His thesis is that Jews have higher average IQ than Whites, and that factor alone fully accounts for over-representation in positions of power and cultural influence in our nations. Allow me to demonstrate that his thesis is unequivocally false.
Let's do a simple statistical analysis factoring in only White, East Asian (Chinese, Japanese, and Korean only), and Jewish demographics and IQ in the USA. We'll be using the IQ scores from 'The Bell Curve' (Herrnstein & Murray, 1994):
solargeneral.org
----
IQ (source: Herrnstein & Murray, 1994, pp. 273–278)
White Americans: 103
East Asian Americans: 106
Ashkenazi Jewish Americans: 113
Population (source: Wikipedia)
White American population: 197,870,516
East Asian American population: 6,790,000
Ashkenazi Jewish American population: 4,700,000
IQ above 145:
White Americans:
197,870,516 * 0.0026 = 514,463
East Asian Americans:
6,790,000 * 0.0056 = 38,024
Jewish Americans:
4,700,000 * 0.0164 = 77,080
Therefore:
If drawing job candidates from a pool of only White, East Asian, and Jewish Americans, and the job requires an IQ of at least 145, in a perfect meritocracy that considered nothing but IQ scores:
77,080 / (514,463 + 38,024 + 77,080) = 0.1224 = 12%
12% of the candidates hired for the position would be Ashkenazi Jews.
For the thesis of Peterson's essay to hold, Jews must be represented at a rate no higher than 12% "in positions of authority, competence and influence (including revolutionary movements)":
jordanbpeterson.com
Next, let's look at a couple of real-world examples of Jewish over-representation that Peterson's thesis cannot possibly account for.
