This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/15/world/americas/trump-jews-executive-order.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
In Era of Hardening Identities, Trump Order on Jews Kindles Questions Old and New In Era of Hardening Identities, Trump Order on Jews Kindles Questions Old and New
(about 16 hours later)
President Trump’s executive order targeting anti-Semitic and anti-Israel speech on campuses might be framed as a narrow legal matter, but it has touched on a defining issue of our time: Who belongs, and who decides?President Trump’s executive order targeting anti-Semitic and anti-Israel speech on campuses might be framed as a narrow legal matter, but it has touched on a defining issue of our time: Who belongs, and who decides?
The order is ambiguous as to whether it sees Jews as a distinct nationality or a minority race, but either interpretation aligns with Mr. Trump’s preoccupation with defining, and policing, the boundaries of identity.The order is ambiguous as to whether it sees Jews as a distinct nationality or a minority race, but either interpretation aligns with Mr. Trump’s preoccupation with defining, and policing, the boundaries of identity.
And the order’s creation of special status for Jews, but not other religious minorities, follows Mr. Trump’s habit of welcoming some demographic groups into the rights and protections of American identity and excluding others. Tellingly, the singling out of Jews for special protection in the order left some feeling still more exposed.And the order’s creation of special status for Jews, but not other religious minorities, follows Mr. Trump’s habit of welcoming some demographic groups into the rights and protections of American identity and excluding others. Tellingly, the singling out of Jews for special protection in the order left some feeling still more exposed.
Such preoccupations with identity have animated not just the Trump administration but much of the global populist backlash. Leaders and movements across the democratic world are increasingly focused on enforcing narrow national identities of the sort that defined the late 19th and early 20th centuries.Such preoccupations with identity have animated not just the Trump administration but much of the global populist backlash. Leaders and movements across the democratic world are increasingly focused on enforcing narrow national identities of the sort that defined the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
The era of hardening national identities includes the rise of far-right parties in Europe, white nationalism in the United States and a campaign for Hindu dominance in India.The era of hardening national identities includes the rise of far-right parties in Europe, white nationalism in the United States and a campaign for Hindu dominance in India.
Mr. Trump’s order, however narrow its intentions, underscores the degree to which the problems and contradictions of national identity — a distinctly modern invention that remade the world before almost destroying it — remain unresolved.Mr. Trump’s order, however narrow its intentions, underscores the degree to which the problems and contradictions of national identity — a distinctly modern invention that remade the world before almost destroying it — remain unresolved.
The dilemmas of the new nationalist era are especially surfaced by the order’s focus on Jews, whose relationship to conceptions of race and nationality has always been fraught. It touches on some of the most sensitive questions of Jewish identity — questions that are extensions of ways that national identity both made the modern world and never quite put it back together.The dilemmas of the new nationalist era are especially surfaced by the order’s focus on Jews, whose relationship to conceptions of race and nationality has always been fraught. It touches on some of the most sensitive questions of Jewish identity — questions that are extensions of ways that national identity both made the modern world and never quite put it back together.
The concept, scarcely 200 years old, holds that humanity is divided among fixed communities, each defined by a common language, ethnicity and homeland. Those communities are nations; membership is one’s national identity. The core tenet of nationalism so pervades today’s world that it feels almost self-evident: Any nation of people should have a country, and any country should consist of a nation.The concept, scarcely 200 years old, holds that humanity is divided among fixed communities, each defined by a common language, ethnicity and homeland. Those communities are nations; membership is one’s national identity. The core tenet of nationalism so pervades today’s world that it feels almost self-evident: Any nation of people should have a country, and any country should consist of a nation.
The concept of an overarching identity tied to one’s country was invented not by ancient poets or warriors but by 19th-century European governments. As monarchies teetered and the church declined, governments saw engineering common languages and ethnic heritages as a way to justify their rule over polyglot empires, as well as an opportunity to marshal their populations for collective pursuits like industry or war.The concept of an overarching identity tied to one’s country was invented not by ancient poets or warriors but by 19th-century European governments. As monarchies teetered and the church declined, governments saw engineering common languages and ethnic heritages as a way to justify their rule over polyglot empires, as well as an opportunity to marshal their populations for collective pursuits like industry or war.
“Nations as a natural, God-given way of classifying men, as an inherent though long-delayed political destiny, are a myth,” the British-Czech political theorist Ernest Gellner wrote.“Nations as a natural, God-given way of classifying men, as an inherent though long-delayed political destiny, are a myth,” the British-Czech political theorist Ernest Gellner wrote.
But this way of thinking reshaped 19th-century Europe, leading to the creation of modern Italy and Germany. It later spread to the rest of the world, inspiring independence and liberation movements on the basis that all people belong to national groups awaiting their nation.But this way of thinking reshaped 19th-century Europe, leading to the creation of modern Italy and Germany. It later spread to the rest of the world, inspiring independence and liberation movements on the basis that all people belong to national groups awaiting their nation.
National identity’s rise, however, also turned minorities and migrants into second-class citizens — or even into perceived threats within. It turned racial purity into a matter of ethnic, and therefore national, survival. It defined nations as irrevocably divided from one another by race and heritage.National identity’s rise, however, also turned minorities and migrants into second-class citizens — or even into perceived threats within. It turned racial purity into a matter of ethnic, and therefore national, survival. It defined nations as irrevocably divided from one another by race and heritage.
The world, unable to unwind a global order built on national identity, sought to manage its worst tendencies by promoting cultural pluralism, international integration and protections for minorities and migrants. These values did not so much replace national identity as sit uneasily alongside it, eventually leading to a backlash.The world, unable to unwind a global order built on national identity, sought to manage its worst tendencies by promoting cultural pluralism, international integration and protections for minorities and migrants. These values did not so much replace national identity as sit uneasily alongside it, eventually leading to a backlash.
Leaders like Viktor Orban of Hungary combine the old appeals to blood and soil with something new: promises to smash the systems of multiculturalism and integration seen as posing just as grave a threat to national identity as any minority or migrant. Mr. Trump rose on a similar message, saying about immigration and border restrictions he considered dangerously weak, “You either have a country or you don’t.”Leaders like Viktor Orban of Hungary combine the old appeals to blood and soil with something new: promises to smash the systems of multiculturalism and integration seen as posing just as grave a threat to national identity as any minority or migrant. Mr. Trump rose on a similar message, saying about immigration and border restrictions he considered dangerously weak, “You either have a country or you don’t.”
Mr. Trump’s order, for purposes of monitoring educational institutions’ handling of discrimination, places Jews under Civil Rights Act protections based on race, color or national origin. The order also draws on a 2005 definition of anti-Semitism, one of whose authors has since said is overly broad, conflating hatred of Jews with criticism of Israel.Mr. Trump’s order, for purposes of monitoring educational institutions’ handling of discrimination, places Jews under Civil Rights Act protections based on race, color or national origin. The order also draws on a 2005 definition of anti-Semitism, one of whose authors has since said is overly broad, conflating hatred of Jews with criticism of Israel.
Mr. Trump has at times conflated American Jews with Israelis. Speaking to an American Jewish group, he referred to Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli leader, as “your prime minister.” He has also described Jewish Democrats who criticized Israeli policies as “disloyal to Israel.”Mr. Trump has at times conflated American Jews with Israelis. Speaking to an American Jewish group, he referred to Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli leader, as “your prime minister.” He has also described Jewish Democrats who criticized Israeli policies as “disloyal to Israel.”
Jewish groups are sensitive to implications that their religion carries a distinct nationality. Centuries of European anti-Semitism were built on the belief that Jews were foreigners within. As late as the 1980s, Soviet passports designated “Jewish” as a nationality akin to Russian or Ukrainian.Jewish groups are sensitive to implications that their religion carries a distinct nationality. Centuries of European anti-Semitism were built on the belief that Jews were foreigners within. As late as the 1980s, Soviet passports designated “Jewish” as a nationality akin to Russian or Ukrainian.
In the late 19th century, as modern national identity took hold, some Jewish leaders arrived at a position that hinted at the contradictions of the era. They embraced the notion that European Jews really were ethnically distinct from their non-Jewish neighbors — and that all Jews belonged to a unified people.In the late 19th century, as modern national identity took hold, some Jewish leaders arrived at a position that hinted at the contradictions of the era. They embraced the notion that European Jews really were ethnically distinct from their non-Jewish neighbors — and that all Jews belonged to a unified people.
In what was then an era of national self-determination, this also made Jews a nationality that, like many liberation movements of the time, sought a nation of their own.In what was then an era of national self-determination, this also made Jews a nationality that, like many liberation movements of the time, sought a nation of their own.
Serbian or Armenian nationalists placed their nations where ethnic Serbs and Armenians lived. But, with Jews dispersed across a half-dozen empires, Zionism’s leaders settled on the ancient biblical land of Judea.Serbian or Armenian nationalists placed their nations where ethnic Serbs and Armenians lived. But, with Jews dispersed across a half-dozen empires, Zionism’s leaders settled on the ancient biblical land of Judea.
Mr. Trump’s order, by treating anti-Israel protests as a form of anti-Semitism, hits on long-running Jewish debates over whether or not Israel is an extension of a shared identity.Mr. Trump’s order, by treating anti-Israel protests as a form of anti-Semitism, hits on long-running Jewish debates over whether or not Israel is an extension of a shared identity.
The Israeli national narrative, of a long-forgotten homeland waiting to be rediscovered by a citizenry scattered by history, implies a Jewish identity that is innately ethnic and national. Still, American Jewish attitudes toward Israel are cooling; national fealty, for many, is a stretch.The Israeli national narrative, of a long-forgotten homeland waiting to be rediscovered by a citizenry scattered by history, implies a Jewish identity that is innately ethnic and national. Still, American Jewish attitudes toward Israel are cooling; national fealty, for many, is a stretch.
.
The executive order also suggests that the government may see Jews as a distinct race.The executive order also suggests that the government may see Jews as a distinct race.
Since World War II, American Jews have been on a generational drift from Jewishness as a national identity, which no longer felt as necessary. But a series of political and cultural changes have called that postwar identity into question.Since World War II, American Jews have been on a generational drift from Jewishness as a national identity, which no longer felt as necessary. But a series of political and cultural changes have called that postwar identity into question.
Rising white nationalism increasingly targets Jews as unwelcome outsiders. Conspiracy theories, some entering the mainstream, portray them as nationless cosmopolitans bent on undermining Western countries’ racial purity.Rising white nationalism increasingly targets Jews as unwelcome outsiders. Conspiracy theories, some entering the mainstream, portray them as nationless cosmopolitans bent on undermining Western countries’ racial purity.
Mr. Trump’s order raises anew a question that has faced Jews throughout the 200-year era of national identity: whether such identities offer them security or only peril. It is an echo of late 19th-century debates, when some urged embracing national identity and forming a state, while others argued for casting it off and integrating into multicultural democracies instead.Mr. Trump’s order raises anew a question that has faced Jews throughout the 200-year era of national identity: whether such identities offer them security or only peril. It is an echo of late 19th-century debates, when some urged embracing national identity and forming a state, while others argued for casting it off and integrating into multicultural democracies instead.
The wider democratic world asked itself this same question in the wake of World War II. It declared old-style national identity a curse and pluralistic democracy the only path to peace, but the argument has raged off and on ever since — as it has, in parallel, for Jews.The wider democratic world asked itself this same question in the wake of World War II. It declared old-style national identity a curse and pluralistic democracy the only path to peace, but the argument has raged off and on ever since — as it has, in parallel, for Jews.
In a twist of history, the creation of Israel put Jews on the opposite side of the question: Now they had to decide whether a Jewish national identity had room for minorities.In a twist of history, the creation of Israel put Jews on the opposite side of the question: Now they had to decide whether a Jewish national identity had room for minorities.
Early Zionist leaders insisted that it did. But more recent Israeli leaders have promoted Israeli identity as exclusively Jewish and have imposed severe restrictions on Palestinians.Early Zionist leaders insisted that it did. But more recent Israeli leaders have promoted Israeli identity as exclusively Jewish and have imposed severe restrictions on Palestinians.
Mr. Trump’s order sharpens this matter as well, offering Jews greater protections by curbing anti-Israel activism that is sometimes animated by Palestinian demands for national self-determination.Mr. Trump’s order sharpens this matter as well, offering Jews greater protections by curbing anti-Israel activism that is sometimes animated by Palestinian demands for national self-determination.
In a sign of how much the world has changed, the new nationalists, from Mr. Orban to Narendra Modi of India, have rallied around Mr. Netanyahu as an ally and model. In a sign of how much it has not changed, all three have invoked ancient ethnic heritage in deploying distinctly modern controls on their country’s religious minorities.In a sign of how much the world has changed, the new nationalists, from Mr. Orban to Narendra Modi of India, have rallied around Mr. Netanyahu as an ally and model. In a sign of how much it has not changed, all three have invoked ancient ethnic heritage in deploying distinctly modern controls on their country’s religious minorities.
Mr. Netanyahu, like Mr. Trump, has emphasized hard-line policies as necessary to preserve Jewish identity.Mr. Netanyahu, like Mr. Trump, has emphasized hard-line policies as necessary to preserve Jewish identity.
Perhaps as a result, intra-Jewish debates, whether over Israel’s direction or Mr. Trump’s order, have become something of a microcosm of the global nationalist moment. They have divided American Jews, like much of the world, over whether the movement toward hardened, national-style identities is the solution to their problems — or the problem itself.Perhaps as a result, intra-Jewish debates, whether over Israel’s direction or Mr. Trump’s order, have become something of a microcosm of the global nationalist moment. They have divided American Jews, like much of the world, over whether the movement toward hardened, national-style identities is the solution to their problems — or the problem itself.