Very interesting.

Muslim and Hindu communities in the West are also trying to be insular and maintain their own cultural identities, but I guess they're not so effective because they don't have the financial success backing them up that the Jews have. It's a lot harder to deride someone when you know they're making way more money than you, I suppose.

those people are up to something

I don't mean this in any negative way, but they ARE up to something. This something is maintaining their levels of privilege. Is this wrong? I don't know. Probably not, I guess.

I come from an upper caste family in India and it's easy for me to see that this is game that we in India have been playing since independence. There's a lot of cultural and economic know-how that helps people succeed in life, and upper caste families have an abundance of this.

On the one hand, these folks succeed only because they ace the admission tests, have extraordinary academic records and are excellent communicators. On the other hand, the reason they have these qualities is because they were born with privilege. Is this wrong? Unfair? I really don't know. I can't help thinking it's the same situation as the Jews, though.

Conflating being Jewish with being upper-caste Indian is probably going (way) too far. Note that you're responding to an article that points to systematic historical Russian discrimination against Jews, that the posters above you have pointed out systematic historical American discrimination against Jews, and I think that systematic European discrimination against Jews doesn't need to be reiterated. In Muslim countries, Jews historically have been legally considered second-class citizens.

Feel free to conflate Jews with successful former lower caste Indians, though.

No, the point was that the Jewish culture is perceived as being one full of practical and successful financial wisdom, similar to that of the upper-class Indian families.

Substituting someone from a less financially successful group would ruin their point.

The reasons Jews stereotypically have a lot of money is because for the majority of history it was illegal for them to own land. Instead they turned to business and banking. Since it's forbidden to lend in the Christian religion, Jews excelled in this area.

Not the best source but check out the first paragraph of this http://www.jewishhistory.org/the-rothschilds/

"In the Middle Ages, the Church, in a misapplication of the Biblical prohibition against charging interest, forbade interest in all instances. The Talmud, in contrast, created an economic system in which loans could be converted into investments, so interest could accrue from them, but under the Christian interpretation, no credit market was possible. The way the Church got around that was by forcing the Jews to become the bankers. "

The "locals" still get grumpy even when Jews can't own land or amass much wealth. The pogroms and massacres in Ukraine, Poland, Russia, etc... were generally against very poor communities. On the other hand, Jewish communities were much more financially successful and culturally prominent across the Arab world and seem to have drawn a lot less antipathy.

I mostly agree with your comment about Jews maintaining their cultural identity and can't really speak to how Jews live in other countries. But I wanted to make the point that in the USA Jews have been if anything more involved in civic life (just look at the profound role Jews played in the civil rights movement of the 60s) and certainly have had great influence on what we think of as American cultural. So insular doesn't characterized American Jews at least in the 20th century.