March 1, 2013

The Simple Joys of Serfdom

Millet, Gleaners, 1857
From Politico:
New York Sen. Chuck Schumer said Wednesday that Chuck Hagel “almost had tears in his eyes” as he explained to the former Nebraska senator that the expression “Jewish lobby” is rooted in a negative depiction of Jews. 
“He struck me as sincere, and you know, you have to be sitting there at the meeting obviously, but I also told him when he used the word Jewish lobby what it meant to Jewish people,” he added. 
“And I told him what a double standard is. That Jewish people throughout the centuries have suffered a double standard. Everyone could be a farmer except Jewish people."

I can totally relate to complaints about how great-grandpa wasn't invited to join the Los Angeles Country Club, so he had to make do with joining Hillcrest CC instead (Hillcrest had the better dining room, but LACC had the better golf course). But, I'm fascinated by how Sen. Schumer (D-Wall Street, 1600 SAT score, Harvard BA, Harvard JD, youngest New York legislator since Teddy Roosevelt, never lost an election) is hurt that when his ancestors 700 years ago were invited by the nobles to move to Poland they weren't allowed to become serfs, but had to go into finance instead.

59 comments:

Orthodox said...

Jews have nothing to win by playing the ancient history game at this point. The pendulum is in their court, no need to go giving it a shove. But I think Schumer's comments do speak to a soft anti-Christian bigotry among Jews. Perhaps it is necessary to keep the flock separate in a majority Christian culture, but once one is in power as a minority, teaching your children to be bigots against the majority will not have good consequences. Certainly not when that growing majority comes from overseas and hasn't forgotten history.

Anonymous said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lcw6xBaCaXM

Anonymous said...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_Jew

(Arkin, 1975; Ben-Sasson, 1976).[1] Ben-Sasson (p. 401)[2] writes: "Western Europe suffered virtual famine for many years in the tenth and eleventh centuries, there is no hint or echo of this in the Jewish sources of the region in this period." They "lived at an aristocratic level, as befitted international merchants and honored local financiers." In the first half of the high medieval period, by most parameters, the standard of living of the Jewish community was at least equal to that of the lower nobility (Roth, 2002).

dirk said...

An interesting study to me would be how far back in time different groups identify. I mean their strong group identity, not some loose identity back to Plato and the roots of Western Civilization.

For instance, as a white American my group identity doesn't go back more than a couple centuries max. I have some vague notion that my ancestors came from somewhere in Western Europe in the middle of the 19th century, although I'm not sure and don't know the specifics.

When someone speaks of their group going back, say, 10 centuries or more I get uncomfortable. They seem foreign to me if only because they identify with such a foreign timeline.

Seems like we should all get together and agree upon what racial identity timeline is acceptable.

Peter the Shark said...

What Schumer really means I assume is that Jews often weren't allowed to own land. But saying that "Everyone could have their own Downton Abbey except Jewish people" doesn't have quite the same ring.

Anonymous said...

Politico seems to hype to death everything they touch. When I read their site it gives me pause, there are hundreds of thousands of highly paid people in N. Virginia who actually have thoughts and interpretations of reality like that.

Anonymous said...

I don't think Jews were ever prevented from being farmers in Europe. They just didn't want to.

Anonymous said...

I'm shocked that Sen. Schumer got a 1600 SAT score. He always seems like such a putz I figured he was an idiot. But stupid he ain't!

Hagel almost burst into tears as Schumer "told him what a double standard is" and then went on to explain how the long suffering Jewish people invented double standards.

Then he expounded upon the concept of moral particularism with a quick reference to the writings of Kevin MacDonald...

Rohan Swee said...

dirk: For instance, as a white American my group identity doesn't go back more than a couple centuries max[...]

When someone speaks of their group going back, say, 10 centuries or more I get uncomfortable. They seem foreign to me if only because they identify with such a foreign timeline.


At least you seem realize that your stereotypically American sense of time and roots is the anomaly. Unfortunately, a lot of allegedly really smart and best and brightest Americans keep putting their foot in it because they can't see that.

Seems like we should all get together and agree upon what racial identity timeline is acceptable.

Getting the UN to draw up some guidelines ought to do the trick. It's not like it's something people get irrational and passionate about.

Anonymous said...

Did you just Google this story based on the anon commentor in the Hagel thread?

Say what you want about the neo-cons but there focus really is on defending Israel/ destroying the Palestinians depending on your point of view. Israel could conquer Cairo tomorrow and Schumer is still going to be crying woe is me. Seems like I know which group of Jews I'd throw my lot in with.

Mr. Anon said...

A double standard is inveighing against "disparate impact" while conveniently ignoring the fact that 33% of the Supreme Court and 10% of the US Senate are jewish.

Mark Caplan said...

This Letter to the Editor by the President of the U.S.-Middle East Project appeared in the NY Times on Jan. 8:

I served on one of Aipac’s committees for more than 20 years when I headed two national American Jewish organizations, the Synagogue Council of America and the American Jewish Congress.

Since the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s creation in 1951, when it was headed by Isaiah L. Kenen, the organization was referred to by everyone in the Jewish community as “the Jewish lobby for Israel.” And to this day, Jewish establishment organizations constitute virtually Aipac’s entire organizational membership.


The letter adds that "Jewish Lobby" is inappropriate only in the sense that most American Jews don't wholeheartedly back Aipac's extreme belligerence toward Arabs.

The letter was signed by Henry Siegman.

Luke Lea said...

I have a big anthology of Jewish folklore, one of my favorite books, and there are surprisingly many stories in it about Jewish farmers.

Anyway, when talking about a people's disabilities and privileges you always have to ask, compared to whom. Polish Jewry had numerous legal privileges denied to the overwhelming majority of the Polish people. Sure, they could be farmers. In fact they had no other choice -- they were serfs after all -- and many of them labored under Jewish overseers, who had purchased from absentee nobilitytemporary rights to the products of their labors, as much as they could squeeze out of them, backed by the powers of the state. Google the arenda system. The reality was that Polish Jewry were tools of exploitation in the hands of the nobility. No wonder the Cossacks came after them as well as the nobility when they rebelled.

It's curious how little of their own history European Jewry knows. But then when you consider the closed world of orthodoxy -- you see it among the haredi in Israel today -- maybe it is not surprising. When you study Torah 24/7 there's not much time to study anything else.

Incidentally a curious fact about Jewish society in Eastern Europe is how oligarchical it was, ruled by a privileged class of rabbis and merchants who consituted about one percent of the population, the same ratio as that of nobility to peasantry in the gentile population. It is also telling that even though they lived in Poland for centuries Polish Jewry never learned the Polish language.

Lastly, about the Pale of Settlement to which Jews were confined: how many Ashkenazi Americans know that it was roughly the size of Western Europe?

We all could profit by clearing away a lot of myths and prejudices that are nourished by an ignorance of history.

Anonymous said...

Steve, let me explain it to you. The reason ashkenazi jews have a much higher iq than christian europeans is because the lower iq jews had many fewer children than higher iq jews. If the low iq jews had been allowed to farm they might have had better reproductive success

Anonymous said...

Christian poles prohibbited jews from professions in which a low iq man could support a family. So as a result, the low iq christian men were allowed to reproduce and low iq jews were not allowed to reproduce. This selective breeding over 700 years had the results you see today

Anonymous said...

Let us make an analogy to what happened to the jews in poland. Let us say that america was run entirely by hindus. The hindus reserved the low iq jobs for hindus and the high iq jobs for christians. Then christians in america who happened to be born with super high iq got high paid jobs and had six children each. Manwhile the low iq christians starved to death. Fast forward a few hundred years and white christians in america have super high iq. You interview one of the white christians. He has high iq. You ask him if he is happy that hindu overlords did what they did. I bet he will be resentful of the fact that his low iq cousins were starved to death, even though the result was eugenic. But if others see it differently i am eager to hear it

KubaNiski said...

Polish Jews were not restricted from owning property until the Russian partitions. Even then most local Polish governments were quiet lax with the restriction. In what is now western Ukraine the the grievance that the Ukrainian peasants had was that most of the land was owned by Poles and the the few acres that weren't were owned by Jews.

DYork said...

So is Israel the "Jewish state" or not?

Not all Jews live there and not everyone living there is Jewish.

But those objecting to the term "Jewish lobby" don't object to the term "Jewish state" for Israel.

FredR said...

Pretty devastating. Reminds of James Coburn in the opening scene of Cross of Iron:

"Good kill".

http://youtu.be/2-_on1wmZxI?t=7m22s

Anonymous said...

If we shouldn't say 'Jewish Lobby', what terminology should we use to describe and discuss Jewish power?
Of course, Schumer isn't so much worried about 'Jewish Lobby' as with ANY discussion of Jewish power as power. He wants us to see Jews only in relation to their history of 'powerlessness'--never mind that many Jews were very privileged vis-a-vis much of the goy population.

Btw, the real double standard is with the likes of Schumer. He thinks it's okay to talk about other forms of lobbies and power--Arab lobby, Chinese lobby, EU lobby, Greek lobby, Cuban lobby, Christian lobby, Mormon lobby, etc--but, he says Jews ought to be spared from any such discussion.

Now, using Schumer's logic, the Chinese can demand that there be discussion of Chinese lobby. They can say, 'Not long ago, China invaded by other nations and Chinese people suffer much humiliation and lose life. And China not dealt as equal but as sick man of Asia, and it very very hurtful to Chinese. So, it no good to discuss Chinese lobby. It anti-Sinitic.'
Of course, we would laugh at such Chinese complaints.
Jews have control over the US. They have control over our lives. Google sits on a cash load of 47 billion, and politicians suck up to Jewish power.
But what does Schumer tell us? He tells us to fixate on the past regardless of present and future realities and just see Jews as eternally a powerless and helpless people. It is downright disgusting.

PS. If Schumer is worried about 'double standard', how about getting rid of the 'Jewish' as well as the 'lobby'. If Jews really wanna be treated as humanity on equal terms, they should drop their Jewish identity and become one with gentiles. But for 1000s of yrs, Jews have maintained the double standard of working in gentile lands--and profiting from it--while feeling they are the 'chosen' and superior to goyim. And that attitude remains to this day.

The story of modern America is Jewish Double Standard on steroids. Jews can control media, finance, government, and much else, but we are not suppose to notice. Jews can steer US foreign policy to destroy white South Africa while supporting Zionists to destroy Palestine.
Jews never wanted to be equal with us but to lord over us, and they do that today... by cleverly posing as victims. They lord over while pretending to be our slaves in need of our sympathy. What foulness.

Oh boo hoo, Hagel wept, but I call it eye-urination. Scared dogs pee sometimes, and Hagel, scared shitless after a month of being ragged on as an 'antisemite', wee-wee-weeped through his eyes in front of his new master.

Anonymous said...

In a sane world, Hagel could have argued with Schumer about the fine points of Jewish history, but in our world, if anyone disagrees with even the slightest bit of Jewish narrative of noble Jewish suffering, it's finito!
So, all one can do is be dopey and go weepy weepy and look all scared and sorry at the same time. Since no man wants to admit to being a coward, Hagel will want us to believe that his teary eyes were about sympathy. But we know it's all about wussiness before the real power. It's like Cool Hand Luke finally breaking and hugging the boss's leg and weeping. "Don't beat me no more, boss, I won't do it again."
That is white America for you.

Anonymous said...

@ Luke Lea

I agree and sincerely wish my landsmen would take a more nuanced, less reactive view of our own history. When ever I hear a fellow Jew speak of Spain's "golden age" or lament the expulsions of 1492, I want to scream "Dude, we picked the losing side in a multigenerational war! What did we expect? Undying gratitude?"

@ KubaNiski

True dat. The Poles actually treated us pretty well historically. If they didn't, it is unlikely that Poland would have become the center of Ashkenazi Jewry that it did. The word pogrom is Russian after all, not Polish. In fact, some of the more antiquated orthodox dress is based on the clothing favored by the szlachta hundreds of years ago. It's difficult for me to imagine such an inward looking group of people deciding en masse to dress like their mortal enemies.

IHTG said...

It is also telling that even though they lived in Poland for centuries Polish Jewry never learned the Polish language.

What do you mean, "learned"? Jews had to know plenty of languages. How do you think they did business?

Svigor said...

What Schumer really means I assume is that Jews often weren't allowed to own land. But saying that "Everyone could have their own Downton Abbey except Jewish people" doesn't have quite the same ring.

He means "STFU about the Jews, unless you're saying something I want to hear." He couldn't give less of a shit about being precise or historically accurate.

Svigor said...

Steve, let me explain it to you. The reason ashkenazi jews have a much higher iq than christian europeans is because the lower iq jews had many fewer children than higher iq jews. If the low iq jews had been allowed to farm they might have had better reproductive success

The lower IQ Jews were encouraged or forced out of the tribe and melted into the surrounding population.

Christian poles prohibbited jews from professions in which a low iq man could support a family.

No they didn't.

Anonymous said...

"He means "STFU about the Jews, unless you're saying something I want to hear."

Ha Ha Ha. A tactic that has never failed them, why ever stop using it?

Anonymous said...

Honkel Tom

Anonymous said...

Israel is to America what Serbia was to Tsarist Russia.

And we all know how great that worked out for the latter...

Tartar said...

Luke Lea is correct in what he reports, I've seen independent sources report similar. I believe the merchant Jews spoke Polish, but not many others, even after the Constitution and the Partition of Poland. Moreover, a 19th century tsar started a proto-affirmative action program-- he tried giving Jews not only farms, but farm tools and, if I recall correctly, livestock. I don't recall that the Jews were especially grateful. Read about it in Solzhenitsyn's "Two Hundred Years Together." Maybe one of these days it will come out in print in the anglosphere, where freedom reigns.

ogunsiron said...

@tartar,
I wonder : Is Solzhenitsyn the only person to ever write, other than in russian, about those back to the land programs by the Tsars in 19th century Russia ? The efforts were pretty much fruitless, in any case.
Solzhenitsyn's book is or was being translated into english by some bloggers but I don't know what happened with that project.
I got the 2 volumes in french.

Jews had better things to do than to toil the soil. It's not that they weren't involved in agriculture, but that they focused on more value added activities like turning potatoes into alcool or selling grain. I really need to sit down and read some detailed jewish history. I read recently that among the ancient hebrews, it was the tribe of Issacar that was specialized in long distance trade.

I wonder when the later hebrews and the jews in general turned to commerce and finance as the main activity for the whole people.

Jacob Joseph L. said...

Disparate Impact For Thee, not for me.

Anonymous said...

I wonder when the later hebrews and the jews in general turned to commerce and finance as the main activity for the whole people.

The Radhanite period or even before:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radhanite

The Phoenicians/Carthageans also had a mercantile sea-faring culture, they spoked the same language of the jews and lived close with them.

uhu said...

Everyone could be a farmer except Jewish people.

In Alexander Solzenitschin's book "200 years together" there is a lot of detail on how the Czar tried to turn Jews into patriotic Russians by giving them land for farming. Mostly the land was either untilled, sold or leased. Obviously the jewish community was not interested b/c the returns were paltry.

ben tillman said...

A double standard is inveighing against "disparate impact" while conveniently ignoring the fact that 33% of the Supreme Court and 10% of the US Senate are jewish.

It was 16% last time I checked.

ben tillman said...

I have a big anthology of Jewish folklore, one of my favorite books, and there are surprisingly many stories in it about Jewish farmers.

Let's see -- there's Max Yasgur and.... But most farmers toil in obscurity, so we shouldn't expect to know of many farmers,
Jewish or not.

"It is also telling that even though they lived in Poland for centuries Polish Jewry never learned the Polish language."

What do you mean, "learned"? Jews had to know plenty of languages. How do you think they did business?


A hundred years ago, 90% of the Jews in Poland could not speak Polish.

Davis said...

Dalits stole all the sweet gigs from the Brahmins as well.

Usury isn't all sitting on your ass, sometimes you have to break some legs and you can work up a farmer like sweat from that sort of thing.

Svigor said...

I wonder : Is Solzhenitsyn the only person to ever write, other than in russian, about those back to the land programs by the Tsars in 19th century Russia ? The efforts were pretty much fruitless, in any case.

IIRC, there was a western monarch who tried the same thing. French, or Spanish, maybe? Or maybe central European. I just remember reading about a king who tried the same thing, and it wasn't in Russia. And that the program failed because nobody makes Jews do manual labor.

Mr. Anon said...

"Anonymous Tartar said...

Read about it in Solzhenitsyn's "Two Hundred Years Together." Maybe one of these days it will come out in print in the anglosphere, where freedom reigns."

The fact that it has not says alot about the realities of our cultural life, does it not? Is there a single scribbling of Dario Fo or Toni Morrison that fails to get published?

ATBOTL said...

"Solzhenitsyn's book is or was being translated into english by some bloggers but I don't know what happened with that project."

http://ethnopoliticsonline.com/archives/ais/ais%20main.html

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2010/08/chapter-5-of-200-years-together-%E2%80%9Cafter-the-murder-of-alexander-ii%E2%80%9D/

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2010/10/solzhenitsyn%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Cthe-february-revolution%E2%80%9D-chapter-13-of-200-years-together/

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2011/05/during-1917-chapter-14-of-solzhenitsyns-200-years-together/

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2010/09/solzhenitsyns-during-the-civil-war-%E2%80%94-chapter-16-of-200-years-together/

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/articles/MacDonald-Solzhenitsyn-200-Years-Together-18.html

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2010/08/alexandr-solzhenitsyns-%E2%80%9Cduring-the-soviet-german-war%E2%80%9D-chapter-21-of-200-years-together/

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2010/07/kevin-macdonald-chapter-22-of-200-years-together-%E2%80%9Cfrom-the-end-of-the-war-to-stalin%E2%80%99s-death%E2%80%9D/

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2010/09/chapter-23-of-200-years-together-%E2%80%9Cbefore-the-six-day-war%E2%80%9D/












Anonymous said...

I don't think Jews were ever prevented from being farmers in Europe. They just didn't want to.

In the enormous Polish Commonwealth (where most European Jews lived during the early modern period), Jews couldn't own agricultural land but they could lease it from noblemen. So many did this that, whereas in most of Europe "Jew" was a colloquial term for moneylender, in Poland in this period it meant "farm manager".

Before the late 18th century, managing a large estate was a zero-sum game. With productivity stagnant, revenue depended on how successfully you could squeeze the peasants. Jewish managers who'd overpaid on their leases might have to choose between going bankrupt and brutalizing their surfs.

Often enough the nobility were the beneficiaries of this squeezing, though the Jews got the blame. It's a bit like the relationship between the publicly beneficent (but privately avaricious) Casby and his rent-collector Pancks in Dickens' Little Dorrit.

Everyone's seen the anti-Semitic caricature that illustrated the Nazi's "Ewige Jude" exhibition. As expected, the evil-looking Jew holds a handful of gold coins, befitting his role as a usurer. But why does he have a whip under his arm? That's for use on the peasants. Of course no-one defends that image as an accurate or fair portrayal of Jews, but the harms it evoked had a basis in reality.

Peter the Shark said...

A hundred years ago, 90% of the Jews in Poland could not speak Polish.

One hundred years ago there was no country called "Poland". Jews learned the languages of power - in the parts of Poland that were under German and Austrian rule Jews learned German. In Russian Poland they learned Russian - or German. In Russian Polish cities like Warsaw, Lodz or Wilno the business elite was still dominated by ethnic Germans. Jews really had very little reason or motivation to learn Polish after the 18th century.

Svigor said...

Before the late 18th century, managing a large estate was a zero-sum game. With productivity stagnant, revenue depended on how successfully you could squeeze the peasants. Jewish managers who'd overpaid on their leases might have to choose between going bankrupt and brutalizing their surfs.

Are surfs related to smurfs?

Yeah, whenever I think of Jews, I think "more prone to overpay." The whole point of Jews making themselves available to the nobility throughout Europe as tax farmers (and to the commie overlords inside the curtain, etc.) was that they squeezed the serfs under their control harder than the native elite would. Jewish bailiffs cared little for non-Jews, as a result of Judaism's ingroup morality, and so were willing to squeeze them harder than the native nobility, who had more sympathy for their own kind. Dovetails nicely with the Jews' unwillingness to learn Polish; what did they care to assimilate with "gentiles" for whom they had no fellow feeling? When the local sentiment turned against them they'd have to move on to another set of freiers anyway.

Everyone's seen the anti-Semitic caricature that illustrated the Nazi's "Ewige Jude" exhibition. As expected, the evil-looking Jew holds a handful of gold coins, befitting his role as a usurer. But why does he have a whip under his arm? That's for use on the peasants. Of course no-one defends that image as an accurate or fair portrayal of Jews, but the harms it evoked had a basis in reality.

Poor overseer me!

P.S., I defend it as based in fact. Caricatures always leave "fairness" behind in favor of artistic license, but Jews seem to be the only ones who can get away with the "poor overseer/banker me" routine. Power has its privileges, I guess.

Svigor said...

One hundred years ago there was no country called "Poland". Jews learned the languages of power - in the parts of Poland that were under German and Austrian rule Jews learned German. In Russian Poland they learned Russian - or German. In Russian Polish cities like Warsaw, Lodz or Wilno the business elite was still dominated by ethnic Germans. Jews really had very little reason or motivation to learn Polish after the 18th century.

Translation: no need to learn the language of the freiers we settle among unless we're selling them something. Gosh, I wonder why Jewish expulsion hit pretty much every country in Europe? They made such good neighbors, put down such deep roots!

Anonymous said...

My apologies , I wrote "surfs" instead of the correct "surfer dudes".

Stewie Jones said...

The IQ article is all fine and good in speculating with some evidence about reasons why 1 group of Scots-Irish are brighter than others, but given how much brighter Germanics (those whom this brighter group interbred and lived around for a number of centuries), then isn't at least a major part of the IQ puzzle that it comes from the Germanic Heritage? Seems like the most reasonable, and also the Occam's razor answer. Particularly if you want to say assign an IQ of 110, since this is around what was found when studying Germanic school children.

Anonymous said...

@ Stewie Jones --

The genetic studies indicate that there isn't much northern European admixture in Ashkenazim.

Anonymous said...

Jews had better things to do than to toil the soil. It's not that they weren't involved in agriculture, but that they focused on more value added activities like turning potatoes into alcool or selling grain.

Farming is boring, quite frankly. It is not an occupation well-suited to high-IQ populations who need mental stimulation, economic "value-added" or not.

Mr. Anon said...

"Peter the Shark said...

One hundred years ago there was no country called "Poland"."

There was still a polish nation. Peoples are not the same thing as governments. Perhaps you are a statist who doesn't understand that.

Svigor said...

Farming is boring, quite frankly. It is not an occupation well-suited to high-IQ populations who need mental stimulation, economic "value-added" or not.

Maybe they should have thought of that before they drove the lower-IQ segments out of their population, then. Nobody forced them to make feeding themselves and taking out their own trash into something beneath them, thus pushing them away from true nationhood and toward parasitic (and thus dependent) "nationhood."

ogunsiron said...

Stewie Jones said...
... but given how much brighter Germanics (those whom this brighter group interbred and lived around for a number of centuries),...Occam's razor answer...IQ of 110, since this is around what was found when studying Germanic school children.
===

110 is a modern measurment of germanic ( specifically deutschland you mean ?) IQ but there is no reason to think that the germanics of 1000 to 1500 years ago were that bright. Certainly their civilisational achievements at the time, compared to those of the southern europoeans doesn't suggest that.

In any case, genetic studies suggest that the european jews are pretty much a mix between southern europeans and middle easterners.

ogunsiron said...

Off topic but maybe interesting :
http://ww
w.lesinrocks.com/2013/02/24/actualite/la-france-a-cesse-etre-centre-vie-intellectuelle-11363692/

This is an interview in french of some italian historian who's part of the postcolonial studies universe. As with many of those people, he's anti-zionist but is in thralls with jewish cosmopolitanism. There is an interesting paragraph towards the bottom where he readily admits that jews have been the "citical voice"for 200 years in the West! He also laments neo-conservativism and feels that it's some kind of betrayal of true jewish activism.

I've noticed that when far left jews (and friends) are speaking in a perceived "safe" environment, they just freely acknowledge their subversive heritage.

Anonymous said...

The origins of European leftism go back at least to the French Revolution and possibly much farther if we consider the English Peasants' Revolt and the Jacquerie of the 14th century. Jews had nothing to do with the medieval peasant rebellions and almost no role in the French Revolution. Maybe if the Italian historian had limited himself to the last 150 years, which would include the writings of Karl Marx, he would have been on firmer ground.

Cosmopolitanism and leftism have never been universal traits among the Jews. There have always been holdouts, the most stalwart and numerous of whom have been found among the Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox religious groups. But there have always been more secular Jews who don't find Marxism or socialism congenial.

Aule said...

"In any case, genetic studies suggest that the european jews are pretty much a mix between southern europeans and middle easterners."

-No, that's the Sephardi, the Askenazim (who make up ~3/4 of the worldwide population and are the majority variety in the US) are Germanic/Middle Eastern mix.


"110 is a modern measurment of germanic ( specifically deutschland you mean ?) IQ but there is no reason to think that the germanics of 1000 to 1500 years ago were that bright."

Who's talking about IQ 1000 to 1500 yrs ago? We're talking about modern scores, and how they evolved to this point. No one, even the authors of the paper, suggest that any of the mentioned groups had average IQs in that range at that point.

Anonymous said...

No, Aule. Ogunsiron is correct. The data from the whole-genome studies thus far is most consistent with both Ashkenazim and Sephardim being predominantly a mixture of southern European and (northern) Middle Eastern ancestry. For this and other reasons, the admixture is though to have occurred in ancient times before Jews had moved north of the Alps to establish permanent communities in significant numbers. That doesn't exclude the possibility of a small amount of northern European admixture, but it is not a large ancestral component.

ogunsiron said...

Anonymous said...
...
Maybe if the Italian historian had limited himself to the last 150 years...
===
One of the outcomes of Napoleon's reign was the emancipation of jews all throughout Europe, so by that 1815, a lot of the legal restrictions on jews had been lifted. Also, the Haskalah (?) movement had been happening among jews so they might have been ready to dive right into the european mainstream as soon as the legal obstacles were removed. Jews have such a long and unbroken tradition that they possibly had done this before ( rapid insertion into a host society)and had written about it. But that I don't know.
===

Cosmopolitanism and leftism have never been universal traits among the Jews...
===
There is definitely a significant proportion of the jews for whom leftist or proto-leftist ideas have resonated with for a very long time. Reform judaism, for instance, is pretty much spiritualized leftism. I think you don't even need to be a believer in God to be a reform jew. You just have to agree that you should do all you can to "make the world better" and that it's your duty as a Jew.
In the old testament there is the tradition of anti-establishment prophets who railed against the rich and the powerful.
It seems like in the late 19th century in the russian empire, almost all the jewish youth was into anarchism or socialism, even though their roots were in orthodox communities.

I'm not sure that cosmpolitanism was very much a feature of the grassroots, european populisms.

I think that one thing that unites unites secular (*diaspora) jews from both the left and the right is the sense that they have to lead the world in some fashion.

The far left jews see themselves as the *moral and cultural* leaders of the world. Like Douglas Rushkoff (please google his name + corrosive + judaism), they see themselves as the bearers of a light that will deliver the gentiles from the moral shadows in which they dwell.

You then have another type of jew, more likely to be zionist, who feels that his people should be the political and financial leaders of the world. Those kinds of jews are most likely to see non jews as expandable donkeys and they care little about wether the donkeys dwell in shadows or not.

ben tillman said...

Farming is boring, quite frankly. It is not an occupation well-suited to high-IQ populations who need mental stimulation, economic "value-added" or not.

Farming is boring? Not compared to practicing law. Lawyers' minds are tied up with tedious and boring stuff, while a farmer's mind is free to think about important things.

Cail Corishev said...

Farming today, which often means picking the same vegetable day after day or driving an air-conditioned machine back and forth while a GPS tells it what to spread on the soil, may be boring. But traditional farming is far from boring, because you're doing something different every day. One day you're building a fence; the next you're castrating bulls; the next you're harvesting a crop. There are a fair number of emergencies to deal with: cattle get into the neighbor's corn; a big rain wipes out a creek crossing. The seasonal variations affect not only what you do, but also how hard you work: you work sunup to sundown, so very long hours in the summer, but in the winter, when you're mostly reduced to daily chores like feeding livestock, you have a lot of downtime to read and reflect.

It may not be the most intellectually demanding work in the world -- though it's not for the simpleminded either -- but it may be one of the least boring.

Anonymous said...

Ogunsiron,

After Napoleon was defeated, a lot of the anti-Jewish restrictions went back into effect. In some German states, Jews did not obtain full civic rights until the unification of Germany in 1871. Napoleon's emancipation policies had minimal effect on Jews in the Russian Pale of Settlement.

The Haskalah started in Germany but was slow to penetrate farther east. The Eastern European secular Jewish radicals are a late 19th and early 20th century phenomenon. You're right, they started off in Orthodox communities because there was almost nowhere else to come from. Orthodox practice was the only option in Eastern Europe. If you were a Jew born in Eastern Europe before 1875, you were almost certainly born into an Orthodox family. Reform Judaism is very much a German and American phenomenon. It had almost no presence in Poland or the Pale as late as the early 20th century.

American Reform Judaism has transformed into "spiritualized leftism" as you call it, but it was not always like that. The New York City German-Jewish bankers of the late 19th century tended to affiliate Reform. The real radicals went for atheism. The transformation to political liberalism has followed the drift of the descendants of Eastern European Jewish immigrants into Reform congregations. Many are not believers but don't feel entirely comfortable endorsing atheism. Others are "spiritual but not religious" types. Both probably affiliate with Jewish religious congregations as much due to inertia as to any other cause. Non-Orthodox Jews don't attend services regularly enough for the congregations to be of much networking value.

Anonymous said...

"The IQ article is all fine and good in speculating with some evidence about reasons why 1 group of Scots-Irish are brighter than others, but given how much brighter Germanics (those whom this brighter group interbred and lived around for a number of centuries), then isn't at least a major part of the IQ puzzle that it comes from the Germanic Heritage? Seems like the most reasonable, and also the Occam's razor answer."

Another possibility is that the Ashkenazi and Sephardim were the same but some other factor created the gap e.g. adopting or at least partially adopting the north european attitude to repeated close cousin marriage.