Some months have passed since the Zionist Congress, but its
echoes are still heard in daily life and in the press. In daily life the
echoes take the form of meetings small and big, local and central. Since the
delegates returned home, they have been gathering the public together and
recounting over and over again the wonders that they saw enacted before their
eyes. The wretched, hungry public listens and waxes enthusiastic and hopes for
salvation: for can "they" -- the Jews of the West -- fail to carry
out anything that they plan? Heads grow hot and hearts beat fast; and many
"communal workers" whose one care in life had been for years --
until last August -- the Palestinian settlement, and who would have given the
whole world for a penny donation in aid of Palestine workmen or the Jaffa
School, have now quite lost their bearings, and ask one another: "What's
the good of this sort of work? The Messiah is near at hand, and we busy
ourselves with trifles! The time has come for great deeds: great men, men of
the West, march before us in the van." -- There has been a revolution in
their world, and to emphasise it they give a new name to the cause: it is no
longer "Love of Zion" (Chibbath Zion), but
"Zionism" (Zioniyuth). Nay, the more careful among them,
determined to leave no loop-hole for error, even keep the European form of the
name ("Zionismus") -- thus announcing to all and sundry that
they are not talking about anything so antiquated as Chibbath Zion, but
about a new, up-to-date movement, which comes, like its name, from the West,
where people do not use Hebrew.
In the press all these meetings, with their addresses,
motions and resolutions, appear over again in the guise of articles --
articles written in a vein of enthusiasm and triumph. The meeting was
magnificent, every speaker was a Demosthenes, the resolutions were carried by
acclamation, all those present were swept off their feet and shouted with one
voice : "We will do and obey !" -- in a word, everything was
delightful, entrancing, perfect. And the Congress itself still produces a
literature of its own. Pamphlets specially devoted to its praises appear in
several languages; Jewish and non-Jewish papers still occasionally publish
articles and notes about it; and, needless to say, the " Zionist"
organ [ Die Welt, the German organ
founded by Herzl ] itself endeavours to maintain the impression which
the Congress made, and not to allow it to fade too rapidly from the public
memory. It searches the press of every nation and every land, and wherever it
finds a favourable mention of the Congress, even in some insignificant journal
published in the language of one of the smaller European nationalities, it
immediately gives a summary of the article, with much jubilation. Only one
small nation's language has thus far not been honoured with such attention,
though its journals too have lavished praise on the Congress: I mean hebrew.
In short, the universal note is one of rejoicing; and it is
therefore small wonder that in the midst of this general harmony my little
Note on the Congress sounded discordant and aroused the most violent
displeasure in many quarters. I knew from the start that I should not be
forgiven for saying such things at such a time, and I had steeled myself to
hear with equanimity the clatter of high-sounding phrases and obscure
innuendoes -- of which our writers are so prolific -- and hold my peace; But
when I was attacked by M. L. Lilienblum, [The
first secretary of the Choveve Zion, and an opponent of the
"spiritual" ideas of Achad Ha'am] a writer whose habit it is
not to write apropos des bottes for the sake of displaying his style, I
became convinced that this time I had really relied too much on the old adage: Verbum sapienti satis. It is not pleasant to swim against the stream;
and when one does something without enjoyment, purely as a duty, one does not
put more than the necessary minimum of work into the task. Hence in the note
referred to I allowed myself to be extremely brief, relying on my readers to
fill in the gaps out of their own knowledge, by connecting what I wrote with
earlier expressions of my views, which were already familiar to them. I see
now that I made a mistake, and left room for the ascription to me of ideas and
opinions which are utterly remote from my true intention. Consequently I have
now to perform the hard and ungrateful task of writing a commentary on myself,
and expressing my views on the matter in hand with greater explicitness.
Nordau's address on the general condition of the Jews was a
sort of introduction to the business of the Congress. It exposed in incisive
language the sore troubles, material or moral, which beset the Jews the world
over. In Eastern countries their trouble is material: they have a constant
struggle to satisfy the most elementary physical needs, to win a crust of
bread and a breath of air -- things which are denied them because they are
Jews. In the West, in lands of emancipation, their material condition is not
particularly bad, but the moral trouble is serious: They want to take full
advantage of their rights, and cannot; they long to become attached to the
people of the country, and to take part in its social life, and they are kept
at arm's length; they strive after love and brotherhood, and are met by looks
of hatred and contempt on all sides; conscious that they are not inferior to
their neighbours in any kind of ability or virtue, they have it continually
thrown in their teeth that they are an inferior type, and are not fit to rise
to the same level as the Aryans. And more to the same effect.
Well -- what then ?
Nordau himself did not touch on this question : it was
outside the scope of his address. But the whole Congress was the answer.
Beginning as it did with Nordau's address, the Congress meant this : that in
order to escape from all these troubles it is necessary to establish a Jewish
State.
Let us imagine, then, that the consent of Turkey and the
other Powers has already been obtained, and the State is established -- and,
if you will, established völkerrechtlich, with the full sanction of
international law, as the more extreme members of the Congress desire. Does
this bring, or bring near, the end of the material trouble? No doubt, every
poor Jew will be at perfect liberty to go to his State and to seek his living
there, without any artificial hindrances in the shape of restrictive laws or
anything of that kind. But liberty to seek a livelihood is not enough:
he must he able to find what he seeks. There are natural laws which
fetter man's freedom of action much more than artificial laws. Modern economic
life is so complex, and the development of any single one of its departments
depends on so many conditions, that no nation, not even the strongest and
richest, could in a short time create in any country new sources of livelihood
sufficient for many millions of human beings. The single country is no longer
an economic unit: the whole world is one great market, in which every State
has to struggle hard for its place. Hence only a fantasy bordering on madness
can believe that so soon as the Jewish State is established millions of Jews
will flock to it, and the land will afford them adequate sustenance. Think of
the labour and the money that had to be sunk in Palestine over a long period
of years before one new branch of production -- vine-growing -- could be
established there ! And even to-day, after all the work that has been done, we
cannot yet say that Palestinian wine has found the openings that it needs in
the world market, although its quantity is still small. But if in 1891
Palestine had been a Jewish State, and all the dozens of Colonies that were
then going to be established for the cultivation of the vine had in fact been
established, Palestinian wine would be to-day as common as water, and would
fetch no price at all. Using the analogy of this small example, we can see how
difficult it will be to start new branches of production in Palestine, and to
find openings for its products in the world market. But if the Jews are to
flock to their State in large numbers, all at once, we may prophesy with
perfect certainty that home competition in every branch of production (and
home competition will be inevitable because the amount of labour available
will increase more quickly than the demand for it) will prevent any one branch
from developing as it should. And then the Jews will turn and leave their
State, flying from the most deadly of all enemies -- an enemy not to be kept
off even by the magic word völkerrechtlich: from hunger.
True, agriculture in its elementary form does not depend to
any great extent on the world market, and at any rate it will provide those
engaged in it with food, if not with plenty. But if the Jewish State sets out
to save all those Jews who are in the grip of the material problems, or most
of them, by turning them into agriculturists in Palestine, then it must first
find the necessary capital. At Basle, no doubt, one heard naive and confident
references to a "National Fund" of ten million pounds sterling. But
even if we silence reason, and give the.rein to fancy so far as to believe
that we can obtain a Fund of those dimensions in a short time, we are still no
further. Those very speeches that we heard at Basle about the economic
condition of the Jews in various countries showed beyond a doubt that our
national wealth is very small, and most of our people are below the
poverty-line. From this any man of sense, though he be no great mathematician,
can readily calculate that ten million pounds are a mere nothing compared with
the sum necessary for the emigration of the Jews and their settlement in
Palestine on an agricultural basis. Even if all the rich Jews suddenly became
ardent " Zionists," and every one of them gave half his wealth to
the cause, the whole would still not make up the thousands of millions that
would be needed for the purpose.
There is no doubt, then, that even when the Jewish State is
established the Jews will be able to settle in it only little by little, the
determining factors being the resources of the people themselves and the
degree of economic development reached by the country. Meanwhile the natural
increase of population will continue, both among those who settle in the
country and among those who remain outside it, with the inevitable result that
on the one hand Palestine will have less and less room for new immigrants, and
on the other hand the number of those remaining outside Palestine will not
diminish very much, in spite of the continual emigration. In his opening
speech at the Congress, Dr. Herzl, wishing to demonstrate the superiority of
his State idea over the method of Palestinian colonisation adopted hitherto,
calculated that by the latter method it would take nine hundred years before
all the Jews could be settled in their land. The members of the Congress
applauded this as a conclusive argument. But it was a cheap victory. The
Jewish State itself, do what it will, cannot make a more favourable
calculation.
Truth is bitter, but with all its bitterness it is better
than illusion. We must confess to ourselves that the "ingathering of the
exiles " is unattainable by natural means. We may, by natural means,
establish a Jewish State one day, and the Jews may increase and multiply in it
until the country will hold no more: but even then the greater part of the
people will remain scattered in strange lands. "To gather our scattered
ones from the four corners of the earth" (in the words of the Prayer
Book) is impossible. Only religion, with its belief in a miraculous
redemption, can promise that consummation.
But if this is so, if the Jewish State too means not an
"ingathering of the exiles," but the settlement of a small part of
our people in Palestine, then how will it solve the material problem of the
Jewish masses in the lands of the Diaspora?
Or do the champions of the State idea think, perhaps, that,
being masters in our own country, we shall be able by diplomatic means to get
the various governments to relieve the material sufferings of our scattered
fellow-Jews ! That is, it seems to me, Dr. Herzl's latest theory. In his new
pamphlet (Der Baseler Kongress) we no longer find any calculation of
the number of years that it will take for the Jews to enter their country.
Instead, he tells us in so many words (p. 9) that if the land becomes the
national property of the Jewish people, even though no individual Jew owns
privately a single square yard of it, then the Jewish problem will be solved
for ever. These words (unless we exclude the material aspect of the Jewish
problem) can be understood only in the way suggested above. But this hope
seems to me so fantastic that I see no need to waste words in demolishing it.
We have seen often knough, even in the case of nations more in favour than
Jews are with powerful Governments, how little diplomacy can do in matters of
this kind, if it is not backed by a large armed force. Nay, it is conceivable
that in the days of the Jewish State, when economic conditions in this or that
country are such as to induce a Government to protect its people against
Jewish competition by restrictive legislation, that Government will find it
easier then than it is now to find an excuse for such action, for it will be
able to plead that if the Jews are not happy where they are, they can go to
their own State.
The material problem, then, will not be ended by the
foundation of a Jewish State, nor, generally speaking, does it lie in our
power to end it (though it could be eased more or less even now by various
means, such as the encouragement of agriculture and handicrafts among Jews in
all countries); and whether we found a State or not, this particular problem
will always turn at bottom on the economic condition of each country and the
degree of civilisation attained by each people.
Thus we are driven to the conclusion that the only true
basis of Zionism is to be found in the other problem, the moral one.
But the moral problem appears in two forms, one in Ihe West
and one in the East; and this fact explains the fundamental difference between
Western "Zionism" and Eastern Chibbath Zion. Nordau dealt
only with the Western problem, apparently knowing nothing about the Eastern;
and the Congress as a whole concentrated on the first, and paid little
attention to the second.
The Western Jew, after leaving the Ghetto and seeking to
attach himself to the people of the country in which he lives, is unhappy
because his hope of an open-armed welcome is disappointed. He returns
reluctantly to his own people, and tries to find within the Jewish community
that life for which he yearns -- but in vain. Communal life and communal
problems no longer satisfy him. He has already grown accustomed to a broader
social and political life; and on the inteliectual side Jewish cultural work
has no attraction, because Jewish culture has played no part in his education
from childhood, and is a closed book to him. So in his trouble he turns to the
land of his ancestors, and pictures to himself how good it would be if a
Jewish State were re-established there -- a State arranged and organised
exactly after the pattern of other States. Then he could live a full, complete
life among his own people, and find at home all that he now sees outside,
dangled before his eyes, but out of reach. Of course, not all the Jews will be
able to take wing and go to their State; but the very existence of the Jewish
State will raise the prestige of those who remain in exile, and their fellow
citizens will no more despise them and keep them at arm's length, as though
they were ignoble slaves, dependent entirely on the hospitality of others. As
he contemplates this fascinating vision, it suddenly dawns on his inner
consciousness that even now, before the Jewish State is established, the mere
idea of it gives him almost complete relief. He has an opportunity for
organised work, for political excitement; he finds a suitable field of
activity without having to become subservient to non- Jews;and he feels that
thanks to this ideal he stands once more spiritually erect, and has regained
human dignity, without overmuch trouble and without external aid. So he
devotes himself to the ideal with all the ardour of which he is capable; he
gives rein to his fancy, and lets it soar as ft will, up above reality and the
limitations of human power. For it is not the attainment of the ideal that he
needs: its pursuit alone is sufficient to cure him of his moral sickness,
which is the consciousness of inferiority; and the higher and more distant the
ideal, the greater its power of exaltation.
This is the basis of Western Zionism and the secret of its
attraction. But Eastern Chibbath Zion has a different origin and
development. Originally, like "Zionism," it was political; but being
a result of material evils, it could not rest satisfied with an "activity
" consisting only of outbursts of feeling and fine phrases. These things
may satisfy the heart, but not the stomach. So Chibbath Zion began at
once to express itself in concrete activities -- in the establishment of
colonies in Palestine. This practical work soon clipped the wings of fancy,
and made it clear that Chibbath Zion could not lessen the material evil
by one iota. One might have thought, then, that when this fact became patent
the Choveve Zion would give up their activity, and cease wasting time
and energy on work which brought them no nearer their goal. But, no: they
remained true to their flag, and went on working with the old enthusiasm,
though most of them did not understand even in their own minds why they did
so. They felt instinctively that so they must do; but as they did not clearly
appreciate the nature of this feeling, the things that they did were not
always rightly directed towards that object which in reality was drawing them
on without their knowledge.
For at the very time when the material tragedy in the East
was at its height, the heart of the Eastern Jew was still oppressed by another
tragedy -- the moral one; and when the Choveve Zion began to work for
the solution of the material problem, the national instinct of the people felt
that just in such work could it find the remedy for its moral trouble. Hence
the people took up this work and would not abandon it even after it had become
obvious that the material trouble could not be cured in this way. The Eastern
form of the moral trouble is absolutely different from the Western. In the
West it is the problem of the Jews, in the East the problem of Judaism. The
one weighs on the individual, the other on the nation. The one is felt by Jews
who have had a European education, the other by Jews whose education has been
Jewish. The one is a product of anti-Semitism, and is dependent on
anti-Semitism for its existence;the other is a natural product of a real link
with a culture of thousands of years, which will retain its hold even if the
troubles of the Jews all over the world come to an end, together with
anti-Semitism, and all the Jews in every land have comfortable positions, are
on the best possible terms with their neighbours, and are allowed by them to
take part in every sphere of social and political life on terms of absolute
equality.
It is not only Jews who have come out of the Ghetto:
Judaism has come out, too. For Jews the exodus is confined to certain
countries, and is due to toleration; but Judaism has come out (or is coming
out) of its own accord wherever it has come into contact with modern culture.
This contact with modern culture overturns the defences of Judaism from
within, so that Judaism can no longer remain isolated and live a life apart.
The spirit of our people strives for development: it wants to absorb those
elements of general culture which reach it from outside, to digest them and to
make them a part of itself, as it has done before at different periods of its
history. But the conditions of its life in exile are not suitable. In our time
culture wears in each country the garb of the national spirit, and the
stranger who would woo her must sink his individuality and become absorbed in
the dominant spirit. For this reason Judaism in exile cannot develop its
individuality in its own way. When it leaves the Ghetto walls it is in danger
of losing its essential being or -- at best -- its national unity: it is in
danger of being split up into as many kinds of Judaism, each with a different
character and life, as there are countries of the Jewish dispersion.
And now Judaism finds that it can no longer tolerate the galuth form which it had to take on, in obedience to its will-to-live, when it was
exiled from its own country, and that if it loses that form its life is in
danger. So it seeks to return to its historic centre, in order to live there a
life of natural development, to bring its powers into play in every department
of human culture, to develop and perfect those national possessions which it
has acquired up to now, and thus to contribute to the common stock of
humanity, in the future as in the past, a great national culture, the fruit of
the unhampered activity of a people living according to its own spirit. For
this purpose Judaism needs at present but little. It needs not an independent
State, but only the creation in its native land of conditions favourable to
its development: a good-sized settlement of Jews working without hindrance1 in every branch of culture, from agriculture and handicrafts to science and
literature. This Jewish settlement, which will be a gradual growth, will
become in course of time the centre of the nation, wherein its spirit will
find pure expression and develop in all its aspects up to the highest degree
of perfection of which it is capable. Then from this centre the spirit of
Judaism will go forth to the great circumference, to all the communities of
the Diaspora, and will breathe new life into them and preserve their unity;
and when our national culture in Palestine has attained that level, we may be
confident that it will produce men in the country who will be able, on a
favourable opportunity, to establish a State which will be a Jewish State, and
not merely a State of Jews.
This Chibbath Zion, which takes thought for the
preservation of Judaism at a time when Jewry suffers so much, is something odd
and unintelligible to the " political" Zionists of the West, just as
the demand of R. Jochanan ben Zakkai for Jabneh was strange and unintelligible
to the corresponding people of that time.2 And so political Zionism cannot satisfy those Jews who care for Judaism: its
growth seems to them to be fraught with danger to the object of their own
aspiration.
The secret of our people's persistence is -- as I have
tried to show elsewhere3--that
at a very early period the Prophets taught it to respect only spiritual power,
and not to worship material power. For this reason the clash with enemies
stronger than itself never brought the Jewish nation, as it did the other
nations of antiquity, to the point of self-effacement. So long as we are
faithful to this principle, our existence has a secure basis: for in spiritual
power we are not inferior to other nations, and we have no reason to efface
ourselves. But a political ideal which does not rest on the national
culture is apt to seduce us from our loyalty to spiritual greatness, and
to beget in us a tendency to find the path of glory in the attainment of
material power and political dominion, thus breaking the thread that unites us
with the past, and undermining our historical basis. Needless to say, if the
political ideal is not attained, it will have disastrous consequences, because
we shall have lost the old basis without finding a new one. But even if it is
attained under present conditions, when we are a scattered people not only in
the physical but also in the spiritual sense -- even then Judaism will be in
great danger. Almost all our great men, those, that is, whose education and
social position fit them to be at the head of a Jewish State, are spiritually
far removed from Judaism, and have no true conception of its nature and its
value. Such men, however loyal to their State and devoted to its interests,
will necessarily regard those interests as bound up with the foreign culture
which they themselves have imbibed and they will endeavour, by moral
persuasion or even by force, to implant that culture in the Jewish State, so
that in the end the Jewish State will be a State of Germans or Frenchmen of
the Jewish race. We have even now a small example of this process in
Palestine. And history teaches us that in the days of the Herodian house
Palestine was indeed a Jewish State, but the national culture was despised and
persecuted, and the ruling house did everything in its power to implant Roman
culture in the country, and frittered away the national resources in the
building of heathen temples and amphitheatres and so forth. Such a Jewish
State would spell death and utter degradation for our people. We should never
achieve sufficient political power to deserve respect, while we should miss
the living moral force within. The puny State, being "tossed about like a
ball between its powerful neighbours, and maintaining its existence only by
diplomatic shifts and continual truckling to the favoured of fortune,"
would not be able to give us a feeling of national glory; and the national
culture, in which we might have sought and found our glory, would not have
been implanted in our State and would not be the principle of its life. So we
should really be then -- much more than we are now -- "a small and
insignificant nation," enslaved in spirit to "the favoured of
fortune," turning an envious and covetous eye on the armed force of our
"powerful neighbours" and our existence as a sovereign State would
not add a glorious chapter to our national history. Were it not better for
"an ancient people which was once a beacon to the world" to
disappear than to end by reaching such a goal as this?4 Mr. Lilienblum reminds me that there are in our time small States, like
Switzerland, which are safeguarded against interference by the other nations,
and have no need of "continual truckling." But a comparison between
Palestine and small countries like Switzerland overlooks the geographical
position of Palestine and its religious importance for all nations. These two
facts will make it quite impossible for its "powerful neighbours"
(by which expression, of course, I did not mean, as Mr. Lilienblum interprets,
"the Druses and the Persians") to leave it alone altogether; and
when it has become a Jewish State they will all still keep an eye on it, and
each Power will try to influence its policy in a direction favourable to
itself, just as we see happening in the case of other weak states (like
Turkey) in which the great European nations have "interests."
In a word: Chibbath Zion, no less than
"Zionism," wants a Jewish State and believes in the possibility of
the establishment of a Jewish State in the future. But while " Zionism
" looks to the Jewish State to provide a remedy for poverty, complete
tranquillity and national glory, Chibbath Zion knows that our State
will not give us all these things until "universal Righteousness is
enthroned and holds sway over nations and States": and it looks to a
Jewish State to provide only a "secure refuge" for Judaism and a
cultural bond of unity for our nation. ''Zionism, therefore, begins its work
with political propaganda; Chibbath Zion begins with national culture,
because only through the national culture and for its sake can a Jewish State
be established in such a way as to correspond with the will and the needs of
the Jewish people.
Dr. Herzl, it is true, said in the speech mentioned above
that "Zionism" demands the return to Judaism before the return to
the Jewish State. But these nice-sounding words are so much at variance with
his deeds that we are forced to the unpleasant conclusion that they are
nothing but a well-turned phrase.
It is very difficult for me to deal with individual
actions, on which one cannot touch without reflecting on individual men. For
this reason I contented myself, in my note on the Congress, with general
allusions, which, I believed, would be readily intelligible to those who were
versed in the subject, and especially to Congress delegates. But some of my
opponents have turned this scrupulousness to use against me by pretending not
to understand at all. They ask, with affected simplicity, what fault I have to
find with the Congress, and they have even the assurance to deny publicly
facts which are common knowledge. These tactics constrain me here, against my
will, to raise the artistic veil which they have cast over the whole
proceedings, and to mention some details which throw light on the character of
this movement and the mental attitude of its adherents.
If it were really the aim of "Zionism" to bring
the people back to Judaism -- to make it not merely a nation in the political
sense, but a nation living according to its own spirit -- then the Congress
would not have postponed questions of national culture -- of language and
literature, of education and the diffusion of Jewish knowledge -- to the very
last moment, after the end of all the debates on rechtlich and völkerrechtlich,
on the election of X. as a member of the Committee, on the imaginary millions,
and so forth. When all those present were tired out, and welcomed the setting
sun on the last day as a sign of the approaching end, a short time was allowed
for a discourse by one of the members on all those important questions, which
are in reality the most vital and essential questions. Naturally, the
discourse, however good, had to be hurried and shortened; there was no time
for discussion of details; a suggestion was made from the platform that all
these problems should be handed over to a Commission consisting of certain
writers, who were named; and the whole assembly agreed simply for the sake of
finishing the business and getting away.
But there is no need to ascertain the attitude of the
Congress by inference, because it was stated quite explicitly in one of the
official speeches -- a speech which appeared on the agenda as "An
Exposition of the basis of Zionism," and was submitted to Dr. Herzl
before it was read to the Congress. In this speech we were told plainly that
the Western Jews were nearer than those of the East to the goal of Zionism,
because they had already done half the work: they had annihilated the Jewish
culture of the Ghetto, and were thus emancipated from the yoke of the past.
This speech, too, was received with prolonged applause, and the Congress
passed a motion ordering it to be published as a pamphlet for distribution
among Jews.
In one of the numbers of the Zionist organ Die Welt there appeared a good allegorical description of those Jews who remained in
the National German party in Austria even after it had united with the
anti-Semites. The allegory is of an old lady whose lover deserts her for
another, and who, after trying without success to bring him back by all the
arts which used to win him, begins to display affection for his new love,
hoping that he may take pity on her for her magnanimity.
I have a shrewd suspicion that this allegory can equally
well be applied, with a slight change, to its inventors themselves. There is
an old lady who, despairing utterly of regaining her lover by entreaties,
submission and humility, suddenly decks herself out in splendour and begins to
treat him with hatred and contempt. Her object is still to influence him. She
wants him at least to respect her in his heart of hearts, if he can no longer
love her. Whoever reads Die Welt attentively and critically will not be
able to avoid the impression that the Western "Zionists" always have
their eyes fixed on the non-Jewish world, and that they, like the assimilated
Jews, are aiming simply at finding favour in the eyes of the nations: only
that whereas the others want love, the "Zionists" want respect. They
are enormously pleased when a Gentile says openly that the
"Zionists" deserve respect, when a journal prints some reference to
the "Zionists'' without making a joke of them, and so forth. Nay, at the
last sitting of the Congress the President found it necessary publicly to
tender special thanks to the three Gentiles who had honoured the meeting by
taking part in it, although they were all three silent members, and there is
no sign of their having done anything. If I wished to go into small details, I
could show from various incidents that in their general conduct and procedure
these "Zionists" do not try to get close to Jewish culture and
imbibe its spirit, but that, on the contrary, they endeavour to imitate, as
Jews, the conduct and procedure of the Germans, even where they are most
foreign to the Jewish spirit, as a means of showing that Jews, too, can live
and act like all other nations. It may suffice to mention the unpleasant
incident at Vienna recently, when the young "Zionists" went out to
spread the gospel of "Zionism" with sticks and fisticuffs, in German
fashion. And the Zionist organ regarded this incident sympathetically, and,
for all its carefulness, could not conceal its satisfaction at the success of
the Zionist fist.
The whole Congress, too, was designed rather as a
demonstration to the world than as a means of making it clear to ourselves
what we want and what we can do. The founders of the movement wanted to show
the outside world that they had behind them a united and unanimous Jewish
people. It must be admitted that from beginning to end they pursued this
object with clear consciousness and determination. In those countries where
Jews are preoccupied with material troubles, and are not likely on the whole
to get enthusiastic about a political ideal for the distant future, a special
emissary went about, before the Congress, spreading favourable reports, from
which it might be concluded that both the consent of Turkey and the necessary
millions were nearly within our reach, and that nothing was lacking except a
national representative body to negotiate with all parties on behalf of the
Jewish people: for which reason it was necessary to send many delegates to the
Congress, and also to send in petitions with thousands of signatures, and then
the Committee to be chosen by the Congress would be the body which was
required. On the other hand, they were careful not to announce clearly in
advance that Herzl's Zionism, and that only, would be the basis of the
Congress, that that basis would be above criticism, and no delegate to the
Congress would have the right to question it. The Order of Proceedings, which
was sent out with the invitation to the Congress, said merely in general terms
that anybody could be a delegate "who expresses his agreement with the
general programme of Zionism," without explaining what the general
programme was or where it could be found. Thus there met at Basle men utterly
at variance with one another in their views and aspirations. They thought in
their simplicity that everybody whose gaze was turned Zion-wards, though he
did not see eye to eye, with Herzl, had done his duty to the general programme
and had a right to be a member of the Congress and to express his views before
it. But the heads of the Congress tried with all their might to prevent any
difference of opinion on fundamental questions from coming to the surface, and
used every "parliamentary" device to avoid giving opportunity for
discussion and elucidation of such questions. The question of the programme
actually came up at one of the preliminary meetings held before the Congress
itself (a Vorkonforenz);and some of the delegates from Vienna pointed
to the statement on the Order of Proceedings, and tried to prove from it that
that question could not properly be raised, since all the delegates had
accepted the general programme of Zionism, and there was no Zionism but that
of Vienna, and Die Welt was its prophet. But many of those present
would not agree, and a Commission had to be appointed to draw up a programme.
This Commission skilfully contrived a programme capable of a dozen
interpretations, to suit all tastes; and this programme was put before
Congress with a request that it should be accepted as it stood, without any
discussion. But one delegate refused to submit, and his action led to a long
debate on a single word. This debate showed, to the consternation of many
people, that there were several kind of "Zionists," and the cloak of
unanimity was in danger of being publicly rent asunder; but the leaders
quickly and skilfully patched up the rent, before it had got very far. Dr.
Herzl, in his new pamphlet, uses this to prove what great importance Zionists
attached to this single word (völkerrechtlich). But in truth similar
" dangerous " debates might have been raised on many other words.
For many delegates quite failed to notice the wide gulf between the various
views on points of principle, and a discussion on any such point was
calculated to open people's eyes and to shatter the whole structure to atoms.
But such discussions were not raised, because even the few who saw clearly and
understood the position shrank from the risk of "wrecking." And so
the object was attained; the illusion of unanimity was preserved till the
last; the outside world saw a united people demanding a State; and those who
were inside returned home full of enthusiasm, but no whit the clearer as to
their ideas or the relation of one idea to another.
Yet, after all, I confess that Western "Zionism"
is very good and useful for those Western Jews who have long since almost
forgotten Judaism, and have no link with their people except a vague sentiment
which they themselves do not understand. I The establishment of a Jewish State
by their agency is at present but a distant vision; but the idea of a State
induces them meanwhile to devote their energies to the service of their
people, lifts them out of the mire of assimilation, and strengthens their
Jewish national consciousness. Possibly, when they find out that it will be a
long time before we have policemen and watchmen of our own, many of them may
leave us altogether; but even then our loss through this movement will not be
greater than our gain, because undoubtedly there will be among them men of
larger heart, who, in course of time, will be moved to get to the bottom of
the matter and to understand their people and its spirit : and these men will
arrive of themselves at that genuine Chibbath Zion which is in harmony
with our national spirit. But in the East, the home of refuge of Judaism and
the birthplace of Jewish Chibbath Zion, this "political"
tendency can bring us only harm. Its attractive force is at the same time a
force repellent to the moral ideal which has till now been the inspiration of
Eastern Jewry. Those who now abandon that ideal in exchange for the political
idea will never return again, not even when the excitement dies down and the
State is not established: for rarely in history do we find a movement
retracing its steps before it has tried to go on and on, and finally lost its
way. When, therefore, I see what chaos this movement has brought into the camp
of the Eastern Choveve Zion -- when I see men who till recently seemed
to know what they wanted and how to get it, now suddenly deserting the flag
which but yesterday they held sacred, and bowing the knee to an idea which has
no roots in their being, simply because it comes from the West: when I see all
this, and remember how many paroxysms of sudden and evanescent enthusiasm we
have already experienced, then I really feel the heavy hand of despair
beginning to lay hold on me.
It was under the stress of that feeling that I wrote my
Note on the Congress, a few days after its conclusion. The impression was all
very fresh in my mind, and my grief was acute; and I let slip some hard
expressions, which I now regret, because it is not my habit to use such
expressions. But as regards the actual question at issue I have nothing to
withdraw. What has happened since then has not convinced me that I was wrong:
on the contrary, it has strengthened my conviction that though I wrote in
anger, I did not write in error.