User:Slrubenstein/sandbox/Jews and Money

The economic history of the Jews has been considered by a wide variety of authors, including Abraham Foxman in his book Jews and Money, Gerald Krefetz in his book Jews and Money, Werner Sombart in his book The Jews and Modern Capitalism, J. J. Goldberg in his book Jewish Power, Salo Wittmayer Baron and Arcadius Kahan in their book Economic history of the Jews, Werner Eugen Mosse in his book Jews in the German Economy, Jerry Muller in his book Capitalism and the Jews, Gideon Reuveni in his book The Economy in Jewish History, Derek Penslar in his book Shylock's children: economics and Jewish identity in modern Europe, Jacob Neusner in his book The Economics of the Mishnah, and Karl Marx in his On the Jewish Question.

WHAT KIND OF A LEAD IS THIS? WHAT ARTICLE BEGINS BY LISTING SOURCES? IF THIS IS REALLY ABOUT THE ECONOMIC HISTORY OF THE JEWS, INTRODUCE THE TOPIC

The Tanakh contains passages that govern the charging of interest.

WHY SAY THIS? THE TORAH CONSISTS OF 613 LAWS A GREAT MANY OF WHICH RELATE TO ECONOMIC MATTERS. ALSO, WHY BEGIN WITH WHAT THE TANAKH SAYS, IN A HISTORY ARTICLE? THE TANAKH WAS REDACTED DURING THE ROMAN PERIOD. THE TORAH WAS EDITED DURING THE BAYLONIAN EXILE. AND IT IS NOT AT ALL CLEAR TO WHAT EXTENT IT IS REVEALING ABOUT THE ECONOMIC POSITION OF JEWS DURING THE TIME IT WAS WRITTEN. MANY HISTORIANS QUESTION WHETHER MOSES WAS EVEN A HISTORICAL PERSON. FOR AN ARTICLE ON HISTORY, THIS LINE IS WILDLY AHISTORICAL. THERE IS NO CONTEXT, SO WE DO NO KNO IF THIS IS MEANT TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THE CONOMIC HISTORY OF JEWS DURING THE TIME OF THE KINGDOMS OF ISRAEL AND JUDAH OR A THOUSAND YEARS LATER.

During the middle ages, Jews were excluded from many occupations. One occupation available to them was moneylending.

NO HISTORIAN WOULD MAKE SUCH A WILD GNERALIZATION. THERE WERE TIMES AND PLACES IN THE MIDDLE AGES WHEN JEWS WERE FORBIDDEN FROM MONEYLENDING, OR WHEN ONLY A SMALL NUMBER OF JEWS WERE MONEYLENDERS, OR WHEN JEWISH MONEYLENDERS EXISTED BUT WERE RELATIVELY INSIGNIFICANT COMPARED TO GENTILE MONEYLENDERS. AND THERE WERE MANY TIMES DURING THE MIDDLE AGES WHEN JEWS OCCUPIED MANY OTHER OCCUPATIONS. WHY SINGLE-OUT MONEYLENDING? IT IS JUST THE ANTI-SEMITIC "POUND OF FLESH" STEREOTYPE, JEW AS SHYLOCK, "HE JEWED ME"

Modern banking in Europe and the United States was influenced by Jewish financiers, such as the Rothschild family and Warburg family, and Jews were major contributors to the establishment of important investment banks on Wall Street.

SIMPLY FALSE. MODERN BANKING EMERGED DURING THE MIDDLE AGES IN GERMANY AND ITALY WAND WERE DOMINATED BY GENTILES. JEWS WERE EXCLUDED FROM ALL THE POWERFULL WALL STREET INVESTMENT BANKS UNTIL AFTER WWII. YES, THERE WERE THESE TWO JEWISH FAMILIES OF BANKERS - BUT WHAT IS THE CONTEXT? WHAT IS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS? AT THE SAME TIME MOST JEWS WERE NOT BANKERS, AND MOST BANKERS WERE NOT JEWISH. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THERE WAS NO ECONOMIC HISTORY OF JEWS DURING THIS TIME, IT MEANS THAT A REAL ECONOMIC HISTORY WOULD COVER MANY OTHER THINGS. AGAIN, JUST THE JULIUS STREICHER/PROTOCOLS OF THE ELDERS OF ZION ANTI-SEMITIC CANNARD OF THE JEWS CONTROLING BANKS.

Antisemites have promulgated myths related to money, such as the lie that Jews control the world finances, first promoted in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. In the modern era, many such myths continue to be widespread in the Islamic world, and in books such as The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews published by the Nation of Islam, and on the internet.

THIS BELONGS IN AN ARTICLE ON ANTI-SEMITISM. NOLEANDER ADDS THIS HERE JUST SO HE CAN SAY HE IS BEING CRITICAL OF ANTI-SEMITISM. BUT THIS IS BS, WHEN THE CONTENTS THAT PRECEDES THIS ARE THE VERY ANTI-SEMITIC CANARDS, STEREOTYPES OF JEWS AS MONEY LENDERS! THIS PASSAGE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ECONOMIC HISTORY OF THE JEWS, IT IS JUST HIS SEEING HOW MANY PEOPLE HE CAN FOOL INTO THINKING THAT THIS ARTICLE IS "BALANCED" AND NEUTRAL BECAUSE NEXT TO ANTI-SEMITIC LIES, HE ALSO SAYS THAT ANTI-SEMITES ALSO BELIEVE THESE THINGS.

Religion

Rabbinic and Talmudic guidance

The Babylonian Talmud

Jacob Neusner writes that the authors of the Talmud addressed every important problem of economics, ranging from the rules of household management to the laws of money making.

TRUE, BUT WHY BEGINNING WITH THE TALMUD, COMPILED BETWEEN 200-600 CE? IS HE MAKING CLAIMS ABOUT ECONOMIC HISTORY OF THE JEWS DURING THAT TIME? THE PROBLEM IS, IT IS NOT CLEAAR HOW MUCH LEGAL AUTONOMY JEWS HAD DURING THIS PERIOD. ALSO WE ARE NOT SURE HOW MANY JEWS WERE LITERATE DURING THIS TIME, WHOAT PERCENTAGE OF JEWS CARED ABOUT THE TALMUD. SO WE ARE NOT SURE WHAT MEANING THIS HAS FOR JEWISH ECONOMIC HISTORY

A Talmudic discussion of interest and usury is in Bava Metzia portion of the Talmud.

WHY SINGLE OUT USURY? BAVA MEETZIA IS ALL ABOUT CONTRACT LAW AND DAMAGES (TORTS) SO ALL ITS CONTENT TOUCHES ON ECONOMIC ISSUES - BUT SEE ME EARLIER COMMENT ON THE DIFFICULTIES IN USING IT AS A HISTORICAL SOURCE

Marvin Perry states that the Talmud deviates widely from the early Christian approach to money: whereas the New Testament viewed money and profit as "filthy lucre" (1 Tim 3:3), the Talmud took a positive view of money and profit because the Talmud "was written, compiled and edited, taught and interpreted for centuries by rabbis who were merchants, artisans, and professional men, knowledgeable and accepting of business and finance, in theory and practice."

WHO IS MARVIN PERRY? IS THIS A MAINSTREAM VIEW, MAJORITY VIEW, OR MINORITY VIEW? I THINK ALL JEWS WOULD AGREE THAT JUDAISM IS MORE "WORLDLY" (MATERIALISTIC NOT IN THE MORAL BUT IN THE EPISTEMOLOGICAL SENSE) THAN CHRISTIANITY. ALSO, THE PHARISEES COULDN'T MAKE MONEY AS RABBIS SO THEY HAD TO HAVE OTHER JOBS (WHICH WERE OFTEN VOCATIONAL E.G. WOOD-CHOPPING, NOT FINANCE), WHICH IS A REAL DIFFERENCE FROM CHRISTIAN PRIESTS. STILL, THERE IS NO CONTEXT PROVIDED. THIS IS A BIG GNERALIZATION AND I AM SURE YOU KNOW THAT AT ALL TIMES IN HISTORY THERE WERE GREEDY OR ENTERPRISING CHRISTIANS AS WELL AS AESCETIC MYSTICAL JEWS, THERE ARE ALWAYS EXCEPTIONS ... SO WHAT IS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS GENERALIZATION? WHAT IS ITS CONTEXT? I SEE NO HISTORY HERE. THIS IS NOT ECONOMIC HISTORY, IT IS JUST A VEY BROAD GENERALIZATION, AND JUST AS MUCH ABOUT CHRISTIANS AS JEWS - WHY NOT CALL THIS ECONOMIC HISTORY OF MEDIEVAL EUROPE, THEN?

Penslar states that the Talmud contains a large amount of economic material, including many "economic sensibilities" such as the notion that wealth should be enjoyed and the rejection of poverty, but he suggests that the Talmud did not promulgate an identifiable "economic philosophy".

THIS IS POORLY WRITTEN AND UNENCYCLOPEDIC. FIRST, IT IS MOSTLY REPEATING A POINT MADE EARLIER, SECOND, A QUOTE THAT SAYS THAT A SOURCE HAS NO PARTICULAR ECONOMIC PHILOSOPHY REALLY DOES NOT BELONG IN AN ARTICLE ON ECONOMIC HISTORY, RIGHT? THIS IS AN ON-LINE ENCYCLOPEDIA ARTICLE, YOU KNOW.

I DO NOT BUY THE LINE THAT ALL WIKIPEDIA ARTICLES ARE WORKS IN PROGRESS, THEY ALL HAVE ERRRORS, WE COUNT ON PEOPLE TO IMPROVE THEM. NOW THAT WIKIPEDIA IS TEN YEARS OLD, THIS ATTITUDE IS TOO BROAD. THERE ARE SOME ARTICLES (E.G. BARACK OBAMA, SARAH PALIN) THAT ARE WATCHED BY MANY EDITORS AND IF THERE IS JUST ONE MISTAKE IT WILL PROBABLY BE CORRECTED IN DAYS. VERY FEW PEOPLE ARE WATCHING THIS ARTICLE; OF THOSE FEW ONLY A SMALL NUMBER HAVE THE TIME TO WORK ON IT, AND OF THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE THE TIME, ONLY A FRACTION HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE. SO UNLIKE SARAH PALIN, MISTAKES IN THIS ARTICLE WILL REMAIN FOR YEARS, RATHER THAN DAYS. WE NEED TO DISCRIMINATE BETWEEN ARTICLES THAT LOTS OF WELL-INFORMED PEOPLE ARE ACTIVELY EDITING AND ARTICLES THAT FEW IF ANYONE IS WORKING ON. WE NEED TO HAVE A MUCH LOWER THRESHOLD FOR ERRORS FOR THE LATTER, BECAUSE ERRORS IN THOSE ARTICLES - IN THIS ARTICLE - WILL LAST FOR A LONG TIME, DURING WHICH INNOCENTS WILL READ IT, AND BELIEVE IT.

Tanakh

See also: Loans and interest in Judaism

EDITED BEFORE THE TALMUD, SO WHY DOES THIS COME AFTER THE TALMUD IN THE ARTICLE? DO YOU SEE WHY I CANNOT TAKE NOLEANDER'S CLAIMS OF WRITING AN ARTICLE ON ECONOMIC HISTORY SERIOUSLY WHEN THE BASIC STRUCTURE OF THE ARTICLE IS ANTI-HISTORICAL?

According to Abraham Foxman and Marvin Perry, important passages from the Jewish Bible that pertain to the relationship Jews and money, specifically lending, include:

• Exodus 22:25 - "If you lend money to one of my people among you who is needy, do not treat it like a business deal; charge no interest"

• Leviticus 25:35–37 - "If any of your fellow Israelites become poor and are unable to support themselves among you, help them as you would a foreigner and stranger, so they can continue to live among you. Do not take interest or any profit from them, but fear your God, so that they may continue to live among you. You must not lend them money at interest or sell them food at a profit."

A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF NOLEANDER TAKING MATERIAL OUT OF CONTEXT IN ORDER TO MISREPRESENT A VIEW IN ORDER TO PROMOTE AN ANTI-SEMITIC CANARD AS FACT. FOXMAN IS NOT A BIBLICAL HISTORIAN, OR BIBLE SCHOLAR, SO HE IS NOT A RELIABLE SOURCE ON THE BIBLE, AND CANNOT BE USED TO MAKE HISTORICAL CLAIMS ABOUT JEWISH ECONOMIC HISTORY DURING THE BIBLICAL PERIOD. HE IS AN EXPERT ON ANTI-SEMITISM AND WAS WRITING IN HIS BOOK ABOUT ANTI-SEMITES, PROVIDING AN ANALYSIS OF ANTI-SEMITISM. HE IS WRITING ABOUT HOW ANTI-SEMITES SELECTIVELY QUOTE FROM JEWISH SOURCES TO MISREPRESENT THEM TO PROMOTE ANTI-SEMITICE STEREOTYPES ... WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT NOLEANDER IS DOING RIGHT HERE!!

Non-Jewish views of money

Theologian Michael Novak suggests that Jewish thought has a "candid orientation" towards profit, property, and commercial activity, in contrast to Catholic thought which is focused on the afterlife, rather than life in this world.

According to Marvin Perry, Christianity - particularly when contrasted with Judaism in the Middle Ages - had an ascetic, anti-commercial viewpoint that was based on the Sermon on the Mount, particularly Matthew 6, in which Jesus condemned the superficiality of materialism and where he "urges his followers to throw over worldly possessions and all considerations of getting and spending, family, position, and status."

THESE ARE REALLY VIESS OF CHRISTIANITY THAT DO NOT BELONG IN AN ARTICLE ON JEWISH ECONOMIC HISTORY. MAYBE THY BELONG IN AN ARTICLE ON CHRISTIAN ECONOMIC HISTORY? BUT THIS IS DEFINITELY NOT JEWISH ECONOMIC HISTORY

Regarded as materialistic rather than spiritual

Several leading thinkers of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, including Immanuel Kant, Karl Marx, Max Weber, Werner Sombart, and Georg Hegel, compared Judaism with Christianity, and concluded that Judaism was more materialistic, and less moral. These thinkers influenced subsequent interpretation of Judaism's role in the rise of capitalism in Europe in the late nineteenth century.

LESS MORAL? LUMPING KANT, WEBER, SOMBART AND HEGEL TOGETHER IS VERY SLOPPY BECAUSE WEBER CERTAINLY DID NOT THINK JEWS WERE LESS MORAL, I DO NOT THINK KANT DID EITHER. AND THIS IS VERY BAD HISTORY BECAUSE HE IS MIXING UP THINKERS FROM THE 18TH, 19TH AND 20TH CENTURIES AND THEY ARE NOT EVEN LISTED IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER!!!!! WHY BE SO ANTI-HISTORICAL IN A HISTORY ARTICLE? JUST SO HE CAN REPEAT THE ANTI-SEMITIC CANART THAT JEWS WERE LESS MORAL.

THE QUOTE THAT HE PROVIDES IN THE SOURCE (HIDDEN IN THE SOURCE, WHY?) DOES NOT SUPPORT THE CLAIM THAT JEWS WERE MORE MATERIALISTIC OR LESS MORAL, IT SIMPLY SAYS THAT JEWS WERE PROTO-CAPITALISTS. WHICH, BY THE WAY, IS THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT MARX, KANT HEGEL AND WEBER SAID!! ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF MISREPRESENTING VIEWS IN ORDER TO REPEAT AN ANTI-SEMITIC CANARD

The most consequential thinker addressing this issue was Karl Marx in his 1843 work On the Jewish Question (sometimes translated into English with the title A World Without Jews). Gerald Krefetz cites a quote from Marx which is representative of Marx's beliefs: "Let us look at the real Jew of our times ... What is the Jew's foundation in our world? Material necessity, private advantage. What is the object of the Jew's worship in this world? Usury. What is his worldly god? Money. Money is the zealous one God of Israel, besides which no other God may stand. The bill of exchange is the Jew's real God".

KREFETZ IS NOT A NOTABLE EXPERT ON MARX OR MARXISM. SCHOLARS OF MARX ALL AGREE THAT THE ESSAY IN QUESTIO9N IS A CRITIQUE OF BOURGEOIS NOTIONS OF FREEDOM. MARX IS INDEED QUOTING ANTI-SEMITIC SLURS, BUT MARX'S BIOGRAPHER CLAIMS THAT MARX HIMSELF DID NOT BELIEVE THESE, AND NO EXPERT ON MARX THINKS THAT THIS ESSAY IS ABOUT JEWS. SO MARX'S VIEWS ARE BEING MISREPRESENTED. I KNOW SOME PEOPLE DO INTERPRET THIS ESSAY TO E ANTI-SEMITIC, BUT THIS IS A MINORITY AND HIGHLY CONTROVERSIAL VIEW. YET THIS ARTICLE PRESENTS A CONTROVERSIAL MINORITY VIEW AS FACT. THAT IS A VIOLATION OF NPOV AND NOR

Anti-capitalists' views of Judaism

Karl Marx

During the nineteenth century, many leading thinkers began to promote communist and anti-capitalist viewpoints. Because capitalism was closely associated with Jews, anti-capitalists often considered Judaism to be the root of capitalism. Those that embraced capitalism tended to be sympathetic to Jews, and those that rejected capitalism tended to be hostile to Jews.

NO CONTEXT, NO HISTORY. NO DISCUSSION OF WHY SO MANY SOCIALISTS WERE JEWISH. THE REFERENCES ARE NOT BY NOTABLE HISTORIANS, AND THEY ARE AHISTORICAL CLAIMS. MANY - E.G. FOXMAN - ARGUE THAT THE LFT TODAY IS OTEN ANTI-JEWISH. THIS WAS NOT THE CASE IN THE 19TH CENTURY. THERE IS ABUDNANT EVIDENCE THAT ALL THE LEADING CAPITALISTS IN THE 19TH CENTURY WERE ANTI-SEMITIC. HITLER WAS ANTI COMMUNIST AND SUPPORTED BY GERMANY'S CAPITALISTS, AS WAS BISMARCK. THIS IS NOT JUST TERRIBLE ECONOMIC HISTORY OF THE JEWS, IT IS TERIBLE HISTORY, PERIOD.

Marx believed that earning a living from collecting interest (or from acting as a middleman) was an unjust and exploitive aspect of capitalism. Because many Jews were employed in such non-productive occupations, Jews were singled out for particular criticism by Marx, and he blamed Judaism for the exploitation and alienation of workers. Moses Mendelssohn argued, to the contrary, that commercial activity was just as valid and beneficial as manual labor, writing "Many a merchant, while quietly engaged at is desk in forming commercial speculations ... produces ... more than the most active and noisy mechanic or tradesman." MARX DID NOT BOAME JUDAISM FOR THE EXPLOITATION OF WORKERS, THIS IS ANOTHER VIEW TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT AND MISREPRESENTED.

MOSES MENDLESON LIVED BEFORE MARX, AND WAS JEWISH; MARX WAS NOT JEWISH, AND NOT RESPONDING TO MENDELSON. THIS IS TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE HISTORY, IF A HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER TAUGHT HISTORY THIS WAY P PRESENTING VIEWS INCORRECTLY AND OUT O CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER AND WITH NO HISTORICAL CONTEXT, THEY WOULD BE FIRED. BUT WIKIPEDIA IS NOW TEACHING THIS CRAP TO ANYONE WITH INTERNET.

Moneylending in the Middle Ages

WHAT KIND OF HISTORY ARTICLE JUMPS FROM THE 1849S TO THE NINTH OR TENTH CENTURY?

Moneylending was an important occupation for Jews, beginning in the early Middle Ages, and continuing into the modern era. Moneylending was first noted as a significant occupation in the ninth century, and in the tenth century, some Jews were large scale financiers. This prevalence in the field of moneylending has led to scholarly debate which considered the question of why Jews gravitated towards money-related occupations.

LARGE SCALE? COMPARED TO WHOM? BY WHAT PONINT OF REFERENCE? ANOTHER VIEW TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT AND MISREPRESENTED

Moneylending as an occupation of last resort

See also: Antisemitism in Europe § Restrictions to marginal occupations (tax collecting, moneylending, etc.)

Moneylending was one of the remaining occupations that were not prohibited for Jews. The exclusion of Jews from many trades and craft guilds began following the First Crusade (1096-1099)

"ONE OF THE REMAINING?" WHAT WERE THE OTHERS? WHAT PERCENTAGE OF JEWS WERE MONEYLENDERS? WHAT PERCENTAGE OF MONEYLENDERS WERE JEWS? WHAT HISTORICAL VALUE DOES THIS POINT HAVE, WITH NO EXPLANATION OR CONTEXT?

The exclusion often came at the urging of clergy and local guild members, state and local governments.

Howard Sachar writes that the occupations that were left for Jews to engage in were often the occupations that Christians disdained, such as peddling, hawking and moneylending, and he estimates that three fourths of Jews in Central and Western Europe were occupied in these occupations in the eighteenth century.

SACHAR WAS A NOTABLE HISTORIAN ABOUT 50 YEARS AGO. THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF PROGRESS IN OUR UNDERSTANDING OF MEDIEVAL HISTORY SINCE THEN. JUST AS WITH MANY FIELDS OF SCIENCE, HISTORICAL KNOWLEDGE CHANGES OVER TIME. WE SHOULD USE THE CURRENT SOURCES.

Abraham Foxman says many Jews in that era 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. Foxman writes that the moneylending profession gave rise, eventually, to the modern financial industries, including banking. Over time, Jews became very skilled at both commerce and moneylending.

FOXMAN IS NOT AN CONOMIC HISTORIAN, HE IS WRITING A CRITIQUE OF ANTI-SEMITISM AND HE HIMSELF IS RELYING ON SECCONDARY SOURCES. WE CANNOT USE HIM AS A RELIABLE SOURCE FOR JEWISH ECONOMIC HISTORY.

Moneylending as a voluntary choice

Werner Sombart, in his book The Jews and Modern Capitalism, asserts that moneylending was an occupation that many Jews preferred, and voluntarily engaged in. As evidence, Sombart cites the fact that Jews were heavily engaged in moneylending before the era when they were excluded from trades and crafts; and also the fact that the religion and culture of Judaism predisposed Jews to commercial and financial endeavors.

SO THIS CONTRADICTS THE VIEW THAT JEWS WERE GIVEN LITTLE CHOICE. WHY IS THIS IN A SEPARATE SECTION, EXCEPT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT CHRISTIANS ARE NOT TO LAME, THAT JEWS WANT TO BE MONEYLENDERS? JUST AN EXCUSE TO REPEAT AN ANTI-SEMITIC CANARD. BUT IF YOU DO NOT CARE ABOUT ANTI SEMITISM ... IT IS AHISTORICAL. WERNER SOMBART WAS A VERY NOTABLE HISTORIAN AROUND THE TURN OF THE 20TH CENTURY. HE IS MAJOR HISTORIAN, BUT MANY HISTORIANS TODAY CONSIDER HIM ANTI-SEMITIC. I DO NOT OPPOSE USING HIM, BUT HEN YOU USE A LEFT-WIND HISTORIAN FHO WROTE 80 YEARS AGO AND WHOSE WORK IS QUESTIONED TODAY (AND GENERALLY REJECTED BY BOTH ECONOMISTS AND JEWISH HISTORIANS) IT IS IRRESPONSIBLE TO JUST PUT HIM IN LIKE AN UNCONTROVERSIAL SOURCE, WITHOUT ANY CONTEXT. HE WAS WRITING AT A PARTICULAR TIME (WHEN MARXISTS AND WEBER WERE COMPETING FOR DOMINANCE IN SOCIOLOGY, AT A TIME WHEN COMMUNISM WAS ROBUST IN GERMANY) AND HE HAD A WHOL THEORY OF JEWS AND CAPITALISM, NOT JUST A LINE ABOUT MONEYLENDING. NOLEANDER IS JUST EXTRACTING THE ONE LITTLE BIT OF THE BOOK THAT FITS THE ANTI-SEMITIC CANARD ... HE IS NOT EXPLAINING SOMBART'S STATUS AMONG ECONOMIC HISTORIANS, NOR IS HE ACTUALLY PROVIDING US ITH SOMBARD'S ACTUAL ANALYSIS OF JEWISH ECONOMIC HISTORY. HE IS JUST CHERRY-PICKING THE WUOTE THAT SERVES HIS PURPOSE.

Usury considerations

See also: Lateran council and usury

The Christian abhorrence of moneylending was rooted in the Old Testament laws of Exodus 22:25, Deuteronomy 23:19–20, Leviticus 25:35–37, and Psalms 15:5. These biblical rules were re-emphasized in the Middle Ages in the Lateran councils particularly the Second Lateran Council of 1139 and the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215, however these proclamations of the Catholic Church outlawed excessively high interest rates, not interest in general.

FIRST, WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH JEWISH ECONOMIC HISTORY?

SECOND, IT IS INCONSISTANT: JEWS TOO READ THE OLD TESTAMENT (YOU KNOW, THEY WROTE IT) AND ALSO ABHORRED MONEYLNDING FOR PROFIT. IN FACT, JEWS AND CHRISTIANS LED TO ONE ANOTHER WITHOUT INTEREST (JEWS DID ADD A CHARGE TO ACCOUNT FOR INFLATION, WHICH YOU COULD LIKEN TO INTEREST, BUT THE POINT IS TO COMPENSATE OR INFLATION, NOT TO MAKE A BIG PROFIT OR EXPLOIT ANYONE), AND JEWS AND CHRISTIANS LENT TO EACH OTHER AT INTEREST.

SO WHAT IS THE POINT OF THIS OUT OF CONTEXT POINT, EXCEPT TO MAKE A POINT - THAT JEWS ARE PROFIT-SEEKING MONEY-LENDERS AND "LESS" MORAL THAN CHRISTIANS WHO ARE NOT.

Rise of Capitalism

Mortgages and bills-of-exchange

Jews played an important role in the dissemination of financial innovations such as mortgages, paper money, and bills of exchange. Bills of exchange (also called negotiable instruments) first appeared in Europe in the twelfth century in Italy, although the concept originated earlier in China and Islamic trading communities. Werner Sombart speculates that, because Jews played a role as intermediaries in Mediterranean trading, they were uniquely positioned to import Islamic financial techniques into Europe. Sombart also analyzed historical evidence of Jewish participation in the establishment of early important banks in Europe (including the Bank of Amsterdam, the Bank of England, and the Bank of Hamburg) and concluded that Jews played an important role in the creation of important early banking concepts in Europe. Sombart also suggested that Jews played an essential role in the creation of mortgage deeds and "pay to bearer" negotiable instruments.

SOMBART IS SPECULATING; THE PASSAGE MAKES IT CLEAR THAT CHINESE AND MUSLIMS FIRST, AND THEN ITALIANS, PLAYED A MORE IMPORTANT ROLE. THIS IS NOT A CONTRIBUTION TO OUR UNDERSTANDING OF JEWISH ECONOMIC HISTORY

Banking

Modern banking arose in Europe during the 19th century. Before the age of modern banking, most bankers were private bankers, affiliated with nobility, and lending exclusively to nobility and governments. But in the nineteenth century, spurred at first by financing required for the the Napoleonic wars and then by the explosion of railroads in Europe, banks evolved into large commercial entities, lending to the public, and often publicly traded.

OKAY, NOT ABOUT JEWISH ECONOMIC HISTORY

Most European banks were founded by Jews or Protestants. Jews were founders and leaders of many of the important early European Banks, as well as significant banks in the United States. The prevalence of Jews in European banking continued from the early 19th century to World War I. Jews played leading roles in banking, financing wars, financing the railroad industry, and the establishment of stock exchanges.

DIMONT WAS NOT A PROFESSIONAL OR ACAEMIC HISTORIAN AN NOT A RELIABLE HISTORICAL SOURCE. CATHOLICS FOUNDED EUROPES FIRST MODERN BANKS, AND MORE BANKS WERE FOUNDED BY PROTESTANTS THAN BY JEWS.

BUT MORE IMPORTANT, AGAIN, THIS IS CRAPPY ECONOMIC HISTORY. IT JUST FOCUSES ON ONLY ONE ASPECT OF ECONOMIC HISTORY AND GUESS WHICH PART? MONEY-LNDING - THAT PART THAT FITS IN WITH ANTI-SEMITIC STEREOTYPES. ALL ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES NOT OF INTEREST TO ANTI-SEMITIES ARE LEFT OUT. WHY? Especially in Germany and Austria, Jewish bankers were dominant in the country's economic development. Marvin Perry writes: "[in the period 1850 to 1910] German Jewish economic elite contributed decisively to the country's economic development, its financial institutions, its industrialization, and its entry into the world market as a great economic power by 1890. That elite also played a significant role in underwriting the costs of Germany's wars of unification (1864-1871)." In 1860 there were 106 Jewish banks and 51 non-Jewish banks in Berlin, while Jews comprised only 1% of the German population.

England also had a significant Jewish participation in its banking industry: in 1904, out of the 63 banks in England in 1904, 33 were Jewish firms.

Cultural attitudes

Derek Penslar writes that Jewish journalists of the nineteenth century in Europe represented Jewish civilization as producing a "capitalistic sensibility", in contrast to Christianity which did not.

Gerald Krefetz writes that money "was and is a central element in the Jewish experience" because, among other reasons, money has often served to protect Jews against persecution. Jews feel ambivalent towards money because on the one hand it is a powerful force, but on the other non-Jews have sometimes blamed financial problems on Jews.

NOT ECONOMIC HISTORY - REPEATING POINS MADE BEFORE, OUT OF HISTORICAL CONTEXT, WITH NO EXPLANATION. KREFETZ WAS NOT A HISTORIAN AND NOT AN AUTHORITY ON JEWISH ECONOMIC HISTORY. HE DID PUBLISH BOOKS BUT THESE ARE NOT ACCEPTED AS SCHOLARLY BY ECONOMIC HISTORIANS OR JEWISH HISTORIANS.

Wealth as protection against persecution

Krefetz states that many Jews, particularly Americans, treat money very seriously because it has "stood between life and death", that is, throughout history there are many times when Jews would have been expelled or oppressed if not for their financial usefulness. Krefetz concludes that, for that reason, Jews - although they do not worship money - have often considered money to be "essential" to their material being, as essential as God is to their spiritual being. This attitude, engendered over many centuries, has produced the viewpoint that money is a critical to their survival and thus the "manipulation, earning, creation, and saving of money has been raised to a fine art… which is passed from generation to generation."

Pride in achievements

Economic success has long been a source of pride for Jews: in the late nineteenth century, Jewish writers drew a positive link between Jews, trade, and economic freedom, and speculated proudly on the sources of Jewish economic success, and the editors of leading German-Jewish newspapers stressed the contribution of Jews to economic development through their commercial acumen. Penslar notes that in France, in 1820-1860,there was a strong feeling of "triumphalism" within the Jewish community, celebrating their rise in influence and prosperity within European circles.

IN THE 19TH CENTURY WASN'T ECONOMIC SUCCESS A SOURCE OF PRIDE FOR MOST GENTILES? THAT IS ONE THING I GET FROM READING BOOKS BY DICKENS AND HARDY. I CAN BELIEVE THE PART ABOUT TRIUMPHALISM IN FRANCE ... BECAUSE I KNOW ABOUT THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT. DO YOU? MAYBE YOU DO, BUT NO READER WOULD JUST FROM READING THIS ARTICLE. THIS IS NOT ABOUT ECONOMIC HISTORY, IT IS ABOUT JEWS LOVING MONEY.

Wealth should be enjoyed

Jewish author Steven Bayme writes that Jews have eschewed poverty, and have a positive view of wealth, provided it is a "means rather than an end". Abraham Foxman contrasts the asceticism of Christianity with the exuberance of Judaism, and concludes that Jewish culture has a belief in "enjoying life to the fullest" which is sometimes manifested in apparently materialistic attitudes. Derek Penslar states that one of the principles enunciated in the Talmud is that "wealth ... should be enjoyed"

FINE BUT - STILL, THIS IS NOT ECONOMIC HISTORY, AND IT IS JUST ONE JEW'S OPINION. HOW WIDESPREAD IS IT? EVERYWHERE? FOR HOW LONG? NORMALLY WE DO NOT PUT INDIVIDUAL OPINIONS IN HISTORY ARTICLES, WE PUT THE RESULTS OF CAREFUL NOTABLE HISTORICAL SCHOLARSHIP.