8
emergence, it relied both on their financial resources and on their political loyalty for its
consolidation.
25
In return, it rewarded wealthy Jews with a host of social privileges that made
them dependent upon state power and prevented their integration into society. The Jews,
Arendt argues, didn’t much object, as this privileged status coincided with their own
aspiration to maintain a separate identity. The interest of the state and the interests of the
Jews therefore seemed perfectly well matched.
26
As Arendt explains, it is precisely because the nation state, unlike its absolutist
predecessor, was not allied with any specific class in society that it allied itself with the
Jews.
27
The class of Jews that had inherited their wealth from the Court-Jews of absolutist
times past seemed ideally suited for this purpose, as they formed the only group in society
that “did not form a class of [its] own and […] did not belong to any of the classes in their
countries”.
28
As a result, they could offer the emergent nation state both the financial
backing and the political loyalty it so desperately needed. On this point, Arendt observes:
“thus the Jews were the only part of the population willing to finance the state’s beginnings
and to tie their destinies to its future development.”
29
The distance from Court Jew to
European banker thus seemed but a short step away. And indeed, the European banker
continued to be of use to the state even as it subsequently achieved a higher degree of
consolidation. When the state’s dependence on the Jews subsequently diminished and thus
25
OT, 17.
26
Cf. OT, 13.
27
OT, 17.
28
OT, 13.
29
OT, 17.
Convention