Lara Gurkaynak During the So-Called

Lara Gurkaynak During the so-called Modern Period, nationalists tried to construct a viable formula which would allow groups to be able to unify people who share the same culture, language, ethnicity, religion, history, and location. These shared characteristics were the main components of a nation according to the nationalist perspective during this time although now we understand nations as less rigid in terms of homogenous population characteristics. Throughout history, Jewish people have been scapegoated by various governments and groups.

They have been othered and been subjected to atrocities including violation of essential human rights, including the deprivation of a nation of their own. The Modern Period was one of international revolution, such as in the United States, France, and Russia wherein peoples demanded independence and autonomy from oppressive governmental regimes. The single group who was most deprived of a chance for similar autonomy was the Jews.

It is a disgrace that the promises of the modern era were not truly equal for "all men" as Rousseau initially said in his Social Contract. Sadly, the new rights and laws established by the French Revolution had mostly benefited the white, Christian French, while the "others" (Jews who live in France and in Eastern Europe) continued to suffer. Jews who were unfortunate enough to be living in these parts of Europe continued to be regarded as second-class citizens regardless of the modern ideas of equality being applicable to everyone.

Directly because of these anti-Semitic policies, Jewish people, as well as other oppressed groups like the Creole, had to take actions to form their own nations in order to live equally and freely without any barriers or "glass ceilings" due to their race or religion. A modern nation is defined more simply as any land that is controlled by a unified government. However, within the Modern Period, it was believed by nationalists that "states form [a] nation" (Hobsbawn).

According to this perspective people can be categorized and classified according to specific characteristic of that group. If a state of homogenous peoples is unified, then they have the right to form a nation according to the perspective using proto-nationalistic traits. In his writing, Hobsbawm includes race as a defining characteristic for a nation, other philosophers such as Herzl and Overberg do not share this perspective.

They focus on race as a nationalistic identifier rather than racial profile; namely they consider the religion of Judaism as one which should have its own nation. Hobsbawm does not believe that the Jews should be classified as a state but that their suffering has led to a confusion wherein they have been "compensated by stressing an imaginary ethnicity" (107). By declaring themselves a unique ethnicity, the Jews are given permission to form a nation but they are not centralized in a location as is necessary for nationhood according to nationalists.

Herzl and Overberg disagree and claim that the Jewish community is a state because the members of the religion all share what it means to be a Jew, including a history of religious practices and violence from Christians and other non-Jews simply because of their religious practices. Being Jewish therefore transcends mere religious definitions because it also has a unique historical heritage, creating a Jewish culture that is unique to fellow Jews.

This issue of Jewish statehood and a right to nationalism is more thoroughly mentioned in Leon Pinsker's Auto-Emancipation and Herzl's The Jews' State. Both Herzl and Pinsker argue that the "Jewish Question" remained a serious issue in terms of social inequality, an issue that was only worsened throughout Europe by political turmoil before and after the First World War. J. Theoder Herzl uses Hobsbawm's proto-nationalistic characteristics in his book The Jews' State and in his essay "Dr.

Gudemann's National-Judentum" to propose a prospective Jewish nation; however, he concludes that race is not an important element in his envisioned Jewish nation. For Herzl, a nation is a "historical group of people who recognizably belong together and are held together by a common foe" (67). Unfortunately, all European Jews did have a common foe which was fascist governments seeking a group to scapegoat and unilaterally blame for their nation's economic problems.

The foe of the Jew is and has always been leaders who want to placate unhappy masses by focusing them on the Jews as their enemy. Jews do make enemies but are made them by governments who other them for their own purposes. In France, there were other groups who were similarly othered by the ethnic majority in order to propagate their attempts at political power, namely the Creoles.

Creoles and Jews were both oppressed and alienated in their communities, being disallowed to participate as full citizens in the country even if they were born there. At every potential opportunity for social advancement, the two groups were refused and forced to remain on the outskirts of society, unable to ascend the social hierarchy. They always are obstructed by barriers when it came to ascending in the society, indeed they were even given a chance to ascend at all.

Similarly, Benedict Anderson highlights this problem of oppression in his book Imagined Communities. He mentions the trouble created against the Creoles in the Americas because they were simply born elsewhere. The Creole nationalistic movement, he argues "predated the appearance of American national consciousness at the end of the eighteenth century. Cramped visceral pilgrimages had no decisive consequences until their territorial stretch could be imagined.