Economic antisemitism
Economic antisemitism is antisemitism that uses stereotypes and canards that are based on negative perceptions or assertions of the economic status, occupations, or economic behavior of Jews, at times leading to various governmental policies, regulations, taxes, and laws that target or disproportionately impact the economic status, occupations, or behavior of Jews.
Relationship to religious antisemitism
writes that economic antisemitism is not a distinct form of antisemitism but merely a manifestation of theological antisemitism. On the other hand, Derek Penslar contends that in the modern era, economic antisemitism is "distinct and nearly constant" but theological antisemitism is "often subdued".Stereotypes and canards
Derek Penslar describes modern economic antisemitism as a "double helix of intersecting paradigms, the first associating the Jew with paupers and savages and the second conceiving of Jews as conspirators, leaders of a financial cabal seeking global domination".Throughout history, stereotypes of Jews as being connected to greed, money-lending, and usury have stoked anti-Jewish sentiments and still, to a large extent, influence the perception of Jews today. Reuveni and Wobick-segev suggest that we are still haunted by the image of "the mighty, greedy Jew".
Allegations on the relationship of Jews and money have been characterised as underpinning the most damaging and lasting antisemitic canards.
Antisemites have often promulgated myths related to money, such as the canard that Jews control the world finances, first promoted in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and later repeated by Henry Ford and his Dearborn Independent. Many such myths are still widespread in the Islamic world such as in books like The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, published by the Nation of Islam, as well as on the internet.
Abraham Foxman cites examples of economic antisemitism found around the world, particularly in the United Kingdom, Germany, Argentina, and Spain. He also cites many modern instances of money-related antisemitism that are found on the Internet.
Gerald Krefetz summarizes the myths as Jews "control the banks, the money supply, the economy, and businesses – of the community, of the country, of the world". He gives as illustrations many slurs and proverbs, in several different languages, suggesting that Jews are stingy, greedy, miserly, or aggressive bargainers. Krefetz suggests that during the 19th century, most of the myths focused on Jews being "scurrilous, stupid, and tight-fisted", but after the Jewish emancipation and the rise of Jews to the middle and upper classes in Europe the myths evolved and began to assert that Jews were "clever, devious, and manipulative financiers out to dominate" world finances.
Foxman describes six facets of canards used by proponents of economic antisemitism:
- All Jews are wealthy.
- Jews are stingy and greedy.
- Powerful and wealthy Jews control the business world.
- Judaism emphasizes profit and materialism.
- Jews may cheat non-Jews.
- Jews use their wealth and power to benefit "their own kind".
Statistics
The Anti-Defamation League conducted a poll in Europe in 2007 that asked respondents if they agreed with the statement that "Jews have too much power in international financial markets". Polling data showed that respondents agreed with that statement as follows: 61% in Hungary, 43% in Austria, 40% in Switzerland, 40% in Belgium, 21% in the United Kingdom and 13% in the Netherlands.Another poll conducted by the ADL in 2009 found that 31% of Europeans surveyed blamed Jews for the 2008 financial crisis.
Motivations
Allegations of unethical business practices
describes popular economic antisemitism in Europe before the 19th century as based on accusations of Jews using alleged unethical business practices in second-hand trade, petty commerce and money-lending.In the 17th and the 18th centuries, anecdotal remarks from Christian merchants and traders show that there were negative feelings towards Jewish business people, who were sometimes regarded as liars or cheats. Werner Sombart hypothesized that the perceptions of cheating or dishonesty were simply a manifestation of Christian frustration at innovative commercial practices of Jews, which were contrary to the customs and traditions of the Christian merchants but were otherwise ethical.
Restrictions on occupations and professions
One form of economic antisemitism in the Middle Ages was a mass of legal restrictions imposed on the occupations and professions of Jews. Local rulers and church officials closed many professions to the Jews, pushing them into marginal occupations considered repugnant, such as tax- and rent-collecting and money-lending, but tolerated them as a "necessary evil".Catholic doctrine then held that lending money for interest was a sin and forbade it to Christians. Not being subject to that restriction, Jews dominated this business. The Torah and the later sections of the Hebrew Bible criticise usury, but interpretations of the Biblical prohibition vary. Since few other occupations were open to them, Jews were motivated to take up money-lending. That was said to show Jews were usurers, which then led to many negative stereotypes and propaganda. Natural tensions between creditors, typically Jews, and debtors, typically Christians were added to social, political, religious and economic strains. More dangerous was lending to the monarchs of Europe, which enabled them to finance their endless wars and projects. Some monarchs would renege on repayments, often accusing their Jewish money lenders of various crimes. The nobility would also borrow large sums to maintain their lavish lifestyles. On numerous occasions the monarchs would cancel loans made by Jewish lenders, and some would also expel Jews from their realms.
Peasants who were forced to pay their taxes to Jews could personify them as the people taking their earnings and remain loyal to the lords on whose behalf the Jews worked.
Also present in the Middle Ages was the insistence by European sovereigns that "the Jews belonged to them in a peculiar way, different from that of their other subjects", which was evident in examples from the English legal code Leges Edwardi Confessoris, which portrayed the king as "tutor" and "defender" of the Jews, and of the Jews as his "possessions"; writing that "for those Jews, and all that they possess, belong to the kind, as if they were his private property". Similar depictions were presented by legal scholars working for King Alfonso II of Aragon.
Occupational preferences
Throughout history, the economic status and occupations of Jews have been the subject of antisemitic stereotypes and canards. Some of the stereotypes and canards are based on economic and social restrictions placed on the Jews.Writing about 130, the Roman satirist Juvenal mockingly depicted Jews as grotesquely poor.
Another aspect of economic antisemitism is the assertion that Jews do not produce anything of value but instead tend to serve as middlemen, acting as "parasites in the production line" of non-Jews, who are doing the real work. Krefetz lists middlemen occupations subject to that canard as distributors, shoppers, wholesalers, brokers, financiers, and retailers and writes that they are "all notably Jewish occupations".
Since the Middle Ages, Diaspora Jews have been characterised by a real or perceived "inverted occupational pyramid": they were perceived to be more prevalent in the tertiary sector, working in service jobs such as accounting, finance, medicine, law or commerce, than in the secondary and primary sectors. Perceptions that Jews are more prevalent in certain occupations or in the professions have been the target of antisemitic sentiment at different periods in history.
Jews have been the targets of antisemitic criticism for their occupational preferences. For example, Robert von Mohl characterised European Jews of the 19th century as being concentrated in trade and finance, with some representation in the artistic and intellectual fields. Perceptions of overrepresentation of Jews in certain occupations have driven antisemitic sentiment in the Soviet Union.
There have been a number of theories for the reason for the "inverted occupational pyramid". Gerald Krefetz writes that the livelihood of Jews, particularly their business activities, has been influenced by religious, cultural, social and historical factors. Krefetz asserts that those factors have led to a predisposition for occupations marked by independence, professionalism and scholarship. Jews have tended to show an "entrepreneurial spirit" and "capacity for risk-taking", which lead them to innovate financial concepts like negotiable instruments of credit, international syndicates, department stores, holding companies and investment banks. Krefetz suggests that Jews have frequently chosen professions that are "portable" or involve duties as a middleman, because of their long historical background, based on trading and "heightened awareness of continual persecution". In a similar vein, Foxman argues that many medieval Jews were especially well suited for commerce because the Jewish diaspora caused many Jews to have far-flung networks of friends and family, which facilitated trade: Zvi Eckstein and Maristella Botticini argue that widespread literacy and a focus on education are primary factors in Jewish occupational tendencies. During the first century, high priest Joshua ben Gamala made it mandatory for all young Jewish boys to get a primary education. Mandatory primary education was not a common practice during this time and did not become so for the rest of the world till well over a millennium later. Another factor in widespread literacy among Jews was the focus on study and interpretation of the Torah, Mishna, and Talmud. This led to the acquisition of basic literacy and argumentative skills. These cultural and religious developments caused many Jews to adopt a skill set that was well adept for urbanization and modernization.
According to Werner Sombart, one complaint of Christian businesses was that Jews did not limit themselves to one particular trade or market but were often "jack of all trades" or "ubiquitous" and "paid no heed to the demarcation of all economic activities into separate categories". When Jews entered trades or business areas in Europe, that frequently resulted in complaints from Christian competitors that the Jews were depriving them of customers and profit.
Sombart, analysing 17th- and 18th-century Christian views of Jewish merchants, concluded that Jewish merchants were considered to pursue profit blatantly, openly and aggressively in contrast to the Christian approach, which was willing to seek profit but viewed the aggressive pursuit of profit as unseemly, uncivilized and uncouth.
Sombart also asserts another cause of Christian frustration with Jewish businesses, who imported raw materials, which was considered inappropriate by Christian merchants.