Why Jews are good at money

10 posts

Thomas777

Jews aren't ''good at money'' in terms of having pioneered the creation of payment systems and credit markets (as Pres. Camacho eloquently noted). Jews are ''good at Capitalism'', as Sombart explicated in his seminal text on Jews and capitalism.

Jews were instrumental in breaking the guild system - which was the basis of the pre-modern economy in terms of both labor and capital - and they did this by cultivating institutions that incentivized the eradication of guild structures and producing an enduring body of theory that attacked what Sombart refers to as ''guild socialism'' on grounds that its structural inefficiencies (coupled with institutionalized social prejudices that gave rise to the guild system in the first place) have the effect of undercapitalizing nascent industries that bear the potential to exponentially increase the amount of wealth in existence and in turn facilitate the upward mobility of men within their own class/trade/profession.

Rightly or wrongly, Jews historically were never viewed as brilliant investors or financial magicians - in fact, they gained the Shylock/userer rep precisely because they weren't viewed as sophisticated businessmen but were considered to be little more than unsophisticated ghetto hustlers who plied their ''trade'' on the periphery of the respectable economy. Thus, the man who could not acquire credit from legitimate sources would seek out a Shylock to cover his debts at usurious rates of interest etc.

Thomas777
Welund
Sombart's theory required a massive amount of Jews in the settlement of America. It doesn't hold up. That might be worth a read anyway, but I recall it putting a bunch of ridiculous ideas in my head.
Thomas777
I don't follow - what do you mean. ''required a massive amount of Jews in the settlement of America''? Forgive me if I am slow on the uptake.
Welund
If I recall correctly, and I need to reread the whole book, it's been ten years, his idea of Jews being the foundation of capital markets (for investment in agriculture and whatever else) and basic trade of non-agricultural goods forced him to conclude that colonial America had to be chock-full of Jewish settlers. A Jewish merchant for every number of settlers. While he doesn't isolate Jews as the single cause of capitalism, Sombart attempts to show capitalist development would have been impossible without the role played by Jews. Is this true? I think he projects tendencies in Germany-Austria elsewhere.

1. The Court/middle man Jew, which became more important to the Dutch and English states but after the long process of urbanisation and radical theological Reformation, when the Sephardim were welcomed as merchants and tolerated religiously along increasingly equal rights due to inward similarity in understanding of finance and divergence from Catholicism/southern powers.
2. Crypsis or rather conversion obfuscating the numbers of Jewish-origin actors across the West, because of the significant number of Jews who had converted to Christianity in the 19th Century-early 20th Century for whatever reason.

Chapter 4, pages 34 to 35:
I don't know. Maybe it was "always a Jewish one," but as Sombart admits he doesn't have all the data, and he's not limiting himself to that approach. Since America was a distillation of English insularity and urbane Protestantism, I don't think this focus on Jewish trade reflects America or Americanism.

(Continued)
Jude

Anyway to get Sombert's other work or is it all in German?

Dogmatic Tower

Forbidden to own (or rather rent) land, forbidden to take up an educated profession (ironically, this included becoming lawyers), often forbidden to learn a skilled trade, a genetically close and high trust community scattered across three continents (i.e. natural trade networks), and the ones in Europe were living in a cash-poor society where additionally, making money off of money was forbidden by the Church (which they got from Aristotle). By process of elimination, you get merchants and moneylenders: the only economic niches the Jews could fill and also which the host society scorned, so there was no competition. This started to change as the early Modern era unfolded, and ended completely with "emancipation", with Napoleon's conquests playing an outsized role in the process. Suddenly this legacy equipped the Jews to thrive as the Medicis invented modern banking, capitalism emerged, and long-distance trade exploded as the European countries started building their empires. Add the legalistic and scholarly traditions of rabbinical Judaism and you get overrepresentation in law and academia as well.

Interestingly enough, some of the early Zionists were all about getting the Jews out of cities, out of business, and turning them into proper peasants and Jeffersonian yeomen. They saw the Jews as the products of 2000 years of profoundly abnormal socioeconomic conditions and in addition to a Jewish nation-state in biblical Israel, taking up the plow - following the biblical mandate to "live by the sweat of your brow" - and the rifle was held up as the way to make Jews men again.

Thesokorus

Let's not be too hasty to buy the "moneylending was only job because of the anti semitism!" meme. Just to pick one example, the Tsars, after getting the Pale Jews, tried to settle them on good workable land in the hopes they'd stop selling vodka on credit to peasants etc etc etc and they refused time and again. They would either sell the land or hire others to work it for them so they could go back to their preferred ways. Since time immemorial they've denigrated working with their hands.

Thesokorus

Great post. And they did relentlessly "bust guilds" by "peddling" or setting up shop (at a lower price and usually lesser quality product) right in front of a guild merchant who was not allowed to reduce his prices.
Thesokorus
As I understand it, the Sephardim, after being expelled from Spain, took their money to Holland...