What About Jewish Privilege?

If there is white privilege, what is Jewish privilege? Is it a bad thing? If it is bad that whites are more affluent, educated and powerful than non-whites, how horrible is it that Jews are so much more affluent, educated and powerful than whites?

A friend says: “It’s a combination of Jewish hostility, the ability to hide behind minority status while being provisionally white and also powerful class privilege aka contempt for the poor while hiding behind the disadvantaged. It’s very common in the post-denominational crowd. Jews are daring for people to call them out and Steve Sailer has nailed them and he’s educating the goyim on how Jews are disenfranchising them. The trick is to call Jews out on their privilege.”

The New York Times publishes a long article on white privilege:

At New York Private Schools, Challenging White Privilege From the Inside

In the past, private school diversity initiatives were often focused on minority students, helping them adjust to the majority white culture they found themselves in, and sometimes exploring their backgrounds in annual assemblies and occasional weekend festivals. Now these same schools are asking white students and faculty members to examine their own race and to dig deeply into how their presence affects life for everyone in their school communities, with a special emphasis on the meaning and repercussions of what has come to be called white privilege.

Steve Sailer writes:

One of the things that your kid would learn to help him compete in 21st Century New York City in return for your annual $40k check is to talk a lot about “white privilege,” but never, ever talk about “white Jewish privilege.”

A Google search for “white privilege” reveals 833,000 results while a Google search for “Jewish privilege” reveals 24,100 results.

Samuel G. Freedman writes:

Nearly a half-century ago, Milton Himmelfarb famously observed, “Jews earn like Episcopalians and vote like Puerto Ricans.” Even more so now, we Jews resemble the WASP elite of yore. We are now the ones with trust funds, family foundations, legacy admission to elite universities. It is not that we don’t work hard, but we start work with a foundation of benefits earned not by ourselves but by our forebears.
So if you are able to grow up in New Rochelle, and if you are able to attend the S.A.R. day-school, both of which Fortgang did, and if just maybe you also had tutoring or test-prep classes, and at the least had the proximate example of college-educated parents, none of that means you did not toil. It just meant you started your toil with assets not available to the children of less prosperous, less educated families.
How, then, can we live as Jews in modern America with an honest admission that we are both Samson and the nebbish, the mighty and the vulnerable, the comfortable offspring of a hated, hunted people?

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* Do these people realize that up through 1965, America was around 88 percent white? If schools and institutions back then did not cater to whites, they’d more than likely not remain in business. There weren’t enough non-whites to go around to make each school or institution diverse. Do they even realize this? Probably not. Just like Steve posts articles about liberals today wanting more white kids to diversify minority-majority schools, but not realizing that the supply of such kids is not what it used to be. But they can’t do the math and don’t understand that you cannot spread out what you do not have.

PS. This whole white privilege thing is fascinating to watch. The progs pick a theme and run with it. At first you think it’s ridiculous. Then you are surprised that a few people are actually discussing it like it has merit. Finally it becomes accepted discourse and any disagreement is considered out of bounds.

Our side can’t even get the ‘cultural marxist’ label to stick. The progs can seemingly get anything they want to stick, even the rape culture that in reality doesn’t exist, but in effect does.

* Yes, you have correctly pointed out (for the 1000th time) that anti-white multiculturalism is the dominant ideology of the upper class and, not coincidentally, that anti-white multiculturalism is also the dominant ideology of the media, of academia, of government, Hollywood etc.

But once again you avoid asking “Cui Bono?”. Who benefits?

Who benefits from the fact that anti-white multiculturalism is the dominant ideology of america?

How did it comes to pass that anti-white multiculturalism became the dominant ideology?

What forces propelled anti-white multiculturalism to the top of the ideology heap?

Pure random chance?

Why did the upper class and the mega-corporations (that are run by the upper class) adopt this ideology?

The Dissident Right does not like to ask these questions.

I look around this world of ours, and I ask questions. That is what I do.

Why does the arctic fox have long white fur, whereas the southern fox has short red fur? Why?

Why did anti-white multiculturalism pass through the filter and become the dominant ideology? Why did it out-compete all the other ideologies?

* I think one thing that must be taken into consideration is that many of these “white couples” are actually Jewish and therefore don’t see themselves as being white anymore than they see themselves as being WASPs. For many Jews being white is a gentile thing. That is why none of these schools are running seminars on combating Jewish privilege.

* For various reasons, Jewish people are really overrepresented at the heights of American society.

For other reasons, this is especially the case when it comes to the media.

So he’s making a snarky comment about how in no way can you point out that say 50% of the elite media are Jewish people when only 3% of the population are.

So if having any white people involved at all in your thing is a sign of ‘privilege’ (and thus evil and wrong and icky), SURELY having Jews be overrepresented by a factor of 17 is also a sign of ‘privilege’. But you can’t say that.

* I am genuinely impressed with how Steve always maintains good-natured amusement when writing about our ruling class, with its gross hypocrisy and passive-aggressive displays of piety and contrition. Lesser men would have become deeply embittered a long time ago.

* Whatever his true feelings may or may not be is secondary. The fact that he elicits such barely concealed rage in his critics tells me he is getting the tone just right. He’d be a fool to change tack now.

* When I attended a private high school in Massachusetts, I had, on several occasions, the distinct displeasure of interacting with students from Philips Andover Academy, the nation’s most prestigious prep school, where the students are taught to maintain a downright sociopathic* fixation on getting into the Ivy League, to which 90% of them do in fact matriculate.

*(That is, amongst other things, treating friendly competitions between high schoolers like they’re Bolsheviks jockeying for position during one of Stalin’s purges).

A few months ago, on a whim, I decided to look up the latest issue of the Andover school newspaper. Virtually the entire thing was one screed after another. “How I Experienced Racism at Andover as an Asian-American.” “How I Experienced Racism at Andover as a Latino.” “How I Experienced Racism at Andover as an African-American.” “How I Experienced Sexism at Andover.” “How I Experienced Sexism and Racism at Andover as a Woman of Color.” “How I Experienced Classism at Andover.” etc. etc.

Andover is apparently a hotbed of every “-ism” under the sun. Each article was virtually the same in content as all the others; “People treat me like I’m an ‘affirmative action case,’” “People ask me ‘where are you from?’” “I’m held to a higher standard than everyone else,” “Andover needs to increase enrollment of students of color and from low-income backgrounds,” “teachers don’t give me the same encouragement they would to a white/male student,” “I experience microaggressions daily from students and teachers.”

My personal favorite was a report on a “symposium on ableism” that had been held at the school. A picture was provided: The four students holding said “symposium” on “how they experienced ableism as Andover students,” all white males, were seated behind a wooden desk with little name placards and microphones and water bottles, as if they were testifying before Congress. Their disabilities? (Clutch your pearls if they’re handy, you may start crying). One had ADHD, one had dyslexia, one had ADHD and dyslexia, and one had injured his back while playing basketball and temporarily had to wear a back brace.

On and on like that, going on for page after page. Unlike your typical school newspaper, which has only a few student contributors per issue, this one had dozens, all writing virtually the same article. What’s more, it had virtually none of the normal school newspaper type-stories about the upcoming Spring Formal or editorials about why pizza should be served more often in the Cafeteria or three months’ out-of-date movie reviews. I realized that the Andover school newspaper was not a “normal” one, but rather the students submitted “articles” to it to send clippings demonstrating they think all the most correct thoughts with their college applications.

Like all things at that school, everything is ultra-cynically boiled down to “how does it help me get into Harvard?” What’s more, it works! Needless to say, one is not exactly speaking the language of the powerless and “marginalized” if one is a Harvard-bound Andover tyke, soon to be tearing up an elite law firm near you.

* David Frum had an interesting Tom Wolfe analogy the other day: he was comparing “Mau-mauing the Flak Catchers” to the seemingly permanent canvass for “moderate Muslim leaders” — i.e. the theory that we gotta track down the local gang bosses and negotiate with them on items of rabble management (I think on the very day of that piece Marie Harf veered into her amusing discussion of ISIS job training centers on TV).

* But sincere kids who take this stuff seriously are weak, and clearly don’t have the right stuff to make it to the top at Morgan anyway.

* I think I read once that Quakers were the second largest non-black religious group (after Jews) represented in the famous Civil Rights era marches. They were certainly on the far left of the political spectrum, but even as radical as they were, Quakers weren’t fully on board when it came to the ultimate goals of the Civil Right movement, judging by the policies of their Earlham College in the 1950s.

Ever heard of the Communist NYC high school teacher, Abel Meeropol? He wrote the lyrics to Strange Fruit, the song about lynching; it was first published in New Masses, a Communist magazine. He also wrote The House I Live In, a song promoting racial integration made famous by Frank Sinatra. After fellow commies Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were executed for treason, Meerepol and his wife adopted the two young Rosenberg sons. When the younger one graduated high school and went off to college, he chose to go to Earlham (before transferring to the University of Michigan).

I mention all this just to show that Earlham was a pretty far left college, long before nearly all colleges had been taken over by “progressives”. But even at Earlham, interracial relationships were verboten in the 1950s. In 1952, they kicked out a white male student, Robert McAllester, for getting engaged to a black female student, Grace Cunningham. The president of the college stated:

The policy of the college has been to discourage hasty, youthful interracial marriages because they present problems which may be almost insurmountable in present day civilization.

Nearly two years later, in December of 1953, they removed the editor of the school newspaper (one Stephen Wersan of NYC) from his position for writing editorials in favor of interracial dating.

So even the radical left-wing white Quakers who were marching in Selma for Civil Rights were opposed to interracial marriage.

* When it comes to micro-aggressions, highly civilized white people are the masters. It’s unacceptable to settle your beefs with your neighbor ghetto style with knives, guns, fists, etc. so words are the main weapon used. Brits will cut each other to shreds with even raising their voices.

* I think our minorities should also be required to take a sensitivity class, entitled:

Our World Without White People – A New Respect

Section 1 – Infrastructure

* I’ve noticed an increasing uneasiness on the part of Jews that the SJW hate machine has no scruples about denouncing them for their whiteness (see, the recent and uncharacteristic pushback against the Justine Sacco case in the NYT), and has fully embraced the Palestinians’ cause. It used to be the unspoken rule that Jews were off-limits, now, as the hard-left has diversified, no longer.

* Here’s the plot to the movie The Social Network: Two arrogant Harvard WASP jocks come up with the idea for Facebook, then make the mistake of hiring a conniving Jew nerd to program the site for them. The Jew screws the WASPs and steals their idea. They appeal to the (Jewish) president of the university, who tells them to go fuck themselves.

About Luke Ford

I've written five books (see Amazon.com). My work has been covered in the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and on 60 Minutes. I teach Alexander Technique in Beverly Hills (Alexander90210.com).
This entry was posted in Jews, Whites. Bookmark the permalink.