The Return: The 19th Century and the Remaking of America

By every measure the United States is experiencing a significant, deliberate return to its 19th-century cultural and political framework, characterized by a shift toward nationalism, protectionism, and a “Second Gilded Age” of economic inequality. More broadly, such a sustained shift toward 19th-century-style nationalism, protectionism, and sharply increased inequality is reshaping law, institutions, and everyday life.

Such radical and rapid political revolution leading to the “repositioning” of this society will have profound and potentially negative implications for minority groups, among others. Class, race, and status are replacing equity, inclusion, and diversity. This “return” will likely feature a type of reconfiguration of “separate but equal” status. “Whiteness” will return to its racially framed meaning in this revised construct, as history is being reconfigured and altered to fit this moment.

Among some Americans, there is a yearning for the “good old days” a type of political nostalgia, which has given license to this administration in its effort to return America to its more conservative, traditional social patterns and reestablish rigid class hierarchies, reintroduce scientific racism, and reimpose strict moral codes.

Such a profound and significant cultural transfer will have a very real impact on Jews whose liberal inclinations and socially conscious understandings will be challenged and upended.

Coercive social control, something already in play, including harsh policing, criminal-justice expansion, and surveillance technologies could be normalized, along with deepening mass incarceration and civic disenfranchisement, all behaviors that are threatening to Jewish sensibilities.

Antisemitic myths focusing on conspiracy and dual loyalty, among other themes, will resurge in an environment where such myth making is encouraged. The redefinition of race and gender distinctiveness will impact people of color and the LGBTQ+ community. A rising ethno-nationalist discourse often scapegoats’ minorities and religious outsiders, producing additional threats to Jews and others.

On matters of foreign policy, we could observe several significant and transformative policies. If this rediscovered nationalism includes anti-globalist protectionism, there may be selective retrenchment of international commitments; support for Israel could be maintained for symbolic identity reasons, even as broader multilateralism is rejected.

Diasporic communities, including Jews, may face dual pressures from homeland politics and US domestic shifts. In such a political environment, US foreign policy may become more transactional, and identity driven. Activists who criticize Israel will face legal penalties, policing, and delegitimization campaigns framed as unpatriotic or subversive, complicating Jewish communal pluralism.

Memory, culture, and history would be exposed to a revised view of society, beginning with such efforts as textbook revisionism, the removal of public symbols, and the sanitation of the histories of oppression. Contests over monuments, curricula, and national holidays will intensify, shaping further divisions. Civic education may shrink or be reshaped to favor nationalist narratives; critical thinking about history and power will likely be discouraged.

Democratic institutions would themselves be subject to reinterpretation. The political capture of courts through stacking, politicized confirmations, or altered rules would encourage and permit constitutional reinterpretation to advance entrench privilege.

A sustained reversion to 19th-century-style nationalism and inequality would disproportionately harm minorities through legal rollback, economic exclusion, heightened violence, and historical erasure; it would weaken democratic institutions and curtail opportunities for young people.

The scale of damage depends on institutional resilience, civic organizing, legal defense, and whether cross-cutting coalitions can form to defend pluralism and rule of law.

A “Second Gilded Age” would intensify the concentration of wealth while reducing upward mobility. Minorities, already overrepresented among lower-income groups, would likely bear disproportionate unemployment, housing insecurity, healthcare gaps, and diminished educational opportunity.

Policy and legal changes skewing toward majoritarian or identity-based privilege can weaken civil society protections including hate-crime enforcement and anti-discrimination, making redress harder. Voting restrictions, gerrymandering, and politicized law enforcement will reduce particular voter group’s political power and amplify social exclusion.

Rising inequality and reduced public investment in education, housing, and health will lower intergenerational mobility for many young people, especially from minority and working-class backgrounds.

No doubt, some younger activists will radicalize in response—either toward exclusionary nationalism or toward renewed activism for inclusion—producing polarization and possible generational conflict.

Re-segregation of America could be a direct outcome, as we are likely to see the reallocation of public resources toward privileged enclaves and private institutions. Intimidation, street-level harassment, vandalism of minority institutions, and workplace/school discrimination are likely to increase as social norms shift, and enforcement slackens. Eroding civil-rights enforcement, weakening of affirmative action, and judicial reinterpretation of equal-protection doctrines could make structural remedies less available. “Colorblind” or “neutral” legal frames often mask substantive retrenchment.

Legislative majorities, using procedural changes, can weaken oversight, constrain independent agencies, and reduce checks on executive power. When elites legitimize exclusionary narratives, norms of impartial administration, civil-service independence, and nonpartisan law enforcement fray.

Media consolidation and disinformation accelerate polarization and reduce civic trust and impose controls on the flow and access to news.

Politically, we are likely to see the fracturing of coalitions leading to a significant realignment of power. Traditional progressive coalitions, including racial, labor, immigrant, religious and minority groups, could be weakened by targeted repression and co-optation. Political rhetoric normalizing exclusion increases risk of hate crimes, organized vigilantism, and the potential for political violence.

Endnote:

Is the scenario described here possible? Yes, but so are the opportunities to create a counter movement, reframing the case for liberal democracy. The storyline laid out here should serve as wake-up call to action. In an essay entitled, Building Forward, we begin to outline an affirmative set of ideas that seek to address this moment in time, offering a prescription for an alternative future.

In response to these significant structural and policy changes, one would expect to see a renewed commitment to legal defense strategies, cross-community coalitions, attention to civics education, and a growing commitment to support and embrace local media, mutual aid programs to protect vulnerable communities.

Understanding the impact of political extremism, while also identifying counter measures designed to offset such movements, now becomes the burden, the responsibility on the part of this nation’s citizens to be proactive!