Skipping over to Britain, an Indian-born Parsi named Dadabhai Naoroji was elected to the British House of Commons in 1892 in the Liberal interest, serving until 1895. As a Zoroastrian priest, he took the oath of office on his copy of the Kordeh Avesta.
When the Tories swept in in 1895, another Parsi, Sir Mancherjee Merwanjee Bhownagree, won a seat representing Bethnal Green, and served in the House of Commons until the Liberal triumph of 1906. (For more on Parsis, see my 2002 article.)
We shouldn't generalize from the British experience to the American, though. I doubt if a South Asian Zoroastrian could have gotten elected in 1890s America. The two Parsis' success in British electoral politics came at the high tide of imperialist ideology in Britain, which is usually denounced for racism; but imperialism also tends to lead to cosmopolitanism, as in ancient Rome. The American equivalent might have been the Cold War. The 1965 immigration act was pushed in the name of fighting the Cold War by treating nicer all those people from strategically crucial developing countries.
The first South Asian to be elected to Congress was California Democrat Dalip Singh Saund, a Sikh, in 1956, who went on to serve three terms.
"The 1965 immigration act was pushed in the name of fighting the Cold War by treating nicer all those people from strategically crucial developing countries"
ReplyDeleteThese ideological Wars will be the end of the White race.
Ottawa, Canada elected a lesbian mayor in the 1950s. It was an open secret, referred to as a "Paris relationship"
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlotte_Whitton
Founder of British Columbia was Sir James Douglas, every bit as black as Obama. Victoria BC had black council members elected 150 years ago and effectively outlawed racism 150 years ago last week:
http://www.britishcolonist.ca/display.php?issue=18620705 page 2
tl;dr: Black guy walks into a bar, gets refused service, takes it to court, wins, in a "thoroughly British" judgment. In 1862. A full 100 years before MLK marched and "Human Rights Commissions" in Canada were created.
See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mifflin_Wistar_Gibbs, world's most interesting 19th century black man and former Victoria city councillor & businessman.
I doubt if a South Asian Zoroastrian could have gotten elected in 1890s America.
ReplyDeleteBut a Jewish guy could hold some of the highest leadership positions of the racist Confederacy?
Steve:"The American equivalent might have been the Cold War. The 1965 immigration act was pushed in the name of fighting the Cold War by treating nicer all those people from strategically crucial developing countries."
ReplyDeleteYeah, C. Vann Woodward, in his THE STRANGE CAREER OF JIM CROW, talks about how the struggle against the Soviets (officially, a racially egalitarian society) in the post-45 period impacted racial attitudes in the USA; its a bit hard to win hearts and minds in sub-Saharan Africa when the aforesaid Sub-Saharan Africans know that their compatriots in the the southern USA can't vote.
Syon
Benjamin Disraeli, Sephardic Jew, became Prime Minister of Great Britain in 1868.
ReplyDeleteDiversity before diversity.
Interesting that they are both Parsees. I seem to recall reading a book which mentioned these two men as examples of Parsee political acumen (was it Ellsworth Huntington?).
ReplyDeleteSyon
That was a very interesting 2002 article. What kinds of places picked up your UPI pieces back then?
ReplyDeleteSteve:"The first South Asian to be elected to Congress was California Democrat Dalip Singh Saund, a Sikh, in 1956, who went on to serve three terms."
ReplyDeleteShould be borne in mind that the Sikhs in California (many of them, at any rate)are very Americanized. I went to High School with a few, and they were culturally indistinguishable from White Americans.
Syon
Anonymous:"Founder of British Columbia was Sir James Douglas, every bit as black as Obama."
ReplyDeleteNot quite. Obama is a genuine 50/50 mix (leaving out disputes over Arab ancestry). Douglas, in contrast, had much more White blood, as his mother was mixed-race. Going on the WIKIPEDIA photo, I would be surprised if Douglas were over 25% Black.
"James Douglas was born in Demerara (now part of Guyana) to John Douglas, a Scottish planter, and Martha Ann Tefler, a Creole originally from Barbados. Telfer was free coloured, which in her time and place meant a free person of mixed European and African ancestry. Thus, James Douglas - as all her children with John Douglas - was part black. The couple had a number of children together, but were not formally married.[1] In 1812 James was sent to Lanark, Scotland to be schooled. It is also believed that he went to school in Chester, England, where he learned to speak and write in fluent French." (via WIKIPEDIA)
Syon
Anonymous:"Benjamin Disraeli, Sephardic Jew, became Prime Minister of Great Britain in 1868."
ReplyDeleteDisraeli is a bit of a special case, as he was baptized a Christian.
Syon
Steve: You ought to put all these Diversity Before Diversity articles in a pamphlet and sell it.
ReplyDeleteShould be borne in mind that the Sikhs in California (many of them, at any rate)are very Americanized. I went to High School with a few, and they were culturally indistinguishable from White Americans.
ReplyDeleteProbably because your knowledge of White American culture is limited to hamburgers and baseball or something.
And to tie this thread and another "Diversity" thread together, James Jesus Angleton's widow and some of their children were converts to Sikhism.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/cicely-angleton-poet-and-cia-officials-spouse/2011/09/24/gIQA5GHDvK_story.html
The Wikipedia page for Naoroji is worth checking out. I had never heard of him, but he seems to have had some significant accomplishments. He was not only a Parsi but a Parsi priest! He also was a founder of the Indian National Congress and apparently a mentor to Gandhi.
ReplyDeleteIts forgotten that the INC originally was a middle class organization founded with British encouragement. And handing over power to something like the INC was probably the best British exit strategy from India conceivable, so they arguably got some benefit from the organization.
The other link, to the Sikh congressman, contains the information that congressman Martin Hoke, not an ethnic Indian, briefly converted to Sikhism. Hoke seems to be one of those strange people who get lucky and get elected to Congress when the voters are looking for a way to retire a corrupt congressman. He was elected in this way to represent a Democratic part of Cleveland and the surrounding territory, and then survived re-election when the Democrats nominated an even worse candidate, before finally losing his third race to Dennis Kuchinich.
There is a commemoration plaque in London highlighting how Mr. Naoroji was the first "Asian" elected to the UK Parliament. Perhaps that plaque may need to be revised in the future to make the message more politically correct.
ReplyDeleteAfter all, is it proper in Britain to call all the current MP's at Westminister of Indian, Pakistani or Bangladeshi background "Asians"? Perhaps it's more tolerable to call a foreign-born brown-skinned MP an "Asian", which is what Mr. Naoroji actually was. So maybe this plaque is acceptable.
There's always a delicate fine line when you commemorate something exotic in the politically correct West.
Does Senator S.I. Hayakawa count?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn theory, Parsis are of Persian descent who left when the Muslims took over, but they've clearly mixed with South Asians over time.
ReplyDeleteDennis Mangan:
ReplyDeleteThe Romans "lionized" a fair few Christians back in the day (tho'
Mark Twain allowed it was 'cause they mistook 'em for Jews).
"Benjamin Disraeli, Sephardic Jew, became Prime Minister of Great Britain in 1868."
ReplyDeleteDisraeli is a bit of a special case, as he was baptized a Christian.
Hardly that special. Disraeli was born a Sephardic Jew, saw himself as Jewish, was regarded by others as Jewish, and is said to have "reconverted" to Judaism on his deathbed.
Is Jewish a religion or an ethnicity?
In a famous debate, Disraeli stated, "Yes, I am a Jew, and when the ancestors of the Right Honourable Gentleman were brutal savages in an unknown island, mine were priests in the Temple of Solomon."
Moreover, dozens of Jewish Brits were elected to parliament in the 1800s and early 1900s. Diversity before diversity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_Jewish_politicians
Babe Ruth and J. Edgar Hoover.
ReplyDeleteBoth may have been part black.
Mangan:"Does Senator S.I. Hayakawa count?"
ReplyDeleteTough question. His Senate term occurred in the post 65 era, but his academic stardom occurred in the 30s-50s (the guy gets name-dropped in A.E. Van Vogt's THE WORLD OF NULL-A). So, perhaps a yes for the pre-65 Hayakawa, but a no for the post-65 Hayakawa?
"Don't forget Alexandre Dumas, lionized French writer, who was part black. As was Alexander Pushkin, lionized Russian writer."
Wasn't Michael Jackson planning on playing Pushkin in a film at one stage?
Syon
There is a very interesting podcast from The National Archives (UK)
ReplyDeleteUntold histories: black Britons during the period of the British slave trade, c. 1660-1807
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documents/untold-histories-black-britons.mp3?pod=rss
Dr Chater's talk challenges commonly held assumptions that have been made about the lives of black Britons during the period of the British slave trade.
Gay Mafia? How about the Gay Boys' Network?
ReplyDeleteLord Liverpool, part-Indian Prime Minister of the UK, 1812-27.
ReplyDeletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Jenkinson,_2nd_Earl_of_Liverpool#Early_life
The 1965 immigration act was pushed in the name of fighting the Cold War by treating nicer all those people from strategically crucial developing countries
ReplyDeleteRiiiiiight. Just like the reason we support Israel is to have a cop on the beat against Soviet client regimes in the Middle East. Sure, that's the reason. (Sarcasm.)
Anonymous:"Hardly that special. Disraeli was born a Sephardic Jew, saw himself as Jewish, was regarded by others as Jewish, and is said to have "reconverted*" to Judaism on his deathbed."
ReplyDeleteIt still qualifies his status vis-a- vis Judaism. Yes, his Jewish ancestry was a factor in his career, but I'm not at all certain that he would have attained the post of Prime Minister if he had not been a childhood Anglican convert.
*The "reconversion" story is apocryphal.
Some insight into the initial problems faced by non-converted Jews can be gleaned from the career of Lionel de Rothschild:
"The son of Nathan Mayer Rothschild and Hanna Barent Cohen, he was a member of the prominent Rothschild family.
In 1847 Lionel de Rothschild was first elected to the British House of Commons as one of four MPs for the City of London constituency. Because Jews were at that point still barred from sitting in the chamber due to the Christian oath required to be sworn in, Prime Minister Lord John Russell introduced a Jewish Disabilities Bill to remove the problem with the oath. In 1848, the bill was approved by the House of Commons but was twice rejected by the House of Lords. After being rejected again by the Upper House in 1849, Rothschild resigned his seat and stood again winning in a by-election in order to strengthen his claim.
In 1850, he entered the House of Commons to take his seat but refused to swear on a Christian Bible asking to use only the Old Testament. This was permitted but when omitting the words "upon the true faith of a Christian" from the oath he was required to leave.
In 1851 a new Jewish Disabilities Bill was defeated in the House of Lords. In the 1852 general election Rothschild was again elected but the next year the bill was again defeated in the upper house.
Lionel Nathan de Rothschild introduced in the House of Commons on 26 July 1858 by Lord John Russell and Mr John Abel Smith by Henry Barraud, 1872.
Finally, in 1858, the House of Lords agreed to a proposal to allow each house to decide its own oath. On 26 July 1858 de Rothschild took the oath with covered head, substituting "so help me, [using a Hebrew word for] God" for the ordinary form of oath, and thereupon took his seat as the first Jewish member of Parliament. He was re-elected in general elections in 1859 and 1865, but defeated in 1868; he was returned unopposed in a by-election in 1869 but defeated a second time in the general election in 1874.
Rothschild was proposed as a member of the House of Lords in 1868, but Queen Victoria refused to elevate him to this status. She denied that this was because Rothschild was a Jew. Instead the monarch claimed it was because of Rothschild's business activities, but few believed her. In 1885 the Queen did raise Rothschild's son Nathan to the peerage. Nathan Mayer de Rothschild became the first Jewish member of the House of Lords." (via WIKIPEDIA)
Syon
Part-Indian PMs:
ReplyDeleteLord Liverpool
Pitt the Elder (Earl of Chatham)
Pitt the Younger.
On the other hand, anti-semitism has been used in Britain as recently as the 2005 general election campaign, by the Labour Party against the Conservative leader Michael Howard. It was aimed at the Asian part of the electorate (i.e. Pakistani and Bangladeshi) whose support for Labour was at risk due to Blair's love of invading people, most conspicuously Muslim people. (Encouraging mass immigration in the belief that the immigrants are bound to vote Labour, and then pissing them off, is a remarkable example of political incompetence.)
dearieme:"Part-Indian PMs:
ReplyDeleteLord Liverpool
Pitt the Elder (Earl of Chatham)
Pitt the Younger."
Liverpool I already knew about, but are you sure about the Pitts?I can find no references to Indian ancestry for Pitt the Elder.
Syon
The "reconversion" story is apocryphal.
ReplyDeleteNope. It's the truth.
Some insight into the initial problems faced by non-converted Jews can be gleaned from the career of Lionel de Rothschild
ReplyDelete1% Problems.
Because Jews were at that point still barred from sitting in the chamber due to the Christian oath required to be sworn in, Prime Minister Lord John Russell introduced a Jewish Disabilities Bill to remove the problem with the oath.
ReplyDeleteProves that any opposition toward Jewish Brits wasn't racial/ethnic. It was ideological.
In 1850, he entered the House of Commons to take his seat but refused to swear on a Christian Bible asking to use only the Old Testament. This was permitted but when omitting the words "upon the true faith of a Christian" from the oath he was required to leave.
ReplyDeleteHe was welcome to assimilate. Any "problems" were created by his ideology, which he could have dropped--a fair condition to enjoying the rights, privileges, and powers of a citizen and an MP of a Christian nation.
On the other hand, anti-semitism has been used in Britain as recently as the 2005 general election campaign, by the Labour Party against the Conservative leader Michael Howard.
ReplyDeleteInteresting that "anti-semitism" has been "used" by a party whose leader is himself Jewish and who has placed Jews at many of its highest positions. Pray tell, what are the specifics?
Some insight into the initial problems faced by non-converted Jews can be gleaned from the career of Lionel de Rothschild
ReplyDeleteImplication - "converted" Jews didn't face such "problems"
an Indian-born Parsi
ReplyDeleteAren't Indian-born Parsis one of the highest-scoring IQ groups? I seem to recall reading somewhere that they score even better than Tamil Brahmins. True or not?
I learned about the Pitts on the web, presumably from Razib Khan's blog which I used to read frequently. If it ain't so, my apologies.
ReplyDeleteThe Labour Party antisemitic stuff I witnessed. Shame on them. Their own current leader is Jewish: I wonder how he felt about it at the time?
Anonymous:"Nope. It's the truth."
ReplyDeleteAccording to the biographies that I have consulted, stories of Disraeli's deathbed conversion to either Judaism or Roman Catholicism are apocryphal.
Please cite your sources.
Syon
Syon:Some insight into the initial problems faced by non-converted Jews can be gleaned from the career of Lionel de Rothschild
ReplyDeleteAnonymous:"1% Problems."
Well, yes. The question was framed by whether Disraeli's conversion to Anglicanism helped his political career, a career which culminated in Disraeli becoming PM. These are questions that only concern the elite, not the hoi polloi.
Syon
Anonymous:"Moreover, dozens of Jewish Brits were elected to parliament in the 1800s and early 1900s. Diversity before diversity."
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure that this is the kind of diversity that Steve has in mind. Steve's intent, as I understand it, is to illuminate diversity as we (early 21st century Westerners) understand it. I.e., diversity is a matter of being non-White/non-Western. Jews and Catholics (whose acquisition of the franchise was a contested issue in early 19th century Britain), under this dispensation, do not count as "diverse." They are just boring White Westerners.
dearieme:"I learned about the Pitts on the web, presumably from Razib Khan's blog which I used to read frequently. If it ain't so, my apologies."
ReplyDeleteThe only South Asian connection that I can find comes via Pitt the Elder's grandfather, Thomas "Diamond" Pitt, who made his fortune in Madras. However, I can find no mention of him marrying a woman of South Asian descent. The WIKIPEDIA article merely identifies his wife as one Jane Innes (Given the racial obsessions of our age, WIKIPEDIA is usually rather keen on pointing out non-White ancestry).
Syon
Anonymous:"Implication - "converted" Jews didn't face such "problems""
ReplyDeleteAnonymous:"Proves that any opposition toward Jewish Brits wasn't racial/ethnic. It was ideological."
Which is precisely my point vis-a-vis Disraeli's status as a Christian convert. In an important sense, one cannot count him as a Jewish Prime Minister of Great Britain.Yes, his ancestry was Sephardic Jewish, but his confessional identity was Anglican, and that is what counted.
Syon
But his name was "D'Israeli".
ReplyDeleteSteve:"But his name was "D'Israeli".
ReplyDeleteActually, no. His father, Isaac D'Israeli, changed the spelling to Disraeli in the 1820s (perhaps another sign, along with having Benjamin get baptized in 1817, of a desire to assimilate?).
On to your more serious point, yes, everyone was aware of Disraeli's ancestry (cf O'Connell's* famous reproach), but there was an important divide between being a Jew in blood and a Jew in faith (cf Lionel de Rothschild ).Britain was capable of having a PM who was Jewish in ancestry in the 19th century; they were not ready to have one who was Jewish in faith.
*O'Connell:"His name shows that he is of Jewish origin. I do not use it as a term of reproach; there are many most respectable Jews. But there are, as in every other people, some of the lowest and most disgusting grade of moral turpitude; and of those I look upon Mr. Disraeli as the worst. He has just the qualities of the impenitent thief on the Cross, and I verily believe, if Mr. Disraeli's family herald were to be examined and his genealogy traced, the same personage would be discovered to be the heir at law of the exalted individual to whom I allude. I forgive Mr. Disraeli now, and as the lineal descendant of the blasphemous robber, who ended his career besides the Founder of the Christian Faith, I leave the gentleman to the enjoyment of his infamous distinction and family honours"
Syon
An interesting quote that illustrates the complexities of Disraeli's position in English society:
ReplyDelete"Queen Victoria once asked Benjamin Disraeli, the 19th-century British prime minister, about his “real” religion.
“You were born a Jew and you forsook your great people,” she said. “Now you are a member of the Church of England, but no one believes that you are a Christian at heart. Please tell me, who are you and what are you?”
“Your Majesty,” Disraeli famously replied, “I am the blank page between the Old Testament and the New.”
When a heckler in Parliament jeered at Disraeli for being Jewish, he retorted: "Yes, I am a Jew, and when the ancestors of the honorable gentleman were brutal savages in an unknown island, mine were priests in the temple of Solomon". Also, he was able to obtain the rights to the Suez canal from the Khedive of Eghypt because of his close relatiopnship with the Rothschilds. Disraeli's Jewishness was no secret in Victorian Britain.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kED0aD3VfKY
ReplyDeleteHe is right.
The mild mannered,rich and powerful Parsis are yet another example how a formerly warrior people are transformed to due to unfortunate circumstances.
ReplyDeleteOne wonders if if Parsis were somehow to repopulate Iran ,they would revive their spirit and attempt to emulate the Persian Empire of yore like Israeli expansionists of today and Solomons empire.
Thank you for noting that the Indian National Congress were basically from the Anglophile middle class.
I always wondered if the Indian national movement as instigated by Congress has to do more with the slights Indians suffered by English snootiness and elitism by genuine blood and soil,earth and grit ties to their motherland.
This reminds me of one of the catalysts for a genuine English identity in the aftermath of the Norman invasion was when Anglo Norman elite with their pidgin French were routinely ridiculed for their accent when they went to study in Paris.This was of the many reasons that compelled them to(gradually) severe ties with France.
Did the American colonists experience something similar in the mother country?
Aren't Indian-born Parsis one of the highest-scoring IQ groups? I seem to recall reading somewhere that they score even better than Tamil Brahmins. True or not?"
ReplyDeleteIt may be true but remember on average they are considerably wealthier than the average Tamil Brahmin who are usually middle class.
Same goes for Marwaris,Gujaratis and other northwestern trading societies descended from Persian speaking (white) Huns who differed racially from those who conquered Europe.
Didn't Dizzy remark that he was the page between the Old and New Testaments?
ReplyDelete“Your Majesty,” Disraeli famously replied, “I am the blank page between the Old Testament and the New.”
ReplyDeleteThe first Messianic Jew since the Apostles?
Remember that O'Connell's nasty speech wasn't from a Briton speaking; it was a Roman Catholic Irishman. Irish anti-semitism gets airbrushed, but it could be nasty. See, for example, Derb:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2000/oct/05/the-pogrom-in-limerick/?pagination=false
Bear it in mind next time you wonder about de Valera visiting the German Embassy in Dublin to pass on his condolences on the death of Hitler.
On April 11, 1807, Ezekiel Hart was elected to the Legislative Assembly of Lower Canada. He is regarded as the first Jew to be elected to public office in the British Empire. Although taking his seat proved to be very problematic.
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ezekiel_Hart
Perhaps the asterisk solution is the correct way to end the Disraeli controversy:
ReplyDeleteDisraeli was the first Jewish* Prime Minister.
*Converted to Anglican faith at the age of 13 (perhaps in lieu of a Bar Mitzvah?)
Syon
Shapurji Saklatvala
ReplyDeleteFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Shapurji Saklatvala, Commons portrait, 1922
Shapurji Dorabji Saklatvala (1874–1936) was a British politician of Indian Parsi heritage. In 1922 Saklatvala became the third ethnic Indian elected to the Parliament of the United Kingdom, following Dadabhai Naoroji and Mancherjee Bhownagree. He also was among the earliest members of the Communist Party of Great Britain to serve as a Member of Parliament.
Contents
1 Biography
1.1 Early years
1.2 Political career
1.3 Death and legacy
2 Footnotes
3 Works
4 Further reading
5 See also
6 External links
Biography
Early years
Shapurji Saklatvala was born 28 March 1874 in Bombay (now Mumbai), India, the son of a merchant. He was educated at St. Xavier's School in Bombay before moving to St. Xavier's College for his collegiate education.[1]
He worked briefly as an iron and coal prospector for Jamsetji Tata[2] before moving to England in 1905.[3] It was at this time that he joined Lincoln's Inn and qualified as a barrister.[4]
Political career
Saklatvala was a committed socialist and first joined the Independent Labour Party (ILP) in Manchester in 1909.[3]
The Bolshevik Revolution in Russia of November 1917 was an inspiration to Saklatvala and following the establishment of the Communist International in 1919 he became active in attempting to affiliate the ILP with that new organization. Saklatvala joined with Emile Burns, R. Palme Dutt, J. Walton Newbold, Helen Crawfurd, and others as part of an organized faction called the Left Wing Group of the ILP which was dedicated to this effort.[5] When the affiliation drive by Saklatvala and the ILP's left wing ended in failure in the party's March 1921 national conference, Saklatvala left the organization with the others in the Left Wing Group to join the new Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB).[3]
He attended the 2nd Pan-African Congress held in Paris in 1921 as a delegate of the CPGB.
In the October 1922 general election the Communist Party of Great Britain launched its first electoral campaign, putting forward candidates in six districts.[6] Saklatvala ran in the Battersea North district of London, one of two Communists to receive the official endorsement of the Labour Party[6] — which was in effect an umbrella organization which included affiliated political parties like the ILP as well as representatives of various trade unions. Saklatvala won election in North Battersea, receiving 11,311 votes — topping his nearest rival by more than 2,000 votes.[7] Also elected running as a Communist, without official Labour Party support, was J. Walton Newbold, capturing a plurality of the vote in the Motherwell electoral district.[8]
Saklatvala was accepted into the Labour Party's parliamentary caucus but while Newbold applied for the same he was rejected.[9] This did not stop Saklatvala and Newbold from joint activity, however, and the pair attempted to raise the demands of the unemployed and the cause of cheap housing and lower rents whenever possible.[10] Newbold wound up being suspended from the House in May 1923 over his actions with respect to the Curzon ultimatum during the French occupation of the Ruhr.[10]
The November 1923 general election saw the CPGB putting forward 9 of its members as candidates, including Shapurji Saklatvala in Battersea North, where he was unanimously adopted as the nominee of the Battersea Labour Party.[11] Although not all the Communist candidates were endorsed by the Labour Party, they all were the recipients of support from local Labour activists.[11] Despite modest gains for Labour in the election overall, the results of the election returned the Conservatives as the largest party in the House of Commons (although their number of seats fell from 346 to 259).[12] All Communist candidates were defeated in the 1923 election, however, including Saklatvala in Battersea North.[12]
What about Jains?
ReplyDeleteDr Van Nostrand;"The first Messianic Jew since the Apostles?"
ReplyDeleteProbably not far off in terms of Disraeli's self-conception. For an interesting insight into his personal mythology, check out his novel TANCRED.
Syon
colins:"On April 11, 1807, Ezekiel Hart was elected to the Legislative Assembly of Lower Canada. He is regarded as the first Jew to be elected to public office in the British Empire. Although taking his seat proved to be very problematic."
ReplyDeleteSeems as though the pre-Revolutionary USA has the honor of first serving non-converted Jew with Francis Salvador:
"After arriving in Charleston in December 1773, Salvador at once entered into the American cause, and became close friends with the leaders of the Revolution in the South, including Pinckney, Rutledge, Drayton, Laurens, and Hammond.[4] Salvador was elected to South Carolina's General Assembly within a year of arriving, the first Jew to hold that office in any of the English colonies in North America.[1] He was just 27, and would hold the post until his death." (via WIKIPEDIA)
Syon
This reminds me of one of the catalysts for a genuine English identity in the aftermath of the Norman invasion was when Anglo Norman elite with their pidgin French were routinely ridiculed for their accent when they went to study in Paris.This was of the many reasons that compelled them to(gradually) severe ties with France.
ReplyDeleteDid the American colonists experience something similar in the mother country?
But its not the same. The colonists spoke English at home anyway.
And when is this period of the Anglo-Norman severing their ties with France happening? France didnt exist as a single entity when the Normans took control of England and Normandy remained in their hands for @ 200 years after 1066. The ties were severed, in one sense, when the French took control of Normandy and the English (Anglo-Normans) acknowledged that.
Some Jews worked for the Nazis. What does this prove?
ReplyDeleteAn article about a famous Parsi, and not one mention of Freddie Mercury yet? Interestingly enough, Mercury will be played in an upcoming biopic by popular Sailer topic Sasha Baron Cohen.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous:"Some Jews worked for the Nazis. What does this prove?"
ReplyDeleteAnd Godwin's Law is once again validated!
Syon
The first Messianic Jew since the Apostles?
ReplyDeleteDon't overlook Sabbatai Tzvi.
>Aren't Indian-born Parsis one of the highest-scoring IQ groups? I seem to recall reading somewhere that they score even better than Tamil Brahmins. True or not?
ReplyDeleteIn regards to actual IQ studies, there doesn't seem to be any positive evidence, but there seems to be quite a bit of secondary evidence from their academic success that would suggest an elevated IQ. In fact, I believe the situation is similar for TamBrahms, there aren't any IQ studies but the ratio academic success to the size of the population is highly suggestive (probably easier to discern in their case since their population size is considerably larger than Parsis but relatively small as an ethnic group in global terms).
This thread on Agnostic's blog has some insightful comments on Parsi IQ. Jason Malloy mentions an IQ study showing no elevated IQ for Parsis and Agnostic infers an IQ at the very least at the white mean based on college success of Parsis.
http://akinokure.blogspot.com/2012/04/why-are-parsi-elites-welcomed-while.html
The first Messianic Jew since the Apostles?
ReplyDeleteDon't overlook Sabbatai Tzvi."
I dont Messianic as in who thinks he is the Messiah (which would apply to Tzvi) but as in who follows THE Messiah(Jesus) ...this certainly didnt apply to Tzvi not just for the above reason but that he converted to Islam to save his neck.
But its not the same. The colonists spoke English at home anyway."
ReplyDeleteMy point about the Anglo Normans and American colonists was their language but how their accent was ridiculed by the mother countri(es).
Interestingly one was the mother country of the other as far as the nobility was concerned.
Thomas Paine noted something similar about England having French rulers when arguing for American self determination..dont quite recollect what exactly it was.
And when is this period of the Anglo-Norman severing their ties with France happening? France didnt exist as a single entity when the Normans took control of England and Normandy remained in their hands for @ 200 years after 1066. The ties were severed, in one sense, when the French took control of Normandy and the English (Anglo-Normans) acknowledged that."
Yes,my point was the reinstatement of an English identity was a gradual process and only got stregthened during the 100 years war (where the rulers of both "England" and "France" were descendents of Norman French)..it was essentially a family squabble...not unlike how the Kaiser during WWI was a grandson of Queen Victoria and a cousin of King George.