Racial nativism receded while anti-Semitism surged in 1921 debate

Evidence

Congressional restrictionists knew that public opinion upheld them, even if some of the big city newspapers remained critical. Consequently the supporters of the bill felt little need to engage in elaborate justifications. Was it not enough to realize that a terrible emergency had befallen the nation? The vision of hungry Europe inundating jobless America provided, therefore, the main theme of debate, and enough of the spirit of the Red Scare endured to furnish supplementary reflections on the immigrants’ Bolshevistic and disloyal propensities. Apparently the doctrines of racial nativism had not yet regained a wide enough currency to play much part in the discussion. On the other hand, a considerable strain of anti-Semitism was present. — John Higham, Strangers in the Land, 1862

Categorization

• XREF: Evidence for the reader’s central claim that the manufactured ‘enemy’ category is not a fixed racial endpoint — race talk faded even as exclusion triumphed, replaced by emergency and Jewish themes. — connects to: Anti-Semitic nativism survived and grew once its anti-radical trigger faded — John Higham, Strangers in the Land: Patterns of…, 1694
• QUESTION: Why would racial nativism have ‘not yet regained wide currency’ while anti-Semitism surged — is Jew-hatred a distinct axis from the racial-nativist axis at this moment?

Broader Connections

• Anti-Semitic nativism survived and grew once its anti-radical trigger faded #corroborates (0.80) — John Higham, Strangers in the Land, 1694