Talk:Rootless cosmopolitan

Bad lede

The poorly-written lede currently contains a false statement:

The anti-cosmopolitan campaign began in 1946, when Joseph Stalin in his speech in Moscow attacked writers who were ethnic Jews,[see source below (1)] and culminated in the exposure of the non-existent Doctors' Plot in 1953.[see source below (2)]

Source 1 is a column by TV journalist Jeff Greenfield. It's an op-ed attacking Stephen Miller [1]. It is not a reliable source for claims not made elsewhere.

Moreover, Greenfield does not actually say anything about Joseph Stalin attacking ethnic Jews in a Moscow speech, as claimed; perhaps that's why I was unable to find another source stating that. Greenfield actually states that Stalin gave a speech about literary works (authors and location unspecified):

"One reason why 'cosmopolitan' is an unnerving term is that it was the key to an attempt by Soviet dictator Josef Stalin to purge the culture of dissident voices. In a 1946 speech, he deplored works in which “the positive Soviet hero is derided and inferior before all things foreign and cosmopolitanism that we all fought against from the time of Lenin, characteristic of the political leftovers, is many times applauded.” It was part of a yearslong campaigned aimed at writers, theater critics, scientists and others who were connected with “bourgeois Western influences.” Not so incidentally, many of these “cosmopolitans” were Jewish, and official Soviet propaganda for a time devoted significant energy into “unmasking” the Jewish identities of writers who published under pseudonyms."

In other words, Greenfield states that Stalin deplored certain "cosmopolitan" written works and spoke out against them in 1946, then adds that many of the people attacked in the "yearslong campaign" afterward were Jewish. That's not a controversial statement, but it does not support the claim made.

Source 2 is an article in Cold War History by Konstantin Azadovskii and Boris Egorov [2]. Having read the article, I find nothing specifically about the Doctors' Plot: the authors seem to avoid mentioning it. Indeed the Russian historical literature I am familiar with separates the anti-cosmopolitan campaign of the late 1940s from the Doctor's Plot of the early 1950s, although these are related phenomena. (E.g., various manifestations of what is called the anti-cosmopolitan campaign were wound down before the Doctors' Plot.) Zloyvolsheb (talk) 23:41, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

So what's the problem? Stalin implied, but everyone knew who were the intended target. It was normal Soviet double speak.--Aristophile (talk) 00:41, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

So you are implying Stalin implied "ethnic Jews" and "attacked ethnic Jews" when the source instead states he "deplored works in which 'the positive Soviet hero is derided and inferior before all things foreign'": is that correct? If so, see WP:OR. We write based on what the sources actually state. Zloyvolsheb (talk) 00:50, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Norwood does say that the anti-cosmopolitan campaign began in the fall of 1948.

YIVO Encyclopedia states "The new trend was heralded by an August 1946 speech by Communist Party Central Committee Secretary Andrei Zhdanov" (Zhdanov doctrine)... but "The onslaught upon Jewish “cosmopolitans” was given wide publicity. It was initiated in mid-December 1948 at the Twelfth Board Plenum of the Writers Union" So I believe that Zloyvolsheb is correct at least in the fact that 1948 is the commonly used start date. However, YIVO also states that "the anticosmopolitan campaign persisted in subdued form, flaring up again in connection with the Doctors’ Plot in 1953 just prior to the plot’s “exposure.”" buidhe 01:04, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

More or less, yes. Zhdanov did launch the so-called Zhdanovshchina campaign against Western influence in 1946, but the campaign was not immediately anti-Semitic. Azadovskii and Egorov actually stated the campaign began as an anti-Western campaign in 1946 but took an ant-Semitic turn in 1949, the argument Azadovskii and Egorov make is the anti-Western "anti-cosmopolitan" campaign morphed into the anti-Semitic "anti-rootless cosmopolitan" campaign in 1949. I take it we agree that the current lede is not written accurately? Zloyvolsheb (talk)

References

Is it widely considered antisemitic?

Widely can be a weasel word, hiding poor attribution. WP:WEASEL. Thus, most of the sources are from the United States and almost all from the United States or United Kingdom. Is that widely? The great majority of those expressing an opinion are Jewish. Is that widely? How representative is this handful of commentators, activists and politicians?

Which languages and time periods does this statement apply to? Several of the sources simply refer to it in theoretical and historical terms as a type of prejudice rather than as a phrase in use. Others do not suggest it is antisemitic at all. None of the sources use the term as it was used under Stalin i.e. referring to a Jew as a rootless cosmopolitan or to Jews as rootless cosmopolitans. Instead, there are references to related phrases e.g. rootless cosmopolitan elite or cosmopolitan xxxx. Are they the same in meaning or different from the original phrase?

There are few, if any, clear examples in the sources of antisemitic intent. How many people are educated in the detailed history of the Soviet Union and so are aware of the issue? Does it make a difference that migration and globalisation mean that many millions of people of every culture and country now move between countries more than once in their lives and are open to multinational influences? Some sources say that such terms should not be used even where there is no antisemitic intent. Should one stop using meaningful words and phrases because of their use in a foreign language 70 years ago?

I think there is more to this that can be captured in a single sentence. It should probably either be expanded to look in detail at controversy over the use of related phrases in the 21st century or reworded to indicate the limitations. Jontel (talk) 18:01, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

That's most likely because most countries do not have a significant Jewish population, so they don't have as much of a debate around antisemitism and/or the publications would not be in English. However, I just found a source in French talking about "cosmopolitan" being used as an anti-Jewish expression around the time of the Dreyfus affair [3] Here is a German source which says that Action Française accused Jews of being cosmopolitans [4] both of these were very easy to find by searching "cosmopolitan antisemitism" in the respective languages, so please don't claim that such sources don't exist without trying your own search. (t · c) buidhe 22:38, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

I do not see that claim in what I said, so sorry if I was not clear. I was talking only of the sources already referenced in the article. My point was that the article could usefully be expanded to include other countries and periods. I can quite see that the term would be used in multiple languages. Jontel (talk) 05:16, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Why not add some reliable, verifiable sources that say it isn't an anti-Semitic trope if that is your position? 80.47.137.128 (talk) 14:03, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

• Yes, of course it is antisemitic as a derogatory expression that was applied in the USSR specifically to Jews. My very best wishes (talk) 23:49, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Last section

It's true that the perceived cosmopolitanism of Jewish people is a recurring theme in anti-Semitic discourse, but the cosmopolitan-provincial divide and the concept of 'rootlessness' have so much salience in mainstream political science + philosophy that it strikes me as totally bizarre that they're being presented here as exclusively anti-Semitic dog whistles. The cosmopolitan-provincial divide exists between Jews as strongly as within other demographics. It's like if a flurry of right-wing American newspapers were cited to the effect that 'anti-country rhetoric' had 'troubling' historical precedents viz a viz dekulakization, or that anti-capitalist slogans were associated with left-wing and fascist suppression of Jews. They would be correct to a degree, but it would not be anything close to the whole truth. There's a lot being omitted. Maskettaman (talk) 07:49, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Maskettaman, Here we go based on reliable sources rather than original research. Any proposed additions to the article must be supported by reliable sources. (t · c) buidhe 07:52, 30 November 2020 (UTC)