According to the 1995 book by Seymour Lipset and Earl Raab, "Jews and the New American Scene" (Harvard University Press), Ashkenazi-Americans on average earn twice as much income as non-Ashkenazi. But the authors don't explain why. The answer is: For over 5,000 years, the Jews and their ancestors have been urban-centric peoples. Today, Ashkenazi-American Jews are more likely to live in the big U.S. cities. They find better education and job opportunities there, and they have adapted to city life both culturally and genetically.
Speech
In a TikTok video, one woman is looking at random images of pale-skinned people from Germany, and exclaims she cannot see the difference between Jewish ones and non-Jewish ones. Another woman responded to this video, saying the reason she cannot see the difference between ethnic Ashkenazi Jews and ‘Germanic’ Germans because she’s not a Nazi from the 1930s.
Her reasoning follows a mode of thought called ‘critical theory’, the basis of which claims that people cannot see the world how it is but only how they are. For example: I only see race because I’m racist. I only see Jews because I’m antisemite, and I only see rainbows because I’m trained to categorize light frequencies into words such as green or blue. You only see groups of people rather than individuals because you’re a capital-F Italian Fascist.
Critical theory leads to a radical denial of reality. But in this video, I will dissect this critical theory and its mode of thinking, and show that it is based on a gigantic false premise, namely that there supposedly is no real ‘real’ world, that nothing is objective, and that who people are somehow influences what they see more than reality itself.
The complexity of the matter starts with the fact that certain cultures of people indeed do perceive the world differently! However, they see things differently not because they are different, but because they look at different attributes of the same reality.
The Greek poet Homer, for example, in his Iliad and Odyssey, describe the sea as “wine-dark”. We wouldn’t call the sea red, but the ancient Greek did. Indeed, the ancient Greek upheld an organic view of the world, believing that everything, including the planet, was a giant organism, and the blood of organisms happens to be dark red.
However, this does not mean that the ancient Greek viewed the sea as having a red color in blatant denial of the obvious and objective observation that seawater looks blue. In fact, Homer was referring to the reddish hue that seas have when the Sun is hovering low above the horizon, in which case the seas indeed look red. In other words: the wine-dark sea can really appear so. It’s not made-up, it’s not subjective in the sense that the observation didn’t spring from Homer’s mind alone but rather came from the observation of a certain phenomenon that can still be replicated in our time, even though we now call the sea blue.
For starters, the Germans of the 1930s often also couldn’t see the visual, meaning phenotypical differences between an individual ethnic Jew and a German. That doesn’t, however, prove there were no differences between ethnic Jews and Germans. There were, and there are. The Germans of the 1930s didn’t look at individual Jews either, they rather pointed out the group differences: Jews were more likely to live in cities and specialize in the sort of careers that non-urban peoples, mostly Germanic in those days, would justifiably find exploitative, such as paying interest on loans and other financial speculation common among urbanites but largely alien to rural peoples.
For example, in a book by Seymour Lipset and Earl Raab titled "Jews and the New American Scene" (Harvard University Press, 1995), the following facts are established:
During the 1880s, 95% of New York City’s clothing manufacturers were Jewish; and in 1897 75% of the clothing industry labor force was also Jewish.
Between 1860 and 1900, the Jewish share of the number of millionaires in the U.S. was 2.5 times that of their relative share of the population. Meaning, Jews were 2.5 times as likely to be millionaires.
By 1908, Jews were 8% of the students of higher education but only 2% of the population, a four-fold advantage.
In 1930, Jews were 25% of the New York population, but they were 55% of physicians, 64% dentists, and 65% of lawyers.
By 1935, 35% of New York youths were Jewish, but Jews were 60% of proprietors, managers, or officials.
Between 1971 and 1972, Jews represented 11% of business leaders, though only 3% of the population.
In 1982, of the 40 richest individuals in the U.S., 16 were Jewish, or rather 40% of the total, despite being no more than 3% of the U.S. population; of the 400 richest, 23% were Jewish.
By 1988, the per capita income of Jewish people was 2x that of non-Jews. Meaning, Jews cannot accuse white people of having any economy of white privilege.
By 1988, In terms of incomes over $50,000, we found 2 times as many Jewish households as non-Jewish.
And in terms of incomes below $20,000, we find 2x as few Jewish households as non-Jewish.
By 1990s, 40% of U.S. Nobel Prize winners were Jewish, 20% of professors leading U.S. universities, 40% of partners in Law Firms in NYC, 26% of editors, reporters, and executives at major media outlets; 59% of directors, writers, producers of top-grossing motion pictures; and 58% of prime-time TV series
And in 1990, 87% of college-aged Jews were in fact enrolled in higher education.
Especially that last two bullet points point to a reality: namely that American Jewish people have an extraordinary influence on the culture life of the non-Jewish segment of their society. And what happens when this influence, for example the exaggeration of Woke and LGBT culture, is deemed uncomfortable or peculiar by the non-Jewish majority? Will they be called antisemitic for the fact a majority of the pro-LGB and pro-Trans and pro-Woke movies and TV series are produced and written by Jews?
The overall conclusion, however, is that Jewish people tend to favor life in big cities, and consequently they benefit from the higher education and subsequent better access to jobs that comes from living in big cites.
But this difference, namely that Jews tend to favor life in the city whereas a majority of non-Jewish whites tends to live outside the urban centers, is indeed a dangerous condition for the Jews. If Jewish intellect pushes them to become too arrogant and too condescending toward the less educated and less economically successful white majority, you don’t have to be a 1930s Nazi to figure out American Jews have a problem on their hands. Any potential backlash over the Woke LGBT trans culture may very well be the Jews’ own doing.
All I’m saying is: beware. Beware of the real-world differences between groups of people. Do not discard them on the basis of some unwarranted critical theory that arrogantly denies the objective and consistent differences between groups of people. Hiding these differences, by breaking groups of people up into individuals and claiming you can’t see any difference between an ethnic Jew and an ethnic Anglo-America or German American, is the starting point from where true social unrest arises.
In other words, critical theory is dangerous, it is so dangerous that it obscures the sources of very real conflict between the city and the countryside, which is ultimately a conflict of highly educated urban Jews and less educated suburban and rural non-Jews. This is not a game laugh off. This is a problem that needs to be taken seriously, not by calling one party antisemitic, but by addressing the real-world differences between holders of urban power and the powerless who live on the fringes.
