Jews Claim to Be White and Semitic


Jews frequently shout “Anti-Semitism” when anybody says anything critical of them; however, when organizations label their population or membership, Jews claim to be white.  They oppose adding “Jewish” as a racial category anywhere.  As a result, if you look at population figures, it is difficult to figure out what the Jewish population is.  You frequently see estimates of 2% or 3%, but is it?  Is Jewishness a race or a religion or both?  For population figures, it has to be a race, rather than a religion, unless you are specifically counting members of religions.  In general, people think of white people as European.  Jews have lived in central and eastern Europe for a thousand years; yet, they have refused to assimilate and have remained, by their own declarations, Middle Eastern Semites.  They insist that they are not European.  And thus, I believe they insist that they are not “white.”

I began thinking about this when looking at diversity statistics for elite universities.  These days diversity is everything, and Harvard claims to be one of the most politically correct, diverse universities in existence.  According to, Harvard is one of the most diverse universities.  It ranks 11th out of 2,475.  Here are two of the charts from CollegeFactual, one for undergraduates and one for faculty:


Group Percent of Undergraduates
White 45.1%
Asian 16.6%
Non-Resident Alien 11.9%
Hispanic/Latino 10.1%
Black or African American 6.1%
American Indian or Alaska Native 0.3%
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 0.1%
Ethnicity Unknown 9.8%

From <>



Group Percent of Faculty
White 69.2%
Non-Resident Alien 9.1%
Asian 7.6%
Hispanic/Latino 6.5%
Black or African American 6.0%
American Indian or Alaska Native 0.2%
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 0.1%
Ethnicity Unknown 1.3%

From <>

Note that neither chart has a group called “Jewish” or “Semitic.”  Therefore, Harvard has clearly labeled Jewish students and faculty as “white”  On the other hand, the Jewish organization Hillel says 12% of the undergraduate population is Jewish, and 67% of the graduate students are Jewish.  If a total of 12% of all undergrad Harvard students are Jewish, then about 27% of the total “white” students are Jewish, and only about 33% of all Harvard students are whites of European ancestry, as opposed to Semitic ancestry.  If Jews make up only 2% or 3% of the US population, then Jews are overrepresented at Harvard by several hundred percent, and European whites, who make up about half of the US population are seriously underrepresented.  No one really knows, because Jews refuse to be counted as Jews; therefore, they can be Jews when they want to be, and whites when they want to be.  It’s dishonest and cruel, but that’s what Harvard stands for and teaches.

Because Jews refuse to be identified as Jews except in Jewish circles (e.g., the Hillel statistics), this same technique is used everywhere.  The US Census may ask about immigration status and whether someone is black or white, but it will not ask if someone is Jewish.  Jews won’t allow it.





Multiculturalism in the US

The following is from Samuel Huntington’s 1993 essay in Foreign Affairs in reply to criticism of his 1991 essay.


One function of a paradigm is to highlight what is important (e.g., the potential for escalation in clashes between groups from different civilizations); another is to place familiar phenomena in a new perspective. In this respect, the civilizational paradigm may have implications for the United States. Countries like the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia that bestride civilizational fault lines tend to come apart. The unity of the United States has historically rested on the twin bedrocks of European culture and political democracy. These have been essentials of America to which generations of immigrants have assimilated. The essence of the American creed has been equal rights for the individual, and historically immigrant and outcast groups have invoked and thereby reinvigorated the principles of the creed in their struggles for equal treatment in American society. The most notable and successful effort was the civil rights movement led by Martin Luther King, Jr., in the 1950s and 1960s. Subsequently, however, the demand shifted from equal rights for individuals to special rights (affirmative action and similar measures) for blacks and other groups. Such claims run directly counter to the underlying principles that have been the basis of American political unity; they reject the idea of a “color-blind” society of equal individuals and instead promote a “color-conscious” society with government-sanctioned privileges for some groups. In a parallel movement, intellectuals and politicians began to push the ideology of “multiculturalism,” and to insist on the rewriting of American political, social, and literary history from the viewpoint of non-European groups. At the extreme, this movement tends to elevate obscure leaders of minority groups to a level of importance equal to that of the Founding Fathers. Both the demands for special group rights and for multiculturalism encourage a clash of civilizations within the United States and encourage what Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., terms “the disuniting of America.”

The United States is becoming increasingly diverse ethnically and racially. The Census Bureau estimates that by 2050 the American population will be 23 percent Hispanic, 16 percent black and 10 percent Asian-American. In the past the United States has successfully absorbed millions of immigrants from scores of countries because they adapted to the prevailing European culture and enthusiastically embraced the American Creed of liberty, equality, individualism, democracy. Will this pattern continue to prevail as 50 percent of the population becomes Hispanic or nonwhite? Will the new immigrants be assimilated into the hitherto dominant European culture of the United States? If they are not, if the United States becomes truly multicultural and pervaded with an internal clash of civilizations, will it survive as a liberal democracy? The political identity of the United States is rooted in the principles articulated in its founding documents. Will the de-Westernization of the United States, if it occurs, also mean its de-Americanization? If it does and Americans cease to adhere to their liberal democratic and European-rooted political ideology, the United States as we have known it will cease to exist and will follow the other ideologically defined superpower onto the ash heap of history.

What follows next is from a Brookings Institution study:

The U.S. will become “minority white” in 2045, Census projects

New census population projections confirm the importance of racial minorities as the primary demographic engine of the nation’s future growth, countering an aging, slow-growing and soon to be declining white population. The new statistics project that the nation will become “minority white” in 2045. During that year, whites will comprise 49.9 percent of the population in contrast to 24.6 percent for Hispanics, 13.1 percent for blacks, 7.8 percent for Asians, and 3.8 percent for multiracial populations….

Among the minority populations, the greatest growth is projected for multiracial populations, Asians and Hispanics with 2018–2060 growth rates of 175, 93, and 85 percent, respectively. The projected growth rate for blacks is 34 percent.* The demographic source of growth varies across groups. For example, immigration contributes to one-third of Hispanic growth over this time span, with the rest attributable to natural increase (the excess of births over deaths). Among Asians, immigration contributes to three quarters of the projected growth.

Cohn & Kushner

Stock futures predicted the stock market would go down today, which It did for a while, because of Gary Cohn’s resignation from the Trump White House.  This indicated to me that the Jews who run the US financial industry were alarmed and disappointed that he was leaving.  However the market recovered towards the end of the day, perhaps indicating that they were not too alarmed, or that Jews are not as dominant on Wall Street as I think they are.

In addition, most of the people that the New York Times reports as corrupting Jared Kushner in the White House are Jews, although the man from Citibank that he was talking to was not.

I have also thought that Jewish financiers are upset because the new chair of the Fed, Powell, is not Jewish.  They wanted a second term for Janet Yellen.  The stock market went down on Powell’s first day as chair and again when he testified before Congress, but it has bounced back.   A commentator on CNBC said that Powell would nit be as friendly to investors as Bernanke and Yellen were..

I can’t figure out Trump’s relationship with the Jewish community.  They seem not to trust him, but he seems not concerned about any united Jewish influence.  He can take it or leave it.  He clearly is comfortable with Jews, since his daughter has converted to Judaism and his Jewish son-in-law is one of his closest advisers.

So far, I have not heard any Jewish names in the running to replace Cohn, but we shall see.