Luke Ford

As media, banking and other businesses are businesses and need to make a profit to stay in business, then it seems obvious to me that the primary reason that Jews dominate certain fields, just like WASPs dominate other fields and blacks dominate other fields and Chinese dominate other fields, is that each of these groups has special skills. Jews, for example, have high verbal IQs, so one would naturally expect them to have success beyond their numbers in the general population in businesses such as media, law, politics, and lobbying. Also, because Jews tend to have a greater capacity for cohesion than other groups, you’d expect Jews to do well in all jobs that require networking and extended cooperation.

If Jews sucked as making movies, they’d go broke. If they sucked at banking and law, they’d be out-competed by other groups. In some fields Jews have traditionally dominated, I expect, other groups are now out-competing them.

If Jews and Chinese etc hold jobs primarily due to merit, I’d expect that would redound to the benefit of the country as a whole. Why would one want to go to an inferior surgeon simply because they were of your race or religion? Why would one go to an inferior lawyer simply because they were of your race and religion? Would you prefer your plane be guided by an inferior air traffic controller simply because they were of your race and religion? In most jobs, I think we want the very best workers, whatever their race and religion. As God/nature have seen fit to distribute skills unevenly, I would expect uneven numbers of Jews and other races in different jobs.

I see some cogent critiques of my “May the best man win” attitude. For example, having more flexible ethics in some businesses allows the slippery to out-compete the honest. Also, if a group can seize monopoly power, it can extract great returns without necessarily delivering a great product or service.

PS. As different peoples have different gifts, this might be the best argument for diversity. The counter argument is that the benefits of such diversity must outweigh the costs, which is not usually evident. A sane white man might well say, “I’m sure latinos, blacks and Muslims have special gifts, but I don’t want your honey and I don’t want your sting.” So I guess the onus goes back on minority groups to prove that they contribute more to the greater good than they subtract, because if the benefits aren’t clear, the majority is insane to tolerate groups who are a net drag.