Tuesday, October 02, 2018

The differences are more than dollar-deep

Among those who express either support or opposition to Kavanaugh's confirmation by income for whites and for Jews:


"Poor" corresponds to those with incomes under $50k per year, "Middle income" to those ranging from $50k-$150k, and "Affluent" to those earning over $150k annually.

Jews are not just gentiles with a lot of money.

Yes, we already knew that--well, most of us anyway, though as my twitter and gab feeds can attest, not all of us. Validating stereotypes is the raison d'etre, remember.

42 comments:

Anonymous said...

You can't help but notice that two Jewish women are working the hardest to bring the Irish catholic Kavanaugh down-Feinstein and Katz, and Jewish women support him the least. Growing up in NY I noticed that Jews disliked Irish Catholics the most amongst the Goyim, and I wonder how much of this is fueled by ethnic malice.

Ben Kurtz said...

What happens when you stratify the White Gentile population by education level as opposed to earnings? The usual dropout / HS / some college / 4 yr degree / graduate work buckets.

I seem to recall that Jews on average tend to have higher rates of participation in post-secondary education/indoctrination. I also get the sense that the white college-educated crowd has to distain Kavanaugh to fit in amongst polite society.

If White Gentiles had the same overall rates of education/indoctrination as Jews have, how much closer would the figures be?

X Marks The Spot said...

But they sure loved them some Kennedys!

aNanyMouse said...

Anonymous, I'll bet that this is an NY thing.
NY Jews are renowned for being pricks, incl. to non-NY Jews.

In the Midwest, Jews and Irish, etc., get on rather well, esp. in Chicago.
This probably is helped by the common fear of guys like Farrakhan.

Ben, the pollsters should also stratify the White Gentile population by Urban vs. rural etc.
After all, rural/ small-town whites don't often rub elbows with the "leaders" of chic, "polite" society, and so are spared the ensuing social pressure.
Rather, their local leaders are far more likely to be Deplorables.

aNanyMouse said...

Indeed, NY Gentiles are rather well known for being pricks, incl. to non-NY Gentiles.
It is, in some respects, a city in too big of a hurry (or too big for its britches?) to try to avoid grating on others.

216 said...

Anonymous,

This is what passes for the "elite" in the suburbs/rural around here. It's amazing how easily they got punked.


https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/17/us/politics/dinesh-dsouza-death-of-a-nation.html

Audacious Epigone said...

Anon,

A couple of months ahead of any of the fraudulent accusations emerged we got, from the refreshingly candid Forward, "The Jewish Case Against Brett Kavanaugh"

Putting Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court means losing a crucial check on the power of a president who has made white nationalism a central tenet of his worldview and policy agenda. Anyone in the Jewish community making the mistake of embracing, or even tolerating, a white nationalist administration, is making a devil’s bargain, and the price is either our safety or our conscience.

A Supreme Court majority shaped by Donald Trump means that the most vulnerable among us — immigrants, women, Muslim Americans, people of color, LGBTQ Americans, and yes, Jews too — will be at even greater risk of harm from Trump’s agenda, untethered from true oversight by either of the other branches of government.


"immigrants, women Muslim Americans, people of color, LGBTQ Americans and yes, Jews too". In the coming years, sooner than a lot of them realize, that last group, which is really just uber-privileged whites from the perspectives of the rest, is going to be locked out of the coalition of the fringes. If cuckservatives ostensibly on our side of the great divide didn't treat Jews with reverence, they already would be cut out.

Ben Kurtz,

Indeed. For those with no more than high school, the gap is 12 points in favor of Kavanaugh's confirmation. For college educated, it's 8 points. For "beyond college", which presumably means Master's degree on up, it's split, 39.5% S and 40.0% O.

Whites who are well educated but poor are the most anti-Kavanaugh (and anti-Trump), while those without much education but high incomes are the most pro-Trump. The credentialed parasitical class versus the unpretentious productive class. That's my kind of Marxism!

aNonyMouse,

R-I doesn't ask about community type. I do have some concern about getting too close to, "well, height isn't an advantage in basketball once you control for shoe size". New York is really Jewish, so it could be the magic dirt in New York or it could be the atmosphere that Jews create that cause SWPLs to emulate them more in New York than they do even in leftist cities like Austin or Portland.

216,

DR3 by a non-white! What more could the NRO crowd ever hope for!?

aNanyMouse said...

AE, it could well owe to "the atmosphere that Jews create" in NY.
But, I wonder if any other major city is as Irish, Italian, or whatever, as NY is Jewish.
I'll wager that, when any group dominates a city (esp. via big $$), it tends to get big for its britches.

And, the larger point still is, let's compare apples to apples, e.g. urban Degreed smarty-pants types, Jews and Gentiles.

216 said...

AE,

It truly shocks me that these Boomers thought the NYT would treat them with equanimity; supercuck John Kasich has long refused to talk to any media outlet that is unfriendly, even during the halcyon days of 2011 when he was a "far-right union buster".

Our county isn't anywhere near rich enough to be called SWPL, but we are full of New England descended MainProt church ladies. We voted 29% for Perot in '92, and 45% for Obama in '08. This stuff plays horribly here.

aNanyMouse said...

In, say, Chicago, Irish controlled City Hall, but dared not stop the Mob from getting its cut.
Same with Rahm nowadays, toward the (esp. Black) gangs.

silly girl said...

"But, I wonder if any other major city is as Irish, Italian, or whatever, as NY is Jewish."

Salt Lake City - English

Salt Lake City is an outlier, albeit it a good way.

thekrustykurmudgeon said...

I was mentioning this on mpc which is that the states don't have the class structure that the uk did/does. But in reality, we have a class system of our own but it just simply manifests itself differently. Instead of looking at things on a strictly monetary level - it's more about lifestyle and location. It's why "education" in the united states is a better predictor of voting than "income".

Dealg said...

The supreme irony is that Muslims absolutely loathe Jews. Even neo-nazis don't hate Jews as much as Muslims do.

In most of Western Europe the majority of anti-Semitic attacks is already carried out by Muslim imports.

Trump is likely one of the most Jewish-friendly American presidents of all times, what with recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and moving the US embassy there.

The American liberal Jews are too scared of the idea of a white-majority nation in control of its immigration policy to see all of this.

Gabriel M said...

Since you like polls, here is yet another confirming that white people around the world, hate, hate, hate, HATE Trump. http://www.pewglobal.org/2018/10/01/trumps-international-ratings-remain-low-especially-among-key-allies/

Spaniards hate him, Frenchmen hate him, Italians hate him, Brits hate him. Hell, even Hungarians hate him. Only Israelis like him and, actually, they don't just like him. They love him.

Overall all it is pretty clear that Jews are far more pro-Trump than white people.

Another factor is that about 40% of people self-identifying as non-orthodox Jews in the U.S. are goyim LARPING (badly) at being Jews. Some of them have partial Jewish ancestry, but more and more - such as Cynthia Nixon or Julia Salazar - are just 100% goys doing it because it gets them some sort of weird street cred. A sort of flight from white for people who can't find any Native American ancestors. Among actual Jews, the figures are totally different.

In short, stop being so butthurt and ungrateful. If it wasn't for Zionist influence on your elections, Democrats would hold the White House and you'd be looking down the barrel at a 6-3 Democrat majority on the Supreme Court.

Unknown said...

I'm an Irish Catholic in Londoniatan & can confirm. We're earthy + instinctual + blue collar, they're sneaky, neurotic & intellectual. plenty of the pale blue star flown @ tax'n'stair dodgers' games!!!

Jig Bohnson said...

Yeah ok, Jews are not just gentiles with more money. But they may be just gentiles with more money, more education, and more concentration in coastal metropolises. If you are trying to specifically isolate the specific effects of being Jewish on political outlook, you haven't really done it.

Also, Israeli Jews are based, and they are the future of Jewish peoplehood.

Jig Bohnson said...

Also the point raised by Gabriel M is interesting. What percent of the people self-identifying as Jewish in any particular survey are actually Jewish? Granted 'Jew' is a strange category because it can be defined either religiously, ethnically, or culturally, but even given that, how many of the people identifying as such in these surveys can reasonably objectively be considered such, by metrics such as adhering to the religion or rites, or having significant Jewish ancestry, or maintaining part of some community, etc.?

Julia Salazar is an extreme example, but there are also people like Chanda Prescod-Weinstein (look her up), who has some Jewish ancestry, but in practice identifies and carries herself day-to-day as a black non-Jew. However when the opportunity comes to speak "as a Jew" for a leftist cause (especially bashing Israel) she certainly does it every time.

Another good example is Henry Herskovitz, of 100% Polish Catholic ancestry but who self-identifies as a Jew to bash Israel and picket synagogues. Is he actually Jewish?

I recognize the danger of getting into 'no true Scotsman' territory but it is worth thinking about.

IHTG said...

Relevant to your interests: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/mattberman/millennials-are-largely-open-to-socialists-new-poll-finds

aNanyMouse said...

Jig: "Israeli Jews are based, and they are the future of Jewish peoplehood."
Yeah, them and the US Orthos. Many of the rest are becoming white Prescod-Weinsteins, or (fewer, slowly) moving toward Paul Gottfriedism.

As to your reference to coastal metropolises, see Whiskey on (women in) the coastal Super-zips, at https://whiskeys-place.blogspot.com/2012/01/charles-murray-and-white-class-divide.html .
Rather than stewing about Jews, I say we're better off looking at the impact of Mad Ave's warping of the (mostly urban) culture, by concentrating its appeals at (mostly single) women, age 15-35, who Mad Ave. knows to be most prone to manipulation of their *impulsive* spending.
The most cost-effective ways to turn this culture around, may well be to break the power of either Mad Ave., or of the Super-zips.

aNanyMouse said...

The Jew who did the most damage to US culture was Ed Bernays.
The Jews most likely to help us emerge, from the hole Bernays helped dig us into, will be disciples of Gottfried.

aNanyMouse said...

And, perhaps, disciples of military etc. historian/ theoretician Martin van Creveld.
His book The Privileged Sex (ripping certain feminist talking points) was a departure from his usual emphasis on how (esp. US and Israeli) politicians/ generals misjudge threats (e.g. from Iraq, Iran).

aNanyMouse said...

Dealg
Most US Lefty Jews can care less about their heritage, US or Jewish.
They're along for the Lefty "We are the world" ride, like their Gentile counterparts.
It's mostly about sucking up to what's chic, as defined by the MSM, incl. Mad Ave.
They're mostly all Bugmen/women.

Audacious Epigone said...

Gabriel M,

I've never expressed disdain for Israel wrt it acting in its own interests. Walls, the ethnostate, the importance of native fertility and repelling the infiltrators--so, so much to admire. If the 2% sense that they are only able to thrive in a majority-minority bazaar, Israel is a great counter to that.

As for the high numbers of faux Jews, the solution to this is simple--Jews MUST lose any elevated moral worth on account of being historical victims. As soon as there is little more than a titular difference between Jews and Episcopalians--not just in how they behave, but in how they are treated in and understood by the zeitgeist--I'll shut up.

"Jewish privilege" needs to be thought of as "white privilege" on steroids. We are not there yet. We are getting closer to a tipping point in the US though, I think.

Jig,

Yeah, but as we talked about some before, at what point are we looking at tall people being no different from short people in terms of basketball success once shoe size is controlled for? How many Jews did it take to push out the WASP elite? What percentage of a city needs to become Jewish for SWPLs in the city to act like SWPLs in the very Jewish city of New York?

Jig Bohnson said...

AE I'm not quite sure what you are getting at in your most recent comment. I think you may have the B-Ball analogy backwards. Consider it this way: Certainly height is the important causal factor in B-Ball success. But if you looked at the correlation between shoe size and B-Ball success, yo would find a huge one. But that's of course because shoe size is correlated to height. So to find the actual causal effect of shoe size on B-Ball success you would need to control for height. The analogy runs as B-Ball success = SJWism, height = wealth, elite education, and concentration in coastal cities, and shoe size = Jewishness.

Jig Bohnson said...

What percentage of a city needs to become Jewish for SWPLs in the city to act like SWPLs in the very Jewish city of New York?

AE I'm confused by this question as well. The most SWPLy city is widely thought to be Portland, although you could make the case for San Francisco or even Austin or Denver nowadays. None of those places have particularly high Jewish populations as cities go. As we have discussed before there is some, although not complete, overlap between SWPLism and SJWism. So maybe the question is where are the SWPLs the most completely SJW-ized? That's going to be probably Seattle, or maybe Oakland/Berkeley. But it sure isn't New York, and again those top places are not particularly Jewish as cities go.

Jan Assman said...

I’m surprised audacious epigone is unfamiliar with this article by Sean Last, which even cites this blog at one point:
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2018/04/24/the-jewish-question-an-empirical-examiniation/


Audacious Epigone said...

Jig,

I don't think of distinct Jewishness as SJWism, which is pretty low-IQ stuff. My conception is of an ability to manage situations ruthlessly to their own benefit as a Jewish--but not SWPL and certainly now SJW--trait. The archetypal Portlander is a smelly vagabond with a drug problem and net assets of one bike. The archetypal New Yorker is the unscrupulous boiler room aspiring billionaire.

Audacious Epigone said...

Jan Assman,

It's in the queue.

Feryl said...

"Yeah, but as we talked about some before, at what point are we looking at tall people being no different from short people in terms of basketball success once shoe size is controlled for? How many Jews did it take to push out the WASP elite? What percentage of a city needs to become Jewish for SWPLs in the city to act like SWPLs in the very Jewish city of New York?"

New Amsterdam was never that WASPy to begin with. New England was.....Before the massive waves of Irish-Catholic immigration soon made-over the leadership of much of Southern New England.

We've all gone over the differing folk-ways of America, before. The mid-late 1800's immigration boom was responsible for creating, or altering, the ethnic character of the Midwest, Western US, Mid-Atlantic, and Southern New England. In the industrial Midwest, there certainly was some tension between Anglo Protestants, Nordic Protestants, Catholics, and Slavs....But I don't think the WASP elite was ever that well-established in the Midwest (vis a vis the Northeast), partly because it was the region that drew most from the plain folk of the English Midlands, who got along pretty well with Germans and Poles. On the other hand, the South hardly received any (free) immigrants compared to other regions, and a lot of that can be attributed to the dysfunctional culture of the Scots-Irish and the aristocratic/decadent Cavalier culture of the Coastal South (not until the Interstate Highway was built, and air conditioning pioneered, would the South come even close to economic parity with the North. Also, the birth of the military industrial complex in the 1940's and 1950's contributed a great deal to the South).

Cincinnati Ohio has always stood out to me as a city that's remarkably resistant to the Jewish merchant impulse (and Nordic pagan impulse), being that the city still heavily regulates porn and sex toys (I've read online numerous times that online merchants have to be careful with what they ship there). In the "sex positive" Nordic belt of the Upper Midwest, however, we don't need Jews around to market porn (likewise, in the "outlaw" belt of Texas and the Western US, they certainly didn't need Jews around to make strip bars, casinos, etc. popular).

BTW, yeah, I know that Englishmen built America. But that being said, there are different kinds of Englishmen (and Scotsmen), which gave each region a unique character. The severe puritanical WASPs largely stuck to Canada and New England; The Midlanders went to the Mid-Atlantic farmbelt and to the Midwest, where they were soon joined by Germans and a fair number of French Protestants, who in turn would be followed by Scandinavians, Poles, Slovaks, and Czechs. All along, the character of the Midwest has never really changed; no non-sense, plain spoken, and generally welcoming to strangers. The Brit Cavaliers settled most in the coastal and swampy South, and established a rigid and cheap (or free) labor dependent economy and culture, which gradually caused mutual hostility with the more equitable culture of the Northeast and Midwest. The Scots-Irish "borderers" went mostly to Appalachia and the Western Frontier, and became famous (and infamous) for their toughness and insistence on self-reliance, which put them at odds with....Just about anyone who told them to do something besides kill someone...In fact, it's hard to imagine what our military would do without the Scots-Irish. Their hard fightin' (and hard livin') would give the Upper South and Western US a forbidding reputation for decades to come.

Feryl said...

Trying to frame the history of the US as a war between WASPs and newcomers is something that Jews desperately promote, and a lot of Ellis Island people in the Northeast seem to buy into it. But it's a ridiculous idea, as can be discerned from New Amsterdam never being a mono-ethnic place to begin with, and the fact that conflict between English "tribes" was exported to America, and would've continued in the absence of Jews, Catholics, etc.. Also, "WASPs" are but one variant of the Anglo-Scots folkways. Americans should be taught Albion's seed, not the Emma Lazarus rendition of American history. To us Midwesterners, the whole idea of the severe WASP isn't something we can really relate to anyway, and we tend to think of the East Coast elite, Gentile or Jewish, as being more representative of the pompous WASP ideal at this point.

And how many people appreciate the fact that, for example, temperamentally plain Nordic folks in the Midwest have almost as much tolerance for seeing naked flesh (the inner Pagan of the Nordic soul will never be conquered) as Jews do? Albeit, the Nord gentiles find aesthetic beauty in nature, while Jews take advantage of human lust to make money. But this doesn't fit the Ellis Island narrative of repressed WASPs desperately keeping vibrant outsiders at bay, so most people remain clueless. Because elites in the Eastern power centers of America have allowed Jews and Irish-Catholics to revise American history so that they can feel like victors over an unappealing enemy. Among white Americans, it is by far the most trendy to celebrate Irish heritage, while Jews of course are neurotic about how they should express their heritage (deny it? Have fun with stereotypes?). But whether they admit or not, it's clear that Jews esp. on the East Coast are obsessed with their ethnicity and what happened to their great-grandpa (or great-great grandpa) after he was processed thru Ellis Island.

Jig Bohnson said...

My conception is of an ability to manage situations ruthlessly to their own benefit as a Jewish----trait

Doesn't this conflict with the central thesis of your next posting, whereby Jews are jeopardizing their position by supporting anti-white identity politics in significant numbers? Certainly that is not ruthlessly managing a situation to their own benefit - at least not collectively. Maybe individually, but isn't that what everyone does?

aNanyMouse said...

"a Jewish--but not SWPL and certainly now SJW--trait. The archetypal Portlander...."

That may be true of Portlanders as such, but, regarding the string-pullers, Jewishness has next to nothing to do with it.

Gates, Bezos, and Zuck have far more in common with each other, than any of them have with the archetypal Portlander.
Steve Miller has more in common with Trump (both sons of real estate "moguls"), than he has with the archetypal budding-billionare New Yorker.
Miller's and Trump's fathers tried to build empires, one lot or building at a time, while closely eyeballing the *local* specifics pertaining to each deal.
Local conditions are largely irrelevant to a Gates or a Zuck, who instead must master the functioning of broad networks.

Globalists tend to come from global-scale "industries", Nationalists from local-scale "industries".
In this context, the differences between the useful idiocy of the archetypal New Yorker, vs. that of the archetypal Portlander, are of (at most) marginal significance.

Zuck likely has far more power than the whole gang of boiler room aspiring billionaires, and will gladly dump them aside, if that gets him a rung or two of more power.
Likewise, with Bezos and the smelly vagabonds.

The key divide between whites isn't Jew vs. Gentile, it's class background, and, at the top levels, between elites with local power bases, vs. those with Global power bases.
I'll damn near bet ranch, that Trump (among others) understands this.
Hopefully WNs will too, soon enough to matter.

aNanyMouse said...

And, if the archetypal Portlander is a smelly vagabond, the archetypal Chicago or D.C. SJW, or SWPL, is a public school teacher, or a non-profit sector office functionary.
Jew or Gentile, s/he went to an archetypal college, listens to NPR, and attends wine-and-cheese fundraisers for virtue-signalling causes.

aNanyMouse said...

Put another way, the archetypal Chicago or D.C. SJW, or SWPL, is a Bugman/ woman, and that matters far more than does the Jew - Gentile split.

aNanyMouse said...

Bugmen/ women, vs. "normies".
String-pullers vs. useful idiots.
Locals vs. Globalists.

aNanyMouse said...

Jan Assman:
The article by Last is indeed impressive, but one sentence makes no sense:
"Furthermore, being up the ethnic interests of certain intellectuals, the Goulds and Lewontins of the world, is necessary to explain why they have decided to lie to the public."
What does "being up" mean here?
And,who is the "they" in "they have decided to lie to the public"?
All Jews? Some Jews? About what? How often?

Hopefully AE can help sort this out, when he gives us his view of the article.

Audacious Epigone said...

Jig,

They're miscalculating. When the Marx brothers were tearing down WASP culture one witty--and deconstructive--observation after another, it made sense because it removed perceived barriers to their own advancement. It's becoming counterproductive for them now. Jews in Europe are waking up to it.

aNanyMouse,

This Kavanaugh confirmation was largely a battle between elites though, wasn't it?

Re: local vs global industries, that's a great way to think about Trump's approach to a whole host of things like trade and manufacturing. Thanks.

Jan Assman said...

Sean Last is a notoriously bad editor of his own writing, actually he doesnt seem to edit at all, even for basic spelling. Im not sure what he was trying to say there.

aNanyMouse said...

"This Kavanaugh confirmation was largely a battle between elites though...."
I don't see how this refutes my theses, if that's what you meant it to do.
The BK clash was between Globalist (mostly coastal) elites, vs. localist (mostly fly-over) elites.

This Globalism vs. localism clash has been implicit for centuries, and is just clearly heating up in recent years, at least partly because, the growth of high-tech has now made Hyper-Globalism possible, and prominent enough, to provoke a very visible backlash from localists.


Jig Bohnson said...

@ AE:

They're miscalculating

Ok, that's a legitimate (as in not internally contradictory) hypothesis - they are ruthlessly pursuing their collective interest, but doing so incorrectly.

My hypothesis is that they are parroting, like most people do in our social media age, the accepted dogma of their particular milieu (coastal, urban/suburban educated professional, etc in their case).



Jan Assman said...

See the article I linked above. Jews with that demo profile were much farther to the political left than their gentile counterparts and have been for decades (since at least the 50s, which is the earliest good data we have). You’re simply wrong.

Jig Bohnson said...

@Jan The article you linked is so full of typos, misattributions, and out-of-context data that it is laughable. Abraham Lincoln won the Jewish vote in 1868 (!) and was a Democrat? GTFO. I'm all for a dispassionate attempt at quantitative analysis of these questions but that article wasn't it.