Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgements
- Preface
- Introduction
- 1 The Limits of Political Obligation
- 2 Power and Obligation
- 3 Between Zion and Diaspora: Internationalisms,
- 4 From Eating Hummus to the Sublime
- 5 Obligation and Critique
- Conclusion: Obligation in Exile, Critique and the Future of the Jewish Diaspora
- Appendix
- Notes
- Bibliography
- Index
1 - The Limits of Political Obligation
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 September 2016
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgements
- Preface
- Introduction
- 1 The Limits of Political Obligation
- 2 Power and Obligation
- 3 Between Zion and Diaspora: Internationalisms,
- 4 From Eating Hummus to the Sublime
- 5 Obligation and Critique
- Conclusion: Obligation in Exile, Critique and the Future of the Jewish Diaspora
- Appendix
- Notes
- Bibliography
- Index
Summary
Introduction
Jewish Diaspora identity politics and political obligation may not appear to have any mutual relevance. Indeed, in one sense they do not because theories of political obligation do not directly address questions pertinent to minority politics. Rather, such theories treat citizens as a single group, and are in this sense not concerned with the different political experiences of minority communities. Different identity-groups are not addressed. Yet in another way, political obligation as a particular type of moral commitment and not a universal duty is deeply relevant to diaspora politics. An example that demonstrates as much is the Damascus Affair.
In Damascus in 1840, a Capuchin friar disappeared and a Jewish barber was arrested and charged with the ritual murder of the friar. The barber was tortured and after a forced confession a mob attacked the local Jewish community. The French government became involved, owing to its Middle Eastern ambitions, and supported the charges against the Jewish barber. French Jews were, consequently, placed in a difficult position. On the one hand, as French citizens they should support France's ambitions in the Middle East, but as Jews they could not stand behind their government's support of a malicious crime against Jews. Indeed, the charge against the Jewish barber revived the blood libel accusation common in the Middle Ages. In the end, owing to the involvement of a Jewish French politician, Adolphe Crémieux, and the British Sir Moses Montefiore, the Jewish prisoners in Damascus were released.
What the Damascus Affair demonstrated was that a diaspora community could pose a security concern to the state because of its diasporic status, of belonging to a trans-state national community. Moreover, it upheld the frightening accusation of dual loyalty, and it did so by presenting the minority diaspora community, in this case the Jews, as not being counted upon to uphold the interests of the state, and thus the institutions of the state. In this sense, the Damascus Affair was for French Jews at least a Pyrrhic victory. With the help of Adolphe Crémieux, the Jewish prisoners in Damascus were released. The Jews involved in the Damascus Affair were not acting for another state but for their people abroad.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Obligation in ExileThe Jewish Diaspora, Israel and Critique, pp. 41 - 70Publisher: Edinburgh University PressPrint publication year: 2014