Enemy distinctions constitute rather than merely reflect the theological-political divide

Evidence

Perceptions of the enemy, distinctions between enemies, cannot therefore be treated as an epiphenomenon of the distinction between theological and political, but are instead constitutive of it. — Gil Anidjar, The Jew, the Arab, 208

Categorization

• XREF: Inverts the usual base-superstructure logic; connects to Milgrom’s point that institutions are constitutive rather than epiphenomenal—but here the causal arrow runs the other way (theology/politics emerging from enemy-distinctions rather than the reverse). — connects to: Doctrinal disputes matter chiefly for their perceived moral consequences; Anti-Catholic and anti-radical nativism defined enemies first while racial nativism defined the in-group first — John Higham, Strangers in the Land: Patterns of…, 55; Religion in settler conflict operates as a differential marker, not as doctrine — Nadim N. Rouhana and Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian, When Politics Are Sacralized:…, 2064 (+2 more)
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Gil Anidjar, The Jew, the Arab: A History of the…, 208