{"title":"评《新犹太问题》","authors":"F. Devji","doi":"10.1017/pli.2021.26","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"If the “old” Jewish Question had asked how a Jew could be a citizen, the “new” one posed by Daniel Boyarin’s remarkable and courageous article asks how nationality can exist without a state. Striking about this formulation is the distance it marks from the European debates about emancipation and assimilation that had defined its predecessor. Boyarin’s context is not continental but imperial, taking into account Jews in colonized lands as much as the historical relationship between Europe and empire. As Hannah Arendt was the first to argue in The Origins of Totalitarianism, this relationship possessed an outward trajectory that went through anti-Semitism and an inward return by way of genocide.1","PeriodicalId":42913,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Journal of Postcolonial Literary Inquiry","volume":"9 1","pages":"85 - 91"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comments on “The New Jewish Question”\",\"authors\":\"F. Devji\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/pli.2021.26\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"If the “old” Jewish Question had asked how a Jew could be a citizen, the “new” one posed by Daniel Boyarin’s remarkable and courageous article asks how nationality can exist without a state. Striking about this formulation is the distance it marks from the European debates about emancipation and assimilation that had defined its predecessor. Boyarin’s context is not continental but imperial, taking into account Jews in colonized lands as much as the historical relationship between Europe and empire. As Hannah Arendt was the first to argue in The Origins of Totalitarianism, this relationship possessed an outward trajectory that went through anti-Semitism and an inward return by way of genocide.1\",\"PeriodicalId\":42913,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cambridge Journal of Postcolonial Literary Inquiry\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"85 - 91\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cambridge Journal of Postcolonial Literary Inquiry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/pli.2021.26\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cambridge Journal of Postcolonial Literary Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/pli.2021.26","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
如果说“老”犹太人问题问的是犹太人如何成为公民,那么丹尼尔·博亚林(Daniel Boyarin)那篇杰出而勇敢的文章提出的“新”问题则是,民族如何在没有国家的情况下存在。引人注目的是,这一提法标志着它与欧洲关于解放和同化的辩论之间的距离,而欧洲关于解放和同化的辩论定义了它的前身。博亚林的背景不是欧洲大陆,而是帝国,他既考虑到了欧洲与帝国之间的历史关系,也考虑到了殖民土地上的犹太人。正如汉娜·阿伦特(Hannah Arendt)在《极权主义的起源》(the Origins of Totalitarianism)一书中第一个提出的那样,这种关系具有一条通过反犹主义向外发展的轨迹,以及一条通过种族灭绝向内回归的轨迹
If the “old” Jewish Question had asked how a Jew could be a citizen, the “new” one posed by Daniel Boyarin’s remarkable and courageous article asks how nationality can exist without a state. Striking about this formulation is the distance it marks from the European debates about emancipation and assimilation that had defined its predecessor. Boyarin’s context is not continental but imperial, taking into account Jews in colonized lands as much as the historical relationship between Europe and empire. As Hannah Arendt was the first to argue in The Origins of Totalitarianism, this relationship possessed an outward trajectory that went through anti-Semitism and an inward return by way of genocide.1