Here are some points to consider:

(1) >>"vastly greater number of Muslims in the world makes their social ascendancy more, not less likely"

You are probably thinking in terms of raw numbers instead of proportional representation as a percentage of the total population.

For example: 10 social ascendant Jews out of a hypothetical population of 100 = 10%, whereas 100 social ascendant Muslims out of a hypothetical population of 10,000 = 1%. So, even though the raw number of ascendant Muslims is higher, it is a much smaller representation of the population

(2) Let's say that we are not talking about percentages, and instead talking about the raw numbers as per you original interpretation. If this were the case, then there are already more "socially ascendant" Muslims in the world compared to Jews - i.e. there are already more than 20 million socially ascendant Muslims currently - which already outnumbers the total world Jewish population. (of course you can argue that there are NOT 20 million socially ascendant Muslims - but how would you go about providing/finding evidence of that? And how rigorous would such evidence be, given that any such information is highly contestable and interpretable in many ways?)

(3) "socially sacred position" should not be based on "socially ascendancy" as per your definition and interpretation. "socially sacred position" (IMO) is a much broader category than just "financial success aka socially ascendant". So, what's your definition of "socially sacred position"? Is it money & financial success? If it is, then I think most people (social experts) would disagree with your interpretation of "socially sacred position".