,
12 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
So the Missouri senator who used the word “cosmopolitan” (which has an anti-Semitic history in 20th century) as a negative in a speech tries to double down on it by quoting Martha Nussbaum. But he *misreads/misleads* the quote. Follow along...
@HawleyMO notes the cosmopolitan does not have a specific American identity and the agenda from these “cosmo” elites is bad for America. He seemingly makes Nussbaum agree with him. But here is her words:
“Americans have frequently supported... giving the fact of being American a special salience in moral and political deliberation, & pride in a specifically American identity & a specifically American citizenship a special power among the motivations to political action.”
“I believe... that this emphasis on patriotic pride is both morally dangerous and, ultimately, subversive of some of the worthy goals patriotism sets out to serve—for example, the goal of national unity in devotion to worthy moral ideals of justice and equality.”
Her central thesis: “I shall now return to the present day and offer four arguments for making world citizenship, rather than democratic/national citizenship, education’s central focus.”
Hawley could be quoting Nussbaum to disagree. But he ignores her most vital claims against the kind of nationalism he espouses. And so he doesn’t really undo any connection to the historic use of cosmopolitan tied to “rootless” Jews who don’t have allegiance to a nation.
Hawley seems to be suggesting these “cosmo” elites/leaders are Americans but not of/for/with America, echoing Trump who wants those who “hate” America to leave, even be “sent” away. These elites are not for “the middle class,” a reference to money.
But also “great middle” could be the heartland and the “cosmo” leaders are new “coastal elites.” Well at least one coastal city is known for its large population of Jews. And those elites are not American to Hawley.
Finally the link I shared earlier today about the history of the anti-Semitic “cosmopolitan”
pri.org/stories/2017-0…
pri.org/stories/2017-0…
A PS: here is link to the senate’s speech. At 5:10 he cites Nussbaum in one sentence:
That one line about her distorts the Boston Review link the senator offered. She isn’t against citizenship to US but treating that as a god, and it is that overemphasis which defeats goals of patriotism she admires
PSS another thread on how Hawley misuses Nussbaum
