



There’s actually a sane, quite reasonable explanation for why so much of the media’s embarrassing levels of Trump Trauma and Putin Psychosis stem from Jewish paranoia.

In the latest of an endless series of incidents, the national press is in a tizzy over Republican Alabama senatorial candidate Roy Moore’s wife pointing out that their lawyer is Jewish. The wisdom of having a Jewish lawyer is, of course, a stereotype, so Southern Republicans aren’t supposed to mention it.

A few hours before that, in response to the latest Muslim attempt to blow up a Manhattan tourist attraction, verified blue checkmark David Rothschild tweeted:

Dear rest of USA,

Whatever we learn over next few hours, New Yorkers do NOT want you to restrict immigrants or harass Muslims due to incident in NYC. They are vital part of our economy & society.

Thank You!

New Yorkers

PS. Happy to talk about 35,000 killed by guns each year.

7:03 AM – 11 Dec 2017

I assumed this was an anti-Semitic parody account, but it’s not. David Rothschild is a good example of how 21st-century Jewish writers, despite the world’s potentially strongest critical thinking skills, increasingly lack the self-awareness to get the joke.

In truth, everyone of goodwill, Jewish and gentile alike, would profit from taking the time to think about the 20th-century events that make so many Jewish-Americans concerned for their futures.

And no, I’m not talking about the Holocaust.

“Perhaps that sounds ridiculous, but notice how various trends over the past few years have not necessarily been good for the Jews in the long run.”

More relevant to the 21st century are the history of college admissions in America and, perhaps most important, the cycles of career opportunities for Jews in Russia.

Granted, while more than a few Jewish pundits have an unfortunate tendency to portray anything that triggers their career insecurities as merely a hop, skip, and a jump from Auschwitz, their real worry is more mundane and realistic: that the left’s program of ethnic diversity, inclusion, and proportional representation will eventually get imposed on the ethnic group that is pound for pound the undisputed world champion.

In an era in which Foucault’s sadomasochism-inspired obsession with “power” as the all-purpose explanation for everything has filtered down to seemingly every community-college lecturer, the fact that the median Jewish person outranks the median anybody else on virtually every realistic metric of power, such as wealth, influence, accomplishments, celebrity, IQ, funniness, or campaign donations, means that Jewish thinkers are going to be antsy.

Granted, the overwhelming volume of Jewish fire at present is not directed toward the social justice jihadis who are increasingly threatening heavily Jewish institutions like the Weinstein Company movie studio, but toward the pro-Semitic rightists like Trump and Putin.

Why? Think about the career risks from the perspective of a Jewish journalist: We’re the world’s richest identity-politics group, but we’ve been promoting leftist resentment. Okay, so far we’ve been able to direct that hatred away from us and toward whites in general. But now there’s this rightist president who thinks Jews are great…but we can’t control what he says. He could say anything!

Trump, despite being more or less America’s first culturally Jewish president, might well blurt out some inconvenient truth, such as that Jews make up something like one-third of all billionaires in the U.S. and an incredible one-seventh or so of all billionaires on earth despite being only 1/500 of the human race.

And then Putin might buy one…hundred…thousand…dollars’ worth of Facebook ads. Using irresistible Slavic skills at publicity and media manipulation, he could get everybody in the world to learn this fact!

Perhaps that sounds ridiculous, but notice how various trends over the past few years have not necessarily been good for the Jews in the long run.

For example, until quite recently, the focus of most affirmative-action controversies didn’t much affect Jewish Americans. The big 2009 Supreme Court quota case focused on New Haven, Conn., but it didn’t have anything to do with Yale. The Supreme Court instead pondered whether it was okay for New Haven to cheat fireman Frank Ricci out of a promotion just because he was white. (By a 5–4 vote: no.)

During Obama’s first term, some major Democratic donor industries such as Silicon Valley and Hollywood acted like the EEOC rules against unintentional disparate impact discrimination didn’t apply to them because they were, you know, progressive and therefore virtuous.

By Obama’s second term, though, there wasn’t all that much left to loot in the name of fighting racism and sexism from conservative institutions. So the SJW hordes were pointed in the direction of universities (as in the Haven Monahan gang-rape hoax), the tech firms, and, most recently, Hollywood.

Objectively, the Obama administration ginning up attacks on colleges, tech, and the entertainment industry was not good for the Jews.

To take an ironic example, apparently one member of the U. of Virginia-Charlottesville fraternity that was libeled by Rolling Stone’s anti-gentilic gang rape on broken glass fantasy about blond beast frat guys (and then had its windows smashed by a leftist mob) was the son of former Republican House majority leader Eric Cantor. (Cantor’s older son had previously been a member of the frat when Haven Monahan would have rushed, if Haven hadn’t been nonexistent.)

Of course, in the ongoing Sex Purges of guys with really good jobs in the media, as Larry David pointed out on Saturday Night Live, Jewish people obviously are overrepresented by an order of magnitude or more compared with their share of the population.

Why so much disparate impact? The most obvious reason that Jews are involved in Weinsteingate at far more than their share of the population (about 2 percent) is because they tend to fill a very high percentage of the really good jobs.

The media feels that the fact that whites in general tend to have an above-high percentage of the really good jobs, such as movie mogul, is the most pressing social problem of the age. On the other hand, observing that Jewish people tend to have an even more disproportionate fraction of the best jobs just leads to blank stares and accusatory questions of “Why are you interested in the ethnicity of billionaires and moguls?”

Why? Well, when anybody mentions that Jews tend to have a high percentage of the top jobs, some of the Jews with the top jobs get extremely upset, and they have a lot of power.

Why do they get angry? Is it because they are rightly terrified that another Holocaust might ensue?

I don’t think so. I presume it’s because these powerful individuals have an admirable degree of career ambitiousness—that’s how they got where they are—and thus they react with great hostility to any line of thinking that could conceivably lead to the kind of hiring and promotion quotas that have been routinely imposed upon whites in general being imposed upon Jews in particular.

Consider the history of discrimination and why Jewish Americans might fear that, as Sarah Silverman would say, losing control of the media could be bad for their careers.

In the United States of a century ago, Jews and gentiles tended each to prefer to associate with their own kind. That wasn’t all that much of a problem for Jewish careers because it was a free country and everybody could start their own businesses.

If J.P. Morgan wouldn’t hire you, Goldman Sachs would. If Walt Disney wouldn’t have you direct his movie, Louis B. Mayer would. If the Sagamore Resort Hotel wouldn’t let you stay for the summer, Grossinger’s would. If the Los Angeles Country Club blackballed you, you could apply for membership at Hillcrest. If you were worried that Catholic nuns would try to convert your Bubbe on her deathbed at St. Joseph’s Hospital in Burbank, you could take her to Cedars-Sinai in West Hollywood.