My old friend Daniel Boyarin has raised, not for the first time, the problem of whether one can imagine what he calls “an ethical form of Jewish collective continuity.” He strikes out against the notion of such a “Jewish” ethical continuity seeing it having been negated in the present discussion, the negation driven by two arguments, “[Christian] supersessionism” on the right and “territorial nationalism” on the left. Whether it is possible “to inform prejudice against collective Jewish continuity is perhaps mitigated when Jews per se are obviously the objects of collective discrimination, and correspondingly exacerbated when Jews as a collective appear to be ‘powerful’ or ‘secure.’” Anti-Semitism or the “model minority.”

我的老朋友丹尼尔·博亚林（Daniel Boyarin）已经不是第一次提出这样一个问题：人们能否想象出他所谓的“犹太集体连续​​性的道德形式”。他反对这种“犹太”伦理连续性的概念，因为它在当前的讨论中被否定了，这种否定是由两个论点驱动的，右派的“[基督教]超验主义”和左派的“领土民族主义”。当犹太人本身显然是集体歧视的对象时，是否有可能“告知对犹太人集体连续性的偏见可能会减轻，而当犹太人作为一个集体似乎'强大'或'安全'时，相应地会加剧。”反犹太主义或“模范少数族裔”。