Nativism’s ideological enemies got remade as biologically fixed racial ones

Evidence

This is not to say that foreigners no longer seemed a national menace after the early months of 1920. The sense of danger was still vivid; the 100 per center’s thirst for conformity remained unslaked. But his conception of the foreign peril changed so profoundly that Americanization became wholly irrelevant to 1t. From fear of a radical danger, nationalists reverted in 1920 and thereafter to a racial bias. Radicalism, and the hyphenism that preceded it, had been ideological infections; presumably one might set up ideological defenses against them. But the racial danger was in the blood. Why try to educate men inherently incapable of receiving American ideals? Why try to change people who are biologically unchangeable? — John Higham, Strangers in the Land, 1580

Categorization

  • XREF: Directly evidences the reader’s hypothesis that the manufactured ‘enemy’ category passes from ideological to racial form — racialization as a transitional hardening, not fixed endpoint. — connects to: Nativism’s core charges repeat for centuries and shift only toward racism — John Higham, Strangers in the Land: Patterns of…, 757; Racial nativism grew only when it fixed on an identifiable new immigrant type — John Higham, Strangers in the Land: Patterns of…, 832; Nativism abandoned ideological conversion for permanent racial exclusion once radical threat dissolved — John Higham, Strangers in the Land: Patterns of…, 1580 (+10 more)
  • QUESTION: The key theoretical question for the reader: if the radical/ideological enemy was defeated, was racialization a retreat to a more ‘primordial’ ground, or itself another constructed category that could also shift?

Broader Connections