Judaism, Materiality And Power: Recontextualizing Contemporary Judaism Through Foucault And Said
Clarification: This essay has been slightly adapted from a paper completed for a Media Studies course
Introduction
It would prove a struggle to proclaim any philosopher of the past half century more influential than Michel Foucault. Arguably the most prominent figure within the realm of post-structural philosophy, Foucault is considered almost entirely responsible for upending prevailing conceptions of the development and imposition of power relations in contemporary society. Situating his understanding of the expression of power relations in the phenomenon of language production, Foucault conceives of contemporary power as a discursive force, whose physical expression is inextricably linked to the structuring of society through linguistic categorization. According to Foucault, this results in broadening the reach of power within contemporary society, as aspects of identity are determined through a multiplicity of discursive practices that act as the primary articulation of power. This turn towards the linguistic determination of identity permits the dramatic expansion of subjectivity, insofar as this determination calls for the elaboration of behaviors, both perverse and normative, so as to produce identity categories through which individuals are “subjected” to power. These categories have subsequently been codified within the epistemic regime of modernity, whose structure serves to organize and arrange power relations between them; It constructs the discursive methodology through which power operates in contemporary society.
Following Foucault, Edward Said seeks to apply Foucault’s notion of power’s discursive and epistemological character so as to understand the distinction between the Orient and the Occident as a constituent component of colonial subjugation. Much in the way that Foucault analyzes the construction of sexuality, Said presents this aforementioned dichotomy as both historically contingent and a product of discursive forces, arguing that the “Orient” only exists to legitimate European imperial interests, as these forces establish an “Other” whose existence is necessary to the maintenance of the mythology of the West. As such, these discursive forces perpetuate, “…the idea of European identity as a superior one in comparison with all the non-European peoples and cultures….”, (Said 1788) through their, “flexible positional superiority, which puts the Westerner in a whole series of possible relationships with the Orient without ever losing him the relative upper hand.” (Said 1788) Individuals ensconced within the prevailing logic of Orientalism, then, find that the constitution of their subjective being cannot be conceived outside of this epistemological framework, rendering them susceptible to the physical and material expression of power.
It is apparent, as someone of Jewish ancestry, that the contemporary manifestation of Jewish identity is a product of the exact kinds of processes previously detailed. What it means to be a Jew is inseparable, not only from the overarching epistemological framework first elaborated by Foucault, but from the logic of Orientalism outlined in Said’s work, especially in regards to the development of Israel. As much as the legal, socio-economic and cultural status of Jews has been subject to dramatic fluctuations, it is precisely these fluctuations that demonstrate Judaism’s subjection to the discursive exercise of power. Through engaging in rigorous dialogue with the aforementioned work of Foucault and Said, this essay seeks to analyze the historically contingent character of Judaism and Jewish identity through discursive practices, especially in relation to the historical conception of whiteness and the privileges afforded by it. It is through a comprehensive critique of these processes that the unique position and constitution of Jewish identity within contemporary society can be fully deduced.
Judaism’s Relationship To Whiteness
To begin to understand the discursive production of Judaism in contemporary America requires an understanding of the oftentimes fraught relationship between Jews, especially those of Ashkenazi descent, and Americans of European ancestry. It should go without saying that to be a Jew in the United States (and, to a lesser extent, Europe) is to perceive oneself as white, despite the fact that the “whiteness” assumed by Jews is a conditional identity, as is their occasional assumption of their position as an “other” or the “Other”. While the history of Jews in Europe demonstrates parallels with that of American Jews, the incorporation of Jews as “white” is far more apparent in the United States. Initially perceived as a distinct race, Jewish immigrants to the United States faced significant challenges to social integration, being barred from specific kinds of economic and social opportunities afforded to other European ethnic groups. Jews were initially assigned a position comparable to that of the “other” within American society, but found themselves quickly incorporated into the folds of White America.
This rapid transition - from the squalor of the ethnic ghetto to the gleaming halls of Congress - can be interpreted as demonstrative of power’s use of discursive practices to neutralize and pacify threats to its dominance, in much the same way that the, “…persecution of the peripheral sexualities entailed an incorporation of perversions and a new specification of individuals.” (Foucault 1517) Rather than the religious and cultural differences associated with Jewish identity being legislated through the kinds of punitive measures more closely associated with African American subjectivity, Jewish identity was subsumed by White society almost entirely through linguistic categorization. Jews became White as a means of reinforcing the socio-economic and socio-political differences between “White” society and “Black” society, appropriating their cultural perversity to bolster the dominance of White power within the United States. (Magid, 2020) Insofar as Jews were discursively conceived of as White, they continued to be conceived of as Jewish through linguistic categorization, with the persistence of anti-semitic language and behavior reinforcing their distinction from other European ethnic groups. This tenuous relationship that exists between Jews and the rest of white society continues to endure, with anti-semitic rhetoric and violence reaching a critical tenor during the presidency of Donald Trump.
This complicated relationship between Jewish identity and Whiteness extends to the creation of the State of Israel, which bears a greater resemblance to the Orient-Occident dichotomy elaborated by Said. The political and social emancipation of Jews in Europe happened to coincide with the emergence of Zionist rhetoric, which argued for the establishment of a Jewish state in what was then known as the Levant, but is now referred to as Israel. This effort to establish an ethnoreligious state was undertaken as not only a means of escaping the kind of religious persecution that had come to define European Jewry, but to re-establish a particular conception of Jewish identity inextricably linked to the settlement of Israel. This burgeoning view of Jewish identity became bound to the discursive construction of Israel as Jewish and of Jews as “of Israel”, insofar as this perspective was influenced by established discourse on, “…the Levant, the Biblical texts and the Biblical lands…”, and, “…a complex array of “Oriental” ideas…” (Said 1786) was utilized to justify immigration from Europe and the establishment of a Jewish state. While not explicitly racial in character, the domineering use of these discursive practices to justify Jewish immigration from Europe thus brought the Levant under the direct dominion of Europe, as British colonial administration of the Levant helped to facilitate a dramatic increase in the Jewish population in the region. Jews, once the “other”, found themselves a bastion of European culture in the midst of the Orient, a “civilized”, i.e., “white” society whose presence helped to re-assert, “…European superiority over Oriental backwardness…” (Said 1789) and whose political circumstances helped to align Jewish aims with those of Europeans.
This particular rhetoric continues to influence the perception of the modern Israeli State. Often referred to as “the only democracy in the Middle East”, Israel is perceived as a distinct political and cultural entity from their Arab neighbors. It is telling that Israel is a member of the UEFA, Europe’s football governing body, and participates in the Eurovision contest, despite their relative cultural and geographic isolation from Europe. These are discursive practices, rendered material, that serve to reinforce the distinction between Israel and the rest of the Orient, positioning it as functionally European. The great irony of this particular circumstance emerges from the ethnic and racial composition of the Israeli state; Jews of European descent comprised less than half the population of Israel’s Jews, with Jews of Asian and African descent comprising the majority. It is thus inaccurate to refer to Israel as “white” or even nominally European for that matter, due to the ethnic and racial heterogeneity expressed within the population.
Israel’s status then, is reflective of the same kinds of conditional identification experienced by Jews in the United States. Israel is European expressly because it serves as a vector through which Europe can continue to exercise hegemonic control over the “Orient”. In the absence of colonial mandates, the discursive exercise of power continues to perpetuate the logic of Orientalism and the kinds of socio-cultural rhetoric that sustain the formal legal and political status of Israel. In much the same way, “…that an Englishman in India or Egypt in the later nineteenth century took an interest in those countries that was never far from their status in his mind as British colonies…”, (Said 1791) the status of Israel amongst Europeans has become synonymous with their own socio-economic and political interests, while simultaneously being reviled by their Arab neighbors. To be Jewish then, is to exist as an antinomy to that of peoples considered to be either Oriental or European, with the discursive nature of power drawing Jews into a fluctuating and tenuous alignment with different forms of subjectivity.
Bibliography:
Magid, Shaul. “The Price Of (Non) Whiteness.” Contending Modernities, The University Of Notre Dame, 25 September, 2020, https://contendingmodernities.nd.edu/theorizing-modernities/the-price-of-non-whiteness/
Leitch, Vincent B., et al. “Michel Foucault.” The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism, W.W. Norton & Company, New York, NY, 2018, pp. 1469–1521.
Leitch, Vincent B., et al. “Edward Said .” The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism, W.W. Norton & Company, New York, NY , 2018, pp. 1780–1821.