{"title":"纳粹决定了谁是犹太人吗?犹太人身份、大屠杀纪念和以色列回归法背后的真实故事","authors":"Netanel Fisher","doi":"10.1080/21567689.2023.2190894","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The idea that the Nazis dictated (retrospectively) who should be considered a Jew in the State of Israel is widespread. Apparent similarities between Nuremberg and Israel’s Law of Return have reinforced the claim that anti-Semitism is the basis for defining Israel’s Jewishness. This study’s primary goal is to refute this prevailing false understanding by demonstrating how Israel’s Jewishness was not based on the reversal of Nazi laws but on positive organic Jewish outlooks. The second goal is to present the original narratives and show how the fallacious Nuremberg myth has evolved. During the 1950s, Israel’s founding fathers addressed the ‘Who is Jew’ question in terms of positive secular Jewish nationalism. The next generation (1970) adopted more religious definitions while being attentive to the evolving inter-marriage reality. In both cases, policy makers saw neither anti-Semitic persecution nor the Holocaust as the basis for defining Jewish affiliation. Only from the 1990s on, due to the need to legitimize the massive immigration of non-Jews, did the ‘Nuremberg myth’ begin to take root. In addition, the emergence of the Holocaust as a global moral imperative icon and a major source of Jewish and Israeli identification, contributed to the acceptance of the myth.","PeriodicalId":44955,"journal":{"name":"Politics Religion & Ideology","volume":"29 1","pages":"1 - 29"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Did the Nazis determine who is a Jew? Jewish identity, Holocaust remembrance and the true story behind Israel’s law of return\",\"authors\":\"Netanel Fisher\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/21567689.2023.2190894\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The idea that the Nazis dictated (retrospectively) who should be considered a Jew in the State of Israel is widespread. Apparent similarities between Nuremberg and Israel’s Law of Return have reinforced the claim that anti-Semitism is the basis for defining Israel’s Jewishness. This study’s primary goal is to refute this prevailing false understanding by demonstrating how Israel’s Jewishness was not based on the reversal of Nazi laws but on positive organic Jewish outlooks. The second goal is to present the original narratives and show how the fallacious Nuremberg myth has evolved. During the 1950s, Israel’s founding fathers addressed the ‘Who is Jew’ question in terms of positive secular Jewish nationalism. The next generation (1970) adopted more religious definitions while being attentive to the evolving inter-marriage reality. In both cases, policy makers saw neither anti-Semitic persecution nor the Holocaust as the basis for defining Jewish affiliation. Only from the 1990s on, due to the need to legitimize the massive immigration of non-Jews, did the ‘Nuremberg myth’ begin to take root. In addition, the emergence of the Holocaust as a global moral imperative icon and a major source of Jewish and Israeli identification, contributed to the acceptance of the myth.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44955,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Politics Religion & Ideology\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"1 - 29\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Politics Religion & Ideology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/21567689.2023.2190894\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politics Religion & Ideology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21567689.2023.2190894","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在以色列国谁应该被认为是犹太人,这一观点广为流传。纽伦堡审判与以色列的《回归法》(Law of Return)之间明显的相似之处,强化了反犹主义是界定以色列犹太性的基础的说法。本研究的主要目标是通过证明以色列的犹太性不是基于对纳粹法律的逆转,而是基于积极的有机犹太人观,来驳斥这种普遍存在的错误理解。第二个目标是呈现最初的叙述,并展示谬误的纽伦堡神话是如何演变的。在20世纪50年代,以色列的开国元勋们从积极的世俗犹太民族主义的角度解决了“谁是犹太人”的问题。下一代(1970年)在关注不断发展的异族通婚现实的同时,采用了更多的宗教定义。在这两种情况下,决策者都不认为反犹太迫害和大屠杀是界定犹太人归属的依据。只是从20世纪90年代开始,由于需要使大量非犹太人移民合法化,“纽伦堡神话”才开始生根发芽。此外,大屠杀作为一种全球道德责任标志和犹太人和以色列身份的主要来源的出现,促进了人们接受这一神话。
Did the Nazis determine who is a Jew? Jewish identity, Holocaust remembrance and the true story behind Israel’s law of return
ABSTRACT The idea that the Nazis dictated (retrospectively) who should be considered a Jew in the State of Israel is widespread. Apparent similarities between Nuremberg and Israel’s Law of Return have reinforced the claim that anti-Semitism is the basis for defining Israel’s Jewishness. This study’s primary goal is to refute this prevailing false understanding by demonstrating how Israel’s Jewishness was not based on the reversal of Nazi laws but on positive organic Jewish outlooks. The second goal is to present the original narratives and show how the fallacious Nuremberg myth has evolved. During the 1950s, Israel’s founding fathers addressed the ‘Who is Jew’ question in terms of positive secular Jewish nationalism. The next generation (1970) adopted more religious definitions while being attentive to the evolving inter-marriage reality. In both cases, policy makers saw neither anti-Semitic persecution nor the Holocaust as the basis for defining Jewish affiliation. Only from the 1990s on, due to the need to legitimize the massive immigration of non-Jews, did the ‘Nuremberg myth’ begin to take root. In addition, the emergence of the Holocaust as a global moral imperative icon and a major source of Jewish and Israeli identification, contributed to the acceptance of the myth.