raelite socieh’, below the pure Israeliternstock, even into Rabbinic times—a phenomenonrnthat attests to the importancernof bloodlines throughout Jewish histor)’.rnWhile the marriage practices of the Kohanimrnare indeed stricter than those ofrnother Jews, there is no question that marriagerninto the Jewish gene pool was veryrninfrequent until quite recently, and modernrnpopulation genetic studies show ver}’rnlittle genetic admixture between Jewsrnand surrounding populations. These datarnare described in my book A PeoplernThat Shall Dwell Alone: Judaism as arnGroup Evolutionary Strategy (1994).rnCurrent rates of intermarriage may berna highly questionable indicator of thernlong-term prospects of Jewish continuityrnas an endogamous ethnic group. First,rnJudaism mav well end up retaining itsrnethnic coherence even in the face of highrnlevels of intermarriage if as appears to bernthe case, a high percentage of the childrenrnand grandchildren of intermarriagerneventually leave Judaism either becausernthev become completely assimilated orrnbecause they feel unwelcome in the Jewishrncommunity. Secondly, despite therncurrent high rates of intermarriage, therernis clearly a core of highly committed individualsrnin all the major sects of Judaismrnfor whom genetic or cultural assimilationrnis anathema. Intense commitment tornethnocentrism and endogamy continuesrnto be characteristic of the increasinglyrnnumerous, prolific, and influential JewishrnOrthodox and fundamentalist movements,rnand conversion and intermarriagernremain controversial even within thernmost liberal sectors of the Jewish conimunit)’.rnFinally, Gottfried rejects my theoryrnthat the high levels of IQ found amongrnAshkenazi Jews and some historicalrnSephardic populations indicate a higherrngenetic potential of intelligence amongrnthese Jewish groups. Wliile it is true thatrnsome Jewish populations have undistinguishedrnIQs, it seems very likely that,rnwhatever cultural pushes there havernbeen for IQ within Jewish groups, there isrnalso a strong genetic component. Currentrnresearch suggests a maximum variationrnof ten IQ points through environmentalrnmanipulations such as adoption.rnCottfried is correct in noting that differentrngroups have waxed and waned in importancernthroughout history, but Jewishrngroups have repeatedly assumed a veryrnhigh degree of social and economic importance,rnfrom the late Roman Empirernto 15th-century Spain and I9th- andrn20th-century Europe.rn—Kevin MacDonaldrnLong Beach, CArnDr. Gottfried Replies:rnMy differences with Kevin MacDonaldrnare ones of emphasis more than of substance.rnLike him, I recognize the existencernof a double standard in the wayrnAmerican and other Jews stress ethnicrnsolidarity for themselves but the moralrnnecessity of multiculturalism for whiternChristians. This double standard offersrnthe hermeneutic key to the comments ofrnSlate editor Judy Shulevitz (May 2). Inrnresponse to a complaint that AmericanrnJews denounced Bob Jones University forrndiscouraging interracial dating but stubbornlyrnpractice tribalism in their ownrngroup, Shulevitz contrasted white Christianrn”racism” to the “ethnic chauvinism”rncharacteristic of blacks and Jews. Becausernof their “historical burdens,” therndistaste for outsiders felt by Jews andrnblacks is excusable and not to be comparedrnto the “reprehensible” objection ofrna white Southerner contemplating hisrnchild’s marriage to a black. (Shulevitz’srncritic happens to be Jewish.) AmericanrnChristians with mainstream journalisticrnrespectability do not choose to raise embarrassingrnquestions about Jewish claimsrnto ethnic exceptionalism, despite the factrnthat Jews have risen far in the UnitedrnStates, encountering on the whole lessrndiscrimination than most ethnic Catholics.rnWhere I do disagree with MacDonaldrnis on the importance assigned to Jewishrnefforts to “de-ethnicize” Western Christianrnsocieties. .Mthough both the FrankfurtrnSchool and Boasian anthropologistsrnhave pushed for an engineered and misnamedrn”open” society, as have the Anti-rnDefamation League and the AmericanrnJewish Congress, such groups do not providerna sufficient or even “necessary”rncause for the changes in question. Betweenrnthe 1920’s, when immigration intornthe United States was restricted, and thernwatershed immigration act of 1965, therernwere political and cultural developmentsrnthat strongly shaped the present attitudesrntoward diversity as a civil religion. Therntwo most critical of these developmentsrnwere the consolidation of a managerialrnstate committed to broad social reconstructionrnand, ultimately, the eradicationrnof national loyalties, and the collapse ofrnWASPdom into its present culture of selfmortification.rnMacDonald rightiy notesrnthat Jewish intellectuals and organizationsrnworked to advance both tiends, butrnthat point does not provide a comprehensivernexplanation of what happened. Vastrnsocial engineering occurred in Scandinaviarnbefore it reached the United Statesrnand unfolded there largely in the absencernof Jews. Moreover, as amply demonstratedrnby Ray Honeyford, Claus Nordbruch,rnand Rene Girard, Christian clergy in Europernhave tirelessly endorsed the multiculturalrnagenda long identified here withrnJews and liberal Protestants. Indeed, thernradicalizing function attributed to Jewsrnhas been effectively incarnated by differentrnminorities in different places at differentrntimes: Huguenots in France, Old Believersrnin Russia, and Irish Catholics andrnnon-Anglican Protestants in Englandrnhave all stirred the pot of social discontentrnbecause of their sense of marginalization.rnToday in Canada, ethnic Catholicsrnsupport the left as enthusiasticallyrnand one-sidedly as do the descendants ofrnEastern European Jews.rnMacDonald’s insistence that AshkenazicrnJews are naturally more intelligentrnthan other European-Americans givesrnme pause. If true, that might justify (certainlyrnfrom the standpoint of racial nationalistsrnwho seem to accept this cognitiverndisparity) the social subordination ofrnwhite gentiles to a Jewish master race. Inrnthis view, Jewish domination of relativelyrndull-witted goyim should be hailed as anrnintellectual step forward, particularly ifrnwhite gentiles, as measured by IQ tests,rnare somewhere midway between Jewsrnand American blacks. What is hard tornfigure out is why racialists assume theyrnhave a right to control less intelligentrnraces but that whites should not be subjectrnto cognitively superior Jews. For all Irnknow, MacDonald may be right about tlierngenetic advantages of my ethnic kin in relationrnto his, but there is another explanationrnfor the observed disparities inrnachievements. Jews, like Asians, try harderrnthan most WASPs to succeed on standardizedrntests, as well as in professions.rnThe striking feature is not how well othersrndo, but how totally WASPdom hasrncollapsed. In One Nation Under Godrn(1993), authors Barry A. Kosmin and S.P.rnLachman demonstrate that even thernhighest WASP group achievers. Episcopaliansrnand Presbyterians, now lag behindrnwhite Catholics as well as Jews inrneducational advancement and family income.rnUntil convinced by further evi-rnSEPTEMBER 2000/5rnrnrn