Comments on: “Hungarian” Nobel Prize winners

By: Another Jonathan

Another Jonathan — Sun, 10 Oct 2004 13:45:57 +0000

Why Chemistry? A couple years ago my father mentioned to me that there were two Israelis who were top candidates to win the Nobel prize in medicine and that most thought it was just a matter of time. The people he was referring to ended up being two of this year’s winners. But they ended up being awarded the chemistry prize, rather than the prize in medicine. I don’t want to appear petty but I’m under the impression that in some quarters the Chemistry prize is viewed as a step less presitgious than the Physics or Medicine prize. Does anyone know if this is true? If so, is there any reason to suspect that the Nobel committee intentionally shunting the first Israelis to win the Nobel prize in the sciences to the chemistry prize rather than the expected prize in medicine? -Another Jonathan

By: Matt

Matt — Sun, 10 Oct 2004 01:41:52 +0000

Soros also did very good and useful work in Russia (and other FSU states, I believe) for many years, providing direct aid to Russian scientists and many universities. The university where I worked in Russia had a significant amount of equipment that came directly from Soros grants. There’s reason to think he personally did more good than than all the ill-spend USAID money did, and that if we’d followed his advice as to who to back in the ‘96 election things might be much different there now. He was essentially run out of the country, w/ lots of mumbling about “foreign jewish influence” and the like by all sorts of unsavory folks there, most of whom are in the government.

By: jet

jet — Sat, 09 Oct 2004 04:32:35 +0000

zizka, If you think Soros is a great champion of the people, how do you explain these: 1992: In this year, Soros’s speculation made big news, as he pulled off major attacks on the currencies of Great Britain and Italy, after which he bragged about earning more than $1 billion by hurting the currencies of these nations. Oh and I guess he might also be to blame as the trigger for the Asian Tiger recession 1997: Soros’s hedge funds launch a speculative attack against the Thai baht, in a move widely credited with triggering the great Asian financial crisis of 1997, which destroyed the economies of Indonesia, and many other nations. Nothing like making money by directly creating misery for the masses. But when you are making billions that way, it apparently only takes a few hundred million spent on “fighting communism” to clear your name with the “progressives” of the world. But your hero is also the man who decided to “punish” Asian countries for devalueing their currency by running up deficits to work on social projects like low income housing. But good ol Soros punished them for daring to impeed his profits. How dare they devalue in order to capitilize on their new found credit based on their record growth. Well, they learned not to mess with Soros, didn’t they?

By: drminorka

drminorka — Sat, 09 Oct 2004 02:30:29 +0000

I have to correct (partially)Istvan Hargittai. The main Hungarian quality newspapers were quite correct in reporting Avram Hershko's Nobel Prize. See (in Hungarian): http://www.nol.hu/cikk/335523/ http://www.magyarhirlap.hu/Archivum_cikk.php?cikk=88906&archiv=1&next=0 It is possible that, "Hershko does not like Hungary but does not hate Hungary either", but one of his sons is studying in Budapest. And yes, there are anti-semitism in Hungary. And there are people opposing it.

By: Zizka

Zizka — Fri, 08 Oct 2004 20:54:40 +0000

Don’t bother to click the link. Jet’s citation says that a group which is part of a Soros-funded coalition has been accused of election fraud in Tennessee. Apparently one employee of the organization, since fired, was responsible for the fraud. Tennessee, along with Florida, is one of the states in which Republican vote-suppression activities have been most successful. Jet, do you really believe that that was a powerful indictment? This is three removes from Soros. The primary accusation all through the links I followed was that the group was leftist, like Kerry.

By: Chris Costello

Chris Costello — Fri, 08 Oct 2004 20:33:01 +0000

Besides, persecution may have worked as a kind of ‘natural selection’ — the smartest Jews with the smartest genes survived Hmm, I don’t know, Carlos. It wasn’t only the poor Jews from the shtetls that got caught in the Holocaust, but whole communities of modern, highly educated, highly assimilated (and, perhaps because of it, often very trusting) Jews from the great capitals of central and Eastern Europe—Prague, Budapest, Berlin, Warsaw, Vilnius, Vienna, Bratislava, Bucharest, Kiev—not to mention large roundups in Amsterdam, Antwerp and Paris. Who can estimate what the world lost along with 37% of its Jews?

By: jet

jet — Fri, 08 Oct 2004 20:31:25 +0000

If anyone is interested in reasons why Kerry may not want to attract too much attention to Soros, take a look at this: http://billhobbs.com/hobbsonline/004634.html Just the tip of the ice-berg, but a good place to start if you want to understand why so many on the right detest Soros.

By: jet

jet — Fri, 08 Oct 2004 14:15:39 +0000

Thomas Palm writes: “Jews have for a long time valued education and intellectual performance higher than most others. This is probably at least partly a result of their persecution. When you have to be prepared to flee at a moments notice the only valuables you can count on are the ones stored in your head.” I would say this is backwards. When Spain cast out its Jews it didn’t cause them to become better educated. They were cast out because they were already much better educated than most of Spain which allowed them to hold positions of wealth and power. This caused the resentment and slander that they had come about their success unfairly. I think it is the stronger argument that Jews have always been better educated and that has been the leading cause of their resentment, not the other way around. Jewish culture is arguably the most successful culture in the world, and certainly for a world population so small. And as Marx proved, everyone loves to hate those better off than themselves.

By: Roman Levin

Roman Levin — Fri, 08 Oct 2004 13:45:48 +0000

“If you select for brawn, you get the brawn, few Nobel prizes, envy, hatred …” And of course, the lack of envy and hatred by Jews goes to prove your point.

By: Carolos Obscuros

Carolos Obscuros — Fri, 08 Oct 2004 11:12:12 +0000

An absolutely fascinating posting—the best I’ve read on CT over the past fortnight! Must mull over it and return later with something interesting to say about it. P.S. Thomas Palm writes: “Jews have for a long time valued education and intellectual performance higher than most others. This is probably at least partly a result of their persecution. When you have to be prepared to flee at a moments notice the only valuables you can count on are the ones stored in your head.” Spot on—indeed, one may hypothesise that the Jews selected for brain and were practicing a kind of intellectual eugenics for 3000 years avant la lettre. Besides, persecution may have worked as a kind of ‘natural selection’—the smartest Jews with the smartest genes survived and, since intelligence is to a large extent inherited, they passed on their smartness genes to their offspring. Hence average Ashekenasi Jewish IQ is approximately 115—or one standard deviation above the European average. If you select for brain, you get brain and lots of Nobel prizes. If you select for brawn, you get the brawn, few Nobel prizes, envy, hatred …

By: David Tiley

David Tiley — Fri, 08 Oct 2004 10:23:46 +0000

This, by the by, exemplifies some of the strengths of the blogosphere which has been discussed on this site. Fast comment by an expert communicating personal experience, which turns a public view inside out and gives us plenty to think about.

By: Thomas Palm

Thomas Palm — Fri, 08 Oct 2004 10:00:47 +0000

Most of the world is still too poor and uneducated to participate in the Nobel race so the Jews may “only” have to compete with about one billion people. It s still a remarkable performance, but Jews have for a long time valued education and intellectual performance higher than most others. This is probably at least partly a result of their persecution. When you have to be prepared to flee at a moments notice the only valuables you can count on are the ones stored in your head. Even people who disliked Jews were forced to accept them if they could do jobs no one else could.

By: Chris Costello

Chris Costello — Fri, 08 Oct 2004 06:54:46 +0000

the otherwise also considerable Jewish share of the Nobel laureates in toto, which is about one fifth. One fifth of all Nobel prizes? 20%? And the total Jewish population in the world is what (…googling…), 13 million? Which would be roughly two 1000ths (one fifth of 1%) of the current world population. Astounding! Can this be right?

By: Harry

Harry — Fri, 08 Oct 2004 01:20:00 +0000

Thanks for this Eszter. Sadly you father’s account of how the Hungarian media are handling this story is not surprising. I wonder how many newspapers in Budapest have ever reported the details on how many of the nobel prize winners were Jewish? As for the point about Soros – a little known element of his work in Hungary was the Soros Breakfast. For many years (and as far as I know it is still the case) the Soros Foundation paid for a glass of milk and a bready croissant (kifli) for every single child in every single Hungarian primary school. And there is also the Central European University – a very interesting institution providing opporunities for people across Central and Eastern Europe.

By: Cryptic Ned

Cryptic Ned — Fri, 08 Oct 2004 00:50:07 +0000

Ubiquitin isn’t an enzyme, it’s a small protein that binds to other proteins that are targeted for degradation. It’s important because basically with one protein you enable all pathways of protein degradation in lots of organisms. (all organisms? I don’t know) As for medical usefulness, theoretically, just about any soluble protein – including all kinds of bacterial toxins – can be chosen for selective ubiquitin-binding and thus destruction. Because all human-made proteins bind to ubiquitin sooner or later.