
measures of Jewish community strength, such as being involved in local Jewish federations, family
services, synagogues, and other agencies, predicted higher levels of labor participation, income, and
education, among Jews.
That Jewish communities would strengthen Jewish economic performance is unsurprising. In the
modern economy, most jobs are obtained view networking, and being involved in a Jewish
community gives individuals access to a social network comprised of people in which wealthy
professionals are vastly more common than average (Belli 2017 (https://www.payscale.com/careernews/2017/04/many-jobs-found-networking), Adler 2016 (https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/newsurvey-reveals-85-all-jobs-filled-via-networking-lou-adler)) .
There is also evidence that Jews have helped other Jews advance in science. Specifically, Greenwald
and Schuh (1994) (https://faculty.washington.edu/agg/pdf/Gwald&Schuh.EJSP.1994.pdf) find that
Jewish researcher cites fellow Jews at a rate that is 40% higher than the rate at which gentiles cite Jews.
Once again, I should note that ethnocentrism is surely not the only variable that explains Jewish
success. There are other variables of great importance, perhaps most obviously intelligence.

https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

21/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

Jewish Intelligence
After reviewing dozens of studies, Lynn (2011, p 316) estimated the mean (Ashkenazi) Jewish IQ to be
110, 10 points above that of European gentiles. Lynn (2011) also aggregated data from 7 studies
showing that Jews score much higher on measures of verbal intelligence than they do on measures of
visual-spatial ability.

Lynn (2011) shows that this cognitive profile is also evident in the pattern of occupational
overrepresentation seen among Jews around the world:

Based on these IQ differences, we would expect Jews to be overrepresented among those with an IQ
of 130 by a factor of 4 and among those with IQ of over 145 by a factor of 7.
This corresponds well to the rate at which Jews have historically been overrepresented among
academics. This figure also may account for most of the overrepresentation we saw for Jews in
Journalism, especially given that journalism would seem to place a premium on verbal abilities.
However, IQ cannot account for even half of the Jewish overrepresentation among financial elites or
recipients of Nobel prices.
Jordan Peterson thinks that this can explain Jewish overrepresentation among the super-wealthy
because he thinks that the mean IQ of millionaires and billionaires is 145. Actually, research suggests
that the mean IQ of billionaires (https://www.psychologytoday.com/files/attachments/56143/waiamericas-elite-2013.pdf)is probably in the low 130s and millionaires
(https://books.google.com/books?
id=p60tDntHVnUC&pg=PA58&lpg=PA58&dq=mean+IQ+millionaires&source=bl&ots=99AWRNK09Q&sig=Zn4WnmBeZEoqZI47vVRefq77e4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiyqtXZotbaAhVHyoMKHaIJBSc4ChDoAQgxMAE#v=onepage&q&f=false)is
in the high 110s (see also here (https://brainsize.wordpress.com/2014/05/18/iq-and-income/)and
here (https://pumpkinperson.com/2016/02/11/the-incredible-correlation-between-iq-income/)),
suggesting that Jews are more common in these categories than their IQ would predict.
Sometimes it is suggested that intelligence can explain why Jews have such leftist political views and
vote so heavily for Democrats. This is almost surely not true.
For starters, the link between IQ and party ID is not what many people might assume it to be. Carl
(2014) (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289614001081) analyzed data on a
test of probability thinking (n = 4,631), verbal reasoning (n = 2,179), verbal comprehension (n =
55,794), and vocabulary (n = 26,308). Republicans scored higher than Democrats on all four measures
of cognitive ability. These differences are small, ranging from 2 to 3 IQ points, but even after
restricting the sample to only Whites, Republicans scored higher than Democrats on some measures
of cognitive ability and equally on others, supporting the hypothesis that White Republicans have
higher mean FSIQ than White Democrats.
There is some debate about the linearity of this relationship. For instance, Solon (2015)
(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016028961500080X) argues that there is a U
shaped relationship between intelligence and both economic leftism and democrat party affiliation
such that people very low on the IQ spectrum tend to be socialist leaning and democrat leaning, and
as we move up the IQ spectrum people move to the right on these issues until we reach the 85th
percentile at which point people become increasingly leftist. In terms of educational attainment, this
corresponds to a graduate degree.

Since Jews mean IQ of 110 puts them at the 75th percentile, and most Jews
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

22/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

(http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/religious-tradition/jewish/) do not have a
graduate degree, on the basis of their IQs and educational attainment we would predict them to be
(libertarian) republicans regardless of which camp is correct in this debate.
Now, certain sorts of conservative social attitudes do correlate negatively with IQ. Specifically, Metaanalytic reviews (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/per.2027) suggest that cognitive
ability has a correlation of roughly -.20 with right-wing attitudes and prejudice. Since Jews have a .66
SD advantage over Whites in IQ, we would, therefore, expect them to have a mean level of social
liberalism that is .13 SD above that of Whites.
If we conceptualized social liberalism as being on a scale like IQ with a mean of 100 and an SD of 15,
Jews would be predicted, on the basis of IQ, to have a “social liberalism quotient”, or SLQ, of 102. This
is a tiny difference which obviously has very little to do with why Jews are so heavily overrepresented
among the left.
With respect to liberal elites specifically, let’s suppose that one must be at the 95th percentile of both
liberalism and intelligence (IQ = 124) in order to be an elite or influential liberal. Not that all people
with that meet these requirements will be influential liberals, but let’s suppose that this is how smart
and liberal you need to be to do that sort of thing.
th
Given a 0.2 correlation between liberalism and IQ, people with IQs of 124 will be at the 95 percentile
of liberalism or higher 14.2% of the time. We would expect this combination of traits to occur at a rate
of 7.1 per 1,000 among gentiles. On the other hand, with Jews we would expect people to have IQs of
124 or higher 17.5% of the time, meaning that a high IQ and a really high level of liberalism would
occur at a rate of 24.85 per 1,000. This gives us a factor of overrepresentation of 4. (If we lessened the
liberalism threshold to just more liberal than average, the factor would be less.) In light of these
calculations, IQ alone probably cannot account for even half of the degree to which Jews are
overrepresented among influential leftists.
However, since you obviously cannot be a Nobel prize winner, an important intellectual, or an
academic, without a good deal of intelligence, IQ is also clearly an important part of the explanation
for Jewish success and influence. It’s probably best thought of as a necessary but not sufficient
condition.

Jewish Personality
Jewish personality is another variable that might plausibly explain some portion of why it is that Jews
are so successful and so liberal. There isn’t a ton of research available on this topic, but I will go
through what little I am aware of.
Using GSS data, the inductivist (http://inductivist.blogspot.com/2009/12/jews-and-altruism.html)
compared Jews, Catholics, Protestants, and Atheists on the following questions about altruistic
behavior: have you, within the last year, given a seat to a stranger, given to the homeless, given to a
needy friend, given to other needy, given to a neighbor, loaned money to a friend, done a walkathon,
ever donated blood or given to race.org. The only significant differences were that Jews were less
likely to have given to a needy friend or neighbor. Altruism is unlikely to play any role in Jewish
success.
The inductivist also took (http://inductivist.blogspot.com/2011/06/jews-and-big-5-traits.html) data
on the big 5 (n=3,915, 94 of which were Jews), and found that, after controlling for self-esteem, Jews
scored higher than average on extraversion, neuroticism, and openness to experience. However, the
relationship between these variables and being Jewish was extremely weak (betas of .04 and .03), and
so they are unlikely to play a practically significant role in Jewish success.
On the other hand, in two high-quality surveys, Dunkel et al. (2015)
(http://midus.wisc.edu/findings/pdfs/1488.pdf) found evidence for a moderate gap in favor of Jews
in terms of openness to experience, but no sizeable gap in terms of the other four big five personality
traits.
Averaging these results together we get a Jew-Gentile gap in openness of .24 SD which, given that
openness correlates at .18 with liberalism
(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092656612001158), would predict a JewGentile liberalism gap of .04 SD, or, practically speaking, nothing.
Openness is either not associated with, or negatively associated with
(https://in.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/15766_Chapter_4.pdf), occupational
success, so it can’t explain that either.
Thus, the research that exists suggests that personality, specifically openess to experience, is a
plausible factor in both Jewish leftism and successful life outcomes.

https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

23/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

Cultural Values, Parenting, and Jewish Success
Many have argued that cultural values and parenting practices are important factors in explaining
why it is that Jews are so successful. To my knowledge, this has never been demonstrated. Several
studies have found Jews to hold various measures of achievement related values more strongly than
gentiles, but when directly tested these values have normally be shown to be unrelated to actual
success. More importantly, no study I am aware of has measured the effect of such values on success
after controlling for cognitive ability. Given the large advantage Jews have on IQ scales, and given that
people who are smarter are also likely going to have more motivation to try and achieve in domains
that require intelligence, such a control would be vital before we could estimate the role such a value
would play in explaining Jewish success. Finally, with respect to parenting, research generally does
not favor the view that Jewish parents uniquely try to instill in their children values related to success.
The earliest empirical work on this topic I am aware of comes from Clark (1949)
(https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00224545.1949.9918946?journalCode=vsoc20) who
analyzed data on scores on a test of scholastic aptitude and GPAs for 6,774 liberal arts freshmen from
Northwestern University. Data for ten years, ranging from 1925 to 1941, were analyzed, and from said
data, a series of equations were created that predicted GPA based on aptitude scores. It was found that
Jewish students had higher GPAs than would be predicted on the basis of their ability scores by a
margin of .15 in the case of women and .31 in the case of men. The male difference was statistically
significant while the female difference was not. Neither was very practically significant, the standard
deviation of GPA averaging 1.3. Despite this, these findings were taken as evidence that Jews must be
more motivated than gentiles at any given level of cognitive ability, leading them to have higher
GPAs. This interpretation would be plausible, though again not practically significant, but correction
for multiple testing was not done despite 40 comparisons being made. While common for the time,
today this would be regarded as statistically improper, and if the proper corrections were made the
differences between Jews and Gentiles would be rendered statistically insignificant.
Next, Rosen (1959) (https://www.jstor.org/stable/2089582?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents) analyzed
data on 427 mother-child pairs, 57 of which were Jewish, who were asked about the ages at which
they expected their children to do various things (e.g. have independent interests, do well in school on
their own, by energetic in sports, picking their own clothes, etc.). Responses from these ten questions
were averaged into an index of “age of independence training”. Jews were found to expect
independent behavior at the youngest age (6.83 years), followed by Protestants (6.87), Blacks (7.23),
Greeks (7.67), French-Canadians (7.99), and Italians (8.03). This variable was positively related to
social class, meaning that Jews had expectations more typical of low-class individuals than high-class
ones. Jews were also found to score above average on a scale of achievement motivation. However,
this score was once again more typical of the lower class.
Rosen also asked the mothers which of the following occupations they would be satisfied with their
sons going into in adulthood: lawyer, druggist, jewelry store owner, machinist, bank teller, insurance
agent, bookkeeper, mail carrier, department store salesman, and bus driver. Jewish mothers were, on
average, satisfied with 3.51 of these occupations compared to 4.7 for Greeks, 5.28 for Protestants, 5.69
for Italians, 6.6 for French Canadians, and 6.95 for Blacks. Means by social class are not given, nor is
there any reference to an empirical measure of the degree to which maternal expectations actually
influence life outcomes.
Veroff, Feld, and Gurin (1962) (http://www.jstor.org/stable/2089676?
casa_token=9E05Z1sEW2sAAAAA:0mNIHDl4dvQqxVU4USe_tccbtXNnkO1EUCF8N6jvhm87_upX7kYyQwHX1Dl9CJJxb4c5jS7qeefO0t7BFim17LqMJ23t45mhUVtBxiNYSL7CXqVu60Q&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents)
utilized data on 1,620 participants from a nationally representative sample which administered a
measure of achievement motivation. When looking at males in the sample, it was found that 68% of
Jews, 57% of Catholics, and 48% of Protestants scored above average. However, this same study found
no relationship between achievement motivation and income, suggesting that it did not actually
contribute to real-world success.
Carney and McKeachie (1963) (https://www.jstor.org/stable/1385004?
seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents) gathered a sample of 919 US college students and had them fill out a
measure of achievement motivation. This scale was an average across five other scales: dominance,
capacity for status, sociability, social preference, and self-acceptance. It is not obvious to me why this
would be called “achievement motivation”, but Carney and McKeachie report that it is correlated
with other measures of achievement motivation.
In any case, Jews scored.31 SD above average on this scale. However, scores on this scale did not have
a linear relationship with the social class from which students came nor their success in school, so
there is no reason to think that the construct it measures contributed to life outcomes.
Jews also scored below average on a measure of achievement anxiety, or the degree to which one feels
a debilitating anxiety in response to competitive academic situations. However, this difference was
only .03 SD, and so not statistically or practically significant.
Kosa (1969) (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/5793798) asked 2,630 medical students,
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

24/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

grouped by religion, about their values. I have not been able to access this paper myself, but Lynn
(2011, p 349) that reports that Jews placed the most importance on obtaining both high income and
high prestige. No reference is made to any attempt at measuring how much such values contributed
to actually obtaining a high income or prestigious position.
Kriger and Kroes (1972) (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00224545.1972.9918618?
journalCode=vsoc20) compared 35 middle-class Protestant, Jewish, and Chinese, mothers on the
Parental Attitude Research Instrument (PARI) which consists of two main factors: “control”, or
approval of maternal control of children, and “rejection”, or approval of maternal expressions of
hostility. Chinese mothers scored far higher than Protestants and Jews on measures of control, but no
difference was found between Jews and Protestants on control, or between any of the three groups on
rejection.
The most impressive study in this literature is Fejgin (1995)
(https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2112761.pdf) who found that Jewish 10th graders spent an
average of 1.66 hours more time on homework weekly, and .71 fewer hours watching TV daily,
compared to gentile Whites. Jews also scored higher than average on a measure of academic
aspiration.
Analyzing scores on measures of mathematical ability, it was found that Jews scored well above the
average, and this remained true after controlling for race, SES, the degree to which the home
environment is educationally stimulating, student behavior (hours spent on homework and TV), and
educational aspirations. However, adding a measure of school sector to the model reduced to Jewish
variable to statistical insignificance. For reading, statistical insignificance is reached merely by
controlling for race, sex, and SES.
Educational aspirations, student behavior, and parental behavior were also independent predictors of
academic ability.
This study lends a little credence to the view that “educational aspirations” have a causal impact on
success, but, since the Gentile-Jewish gap in ability survived controlling for aspirations, this research
also shows that such values cannot totally explain Jewish success. Unfortunately, this study did not
include a measure of IQ, so the actual impact of aspirations on outcomes cannot possibly be measured
nor can the contribution of such values to Jewish success.
Finally, Lynn and Kanazawa (2007)
(https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8ed1/a05698ac313c6e361f1f0c31ab6d80f4c1d5.pdf) analyzed data
on 10,700 parents who were asked to select from a list the most, and three most, important values they
would like they children to manifest from a list of twelve: success, studiousness, amicability,
cleanliness, considerateness, control, honesty, interest, judgement, manners, obedience, responsibility,
and traditional sex roles.
When asked to select a single most important value, Jewish parents were more likely than average to
select judgment and less likely than average to select honesty. When asked to select three top values,
Jewish parents were less likely than average to select cleanliness, honesty, manners, and obedience,
and more likely than average to select considerateness, interest, and judgment. No link between
parents hoping their children embody these values and life outcomes was established in the paper.
In sum, Jewish parents and Jewish individuals differ from gentiles in the things they value, but it is
not clear that such differences are consistently correlated with success, let alone that they have a
causal impact on life outcomes. If I had to speculate, I would wager that they do, but it is not possible
to estimate how much of Jewish success such values can account for on the basis of the available data.

Geography (Living in Big Cities)
Finally, some have noted that Jews tend to live in major cities and that this makes it easier to rise to
positions of influence. There is certainly some truth to this. Goldstein (1971)
(http://www.jewishdatabank.org/Studies/downloadFile.cfm?FileID=1447) calculated that, in 1957,
87.4% of Jews lived in cities with populations of 250,000 of more compared to just 36.6% of the general
population, and if you compared people who all lived in urban areas and had college degrees, Jewish
people were actually less likely to have a “professional occupation” (58.2% ) than are the total sample
(62.3%).
This hypothesis was best tested by Mazur (2007) (http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?
doi=10.1.1.514.2587&rep=rep1&type=pdf) who compared a large sample of Jews to a set of “controls”
who were White, college educated, and lived in one of the nation’s 100 largest cities. These controls
self-identified as republican over democrat by a margin of 9 points and were equally likely to identify
as liberal and conservative. By contrast, Jews were found to identify as a Democrat by a margin of 40
points and liberal by a margin of 27 points.
Consistent with Goldstein’s data from the 50s, when using a question introduced in 1972 about
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

25/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

whether one’s income was higher than 25,000 dollars, Jews were found to be somewhat less likely
than controls to answer “yes”. However, using a question introduced in 1998, Jews are found to be
twice as likely as controls to have an income of more than 110,000 dollars, suggesting that Jews today
are both far more liberal and more wealthy than we would expect on the basis of them being highly
educated and living in large cities.
It is also worth noting that NYC is both the biggest city in America and the largest city with the most
Jews. Yet, Jews vote democrat by smaller margins in NYC than they do nationally, making the claim
that living in large cities explains Jewish leftism even more implausible (Heilman 2016
(https://www.jta.org/2016/04/18/news-opinion/politics/7-things-to-know-about-the-jews-of-newyork-for-tuesdays-primary)).
Cofnas (2018) (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12110-018-9310-x) has argued that we
should consider the view that IQ and geography account for Jewish overrepresentation in just about
everything a “default hypothesis”. I see no reason to accept this claim. That is, there is no reason to
treat geography and intelligence as “default” variables and ethnocentrism, personality, and cultural
values, as somehow less default, especially in light of the evidence that important differences in
success and political orientation between Jews and gentiles persist after controlling for these sorts of
variables.
To sum up, I think a large number of variables account for why it is that Jews are so overrepresented
in positions of power. These include intelligence, openness to experience, living in big cities, cultural
values, and ethnocentrism. Ethnocentrism and personality also play a role in explaining Jewish
politics. There are doubtless still more variables at play that my analysis has neglected totally.
Whatever the cause, it is truly remarkable that, by some counts, less than 2% of the population
accounts for near half, or even an outright majority, of society’s most powerful people, and have
radically altered the political landscape of the American elite.

Implications
Turning to said implications, I’d like to spend some time talking about how I think people interested
in White Identity politics should act in light of the reality about Jews.

Race Realism vs Anti-Semitism
I analyzed data from the ADL
(https://www.adl.org/sites/default/files/documents/ADL_MS_Survey_Pres_1_25_17.pdf)and the
GSS (Variable name: RaceDif2, asks if Black-White gaps in SES are due to inborn differences in
learning ability) on the prevalence of anti-semitism and race realism among NH Whites.

The results suggest that race realism is slightly less popular than anti-semitism. These are probably
low figures, people don’t like to admit to politically incorrect views, but this bias probably impacts
both variables in roughly the same way so the comparison should still be valid.

Prejiduce and Sucess
One of the most obvious lessons to take away from an analysis of the Jewish question is that
discrimination is not something that can stop a determined ethnic group from being successful.
Probably no group has faced greater ethnic conflict that Jews, and yet they do very well for
themselves. This should make us skeptical of the claim that other groups, most of which have never
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

26/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

experienced anything like the episodes Jews have gone through, are just poor due to racism.

Ethnicity and Ideology
Another take away is that variables like socioeconomic status, belonging to a religion, and IQ, are not
always large determinants of political ideology and voting behavior. Jews are a rich religious group
that is above average in IQ, so if we were using a model based on how gentile Whites vote we would
predict Jews to be strong supporters of the Republican party. But, as we’ve seen, other factors like
personality and ethnic interest seem to trump economics, intelligence, and religion.

How and When Should We Talk About Jews?
I am not a fan of the way in which the Jewish Question is normally talked about by the far right. It
often comes off as unhinged, unconnected with data and reality, and hate-filled, in a way that
discussions about no other ethnics groups do. This is unfortunate, as there is perhaps no ethnic group
which more carefulness should be taken when discussing than the Jews, giving how sensitive the
public is to such issues.
That being said, there is a time and a place to talk about them. The fact is that Jews stand out both in
terms of their influence and their politics. This is partly because Jews see themselves as a distinct
group with separate interests from Whites. This is not something that a nationalist should want for his
nation, and in the case of Jews, even a small number can have a large effect due to their enormous
influence. It already has and it is hard to see how this can be ignored.
Furthermore, being up the ethnic interests of certain intellectuals, the Goulds and Lewontins of the
world, is necessary to explain why they have decided to lie to the public.
Moreover, there is a tendency within white identity politics such that people who are passionately
anti-Semitic speak obsessively about jews and those who are not rarely talk about jews at all. This has
the unfortunate effect of making discourse about jews worse, from a PR standpoint, then it needs to
be.
Some, myself included, have long urged white nationalists to try and just not talk about Jews. Well,
whether that advice was right or not it was not it was not, and almost surely will not, be followed. So I
think it is time to start trying to improve how we talk about Jews instead, with this post being my
small contribution to such an effort.
That being said, I also think Jews are brought up too often by the far right. Many people know next to
nothing about Jews, and their relevance is not self-evident. From the standpoint of White nationalism
Jews are only bad in so far as they cause white guilt and demographic decline. Opposing anti-White
ideology directly is more important than opposing an ethnic group which is overrepresented among
its advocates. Moreover, discussions of Hispanics and Blacks are more obviously relevant to the
situations of most Americans. So I think we should talk about Jews, but I do not think they should be
our central theme.

“Naming the Jew”
There is some controversy about the so-called practice of “naming the Jew”. I think pointing out that
someone is Jewish can be useful but only when a few conditions are met. First, it needs to be
demonstrable that their Jewish ethnicity is playing a role in their politics. Secondly, this needs to occur
in a context in which the relationship between Jewish ethnic identity and left-wing politics can be
explained. And thirdly, this should only be done by people who can do all this calmly. If you feel like
shouting, it’s probably a bad idea to “name a jew”.

Jews in Right-Wing Movements
There is some debate about the role that Jews should have in White identity movements. My view on
this is that White identitarians should not attempt to stop Jews from furthering anti-immigration or
pro-white causes, and to my knowledge, no one does this anyhow, but Jewish people should not lead
any white nationalist organizations or be a figurehead for a white nationalist movement. Such a Jew

would also be under the suspicion of having an allegiance to their Jewish ethnic group more so than
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

27/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

their White racial identity, and this would cause unneeded tension and drama in a movement that
already has too much of both.

What Should We “Do” About Jews?
First, it needs to be noted that Jews have low fertility rates and are increasingly marrying gentiles, but
they are still going to be around in roughly the same
(http://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/jews/) numbers in 2050:

For moral reasons, I don’t think the deportation of Jews from America, as some White nationalists call
for, can be justified. However, I do think it would be sensible to limit the immigration of Jews into any
future White ethnostate, and I would not recommend setting up such an ethnostate in New York City.
In previous centuries, what to do with the Jews was a problem. Today, it is not. Even if all of Europe
and America someday becomes ruled by Jew exiling White Nationalists, which I think is highly
unlikely, and Jews now have an ethnostate of their own. They need not be immigrants any longer.
Of course, Jewish people contribute a great deal of good to the world in the form of science and
innovation. However, science is an international enterprise, and such advances can be enjoyed by the
world with the science being done in Israel. By contrast, political theorists in Israel don’t have nearly
as much influence in the West as do Jews who live here. Moreover, Jews have a funny tendency to be
right-wing nationalists when they live in their own state.

Conclusion
So, those are some of my thoughts on the Jewish Question. More can always be said, and this is only
one way of approach the question, but I thought it would be good to try approach the “JQ” in this
way, and overall I am happy with the results.

Notes:
1. In a video corresponding to this post, these statistics are misstated. I had written this analysis some
years ago and initially could not find it. I reported the result in the video based on notes of mine,
but I have since found the actual analysis, via the “Way-Back Machine”, and found them to be in
error. The errors are as follows: I incorrectly stated that these elites were from around the world
when they were from America, I reported all names and lists including redunant ones, and I
overstated Jewish representation among conservatives. I also failed to report the results of the
Adious Epigone’s Analysis.
Uncategorized

https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

28/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

24 thoughts on “The Jewish Question: an
Empirical Examiniation”
1. Peter Cawthron (@PeterCawthron)
APRIL 27, 2018 AT 8:04 AM
Thanks for a very interesting article. It would be interesting to consider Jewish populations of a
longer timeframe, say from 1900 to 2050, and compare the percentage Jewish population in the Top
10 countries by Jewish population with the percentage White population in those same countries.
So, very approximate, we may see the USA as 88% White/2% Jew in 1900 become 48%
White/1.4% Jewish in 2050. Since US elites throughout this period will be overwhemimgly White
or Jewish this represents a substantial increase in Jewish elite power and influence over this time.
PC
(I came here via the excellent The Daily Shoah, Episode 285 at
https://therightstuff.biz/2018/04/25/tds285-agenda-setters/)
REPLY
2. alt skull
APRIL 27, 2018 AT 12:14 PM
I’m very eager to break into this on Mike’s recommendation, but before I do, and, more
importantly, before thousands of others do, I thought I’d better alert you to the egregious typo in
the title of the article that is probably going to turn some people off or away immediately. Just
thought you’d want to know.
REPLY
3. Reisen
APRIL 27, 2018 AT 9:34 PM
You write, “Jews have also been said to yield greater than average political power. Again, this
largely seems to be true. In 1939, Jews accounted for 63% of the USSR’s NKVD, Stalin’s militaristic
police force with which he conducted his great purge (RR= 35).”
This is incorrect. According to Russian sources and an independent analysis of the list of names in
the NKVD, only 31% or so was Jewish, not 63%. Even a Forward article did not push such a high
number. The IHR had an article discussing this 31% statistic as well.
Second, there are a lot of references to the Lynn book and the ‘insanely high’ Jewish IQ, but you do
add some neutrality in there although I think it’s not taken seriously.
The study by Clark suggests that the differences of motivation may result in differences in test
scores, but the test scores, he said, were not so statistically different as to be a slam-dunk for
superior Jewish IQ. He advises caution and wanted more studies done on college students to see if
the difference was still there.
On ‘Human Varieties’, a graph of comparison between Jewish and non-Jewish high school
students was made, and there were not many differences. There were /some/ higher scores, but
not enough to denote a massive difference.
The Lynn book on the domination of Jews in banking in finance in European nations in the 1930’s
would justify nationalist concerns on driving Gentiles out of their own professions. The only way
to see if Lynn’s data is correct is to see the primary sources themselves.
In the paper by Carney, again, they write that Jews seem to have more ‘academic anxiety’, but that
Protestants and Catholics weren’t too far behind. The authors stressed that more data was needed.
Vox also did some speculating on the supposedly high Jewish IQ. From the studies linked, Jews
tend to thrive more in metropolitan areas and have some superior qualities, but overall are not a
slam dunk to Gentiles. The post was nice, but I found it rather lacking in that the analyses given
were no different from what Kevin MacDonald had to say.
REPLY
4. Pingback: A Celebration of the Jewish People - Christopher Cantwell
5. writingwithflames
APRIL 28, 2018 AT 5:46 PM
Came from a certain somebody who’s got a lot of alternative hypothesises.
Goddamn, you’re doing God’s work (not that I’m a believer in God, but you know what I mean).
There’s actually a lot of statistics one could gather on Jewish Americans being over-presented in
the field of economic trade and international corporations positions, stuff not answered here.

Regardless, this is a fantastic article crafted through perfect research, and I thank you for your
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

29/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

contribution to political academia, alongside ways the New Left can interrupt this data in relation
to Jews being over-represented both economically and politically.
It does rise questions regarding that of democracy – a failed system and concept – and how Jews
have historically manipulated it in ways to favour them at the expense of gentiles, most
unfortunately. Without a doubt, the Jews are a burden upon Western civilisation, especially in
Europe. But, there is a place for them, a unique people. It’s known as the State of Israel, the only
place they should inhabit. Let’s hope it’s made an ethno-state, the same way we’ll hope Europeans
nations will be too.
REPLY
6. Gabriel M
APRIL 29, 2018 AT 11:32 AM
I read this with great interest and greater sadness. I’ll admit at the outside that I am not an
unbiased observer. Not only am I Jewish, but I had the good fortune to grow up in an environment
where until the age of 18 I never questioned the connection between Judaism and being right
wing. Indeed, if I am honest, the reason I decided to adopt the religion of my mother rather than
my (Anglican) father or simply do what all my friends at school did and become an atheist was
because I wanted a lifestyle prop for my conservatism. It was not until I went to university and I
met American Jewish exchange students that it ever occurred to me that someone might think
Leftism and Judaism were anything other than opposites. Reading about the JQ online over the
past 3-4 years has not been a happy experience, to put it mildly.
Anyway, disclaimer aside I have the following objections. I don’t mean them as gotchas, but I
suppose some of them might come off that way.
1) You document the rise of Jews in American academia, media, and elite circles, demonstrate their
disproportionate Leftism and suggest a causative link with America’s move to the Left, all in the
post WW2 period. This is all seems very logical, except that movement to the Left is the near
universal experience of not just America, but every European and Anglosphere country for over
200 years with a few, brief interruptions. If it were true that without the Jew that America would
not have moved to the Left in the last 50 years it would be literally unique. If you want to say that
without the Jew, America would still have moved to the Left, but more slowly then you are faced
with the problem that America did move more slowly than almost any other White country, all of
which have fewer Jews. Most White people think America is a scarily right wing place (that was
certainly the view I was given growing up). For me, this is the genuine intellectual problem at the
heart of the JQ. On the one hand, almost everywhere you find Jews, they are over represented in
Leftism, but there seems to be no real correlation between the amount of Jews or their prominence
and the progress of Leftism. To me, this suggest that you are looking at the issue from the wrong
direction.
2) You demonstrate that Jews are more ethnocentric than other white subgroups in America (I’m
not sure I actually believe that the majority of Frenchmen do not prefer the company of other
Frogs, but whatever). You suggest that this is linked to higher levels of Leftism, but if anything is
clear it is that Jewish ethnocentrism is negatively correlated with Leftism. Non-orthodox Jews in
the U.S. have an intermarriage rate of 70%+ When you factor in IQ assortative mating and
geography, that’s basically at zero ethnocentrism levels. You write about the ethnic interests of
Gould and Lewontin. I ask you honestly, since neither of these people even have Jewish children,
what you think these are. The most parsimonious explanation for much of the data here is that
Leftism forms a sort of substitute Jewish identity for people who abandon the Jewish faith, but that
this lasts only for one or two generations.
3) I think some of the comparisons you make between Israeli and non-Israeli Jews are unfair. First,
non-orthodox pure Ashkenzism make up less than 1/4 of the Israeli population and the clear
majority of them are Leftists despite the fact that Leftism in Israel means giving territory to people
who openly say that the purpose of giving them territory is to use it as a means to exterminate
you. As far as I know, there has never been any particular connection between orthodox Jews or
non-ashkenazi Jews and Leftism. Secondly, I think you make a selective mountain out of a
molehill, namely that no people anyway are that bothered about immigration restrictionism for
other countries. We have good data for global opinion on Trump’s border wall and ‘Muslim ban’
respectively (http://www.pewglobal.org/2017/06/26/worldwide-few-confident-in-trump-or-hispolicies/). What we find is that Israel is not only more supportive of pro-white policies than any
white country it is vastly so, except for Hungary. In my experience, most people accept the logic of
no borders, but make unprincipled exceptions for their own country (‘burden on the NHS’), just as
they accept the logic of liberalism generally, but make unprincipled exceptions for whatever they
happen to be interested in.
4) You write that by becoming Atheists, Jews do not assimilate into mainstream American White
culture. It seems obvious to me that they assimilate into mainstream elite, educate, urban
American culture. In other words, the winning team. Now, obviously it’s a bit more complicated
than that, because, as you show, Jews contributed to the formation of that culture (or did they…).
The simple model that best describes reality, I would argue is of a tribal group that consists of high
IQ deracinated people and mudbloods who form an alliance with blacks and other dysfunctional
minorities to screw over people they hate, i.e. Christian whites. That’s a sort of ethnocentrism for
sure, but I don’t think it’s Jewish ethnocentrism, though it’s probably quite easy to make the
switch.
5) You write that Jewish ethnocentrism is a better business practice than hispanic ethnocentrism
because Jews make good employees. That seems like an unnecessarily churlish way of writing that
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

30/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

employing Jews is a good business strategy, which, if true, would seem to remove the whole force
of the ethnocentrism argument. I once read that both Jewish and non-Jewish employers are more
likely to look at a resume if it has a Jewish name, but I don’t recall where.
I have other comments, but they are the biggies and I am, after all, supposed to be working
REPLY
Coffee Long
MAY 19, 2018 AT 5:02 AM
…highbrow academic lexicon aside, let me say plainly what the numbers all suggest and what
you’ve done your best to obscure: you people get launched out of every single place that takes
you in; different people, different continents, sometimes in different millenia have used many
different languages to say the exact same thing: YOU PEOPLE DESTROY NATIONS, YOU
ARE NOT WELCOME.
REPLY
7. Bob Roberts
APRIL 29, 2018 AT 12:34 PM
I’m puzzled by the AQ numbers. For instance, under “Jewish Representation in Journalism,” for
Austria the percentage of Jews is 57. (I assume this means that over half of all journalists were
Jewish.) The definition of AQ in small letters says “Achievement Quotient = % of Jews/% of
Gentiles.” BUT if the Jewish percentage is 57 and that of Gentiles is 43, then how can the AQ be
1.63 ?
REPLY
8. Nathan Cofnas
APRIL 29, 2018 AT 3:19 PM
My comments on Sean Last’s video discussion of this paper from Twitter –
https://twitter.com/nathancofnas/status/990608368720121856
1. Sean Last (@Sean84076698) claims the “default hypothesis” (Cofnas 2018) has been “directly
tested” and disproved. He fails to understand the DH, & appears to have read only half of the
sentence describing it (even that he misunderstands).
2. Here’s the default hypothesis: “Because of Jewish intelligence and geography—particularly
intelligence—Jews are likely to be overrepresented in any intellectual movement or activity that is
not overtly anti-Semitic.”
3. According to Last, “Mazur (2007)…directly tested Cofnas’s hypothesis.” Mazur found that
among Jewish & gentile whites with college degrees living in big cities, Jews were more likely to
be Democrats. Ergo “the default hypothesis is dead.”
4. Last fails to notice 2 things: 1) The DH is about Jewish overrep in *intellectual*
movements/activities. That means political *leadership* positions. 2) I say explicitly that Jews lean
left b/c right-wing movements are more anti-Semitic.
5. Last goes on and on about how the default hypothesis says that IQ + city living is supposed to
explain Jewish liberalism. (“Geography and intelligence just cannot explain [Jewish support for
Democrats].”) IT DOESN’T SAY THAT.
6. I repeatedly and emphatically say in the paper that Jews lean left. I made it clear that Jewish
political behavior is *not* explained entirely by IQ + geography. Mazur’s findings are exactly what
I predict and are consistent with the DH.
7. Although I do address the pol behav of the Jewish pop as a whole the DH concerns Jews in
positions of influence. No test (def not Mazur’s) has disproved my claim that Jews are
overrepresented as leaders of all non-anti-Semitic movements.
8. There are many other confusions and misrepresentations in Last’s video.
9. My paper on @TOOEdit: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12110-018-9310-x
10. Last’s video (discussion of the default hypothesis starts at 54 min 45 s):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lh4MSZjhdoU#t=54m45s
REPLY
ikacer
APRIL 30, 2018 AT 1:19 PM
Cofnas, an obvious issue with your argument is your assertion that “Jews lean left b/c rightwing movements are more anti-Semitic,” which seems to me to be false, at least historically
within the US. For instance, look at the chart of “Religious Groups’ Ratings of Each Other” in
this article which suggests the opposite is the case and that the right has been the more philoSemitic and the left the more anti-Semitic. If your hypothesis were correct, I would expect Jews

to lean Republican. I also think it is stupid to rely on this sort of causal reasoning rather than
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

31/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

the purely descriptive as it introduces additional implicit assumptions which I suspect are
false.
REPLY
writingwithflames
APRIL 30, 2018 AT 4:49 PM
I just read it (thanks for sharing on your Twitter) and I have four major problems with your
critique, “Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy: A Critical Analysis of Kevin MacDonald’s
Theory”.
1: Your perspective of Jewish resentment toward gentile survival and genetic determinism –
especially that of European and Arab non-Jews – relating to past events, such as persecution in
Europe and Israel. Since New Antisemitism, both as an ideology and a political movement,
developed after World War 2, most people critical of Jews who exist within the Western world
will bring up concerns for their representation in Western media, economics and political fields
such as parliaments, voting, and general government-related issues, as opposed to their past
atrocities, such as the Holodormor (Ethnic Ukrainian famine in Eastern Europe) and their high
enrolment rate in the Soviet Union’s army (See: doi: 10.1086/592862).
The over-representation of South Caucasians is due to most of them being Muslims (Azerbaijan
comprising the largest nation in the region), as Nazi Germany made it illegal to practice any
other religion aside from Christianity, and even then, just Protestantism. Catholicism and Islam
were strictly prohibited, aside from Adolf Hitler having positive personal views toward Islam.
Nobody will deny Jews were oppressed throughout Europe and within the Palestinian
territories, but the Jewish Question came into debate far before that of Hitler’s rise to power.
Karl Marx’s “On The Jewish Question” was written in 1843, far before World War 2 or drastic
changes to Germany’s historical image occurred.
Jews, escaping persecution and belittlement in Islamic, Arab countries, fled to Europe where
they became evidently troublesome to the continent’s religiously and ethnically homogeneous
identity, many major Jewish, and even Gypsy, populations still remaining in rural districts of
European nations. If Europeans or Arabs were to occupy Israel, then negative attitudes toward
their presence would without a doubt be justified. It was true that at one point Israel was
colonised by the Roman Empire, as the Romans also occupied Egypt for a period of time.
Seeing Jews want to protect their culture and heritage, as many surveys reveal, taking such
pleasures away from Europeans and Christians is unquestionably hypocritical, the same way it
would be to Arabs and Muslims. Those who live within the Palestinian territories and are of
Palestinian descent, they value the same qualities of a country as Israelis do. The two don’t see
eye to eye, but they’re not so different when they actually comfort their overt similarities.
“The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” whether you agree with its contents or not, was
originally published in 1903, and in the Russian Empire of all places. Not in Israel or America,
in Russia.
You have to ask yourself why the Jews have been expelled so many times throughout history,
and it’s all because they seek to be dominate in all fields of power, including in terms of land
mass, as Israel is colonising the remaining Palestinian territories as opposed to seizing state
control and then declaring the two independent states: Israel and Palestine.
2: You point out prominent Jewish politicians who oppose Zionism (Israeli nationalism and/or
imperialism). These are Noam Chomsky and George Soros, literally two people out of an
ethno-religious population of roughly 16 million by 2016, which accounts for
0.000012499999999999999% of all Jews worldwide. For some reason, you mange not to mention
Karl Marx, who could be considered antisemitic for his remarks on Jews within the European
economy in his essay. Even so, that’s three Jews.
“The Culture of Critique” never states every Jew thinks the same. Data disproves that. But that
there is a significant correlation between Judaism, Israelis and a bitter disdain for anything
outside of that realm that happens when you combine the three.
3: Your remarks surrounding Goethe University in Frankfurt, Germany and the Institute for
Social Research. There are blatant hypocrites such as Heidi Beirich who don’t even attempt to
hide their hypocrisy, people who can’t be cited as true defendants of the school’s critical
theories, but Frankfurt School’s younger members have later arrived to defend the
establishment against accusations of “cultural Marxism” and “political correctness” and the
like. This isn’t a generational aspect of the country, it’s something inherit about ideology.
I actually happen to agree with the concept of a think tank dedicated to promoting socialist
ideas through means of academic publication, alongside enrolment of students focused on
learning economics from an egalitarian perspective. Despite agreeing with many of Marx’s
ideas, I wouldn’t call myself a Marxist, but simply an egalitarian.

When people reflect upon the Frankfurt School’s legacy, it’s reflecting more on who was
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

32/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

influenced and how they were influenced. Less about what the actual philosophers themselves
thought, retrospectives on the institute discuss how the future was inspired by the past. To
modern Liberals, nationalism’s only acceptable in the context of non-European countries
striving for independence. If you ask your average Liberal, or just general teenager who has
any interest in politics, they’ll tell you they support Tanzania or India breaking free from British
colonisation, but not Ukraine wanting out from the Soviet Union.
Past generations who’ve read studies published by the Institute for Social Research came to
their own conclusions, had their own interpretations, and came away agreeing with Israeli
nationalism, but also came away believing in European identity having no meaning, and that
Europeans shouldn’t act collectively, they should instead only act as individuals. They saw
Jews as a group, but not gentiles.
But, also, any members of the Frankfurt School would condemn antisemitism even in joking
situations. In Herbert Marcuse’s essay, part of his book he wrote with other philosophers at the
school, “A Critique of Pure Tolerance,” “Repressive Tolerance,” he argues against freedom of
speech against minorities groups in the United States, Africans, Arabs, Muslims – Jews being
another – Indians, homosexuals, and even ideological groups such as socialists. But freedom of
speech was allowed as long as it was directed against more populous demographics, such as
European Americans, Christians and Conservatives, essentially banning antisemitic speech and
permitting anti-gentile sentiment. As Jews show concerns for their homeland, Israel, being
taken over by Arabs and Muslims, they also display it in the context of the West, having rather
unfavourable views of American Muslims as shown by polling.
Herbert Marcuse wrote in 1965:
“The whole post-fascist period is one of clear and present danger. Consequently, true
pacification requires the withdrawal of tolerance before the deed, at the stage of
communication in word, print, and picture. Such extreme suspension of the right of free speech
and free assembly is indeed justified only if the whole of society is in extreme danger. I
maintain that our society is in such an emergency situation, and that it has become the normal
state of affairs. Different opinions and ‘philosophies’ can no longer compete peacefully for
adherence and persuasion on rational grounds: the ‘marketplace of ideas’ is organized and
delimited by those who determine the national and the individual interest. In this society, for
which the ideologists have proclaimed the ‘end of ideology’, the false consciousness has
become the general consciousness–from the government down to its last objects. The small and
powerless minorities which struggle against the false consciousness and its beneficiaries must
be helped: their continued existence is more important than the preservation of abused rights
and liberties which grant constitutional powers to those who oppress these minorities. It
should be evident by now that the exercise of civil rights by those who don’t have them
presupposes the withdrawal of civil rights from those who prevent their exercise, and that
liberation of the Damned of the Earth presupposes suppression not only of their old but also of
their new masters”.
Jews are both a racial and religious minority in the United States, but Europeans and Christians
aren’t. Well, as of then and now. Unfortunately, I can’t quite say the same for the future.
One could point out that Marcuse’s essay was based upon the tolerance paradox, which would
be true, but ultimately missing the point. Anybody can insert political opinions into their
works, even if the subject matter has nothing to do with politics whatsoever. With that said, in
Marcuse’s essay, the entire purpose of why it was written to begin with was to make it clear he
supported minority speech and suspension of speech arriving from the America’s majority.
4: The statistic you post on Jews intermarrying. In 2013, the Pew Research Center that nonreligious racial Jews in the United States married with a non-Jew 69% of the time. However,
take into account that in 2012 Jews only comprised 2.15% of the national population. With this
in mind, Jews are 1441.86% more likely to marry a Jew than a non-Jew based upon their
population size.
I don’t have a problem with it. In fact, I don’t think anyone should marry outside their race or
religion. But to claim that Jews are disobedient to their own kind, to imply that they’re not
loyal – as I believe they’re perhaps the most loyal out of any of the world’s human
demographics – is to deny the facts.
Let’s pretend there’s a country where half of its residents are Jews and the other half are nonJews. There would be practically no intermarriage between the two whatsoever.
Conclusion:
Though I find find your citation to be rather thought-provoking, and for that I suppose I’m
happy it exists – gave me something to think about – it lacks an understanding of the
collectivism that has been, and still is, historically present within Jews scattered all across
Earth. And for that, I believe it’s very, very incorrect.
REPLY
tungsten
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

33/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

JANUARY 13, 2019 AT 7:41 PM
Hi! You said:
“Jews in Israel tend to be far less welcoming of immigration.
For instance, a poll reported on by the Times of Israel found that Israelis opposed Israel taking
in Syrian refugees by a margin of 69 points, but these same respondents favored Europe taking
in these exact same refugees by a margin of 8 points.”
As you can see the poll is talking about Ultra-Orthodox and Orthodox Jews in Israel (see where
is says “datim, haredim”?), not Israeli Jews in general. Ultra-Orthodox and Orthodox Jews in
the US mostly vote Republican and mostly have very conservative views on everything,
including immigration.
That type of CNN-worthy trickery makes me worry about the rest of your analysis.
I am also worried about the methodology of “counting of the Jews”, especially when
differences between “right” and “left” leaning are within few percentage points. What
definition is applied? Any Jewish grandparent makes you Jewish? Why not “any gentile
grandparent makes you a gentile”? What about “religion”? E.g. Tom Steyer who donates
lavishly to Democrats is a Christian with only a jewish father, but many count him as “Jewish”
in the “debates”. Would he benefit from “Jewish clanishnes”? What’s the prediction of your
theory?
REPLY
9. Pingback: The Jewish Question: An Empirical Examination – Radical Capitalist
10. Joshua Sinistar (@Joshua06716)
APRIL 29, 2018 AT 7:05 PM
That’s a lot of data and tables for a question that’s so simple to answer. The real reason these aliens
are hated is they DO NOT MAKE OR CONTRIBUTE ANYTHING. That “success” is due to
printing the currency and giving it ONLY TO THEMSELVES. Everyone else has to pay three times
the principal just to get by, and they hoard it and use it to humiliate others and CORRUPT THE
INNOCENT.
Yeah they are of the Devil. Their immorality is fairly obvious. They follow no prophet. They HATE
morality and God. They cannot even say God or spell it. Their infernal master wouldn’t let them.
These cretins have NEVER invented anything. Thieves is what they are. They have stolen just
about everything they own. You would be hard pressed to claim they “bought” anything with that
fiat monopoly money they print. Its no surprise about the over-representation. They simply hand
out positions to their own kind. They hand over positions to OTHER ALIENS too. At the
EXPENSE of the people who built the country. You can see why they are HATED AND DESPISED.
Go ahead and call me names. Attack me if you dare. Your little game is OVER. TRUST ME.
REPLY
11. jim
MAY 1, 2018 AT 9:04 AM
Interesting discussion. This is long past due, and ironically enough, it is the sort of discussion that
will become more and more frequent as legions of third worlders (who lack holocaust guilt) flood
into the USA and start to notice who is running the place.
Left wing Jews apparently couldn’t figure out that all the rhetoric about ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusion’
is eventually going to give people a crowbar by which they can start asking about the complete
lack of diversity in Hollywood, the art industry, etc. If diversity and inclusion is so wonderful,
why do Jews maintain a lock on power in so many areas? For that matter, why do they place
emphasis on not interbreeding?
Jewish over-representation in various fields is exactly as you say, a mix of variables that includes
IQ, emphasis on education, ambition, discipline, community expectations of success, and ethnic
nepotism. Capturing the key seats of power (e.g., banking, media) doesn’t hurt either.
I really had nothing against them until I was redpilled by a Jewish lawyer whom I met accidentally
on a bus. I was reading a law text, and he started going on about what a wonderful career it was.
He leaned over and said ‘plus it’s one of the ways we keep a leg up, you know’. I gradually
realized he had mistaken me for a Jew, and he was giving the old ‘come visit my law office’
schtick.
The kicker, though, was seeing how Jews almost universally support mass third world
immigration into western countries. You can find them saying “We don’t feel safe in homogeneous
cultures, so we are going to change country X into a diverse culture”. The narcissism and
selfishness of putting the interests of < 2% of the population over and above the interests of the
majority is shocking. There's payback coming.
REPLY
12. Sam Kik
MAY 5, 2018 AT 10:34 PM
I believe the IQ numbers posted are possibly a bit out of date. Maybe not. The more recent material
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

34/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

I’d seen from Lynn for Ashkenazi Jews puts them at 107.5 for the verbal IQ “average”, and at 97 on
the visuospatial portions of tests – other researchers who dared to look into the subject generally
had Jews almost always scoring below European Whites on visuospatial tests.
Lynn himself had noted it was very tough to gather material on Jewish IQ because they “seemed”
to by trying to obfuscate things. In the end, most of Jewish success is based on ethnocentrism, they
are outnumbered by high IQ European Whites and by high IQ Asians (interesting side note is that
Asians are actually mediocre overall when it comes to verbal IQ scores but do very well on the
visuospatial portions of tests.
Back on point, the Jews themselves kept releasing stories that had their average IQs rising over the
years, having us see it go from 105 to 110 to 113 to 114 to 117. The truth is likely about 105 although
110 is possible. BUT another flaw is assuming their SD (standard deviation) in IQ scores is 15 like
that of White Europeans. Jews are extremely inbred one can say and their SD is likely much
narrower, something they do not like people to bring up, and something they don’t want
researched.
The “smart fraction” theory is really no longer a theory when it comes to explaining the slightly
higher average IQs of NE Asians in comparison to Whites and yet the Asians lag behind the higher
number of ground-breaking innovations, inventions, etc. from Whites who have a significantly
wider SD than NE Asians. And this is with Asians outnumbering Whites on Earth by large
margin. As for Jews, they’ve never been able to truly create a workable society or civilization of
their own, always piggy-backing on those of others. Israel would collapse in a week without all of
the tax dollars siphoned from American and German taxpayers. Food for thought.
Another side note is that Lynn, as courageous as he has been in some ways, would become a bit
frightened when any area in which Whites were superior to other groups would be mentioned. He
would usually avoid material regarding Whites having a wider SD than other groups or ignore the
not yet perfected tests for divergent thinking ability (the ability to draw connections between
unrelated ideas, imagination, etc.) as too subjective. He might be right, but then again Whites were
outscoring other groups including Ashkenazi Jews. But I have to agree that measuring
imagination is very tough.
Jews seem to work as a cohesive group for success in a society while at the same time seeking to
destroy that society before moving on, locust like. They are now doing this to the entire West, but
like many others believe, I think they have gone too far too quickly, and things are going to crash
and burn within a decade. They will simply run to Israel or wherever to reconstitute, then will try
to do it all over again.
REPLY
13. Truth-hammer
MAY 9, 2018 AT 1:27 AM
The jews are Satan’s children, and he loves his children and wants them to be successful in
bringing to fruition/dominion Satan’s hell on earth.
REPLY
14. Robert What?
MAY 9, 2018 AT 1:30 AM
One hell of an article. You mention Jewish clannishness and financial success for antisemitism. But
I think it is more than that. The Jews (at least the elite) hate the Goyim and throughout history
have actively subverted them at every turn.
REPLY
15. Carlos Danger
MAY 9, 2018 AT 3:26 AM
Look up Sabbateanism- the root cause of most of this Jewish pathology.
REPLY
16. John108
MAY 15, 2018 AT 3:26 PM
Jew or Jewish is not a race. It is a religion. But only whites can covert to be Jewish.
REPLY
John R.
AUGUST 28, 2018 AT 9:23 PM
You’re extremely d.um.b if you believe that. Many Jews openly identify themselves as
ethnically Jewish atheists.
You clearly haven’t done even 5 minutes of research and yet you’re here trying to “correct”
other people vastly more informed that you….? Is that a habit you have?
REPLY
J.C.
AUGUST 28, 2018 AT 9:25 PM
Ki11 y0urself. You’re too s7up1d to live.
REPLY
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

35/36

6/20/2019

The Jewish Question: an Empirical Examiniation | Ideas and Data

17. Pingback: Links and short comments | Throne and Altar
18. pnwbatman
NOVEMBER 28, 2018 AT 3:09 AM
The Jewish people are both a race and religion and anyone can convert: white, black, mexican,
arab.
REPLY

https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/

36/36


Related documents


the jewish question an empirical examiniation  ideas and data
white genocide leaflet
palestine and israel
10 1017s1742058x1300012x frank samson
alicia carl manya rosenkropf article
the jewish lie


Related keywords