Some months have passed since theZionist Congress, but its echoes are still heard in daily life and in thepress. In daily life the echoes take the form of meetings small and big, localand central. Since the delegates returned home, they have been gathering thepublic together and recounting over and over again the wonders that they sawenacted before their eyes. The wretched, hungry public listens and waxesenthusiastic and hopes for salvation: for can "they" -- the Jews ofthe West -- fail to carry out anything that they plan? Heads grow hot andhearts beat fast; and many "communal workers" whose one care in lifehad been for years -- until last August -- the Palestinian settlement, and whowould have given the whole world for a penny donation in aid of Palestineworkmen or the Jaffa School, have now quite lost their bearings, and ask oneanother: "What's the good of this sort of work? The Messiah is near athand, 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 beena revolution in their world, and to emphasise it they give a new name to thecause: 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 thename ("Zionismus") -- thus announcing to all and sundry thatthey are not talking about anything so antiquated as Chibbath Zion, butabout 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 guiseof articles -- articles written in a vein of enthusiasm and triumph. Themeeting was magnificent, every speaker was a Demosthenes, the resolutions werecarried by acclamation, all those present were swept off their feet and shoutedwith one voice : "We will do and obey !" -- in a word, everything wasdelightful, entrancing, perfect. And the Congress itself still produces aliterature of its own. Pamphlets specially devoted to its praises appear inseveral languages; Jewish and non-Jewish papers still occasionally publisharticles and notes about it; and, needless to say, the " Zionist"organ [ Die Welt, the German organfounded by Herzl ] itself endeavours tomaintain the impression which the Congress made, and not to allow it to fadetoo rapidly from the public memory. It searches the press of every nation andevery land, and wherever it finds a favourable mention of the Congress, even insome insignificant journal published in the language of one of the smallerEuropean nationalities, it immediately gives a summary of the article, withmuch jubilation. Only one small nation's language has thus far not beenhonoured with such attention, though its journals too have lavished praise onthe Congress: I mean hebrew.
In short, the universal note isone of rejoicing; and it is therefore small wonder that in the midst of thisgeneral harmony my little Note on the Congress sounded discordant and arousedthe most violent displeasure in many quarters. I knew from the start that Ishould not be forgiven for saying such things at such a time, and I had steeledmyself to hear with equanimity the clatter of high-sounding phrases and obscureinnuendoes -- of which our writers are so prolific -- and hold my peace; Butwhen 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 aproposdes bottes for the sake of displaying his style, I became convinced thatthis time I had really relied too much on the old adage: Verbum sapientisatis. It is not pleasant to swim against the stream; and when one doessomething without enjoyment, purely as a duty, one does not put more than thenecessary minimum of work into the task. Hence in the note referred to Iallowed myself to be extremely brief, relying on my readers to fill in the gapsout of their own knowledge, by connecting what I wrote with earlier expressionsof my views, which were already familiar to them. I see now that I made amistake, and left room for the ascription to me of ideas and opinions which areutterly remote from my true intention. Consequently I have now to perform thehard and ungrateful task of writing a commentary on myself, and expressing myviews on the matter in hand with greater explicitness.
Nordau's address on the generalcondition of the Jews was a sort of introduction to the business of theCongress. It exposed in incisive language the sore troubles, material or moral,which beset the Jews the world over. In Eastern countries their trouble ismaterial: they have a constant struggle to satisfy the most elementary physicalneeds, to win a crust of bread and a breath of air -- things which are deniedthem because they are Jews. In the West, in lands of emancipation, theirmaterial condition is not particularly bad, but the moral trouble is serious:They want to take full advantage of their rights, and cannot; they long tobecome attached to the people of the country, and to take part in its sociallife, and they are kept at arm's length; they strive after love andbrotherhood, 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 abilityor virtue, they have it continually thrown in their teeth that they are aninferior type, and are not fit to rise to the same level as the Aryans. Andmore to the same effect.
Well -- what then ?
Nordau himself did not touch onthis question : it was outside the scope of his address. But the whole Congresswas the answer. Beginning as it did with Nordau's address, the Congress meantthis : that in order to escape from all these troubles it is necessary toestablish a Jewish State.
Let us imagine, then, that theconsent of Turkey and the other Powers has already been obtained, and the Stateis established -- and, if you will, established völkerrechtlich, withthe full sanction of international law, as the more extreme members of theCongress desire. Does this bring, or bring near, the end of the materialtrouble? No doubt, every poor Jew will be at perfect liberty to go to his Stateand to seek his living there, without any artificial hindrances in the shape ofrestrictive laws or anything of that kind. But liberty to seek alivelihood is not enough: he must he able to find what he seeks. Thereare natural laws which fetter man's freedom of action much more than artificiallaws. Modern economic life is so complex, and the development of any single oneof its departments depends on so many conditions, that no nation, not even thestrongest and richest, could in a short time create in any country new sourcesof livelihood sufficient for many millions of human beings. The single countryis no longer an economic unit: the whole world is one great market, in whichevery State has to struggle hard for its place. Hence only a fantasy borderingon madness can believe that so soon as the Jewish State is established millionsof 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 longperiod of years before one new branch of production -- vine-growing -- could beestablished there ! And even to-day, after all the work that has been done, wecannot yet say that Palestinian wine has found the openings that it needs inthe world market, although its quantity is still small. But if in 1891Palestine had been a Jewish State, and all the dozens of Colonies that werethen going to be established for the cultivation of the vine had in fact beenestablished, Palestinian wine would be to-day as common as water, and wouldfetch no price at all. Using the analogy of this small example, we can see howdifficult it will be to start new branches of production in Palestine, and tofind openings for its products in the world market. But if the Jews are toflock to their State in large numbers, all at once, we may prophesy withperfect certainty that home competition in every branch of production (and homecompetition will be inevitable because the amount of labour available willincrease more quickly than the demand for it) will prevent any one branch fromdeveloping 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 evenby the magic word völkerrechtlich: from hunger.
True, agriculture in itselementary form does not depend to any great extent on the world market, and atany rate it will provide those engaged in it with food, if not with plenty. Butif the Jewish State sets out to save all those Jews who are in the grip of thematerial problems, or most of them, by turning them into agriculturists inPalestine, then it must first find the necessary capital. At Basle, no doubt,one heard naive and confident references to a "National Fund" of tenmillion pounds sterling. But even if we silence reason, and give the.rein tofancy so far as to believe that we can obtain a Fund of those dimensions in ashort time, we are still no further. Those very speeches that we heard at Basleabout the economic condition of the Jews in various countries showed beyond adoubt that our national wealth is very small, and most of our people are belowthe poverty-line. From this any man of sense, though he be no greatmathematician, can readily calculate that ten million pounds are a mere nothingcompared with the sum necessary for the emigration of the Jews and theirsettlement in Palestine on an agricultural basis. Even if all the rich Jewssuddenly became ardent " Zionists," and every one of them gave halfhis wealth to the cause, the whole would still not make up the thousands ofmillions that would be needed for the purpose.
There is no doubt, then, that evenwhen the Jewish State is established the Jews will be able to settle in it onlylittle by little, the determining factors being the resources of the peoplethemselves and the degree of economic development reached by the country.Meanwhile the natural increase of population will continue, both among thosewho settle in the country and among those who remain outside it, with theinevitable result that on the one hand Palestine will have less and less roomfor new immigrants, and on the other hand the number of those remaining outsidePalestine will not diminish very much, in spite of the continual emigration. Inhis opening speech at the Congress, Dr. Herzl, wishing to demonstrate thesuperiority of his State idea over the method of Palestinian colonisationadopted hitherto, calculated that by the latter method it would take ninehundred years before all the Jews could be settled in their land. The membersof the Congress applauded this as a conclusive argument. But it was a cheapvictory. The Jewish State itself, do what it will, cannot make a morefavourable calculation.
Truth is bitter, but with all itsbitterness it is better than illusion. We must confess to ourselves that the"ingathering of the exiles " is unattainable by natural means. Wemay, by natural means, establish a Jewish State one day, and the Jews mayincrease and multiply in it until the country will hold no more: but even thenthe greater part of the people will remain scattered in strange lands. "Togather our scattered ones from the four corners of the earth" (in thewords of the Prayer Book) is impossible. Only religion, with its belief in amiraculous redemption, can promise that consummation.
But if this is so, if the JewishState too means not an "ingathering of the exiles," but thesettlement of a small part of our people in Palestine, then how will it solvethe material problem of the Jewish masses in the lands of the Diaspora?
Or do the champions of the Stateidea think, perhaps, that, being masters in our own country, we shall be ableby diplomatic means to get the various governments to relieve the materialsufferings of our scattered fellow-Jews ! That is, it seems to me, Dr. Herzl'slatest theory. In his new pamphlet (Der Baseler Kongress) we no longerfind any calculation of the number of years that it will take for the Jews toenter their country. Instead, he tells us in so many words (p. 9) that if theland becomes the national property of the Jewish people, even though noindividual Jew owns privately a single square yard of it, then the Jewishproblem will be solved for ever. These words (unless we exclude the materialaspect of the Jewish problem) can be understood only in the way suggestedabove. But this hope seems to me so fantastic that I see no need to waste wordsin demolishing it. We have seen often knough, even in the case of nations morein favour than Jews are with powerful Governments, how little diplomacy can doin matters of this kind, if it is not backed by a large armed force. Nay, it isconceivable that in the days of the Jewish State, when economic conditions inthis or that country are such as to induce a Government to protect its peopleagainst Jewish competition by restrictive legislation, that Government willfind it easier then than it is now to find an excuse for such action, for itwill be able to plead that if the Jews are not happy where they are, they cango to their own State.
The material problem, then, willnot be ended by the foundation of a Jewish State, nor, generally speaking, doesit lie in our power to end it (though it could be eased more or less even nowby various means, such as the encouragement of agriculture and handicrafts amongJews in all countries); and whether we found a State or not, this particularproblem will always turn at bottom on the economic condition of each countryand the degree of civilisation attained by each people.
Thus we are driven to theconclusion that the only true basis of Zionism is to be found in the otherproblem, the moral one.
But the moral problem appears intwo forms, one in Ihe West and one in the East; and this fact explains thefundamental difference between Western "Zionism" and Eastern ChibbathZion. Nordau dealt only with the Western problem, apparently knowingnothing about the Eastern; and the Congress as a whole concentrated on thefirst, and paid little attention to the second.
The Western Jew, after leaving theGhetto and seeking to attach himself to the people of the country in which helives, is unhappy because his hope of an open-armed welcome is disappointed. Hereturns reluctantly to his own people, and tries to find within the Jewishcommunity that life for which he yearns -- but in vain. Communal life andcommunal problems no longer satisfy him. He has already grown accustomed to abroader social and political life; and on the inteliectual side Jewish culturalwork has no attraction, because Jewish culture has played no part in hiseducation from childhood, and is a closed book to him. So in his trouble heturns to the land of his ancestors, and pictures to himself how good it wouldbe if a Jewish State were re-established there -- a State arranged andorganised 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 seesoutside, dangled before his eyes, but out of reach. Of course, not all the Jewswill be able to take wing and go to their State; but the very existence of theJewish State will raise the prestige of those who remain in exile, and theirfellow citizens will no more despise them and keep them at arm's length, asthough they were ignoble slaves, dependent entirely on the hospitality of others.As he contemplates this fascinating vision, it suddenly dawns on his innerconsciousness that even now, before the Jewish State is established, the mereidea of it gives him almost complete relief. He has an opportunity fororganised work, for political excitement; he finds a suitable field of activitywithout having to become subservient to non- Jews;and he feels that thanks tothis ideal he stands once more spiritually erect, and has regained humandignity, without overmuch trouble and without external aid. So he devoteshimself to the ideal with all the ardour of which he is capable; he gives reinto his fancy, and lets it soar as ft will, up above reality and the limitationsof human power. For it is not the attainment of the ideal that he needs: itspursuit alone is sufficient to cure him of his moral sickness, which is theconsciousness of inferiority; and the higher and more distant the ideal, thegreater its power of exaltation.
This is the basis of WesternZionism and the secret of its attraction. But Eastern Chibbath Zion hasa different origin and development. Originally, like "Zionism," itwas political; but being a result of material evils, it could not restsatisfied with an "activity " consisting only of outbursts of feelingand fine phrases. These things may satisfy the heart, but not the stomach. So ChibbathZion began at once to express itself in concrete activities -- in theestablishment of colonies in Palestine. This practical work soon clipped thewings of fancy, and made it clear that Chibbath Zion could not lessenthe material evil by one iota. One might have thought, then, that when thisfact became patent the Choveve Zion would give up their activity, andcease 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 oldenthusiasm, though most of them did not understand even in their own minds whythey did so. They felt instinctively that so they must do; but as they did notclearly appreciate the nature of this feeling, the things that they did werenot always rightly directed towards that object which in reality was drawingthem on without their knowledge.
For at the very time when thematerial tragedy in the East was at its height, the heart of the Eastern Jewwas still oppressed by another tragedy -- the moral one; and when the ChoveveZion began to work for the solution of the material problem, the nationalinstinct of the people felt that just in such work could it find the remedy forits moral trouble. Hence the people took up this work and would not abandon iteven after it had become obvious that the material trouble could not be curedin this way. The Eastern form of the moral trouble is absolutely different fromthe Western. In the West it is the problem of the Jews, in the East the problemof Judaism. The one weighs on the individual, the other on the nation. The oneis felt by Jews who have had a European education, the other by Jews whoseeducation has been Jewish. The one is a product of anti-Semitism, and isdependent on anti-Semitism for its existence;the other is a natural product ofa real link with a culture of thousands of years, which will retain its holdeven if the troubles of the Jews all over the world come to an end, togetherwith 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 themto take part in every sphere of social and political life on terms of absoluteequality.
It isnot only Jews who have come out of the Ghetto: Judaism has come out, too. ForJews the exodus is confined to certain countries, and is due to toleration; butJudaism has come out (or is coming out) of its own accord wherever it has comeinto contact with modern culture. This contact with modern culture overturnsthe defences of Judaism from within, so that Judaism can no longer remainisolated and live a life apart. The spirit of our people strives fordevelopment: it wants to absorb those elements of general culture which reachit from outside, to digest them and to make them a part of itself, as it hasdone before at different periods of its history. But the conditions of its lifein exile are not suitable. In our time culture wears in each country the garbof the national spirit, and the stranger who would woo her must sink hisindividuality and become absorbed in the dominant spirit. For this reasonJudaism in exile cannot develop its individuality in its own way. When itleaves the Ghetto walls it is in danger of losing its essential being or -- atbest -- its national unity: it is in danger of being split up into as manykinds of Judaism, each with a different character and life, as there arecountries of the Jewish dispersion. [see my essayImitation and Assimilation]
part 2
__________
And now Judaism finds that it canno longer tolerate the galuth form which it had to take on, in obedienceto its will-to-live, when it was exiled from its own country, and that if itloses that form its life is in danger. So it seeks to return to its historiccentre, in order to live there a life of natural development, to bring itspowers into play in every department of human culture, to develop and perfectthose national possessions which it has acquired up to now, and thus tocontribute to the common stock of humanity, in the future as in the past, agreat national culture, the fruit of the unhampered activity of a people livingaccording to its own spirit. For this purpose Judaism needs at present butlittle. It needs not an independent State, but only the creation in its nativeland of conditions favourable to its development: a good-sized settlement ofJews working without hindrance
This Chibbath Zion, whichtakes thought for the preservation of Judaism at a time when Jewry suffers somuch, is something odd and unintelligible to the " political"Zionists of the West, just as the demand of R. Jochanan ben Zakkai for Jabnehwas strange and unintelligible to the corresponding people of that time.
The secret of our people'spersistence is -- as I have tried to show elsewhere
In a word: Chibbath Zion,no less than "Zionism," wants a Jewish State and believes in thepossibility of the establishment of a Jewish State in the future. But while" Zionism " looks to the Jewish State to provide a remedy forpoverty, complete tranquillity and national glory, Chibbath Zion knowsthat our State will not give us all these things until "universalRighteousness is enthroned and holds sway over nations and States": and itlooks to a Jewish State to provide only a "secure refuge" for Judaismand a cultural bond of unity for our nation. ''Zionism, therefore, begins itswork with political propaganda; Chibbath Zion begins with nationalculture, because only through the national culture and for its sake can aJewish State be established in such a way as to correspond with the will andthe needs of the Jewish people.
Dr. Herzl, it is true, said in thespeech mentioned above that "Zionism" demands the return to Judaismbefore the return to the Jewish State. But these nice-sounding words are somuch at variance with his deeds that we are forced to the unpleasant conclusionthat they are nothing but a well-turned phrase.
It is very difficult for me todeal with individual actions, on which one cannot touch without reflecting onindividual men. For this reason I contented myself, in my note on the Congress,with general allusions, which, I believed, would be readily intelligible tothose who were versed in the subject, and especially to Congress delegates. Butsome of my opponents have turned this scrupulousness to use against me bypretending not to understand at all. They ask, with affected simplicity, whatfault I have to find with the Congress, and they have even the assurance todeny publicly facts which are common knowledge. These tactics constrain mehere, against my will, to raise the artistic veil which they have cast over thewhole proceedings, and to mention some details which throw light on thecharacter 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 notmerely a nation in the political sense, but a nation living according to itsown spirit -- then the Congress would not have postponed questions of nationalculture -- of language and literature, of education and the diffusion of Jewishknowledge -- to the very last moment, after the end of all the debates on rechtlichand 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 importantquestions, which are in reality the most vital and essential questions.Naturally, the discourse, however good, had to be hurried and shortened; therewas no time for discussion of details; a suggestion was made from the platformthat all these problems should be handed over to a Commission consisting ofcertain writers, who were named; and the whole assembly agreed simply for thesake of finishing the business and getting away.
But there is no need to ascertainthe attitude of the Congress by inference, because it was stated quiteexplicitly in one of the official speeches -- a speech which appeared on theagenda as "An Exposition of the basis of Zionism," and was submittedto Dr. Herzl before it was read to the Congress. In this speech we were told plainlythat the Western Jews were nearer than those of the East to the goal ofZionism, because they had already done half the work: they had annihilated theJewish culture of the Ghetto, and were thus emancipated from the yoke of thepast. This speech, too, was received with prolonged applause, and the Congresspassed a motion ordering it to be published as a pamphlet for distributionamong Jews.
In one of the numbers of theZionist organ Die Welt there appeared a good allegorical description ofthose Jews who remained in the National German party in Austria even after ithad united with the anti-Semites. The allegory is of an old lady whose loverdeserts her for another, and who, after trying without success to bring himback by all the arts which used to win him, begins to display affection for hisnew love, hoping that he may take pity on her for her magnanimity.
I have a shrewd suspicion thatthis allegory can equally well be applied, with a slight change, to itsinventors themselves. There is an old lady who, despairing utterly of regainingher lover by entreaties, submission and humility, suddenly decks herself out insplendour and begins to treat him with hatred and contempt. Her object is stillto 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 andcritically will not be able to avoid the impression that the Western"Zionists" always have their eyes fixed on the non-Jewish world, andthat they, like the assimilated Jews, are aiming simply at finding favour inthe eyes of the nations: only that whereas the others want love, the"Zionists" want respect. They are enormously pleased when a Gentilesays openly that the "Zionists" deserve respect, when a journal printssome reference to the "Zionists'' without making a joke of them, and soforth. Nay, at the last sitting of the Congress the President found itnecessary publicly to tender special thanks to the three Gentiles who hadhonoured the meeting by taking part in it, although they were all three silentmembers, and there is no sign of their having done anything. If I wished to gointo small details, I could show from various incidents that in their generalconduct and procedure these "Zionists" do not try to get close toJewish culture and imbibe its spirit, but that, on the contrary, they endeavourto imitate, as Jews, the conduct and procedure of the Germans, even where theyare 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 theunpleasant incident at Vienna recently, when the young "Zionists"went out to spread the gospel of "Zionism" with sticks andfisticuffs, in German fashion. And the Zionist organ regarded this incidentsympathetically, and, for all its carefulness, could not conceal itssatisfaction at the success of the Zionist fist.
The whole Congress, too, wasdesigned rather as a demonstration to the world than as a means of making itclear to ourselves what we want and what we can do. The founders of themovement wanted to show the outside world that they had behind them a unitedand unanimous Jewish people. It must be admitted that from beginning to endthey pursued this object with clear consciousness and determination. In thosecountries where Jews are preoccupied with material troubles, and are not likelyon the whole to get enthusiastic about a political ideal for the distantfuture, a special emissary went about, before the Congress, spreading favourablereports, from which it might be concluded that both the consent of Turkey andthe necessary millions were nearly within our reach, and that nothing waslacking except a national representative body to negotiate with all parties onbehalf of the Jewish people: for which reason it was necessary to send manydelegates to the Congress, and also to send in petitions with thousands ofsignatures, and then the Committee to be chosen by the Congress would be thebody which was required. On the other hand, they were careful not to announceclearly in advance that Herzl's Zionism, and that only, would be the basis ofthe Congress, that that basis would be above criticism, and no delegate to theCongress would have the right to question it. The Order of Proceedings, whichwas sent out with the invitation to the Congress, said merely in general termsthat anybody could be a delegate "who expresses his agreement with thegeneral programme of Zionism," without explaining what the generalprogramme was or where it could be found. Thus there met at Basle men utterlyat variance with one another in their views and aspirations. They thought intheir simplicity that everybody whose gaze was turned Zion-wards, though he didnot see eye to eye, with Herzl, had done his duty to the general programme andhad 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 anydifference of opinion on fundamental questions from coming to the surface, and usedevery "parliamentary" device to avoid giving opportunity fordiscussion and elucidation of such questions. The question of the programmeactually came up at one of the preliminary meetings held before the Congressitself (a Vorkonforenz);and some of the delegates from Vienna pointed tothe statement on the Order of Proceedings, and tried to prove from it that thatquestion could not properly be raised, since all the delegates had accepted thegeneral programme of Zionism, and there was no Zionism but that of Vienna, and DieWelt was its prophet. But many of those present would not agree, and aCommission had to be appointed to draw up a programme. This Commissionskilfully contrived a programme capable of a dozen interpretations, to suit alltastes; and this programme was put before Congress with a request that itshould be accepted as it stood, without any discussion. But one delegaterefused to submit, and his action led to a long debate on a single word. Thisdebate showed, to the consternation of many people, that there were severalkind of "Zionists," and the cloak of unanimity was in danger of beingpublicly rent asunder; but the leaders quickly and skilfully patched up therent, before it had got very far. Dr. Herzl, in his new pamphlet, uses this toprove what great importance Zionists attached to this single word (völkerrechtlich).But in truth similar " dangerous " debates might have been raised onmany other words. For many delegates quite failed to notice the wide gulfbetween the various views on points of principle, and a discussion on any suchpoint was calculated to open people's eyes and to shatter the whole structureto atoms. But such discussions were not raised, because even the few who sawclearly and understood the position shrank from the risk of"wrecking." And so the object was attained; the illusion of unanimitywas preserved till the last; the outside world saw a united people demanding aState; and those who were inside returned home full of enthusiasm, but no whitthe clearer as to their ideas or the relation of one idea to another.
Yet, after all, I confess thatWestern "Zionism" is very good and useful for those Western Jews whohave long since almost forgotten Judaism, and have no link with their peopleexcept a vague sentiment which they themselves do not understand. I Theestablishment of a Jewish State by their agency is at present but a distantvision; but the idea of a State induces them meanwhile to devote their energiesto the service of their people, lifts them out of the mire of assimilation, andstrengthens their Jewish national consciousness. Possibly, when they find outthat 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 thismovement will not be greater than our gain, because undoubtedly there will beamong them men of larger heart, who, in course of time, will be moved to get tothe bottom of the matter and to understand their people and its spirit : andthese men will arrive of themselves at that genuine Chibbath Zion whichis in harmony with our national spirit. But in the East, the home of refuge ofJudaism and the birthplace of Jewish Chibbath Zion, this"political" tendency can bring us only harm. Its attractive force isat the same time a force repellent to the moral ideal which has till now beenthe inspiration of Eastern Jewry. Those who now abandon that ideal in exchangefor the political idea will never return again, not even when the excitementdies down and the State is not established: for rarely in history do we find amovement retracing its steps before it has tried to go on and on, and finallylost its way. When, therefore, I see what chaos this movement has brought intothe camp of the Eastern Choveve Zion -- when I see men who till recentlyseemed to know what they wanted and how to get it, now suddenly deserting theflag which but yesterday they held sacred, and bowing the knee to an idea whichhas no roots in their being, simply because it comes from the West: when I seeall this, and remember how many paroxysms of sudden and evanescent enthusiasmwe have already experienced, then I really feel the heavy hand of despairbeginning to lay hold on me.
It was under the stress of thatfeeling 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 letslip some hard expressions, which I now regret, because it is not my habit touse such expressions. But as regards the actual question at issue I havenothing to withdraw. What has happened since then has not convinced me that Iwas wrong: on the contrary, it has strengthened my conviction that though Iwrote in anger, I did not write in error.
---------------------------------
1 The "political" Zionists generally thinkand say that they were the first to lay down as a principle that thecolonization of Palestine by secret and surreptitious means, withoutorganisation and in defiance of the ruling power, is of no value and ought tobe abandoned. They do not know that this truth was discovered by others first,and that years ago the Chibbath Zion of Judaism demanded that everythingshould be done openly, with proper organisation and with the consent of theTurkish Government.
2 Imitation andAssimilation.
3 The phrases in inverted commas are taken from mynote on the Congress. As my critics have misinterpreted them. I have taken thisopportunity of explaining their true meaning.
4 The fact mentionedis familiar to many Choveve Zion in all the towns which the emissaryvisited with a letter from the headquarters of the movement. In my Note I onlyalluded to it briefly, and I am sorry that the denials of my opponents havecompelled me here to refer to it again more fully.
Translatedfrom the Hebrew by Leon Simon. © 1912, Jewish Publication Society of America