Sunday, July 10, 2011

Jewish hyper ethnocentricity and nepotism provides a huge advantage in free market societies where others operate individualistically

A Review of “Capitalism and the Jews” by Jerry Z. Muller, Part 1

(The Occidental Observer) -- by Brenton Sanderson --

Jerry Z. Muller is Professor of History at Catholic University of America in Washington DC. In his book Capitalism and the Jews (2010, Princeton University Press; 272pp.), Muller attempts to explore the nature of the special relationship between Jews and capitalism given that they ‘have been particularly good at it,’ and ‘whenever they have been allowed to compete on an equal legal footing, they have tended to do disproportionately well.’ Jews have been a conspicuous presence in the history of capitalism, both as symbol and as reality. Critiques of capitalism have long been intertwined with attitudes toward Jewry, and Muller (who is himself Jewish) observes that ‘For a variety of intellectuals in modern Europe, Jews served as a kind of metaphor turned flesh for capitalism.’ Therefore, evaluations of the social effects of the free market economy have tended to go hand in hand with evaluations of the Jews. Despite this, the relationship of the Jews to capitalism has, Muller observes, ‘received less attention than its significance merits’ (p.1). I agree wholeheartedly, and this review is an effort to help remedy this state of affairs...

...rather than the result of genetic traits which are the outgrowth of centuries of eugenic practices, the ability of Jews to take advantage of opportunities under the capitalist system is, for Muller, ‘deeply influenced by cultural traits transmitted in the private realm of the family and cultural community’ (p. 4). This amounts to saying that Judaism is little more than a cultural construct, and is not centrally preoccupied with the preservation and flourishing of a coherent ethnic community. While few would question the significance of cultural traits in accounting for Jewish success under capitalism, the reality is that such traits have been largely formed by, and are mediated through, the unique genetic inheritance of the Jews – which is the outgrowth of centuries of eugenic practices – particularly among the Ashkenazim...

Ignoring [Milton] Friedman’s carefully worded claim that “only a tiny fraction of Jews were involved in Communism” (the reality is that leftist radicalism was a very large, entirely mainstream movement among Jews in the West, at least until the 1970s), he finds Jewish involvement with the left somewhat difficult to reconcile with the fact that ‘the Jews owe an enormous debt to capitalism.’ It is obvious that, as an intelligent and capable people, the Jews are always likely to thrive in the competitive context of the unfettered market. Accordingly, it seems apparent to Friedman that the real enemy to Jewish interests (and other able minority groups) are the barriers to entry and anti-competitive practices that, in various historical instances, have restricted their full participation in the economic affairs of a nation...

Free markets, Friedman affirmed, advanced the interests of Jews through imposing an impersonal economic discipline on non-Jews through which their ethnocentricity and anti-Semitic prejudice could be circumvented. That this proposition contains a great deal of truth is confirmed, I would contend, by the historical record. Jews have indeed prospered under the conditions of free market capitalism among frequently hostile majority European-derived populations. Muller summarizes Friedman’s point as follows: ‘Free competition counteracts the forces of anti-Semitic prejudice…. Hiring the less qualified, or buying from the less efficient producer because buyer and seller share some cultural trait, will eventually lead to bankruptcy’ (Muller, pp. 72-73)...

Unfortunately, Muller fails to acknowledge that when we look at the ‘revealed preferences’ of Jews we discover, that while Friedman, and other Jewish libertarians like von Mises and Rand, opposed the existence of monopolies that provided ‘room for the application of arbitrary criteria in the selection of the beneficiaries of the monopoly’ the reality is that Jews, even in the freest of markets, are notorious for developing and using ethnic monopolies in precisely this fashion. Indeed, this is a major theme of MacDonald’s A People That Shall Dwell Alone where he observes that from ‘the standpoint of the group, it was always more important to maximize the resource flow from the gentile community to the Jewish community, rather than to allow individual Jews to maximize their interests at the expense of the Jewish community’ (see here, p. 148; see also MacDonald’s review of Paul Rubin’s Darwinian Politics, the section titled “Is Ethnic Conflict Rational? Historical Data”)...

The massive extent of Jewish nepotism in their business dealings is so exhaustively documented (very frequently by Jews themselves) as to be beyond dispute. Instances where Jews use other Jews in a purely mercenary fashion are cause for shock and trauma within the Jewish community (witness the Madoff affair). Given this, it seems that while, as Friedman asserts, the free market may function powerfully to hinder ethnocentric discrimination among Whites (a group that Kevin MacDonald characterizes as, owing to their evolutionary history, strongly predisposed to individualism), the hyper-ethnocentrism of Jews disposes them to transcend the ‘rational’ discipline imposed by the free market. MacDonald makes the point that the propensity of these groups to engage in ‘tribal economics’ involving high levels of within-group economic cooperation and patronage confers on these groups ‘an extraordinarily powerful competitive advantage against individual strategies’ (see here, p. 145)...

We should also mention that much Jewish entrepreneurial activity, while undoubtedly contributing to economic growth at times (but certainly there are exceptions, as with Jewish involvement in the financial crisis that has led to the current economic malaise), has had pernicious consequences for European-derived peoples in subverting their moral codes, and promoting lifestyles that are dysfunctional from a group strategic perspective. Muller is honest enough to admit there is a long history of ‘Jews who applied their entrepreneurial virtues to vice,’ noting that: ‘In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the extreme poverty of eastern European Jewry together with international migration led to substantial networks of Jews engaged in sexual commerce (as pimps, prostitutes, and brothel owners)’ and that ‘During the era of Prohibition in the United States, Jews were disproportionately active in the trade in illicit booze. The most successful Jewish gangsters then invested their profits in the gambling industry and played a seminal role in the creation of Las Vegas, that quintessential site of American vice cum mass entertainment’ (pp. 90-91). Muller could have added Hollywood and the pornography industry to this catalogue of commercial vice...MORE...LINK

Chris Moore comments:

A national socialist, parasitic, colonizing network, in some ways similar to the Royalists, although less hierarchical. And at least the Brits sought to build functional societies, whereas all too often Jewry simply seeks to simultaneously degrade them and ring them for all they’re worth.

At any rate, it’s not hard to see that Jewry never would have been able to pull off what it has without the partnership and complicity of a lot of English blood, who have made both their perfect partners due to their common insatiable greed, and their perfect dupes due to English conceit that they’re too smart to get swindled, even as Jewry runs circles around them and laughs about it.

The Royalist question (or freemason, or Anglo-elitism, or Anglo-fascism, or whatever you want to call it) is going to have to also be dealt with in order to deal with the Jewish one. That’s one of the components that makes the Jewish question so difficult to get at. There are simply layers upon layers of corruption and complicity in the Anglosphere wherever Jewry also reside in large numbers.


Jewish hyper ethnocentricity and nepotism provides a huge advantage in free market societies where others operate as individuals.

This is yet another reason why organized Jewry is poisonous to liberty, free enterprise and enlightened liberal values wherein people don’t want to answer to some corrupt tribal hierarchy, or don’t want to be forced to operate under some tyrannical regimes thumb to exist (just what America’s founders rebelled against). Jewry’s under-handed ethnic networking in such societies eventually forces everyone to play by those rules to survive, or if they don’t, they’ll end up under some Jewish tyrant’s thumb.

But how does one break up pernicious ethnic networks and preserve freedom of association, freedom of religion and the free enterprise system? It seems to me nationalism is the only answer, wherein when any “tribe” becomes a threat to the national health and the enlightened way of life, the rest of the nation quickly and firmly cuts it down to size, or throws it out.


Anonymous said...

"‘Free competition counteracts the forces of anti-Semitic prejudice…. Hiring the less qualified, or buying from the less efficient producer because buyer and seller share some cultural trait, will eventually lead to bankruptcy’"

That's an interesting statement. On the one hand, the author admits that hiring the less qualified or dealing with the less efficient seller is bad for business. He then goes on to claim that ethnic networking is also bad for business.

My experience is that most Jews support affirmative action as long as whites are on the losing end, and oppose ethnic networking as long as whites are the only group not allowed to participate.

Jerry Muller brings to mind a comment that I recently came across by Clyde Wilson:

"When and why did the critical shift occur in American mentality that caused “scholars” and journalists to stop reporting facts, events, and conditions observable in the world around us and concentrate on reporting their feelings about an imaginary world?"

Anonymous said...

Judaism is the 'religious go(l)d age' of capitalism. Am segullah means in hebrew 'people of the treasure' not chosen people. They were a religion of gold in which their levy priest-bankers asked golden menorahs and other exvotes to the other tribes that formed the class of peddlers, called habiru, 'those who walk behind the asses' as they were caravaans of miltary transporters (asses main use) and traded with weapons in the bronze age. soon they bought slaves in battlefields... This dual structure of banker-priests and military/slave purveyors has always been their core work and the bible merely a racist book of history that allowed them to separate from those slaves. Meanwhile the upper castes of banker-priests became diplomatic advisors promoting wars between kingdoms in mesopotamia, as they would do in middle ages spain and germany. When capitalism came they entered corporations, the first one voc, with a cohen president. Today they run the 'market', which is merely as the biggest shareholders of most banks, their market. The jewish empire is now global and only china resists.