The politics of Wall Street's elite

The problem with reading HBD blogs is that you can start to believe that a lot more people share your views than actually do, and then come up with dumb theories about people on Wall Street or in big corporations being secret believers in HBD.

The typical Wall Streeter may have been politically apathetic in his youthful Ivy League college days, and thought that getting rich was more important than doing something to “contribute” to society, but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t buy into the basic liberal metanarrative that all races have equal mental abilities, that global warming is happening, that more immigration is good for America, etc. After their college days, they probably got married to a SWPL girl who has moved them in the direction of being more concerned about SWPL issues.

There’s no reason to think that Wall Streeters donating money to Obama secretly voted for McCain in the voting booth. There’s no evidence in the election results from places where Wall Streeters live, such as the Upper East Side or Greenwich, CT (which is 90% white and less than 2% black) that there was a huge hidden support for McCain. Greenwich, one of the nation’s most elite towns, supported Obama by 16,233 votes to 13,937 votes.

Among Wall Streeters who do vote Republican, they tend to align with Bush or McCain on economic issues, and Obama on issues like race and the environment and most especially abortion and other religious issues. They’re not Tom Tancredo or Ron Paul supporters. They don’t care about affirmative action because it doesn’t hurt them in the slightest. Affirmative action is a problem for white proles. They don’t care about immigration, they aren’t competing against them—immigration means cheaper maids and nannies, and whenever they go on vacation it’s to some foreign country where they meet foreigners who are a lot more of their type of people than domestic white proles. You will be hard pressed to find anyone on Wall Street (except for some prole cold-calling stockbrokers) who would identify more with Sarah Palin than with the type of person described in Christian Lander’s Stuff White People Like blog.

Since Reagan was in office, the elite, Wall Streeters included, have been moving from the Republican to the Democratic Party. Wall Streeters, like all of the elite, don’t share Sarah Palin’s or George W Bush’s views on religion. If they do go to church, it’s a liberal mainline Protestant church, or a Synagogue, and they don’t really believe in the stuff anyway, they go out of guilt or a sense that it’s socially required of them. The Sarah Palin wing of the Republican Party is a big force driving the elite over to the Democrats.

Comments

[Sheila Tone]

"(except for some prole cold-calling stockbrokers)"

I have not forgotten your promise to tell your story about this someday.

[harvard student]

Half -

Yes, to all of this. Especially with regards to affirmative action & immigration - I've had friends here extensively defend both in conversation, and have even heard individuals argue that borders in the US should be wide open to any and all that wish to come here.

The logic?

"Its a big country. There's lots of space in the middle"

The bottom line is that "giving a shit", about any of this, is considered to be in extremely poor taste/revelatory of a prolish background.

At least subconsciously, the thinking is "well, I'll always have enough money to escape whatever problems may arise."

[ironrailsironweights.wordpress.com]

It's been my impression over the years that Wall Streeters (and financial industry people in general) have relatively low levels of political activism. They'll vote, out of a sense of civic responsibility, but generally don't actively campaign on behalf of particular candidates/causes and seldom run for office themselves. Lawyers, small businesspeople, and public employees are all much more likely to be active in politics.

Peter

[Lugo]

HS, what do you think of Steve Sailer's article at VDARE about America's Jewish elite? The basic thrust of his argument is that since they are no longer excluded from the nation's important institutions - indeed, they disproportionately own and control them - they need to stop acting like outsiders and start acting like owners. He contends that if they did this would have profound implications for how they, as a group, view a lot of social / political / economic issues.

[Basil Ransom]

The typical finance and consulting types aren't that SWPL either. They don't wear skinny jeans, talk about French New Wave films or listen to terrible Indie music. At least in college, their SWPL rating is well-below 50%.

When it comes to politics, they don't stray too far from the center position among their social set, whatever that is. Their liberalism is tacit, because they defer to their peers. Strong conservatism is seen as *out there,* its verity is irrelevant. They aren't very intellectually curious either - they'd much sooner study finance than political philosophy or human evolution.

[PA]

You are also, as far as I can tell, unaffected personally by imigration and affirmative action, and other paleo-concerns. So how come you are an HBDer and the RINO stockbroaker you bump into at the lunch deli isn't?

Does the fact that you are an HBDer make you an outlier in your social class, or is it that intellectually-oriented non-liberals (as opposed to stockbrokers who generally are not intellectuals) are becoming HBDers?

[Gorilla]

The only professions i can think of that seem to harbor lots of libertarians or Ron Paul people may be actuaries, IT/engineers, and maybe accountants. Decent jobs, but as you said, not particularly high prestige. The elite aren't libertarian generally because big government works for them. Only the little people need worry about big government.

[HS: Correct. People who are big winners under the status quo don't wish to change anything.]

[Tino]

You are right about everything. However you are slightly wrong about Ron Paul. A non-negligible number of of Harvard MBA types are libertarian, and support Ron Paul, Kudrow etc.

Also remember that wall-street people are very "Hard", whereas Democrats are "soft".

Wall-Street is socially very liberal, economically quite conservative. They moved away from Bush because of religion (as you mention), the social stigma of Bush among the elite, and because they perceived him as incompetent.

But because of the salience of tax and spend, they are moving away from Obama as well.

Wall-Street would support Romney against Obama by 60-40. They would support Obama against Palin 75-25.

[JXT]

Immigrants from Lebanon and India are very well represented on Wall Street. Wouldn't that be extra competition?

Also, lots of Asians and Indians in the Ivy Leagues and in the ranks of entry level analysts. I was reading that something like a third of entry analysts at Goldman were Asian-American. That makes it harder for the hard partying, lacross playing, non-academic children of Walls Streeters to make it in. Do you think the Duke Lacross Team boys could hack it with Mr. Patel and Mr. Chen? Me think not.

[Sparks123]

Mister, we could use a man like Gordon Gekko again...

[The Undiscovered Jew]

"The basic thrust of his argument is that since they are no longer excluded from the nation's important institutions - indeed, they disproportionately own and control them - they need to stop acting like outsiders and start acting like owners."

Yes, if only Jewish elites like Bernanke, Greenspan, Schumer, Bloomberg, and Stephen Breyer started acting like responsible gentile stake holders such as Hank Paulson, Tim Geithner, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Lindsay Grahamnesty, George Duhbya Bush, George Herbert Walker Bush, Bill Gates, Gerald Ford, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Earl Warren, David Souter, and John Paul Stevens, we could get some good government going.

[The Undiscovered Jew]

"Among Wall Streeters who do vote Republican, they tend to align with Bush or McCain on economic issues,"

Nobody is disputing Wall Street is country club.

The question is whether Wall Street Country Clubbers are SWPL or "Preppie".

I still favor "Preppie" over SWPL.

[www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawlqxrserdsbiaIXRZ-pkCEIgnCKOBhenWg]

I have worked on Wall Street for over 22 years, and I would say that white male Wall Streeters are roughly 2-to-1 Republican-leaning on economic issues, while somewhat more liberal on social issues. If Romney is the Republican nominee for President in 2012, I would expect him to carry white male Wall Streeters by about 2-to-1, maybe even 70-30. Greenwich, CT voted for Bush over Kerry before preferring Obama over McCain, but other high-income CT towns such as Darien still went for McCain, as did my high-income Wall Street-oriented New Jersey town of Holmdel. Bush hurt the Republican brand among high income voters in his second term with the Katrina and Schiavo debacles, but the brand is coming back under Obama. Palin, of course, is hardly a Wall Street type of Republican, and many Republican-leaning Wall Streeters (myself included) do not think she is smart enough to be President.

[John Derbyshire]

Contemporary politics in America can boiled down into one simple sentence. It's the Top and the Bottom united against the Middle.

http://www.johnderbyshire.com/Opinions/USPolitics/mars.html

[Jack]

My impression was that the Duke lacrosse types were pretty much all Republican, though maybe not super socially conservative.

[Mercer]

Undiscovered Jew,

It is the impression of this gentile that Jews are better off in the US then in any other country outside Israel. Do you agree? I would think that Jews would want to keep the US the way it is to preserve their present status. That is not the case. It is Jews who are most determined to change the demographic makeup of the US.

They seem totally indifferent to the potential problems of the country having a larger Muslim population. Jews suffer the most from Muslim violence around the world but American Jews seem to have no concern about our rising Muslim population in the US. Instead they attack anyone who wants to reduce immigration. I find their thinking totally illogical when it comes to immigration.

I would like you to explain this thinking to the gentiles.

[The Undiscovered Jew]

"I would think that Jews would want to keep the US the way it is to preserve their present status."

How many elite gentiles are there who oppose the demographic transformation of the US? Does Warren Buffet think differently about immigration than Steve Balmer?

"It is Jews who are most determined to change the demographic makeup of the US."

Umm, Evidence?

The Zogby poll showed only 5% of American Jews want immigration increased and 50% want immigration decreased.

Give me evidence that American Jews are the prime movers behind immigration You remember that GWBush is one of those saintly, right wing, tradional WASPs and Rove is a Norwegian, right?

Per the Center for Immigration Studies, George Herbert Walker Bush - again one of those out of power, right wing, traditionalist WASPs - increased legal immigration in 1990 from the moderate level of 600,000 under Ronald Reagan to the 1,000,000 level we have today.

And almost all of those extra 400,000 immigrants per year we have taken over the past twenty years have been non-white. George Herbert Walker Bush was a WASP who can trace his bloodline all the way to the Mayflower so I'm not seeing how American Jews are primarily at fault for our immigration policy.

Give me EVIDENCE that American Jews are the primary reason for our immigration policy.

And quote someone OTHER than Kevin MacDonald or some other lone internet crackpot.

I want evidence from an CREDIBLE and scholarly resource, not some weirdo on the internet.

How much lobbying dollars do Jewish organizations spend on amnesty compared to the Chamber of Commerce, the SEIU and other labor unions, and every other elite American institution that wanted amnesty in 2006 and 2007?

Who pressed Congress harder for amnesty, the Catholic Church or Jewish Organizations?

Give me hard proof here, I'm not going to waste my time responding to WN nutcases who pulled some rumor off of Jew watch that claims Karl "Hispanic Outreach" Rove is a crypto Jew or that the 100% Irish Ted Kennedy was being bribed by Abe Foxman.

[The Undiscovered Jew]

"I would like you to explain this thinking to the gentiles."

What percentage of elite gentiles who oppose our immigration policy? 2%?

[The Undiscovered Jew]

The ADL spent a grand total of ~$120,000 in both 2006 and 2007 lobbying Congress on various issues, not simply immigration.

Again this was the total the ADL spent lobbying Congress for ALL issues, not just immigration.

$120,000 is peanuts compared to Silicon Valley lobbying for H1b visas and Big Agriculture's lobbying for amnesty.

So I'm going to call bullshit on American Jews being "most determined to change the demographic makeup of the US" unless you can give me evidence from a credible source that shows Jews are the primary movers behind our immigration policy (note please that Kevin MacDonald, JewWatch, and Stormfront are not credible sources):

http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?year=2007&lname=Anti-Defamation+League&id=

[The Undiscovered Jew]

The ADL spent a grand total of ~$120,000 in both 2006 and 2007 lobbying Congress on various issues, not simply immigration.

Again this was the total the ADL spent lobbying Congress for ALL issues, not just immigration.

$120,000 is peanuts compared to Silicon Valley lobbying for H1b visas and Big Agriculture's lobbying for amnesty.

So I'm going to call bullshit on American Jews being "most determined to change the demographic makeup of the US" unless you can give me evidence from a credible source that shows Jews are the primary movers behind our immigration policy (note please that Kevin MacDonald, JewWatch, and Stormfront are not credible sources):

http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?year=2007&lname=Anti-Defamation+League&id=

[Mercer]

Undiscovered Jew,

"ADL Welcomes Immigration Reform

Date: February 9, 2010
ADL joined the Pennsylvania Immigration and Citizenship Coalition, Reform Immigration FOR America, as well as other immigration advocates at Philadelphia City Hall in support of a city council resolution calling on the Southeast PA congressional delegation to support Comprehensive Immigration Reform. The resolution, introduced by Councilwoman Maria Quiñones-Sánchez, was passed.

Additionally, immigration advocates were vocal in their opposition to a recently introduced Congressional resolution, supported by Congressman Patrick Murphy, which rejects "amnesty" or earned legalization, mandates the use of E-verify (an electronic system to verify employees' immigration status, and thus their right to a job), and addresses border enforcement.

As an organization with a long and proud tradition of defending civil liberties for all, ADL has in recent years taken a lead role in exposing the virulent anti-immigrant and xenophobic rhetoric that has risen to the surface as part of the national debate over immigration. ADL speaks out against discrimination and bigotry and advocates a meaningful and substantive policy that honors America's promise as a nation of immigrants."

The ADL puts out stuff like this all the time. What other non-Hispanic group ethnic group calls attempts to use E-verify: "virulent anti-immigrant and xenophobic"

Do any Jewish individuals or organizations publicly oppose them? 35% of the Forbes 400 are Jews so there are plenty of Jews with the money to back groups to oppose the ADL line and the businesses lobbying for cheap labor.

Jews have the most to fear from Islamic terrorists but they do nothing with their wealth to reduce Muslim immigration. Instead all Jewish groups call anyone who tries to reduce even illegal immigration xenophobic.

[The Undiscovered Jew]

"The ADL puts out stuff like this all the time."

I'm not impressed with that press release. Many other organizations and politicians supported amnesty.

What percent of ADL lobbying money went to lobby for the 2006 and 2007 amnesty legislation?

"What other non-Hispanic group ethnic group calls attempts to use E-verify: "virulent anti-immigrant and xenophobic"

They aren't ethnic groups, but how about the Chamber of Commerce, the Roman Catholic Church, the RNC, Norwegian descended Karl Rove, the powerless and ethnically displaced WASP presidents GHWBush and GWBush, and others.

"Jews have the most to fear from Islamic terrorists but they do nothing with their wealth to reduce Muslim immigration."

Name any gentiles on the Forbes 500 who use their wealth to reduce Muslim immigration.

Christian CEOs have good reason to oppose Muslim immigration just like Jewish CEOs but the Christians are just as useless as anyone else in reducing Muslim immigration.

Anyway, I didn't ask you for a press realease from Abe Foxman, I demand proof that Jews are the driving force behind American immigration policy not press releases.

[Mercer]

Congress makes the immigration laws. New York has the highest percentage of Jewish voters in the country. You can see the immigration voting records of the politicians that NY sends to Congress here:

http://www.numbersusa.com/content/my/tools/grades/list/0/RECENT/ny/A/Grade/Active

New York's delegation has a voting record on immigration enforcement well below the national average. I find this bizarre considering that they suffered the most from foreign terrorists entering the US. If Jewish voters wanted to reduce immigration the NY delegation would not have this record.

[The Undiscovered Jew]

"If Jewish voters wanted to reduce immigration the NY delegation would not have this record."

If Republican voters didn't want amnesty then George W Bush, George Herbert Walker Bush, Lindsay Graham and John McCain wouldn't have their lousy immigration records /snark.

Btw, what makes you think Jewish voters in New York are voting primarily on immigration issues? When Jews were polled by Zogby 50% wanted a reduction in immigration and only 5% wanted an increase.

Now, back to my original question, I asked you if you had any hard evidence to prove "It is Jews who are most determined to change the demographic makeup of the US"

As I expected, you haven't got shit to prove your allegation, at least not from a credible source like Opensecrets.org .

Here's is some advice to all you anti-Jewish paleocons: Try making allegations against Jews that are NOT lies, otherwise you can't complain if we don't want to listen to bogus allegations from internet crackpots.

As an example, one of the most popular Faileocon lies against American Jews is that post-WWII America intervened in the affairs of the Middle East because Jewish Americans and Israel have been manipulating American foreign policy to antagonize Arab States.

This is a standard paleocon lie against American Jews because America did NOT interfere in Middle Eastern Affairs to antagonize Muslims.

The US interfered in Middle Eastern Politics in order to prevent Communist Russia advancing their sphere of influence into the Middle East after the British and French empires collapsed after WWII and left a power vacuum in the region.

In other words, America manipulated Israel's foreign policy to contain Communist Russia rather the paleocon lie that Israel used America as a client state against Muslim nations.

Israel was a client state in NATO's proxy war against Russia:

http://www.mythsandfacts.com/NOQ_OnlineEdition/Chapter17/unitedstatesisrael1.htm

Israel – The Cold War Warrior

Historically, Israel and America have had a host of overlapping strategic interests. During the Cold War, Israel played a key role containing Soviet penetration of the Middle East.

The Soviet Union posed a real threat to the United States during the Cold War, and in the Middle East, the Soviet Union eagerly armed radical Arab states and the PLO, helping to fuel instability that would hurt American interests. Israel repeatedly demonstrated the superiority of American weaponry in war after war, discrediting the Soviet’s weaponry, training, and sponsorship. Observers believe Israel’s role played a key factor in eroding the stature of the USSR and the decision of Arab states to turn to the West for defensive needs.13 One way Israel aided the United States was to allow Americans to scrutinize state-of-the-art Soviet technology, whose value to American security in the Cold War was priceless. Among those weapons were an Iraqi MiG-21 (whose pilot defected to Israel in a complicated undercover operation in 1966), a fully operational Russian-made ground-to-air missile system captured in the 1967 Six-Day War (that contributed greatly to protecting American pilots during the Vietnam War), and a Soviet radar system capable of detecting low-flying aircraft (literally lifted intact by two Israeli CH-53 helicopters from Egypt in 1969 during the War of Attrition).

In short, Israel has remained one of the few allies upon which the United States has always been able to count on in a crisis. Well before other Middle Eastern states curtailed their commitment to the 2003 coalition created to disarm Iraq, security expert and former U.S. Secretary of State Gen. (Ret.) Alexander Haig described Israel as “the largest pro-U.S. aircraft carrier, which doesn’t require U.S. personnel and can’t be sunk.” Indeed, Haifa has become one of the most hospitable (and safest) ports for the 6th Fleet. More recently, Israel has become a dependable base for pre-positioning emergency military stores in the Middle East, with the capability to provide close-by sophisticated medical services, if needed.

From a geopolitical standpoint, Israel and America for decades have had many overlapping strategic goals in the Middle East, long before terrorism became a threat to America’s own security. A case in point centers on Israel’s role in helping the West maintain Jordan’s integrity as a pro-Western, stable ally. In 1958, President Eisenhower wanted to cross Israeli airspace in order to save the Hashemite Kingdom; Israel granted the U.S./UK request. Then in 1970, at the request of President Nixon, Israel flexed its muscles as a deterrent, preventing pro-Soviet Syrian and PLO forces from toppling King Hussein and eliminating the need to send U.S. Marines into Jordan, a step America was forced to take in 1957 to ‘save’ Lebanon.

Although American and Israeli strategic interests overlap, they are not identical. At times, the United States has ordered, for example, temporary embargoes, reassessments, or postponements of munitions deliveries; yet the relationship has remained strong enough to ride out conflicting interests, avoiding communications breakdowns or a rupture of relations. In some cases – such as Israel’s destruction of Iraq’s nuclear reactor in 1981 – joint strategic interests have been recognized only in retrospect.

Following destruction of the reactor, the New York Times charged Israel with embracing a “code of terror” and claimed the raid was “inexcusable and short-sighted aggression”; the State Department spoke of a “reassessment” of relations with Israel;14 and the U.S. Ambassador to the UN chastised Israel, noting:

“I do think that one has to recognize that Israel had reason for concern in view of the past history of Iraq, which has never signed a cease-fire or recognized Israel as a nation... Nonetheless, we believe the means Israel chose to quiet its fears about the purpose of Iraq’s nuclear program have hurt, and not helped, the peace and security of the area. In my Government’s view diplomatic means available to Israel had not been exhausted and the Israeli action has damaged the regional confidence that is essential for the peace process to go forward.”15

However, after the 1991 Gulf War, then-U.S. Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney belatedly thanked Israel for destroying Iraq’s Osirak reactor,16 noting in a talk before the Center for Security Policy – a pro-Israel advocacy group – that the action, renounced at the time, had been central to the security of the United States:

“Let me … thank my good friend David Ivry [Commander of the Israel Air Force in 1981] for the action Israel took in 1981 with respect to the [Osirak] reactor.... There were many times during the course of the buildup in the Gulf and the subsequent conflict that I gave thanks for the bold and dramatic action that had been taken [by Israel] some ten years before.”

[Mercer]

"I asked you if you had any hard evidence to prove "It is Jews who are most determined to change the demographic makeup of the US"

I don't know what is better evidence then how congressmen vote. NY has had thousands of people die from Muslim terrorists and only one of their thirty one people in congress votes to reduce immigration - Peter King.

"what makes you think Jewish voters in New York are voting primarily on immigration issues?"

After 9/11 why is reducing immigration not an important issue to NY voters?

[JXT]

Does anyone know the demographic makeup on Wall Street? ie what percent are gentile white, Jewish, NAM, Asian, Indian, Lebanese, etc.?