in speaking not of them and their sufferings, but of ourselves. I
repeat, the Jewish question was never a question for me, and in order
to justify the proposed measures I need not allege the heroism shown
by the Jews in defending Russia, their love for Russia, tragic in its
faithfulness. As for demonstrating again and again that a Jew, too, is
a human being, to do so would mean not only to bow too low to
absurdity, but also to insult those whom I respect and love. And if I
persist in speaking of ourselves and our suffering, it is not for
personal egoism, nor even class egoism, but the pardonable egoism of a
nation, which has been too long playing a miserable part on Europe's
stage and in its own conscience, and which now repudiates the
suffering of yesterday and, at the dawn of new life, seeks the
possibility--oh, only the possibility!--of respecting itself.
Yes, we are still barbarians, the Poles still mistrust us, we are a
dark terror for Europe, a baffling menace to her civilisation, but we
do not want to be that any more, we long for purity and reason, our
wretched rags burden us beyond all measure. The Jews' tragic love for
Russia finds a counterpart in our love for Europe, as tragical in its
faithfulness and completeness. Are we not ourselves the Jews of Europe,
and is not our frontier--the same "Pale of Settlement"--something in
the nature of a Russian Ghetto? And try as our Pushkin and Dostoyevsky
and your Byalik may to prove that we, too, are human beings, people do
not believe us, as they do not believe you: here is that equality
whence we all can derive a bitter consolation; here is the punishment
by means of which impartial life takes revenge on the Russians for the
Jews' sufferings.
The thirst for self-respect--that is the fundamental feeling which
now, in the days of the most terrible war, has seized all Russian
society, which has exalted the people to the heights of heroism, and
which makes us fear all that reminds us of our sad past. That is why
persecution of Germans in our own country is so unbearable to us; we
want no persecution; that is why we hate all that, like the belching
of yesterday's drinking, distorts our disinterested aims and
intentions: better yield than take too much of what belongs to other
people--that is nowadays the motto of the majority. Could the country
become sober if not for this feeling which one has when about to
receive holy communion? Although proud at the victories of our arms,
we scrupulously hide this pride, we treasure it in our hearts as our
most precious possession, and we hate all swaggering and
self-adulation. Not with the haughtiness of a righteous pharisee do we
approach the altar, but with a prayer of penitence: "like a murderer I
profess Thee."
We must all understand that the end of Jewish sufferings is the
beginning of our self-respect, without which _Russia cannot exist_.
The black days of war will pass, and the "German barbarians" of to-day
will again become cultured Germans, to whose voice the world will once
more hearken with deference. And we must never again allow this or any
other voice to utter aloud: "The Russian barbarians."
FOOTNOTES:
[1] This is an insulting synonym for "Jew."--Translator's Note.
* * * * *
MR. JACKSON'S OPINION ON THE JEWISH QUESTION
_Vladimir Galaktionovich Korolenko is to-day universally
recognized in Russia as the most worthy guardian of the best
traditions of Russian letters. He has done yeoman service to his
country both as an author of humanitarian tales and as the
mouth-piece of Russia's public conscience. After the government
some time ago suppressed the magazine "Russian Wealth" which
Korolenko had edited, he retired to the city of Poltava, in the
South, and in late years his appearance in print has been a rare
event. He was born in 1853._
MR. JACKSON'S OPINION ON THE JEWISH QUESTION
BY VLADIMIR KOROLENKO
One of the most intelligent though not one of the most profound
opinions about the Jewish question I happened to hear from a chance
fellow-traveller on the Atlantic Ocean. And although it was quite some
time ago, and the man who expressed it was in no way remarkable,
nevertheless this opinion is recalled to me on various occasions--very
frequently in these days.
It was in 1904. Together with a fellow countryman, also a man of
letters, I was travelling aboard a steamer of the Anglo-American
Company, "Cunard." Our cabin was small and narrow. It was lighted by
the dull light of an electric bull's-eye in the ceiling which served
as a deck. There were three berths and a wash basin. My friend and I
occupied two of the berths. On the third there camped the gentleman
about whom we read in the passenger list: "Mr. Henry Jackson of
Illinois." This was all we knew about him for the first few days. He
rose very early, went to bed late and spent all day outside of the
cabin. As a rule, we woke early, because to the muffled and steady
splash of the ocean over the sides of the ship there was added a
splash issuing from the basin, nearby. By the dim light of the
bull's-eye I could see from my top berth a tall figure in a nightshirt
as long as a shroud, with a small bald spot on the pate. Out of
delicacy he did not turn on the electric lights and in the
semi-darkness made his toilet very quietly, but was not able to forego
the pleasure of emitting some snorts while splashing himself with cold
water from the basin. Then he dived again into his berth and for some
time quietly and cautiously busied himself there; then--a light squeak
of the door, and a long figure glided out from the cabin. We were
interested in the personality of our neighbour. He was the first
American whom fate had brought so near to us. We were unable even to
distinguish his face and during the day tried to single him out in
the international crowd of gentlemen scurrying about the deck of our
_Urania_, lounging on the deck-chairs, having luncheon, or dinner or
supper, or lost in the smoke of cigars in the smoking room. This
elusiveness made the personality of the traveller puzzling and
interesting, and we bestowed the title of "Our American" now on one,
now on another of the middle-aged American gentlemen. Of course, we
marked as candidates the more interesting and typical figures. The
_Urania_ had been on the ocean for quite some time when my friend at
last said to me: "I have found out which American is ours. Here he
comes now. Look!"
Along the railing, a lanky gentleman and a short stout lady were
coming toward us. I felt a sense of involuntary disappointment: both
he and she were the least interesting of all the first-class
passengers on the _Urania_.
A kind of half-European, half-exotic troupe were on the boat. They
were going to America for a tour. The central figures in the group
were two beautiful Creoles who had already succeeded in gaining a
reputation in Europe. Around them were grouped a few stars of smaller
magnitude, and the whole constellation attracted considerable
attention from the men of the various nationalities represented on
board. Soon a few couples circling the decks together came into
notice. Amongst them were the lanky gentleman and the short, very
vulgar lady, who looked like a maid or a duenna. As they passed in
front of the other couples, one could sometimes notice slightly
ironical glances and meaning smiles. But "our" American had a most
self-satisfied, even somewhat victorious look. My companion,
well-versed in English soon made a few acquaintances. Most often I saw
him converse with "our" American in the hours when the latter was free
from his knightly duties. Pretty soon we gained an insight into the
main facts of his life-history. We learned that in his youth he had
followed in turn a number of various callings, until one of them
brought him success. He had retired and was now living on his large
income, had provided very well for his two sons, had lost his wife,
and decided to devote to pleasure the rest of his life which had begun
amidst drudgery and many vicissitudes. He spent his time in
travelling from one son to the other and retiring now and then to his
own well-furnished home in Chicago. "When travelling you very often
have very interesting adventures, don't you?" And he shot a triumphant
and sly glance in the direction of his artistic lady.
Having learned that we were Russian writers, he decided at once that
we were going to the Exhibition in the capacity of correspondents.
"Oh, yes, in my hard days I ate bread baked in this oven, too," he
said, with an air of satisfaction. "There are many occupations which
are more respectable and profitable.... But one tries everything. I
can give you a good piece of advice. On the first train which will
take you into the interior of the country, you will encounter a young
man who offers illustrated guide-books for sale. Do not grudge your
half-dollar, and buy these guide-books as frequently as possible. You
will find in them excellent descriptions of noteworthy places, written
by real masters. You can draw from them quite liberally. Even we,
Americans, cannot know all our guide-books, as for Russia.... Heh-heh!
Before reaching Chicago you will have several thousand lines.... Your
readers will be satisfied, and so will your editor and you will earn
your pay easily.... What?... Isn't that so?"
"Much obliged, sir!" answered my companion with ironical civility, and
added in Russian: "The swine! He is cock-sure that he has benefited us
highly by his advice."
My companion had a strong sense of humour, and every day he had some
new episode, some characteristic opinion held by the American or some
story of his past to tell me. Sometimes he would take out his
note-book and make believe he was respectfully taking notes on some
especially happy passages from these enlightening conversations. And
at the same time he would say to me in Russian:
"He is deeply convinced that America is the best country in the world,
Illinois is the best State in America, the street he lives on is the
best street in his city, and his house the best house on the street.
Now he is trying to persuade me that Chicago outgrew New York long ago
and is now the first city in the world. Wait a minute ... there comes
another one. That one is a New Yorker." He stopped the gentleman who
was passing by and proceeded to introduce them to each other:
"Mr. Jackson of Illinois, Mr. Carson of New York."
Then in the naïve tone of a person, somewhat perplexed, he asked:
"You told me that New York is the first city in the world. And here is
Mr. Jackson who asserts that for the last ten years Chicago has
outstripped New York in population. According to him Chicago has so
many million inhabitants."
My companion leaned back slightly in his arm-chair and looked with
obvious curiosity at the two Americans.
"Presently we shall have a cock-fight," he said to me in Russian, and
a mocking twitch appeared beneath his moustache.
Mr. Carson straightened up. His eyebrows lifted impatiently but
immediately his face took on an expression of polite calm, and
slightly tipping his hat, he said: "It is very possible ... the
gentleman evidently includes the population of the cemeteries of
Chicago."
He bowed and resumed his walking, leaving Mr. Jackson aghast with
mouth wide-open, speechless, for he had not time to protest. Then he
got up quickly and walked along the deck.... My companion followed him
with his smiling eyes....
"Perfect parrots," he said. "Petty patriotism, in its most naïve
form.... Dickens long ago noticed that trait of American character and
so it goes on." My sly countryman skilfully interviewed his victim,
disclosing step by step the ludicrous traits of a Yankee. There were
many weak sides. Mr. Jackson, in whom we were mainly interested,
proved to be a mediocre person in all respects, with a naïvely
middle-class outlook on life, and we, the two Russian observers,
revelled in that delightful malice which is so characteristic of
Russians abroad. So that is what they are, the far-famed children of
the transatlantic republic!
Sometime later, I again found my companion engaged in conversation
with Mr. Jackson. The ocean was somewhat rough. The ladies did not
come out on deck; Mr. Jackson was, therefore, free and evidently in
high spirits. He spoke with great animation. My companion had his
note-book in his hands and there was a slyly respectful smile on his
face.
"We are discussing the Jewish question," he said in Russian. "Mr.
Carson, a quarter of an hour ago, praised the Jews, and ever since
'our man' cannot calm down. He enlightens me with arguments which
sound as if they were just taken from our yellow newspapers. Please,
go on, sir," he respectfully addressed Mr. Jackson. "Everything you
say is so new and interesting...."
Mr. Jackson, who was flattered by the respectful attention of the
naïve Russian, continued his sermon. It was before the days of the
Beyliss trial. Nevertheless, except for the "ritual" murder, all the
rest of the jargon of our anti-Semitic papers was there, and the
Jewish character was painted the most frightful black.
On the other end of the deck resounded the shrill sound of the gong, a
signal for lunch.
"Thank you, sir," said my companion. "It is with great pleasure that I
have listened to your views on the subject, and I am certain that all
this will be found extremely novel in our country.... I have a few
more minutes to ask you one last question...."
"What else do you wish to know?" said Mr. Jackson.
"I wonder," answered my friend, "what conclusions are to be drawn from
this enlightening conversation. You are undoubtedly against equal
rights for the Jews. You would shut the doors of the country for the
Jews, wouldn't you? And you would limit the rights of those who
already live there, by establishing, let us say, something in the
nature of a special zone outside of which they would not be allowed to
settle?"
Even as my friend was saying this the American's eyebrows went up,
forming a sharp angle, and he looked at the speaker with such an air
of pity that the latter was somewhat put out of countenance.
"How in the world have you reached such a conclusion?" asked Jackson
coldly, and somewhat severely.
"But ... you dislike the Jews heartily...."
The clanging of the gong was reaching our corner. Mr. Jackson rose
and buttoning his coat, he said:
"It does not follow. You have made a bad syllogism: the conclusion
does not follow from the premises."
"But, sir...."
"It is true that I dislike those people, but it doesn't follow that I
want their rights restricted...."
And after a moment of deliberation, as though seeking for the clearest
form of explanation, he went on.
"Here we are being called for dinner ... I must tell you, sir, that I
cannot tolerate green peas. That is my personal taste. But it does not
follow by any means, gentlemen, that I have the right to demand that
green peas should not be served.... Probably, others like the
dish...."
And rising to his full height, he added:
"As for the rest of your words ... as an American, I would feel
insulted, if there were in my country citizens deprived of equal
rights.... That a Kentuckian, for instance, should not have the right
to breathe freely the air of Illinois.... My goodness.... The idea!"
And he started out, moving along the railing, straight and gaunt, and,
there was something peculiar in his entire figure. He seemed to feel
himself deeply insulted. At the door of the smoking-room, he met Mr.
Carson of New York, his recent antagonist, and amiably taking his arm,
he started to tell him something in great excitement. Judging by the
way Mr. Carson turned to look at us, it was evident that they were
discussing us Russians, the gentlemen who draw false conclusions from
premises.
We exchanged glances. Half a minute passed in perplexed silence. Then
we both laughed at once....
"_Rira bien qui rira le dernier._ We must confess that this time it is
'our' rather bad American who laughs last," said my sarcastic friend.
"And did you notice the expression on his face at that moment?"
"Yes, it looked positively intelligent.... Probably, because the
experience and wisdom of a great nation, which has already firmly
established axioms, were speaking at that moment through the mouth of
our American...."
"And the negroes?" said my friend hesitatingly and thoughtfully.
"Well, the negroes are 'the black peas' which Americans detest. But
that is a matter of social custom; the law, however, does not
distinguish them from other citizens.... To love, not to love ... that
is elusive and capricious, but justice is obligatory, like an
axiom...."
Entering the dining-room, I felt somewhat uneasy.... It seemed to me
that all the Americans would turn and eye us, the representatives of a
nation which has not as yet learned the axioms of law, and which draws
childishly false conclusions from premises....
But I was mistaken. There was in the dining-room the usual rustling,
clatter of plates, forks and knives, tinkling of glasses, and
whispered conversation. "Our" American was sitting at the side of his
odd Dulcinea, and he again looked like a self-satisfied cox-comb. But,
it seemed to me that into the everyday mood of the vessel's
table-d'hôte, there entered something elusive and significant, which
could change the appearance of this motley crowd just as our
American's face had changed at the end of our conversation.
And, in fact, a few weeks later, I happened to be present at one of
those tempestuous manifestations of public opinion which at times
break out like storms on the surface of the ocean. There is much that
is ridiculous in the every-day tone of American newspapers, in their
thirst for sensations and _réclame_, in their petty interviews. But
here everything was suddenly swept aside, and the dominant tone of the
American press became deep and significant. Now and then the voices of
past generations,--the men who had been the builders of freedom and
law in their country, the voices of Lincolns, Harrisons, and Davises
pierced the bustle of every-day life and were heard in editorials,
articles, in the speeches delivered at meetings.
The occasion for all this was again the Jewish question, and the
ignorance of axioms shown by a nation of the old continent. And it
occurred to me that probably somewhere in Chicago, Mr. Jackson, "who
dislikes green peas," was delivering, or at least listening to, a
speech about the axioms of human law, and was voting in favor of a
corresponding resolution.
For he firmly believes that love is capricious. Like mercy, it
bloweth, whither it listeth.... But justice, justice is
obligatory....
* * * * *
THE JEWISH QUESTION IN RUSSIA
_Professor Paul Nikolayevich Milyukov, the central figure in the
present Russian revolution, was born in 1859. Before the upheaval
in 1905 he was known as a distinguished historian. In 1903 and
1904 he lectured on Russia at Harvard and at the University of
Chicago, and in 1908 he spoke on the situation in Russia before
the Civic Forum in Carnegie Hall. Ever since the revolutionary
days of 1905-6, Professor Milyukov has been playing a most
conspicuous part in the Russian emancipatory movement, as the
leader of the Constitutional party, as a Duma deputy and the
editor of the influential radical newspaper Ryech._
THE JEWISH QUESTION IN RUSSIA
BY P. MILYUKOV
The Jewish question in Russia presents altogether peculiar aspects.
This is not only because there are in the Empire six million Jews,
i.e., more than in any other State in the world, and because in the
provinces annexed at the end of the eighteenth and the beginning of
the nineteenth centuries, they form as much as 11 per cent. of the
population--but also for the reason that the legal status of the
Russian Jews completely differs from that of other non-Russian
nationalities which go to make the Empire. These nationalities
endeavour to obtain the many rights of which they are deprived. The
most important of these rights is national autonomy, i.e., the right
of a collective unit to preserve and develop its national
individuality. In this manner they desire to protect themselves from
the danger of assimilation, from the possibility of their fusion with
the dominant nationality. Of course the Jews, too, have been striving,
especially in late years, to realise national autonomy and thus
safeguard the rights and aspirations of their collective unit. But
they lack still other rights. They have still to be granted those
rights which to a considerable degree other Russian subjects, not of
Russian birth, enjoy. The law does not protect the elementary civil
rights of the Jews as members of our common Russian commonwealth.
Consequently, that which the Jews strive for is far more elementary,
far more primitive and simple, than the objective of other non-Russian
nationalities which inhabit Russia.
Anti-Semitism is not peculiar to Russia; it is to be found in other
countries as well. But there it exists as an emotion and a state of
mind, not as a system of legislative definitions. The time has long
since passed when the legislatures of the world failed to guarantee
the elementary civil rights of the Jews. Roumania alone constitutes a
peculiar exception. But, as a rule, in all civilised States the law
guarantees Jewish rights, and religious and racial differences do not
create legal disabilities. Nevertheless, if anti-Semitism is still in
existence in the Western countries, the aims it pursues there are
political. It continues to be the weapon of political reaction. And
its objective, at its extreme, is by no means like the grandiose
programme of utter destruction of the Jews which is pursued by the
"truly-Russian" theoreticians of our reaction.
Consequently, the Jewish question in Russia means, above all, the
legal disabilities of the individual Jews that result from the
discriminations made against them as a religious and national entity.
It is only one aspect of our general inequality and of our lack of
civil freedom. The problem of Jewish equal rights in Russia is the
problem of the equal rights of all our citizens in general. That is
why the anti-Semitical parties in Russia have a larger political
significance and importance than the anti-Semitical parties of the
West. In our country they almost coincide with anti-constitutional
parties, in general, and anti-Semitism is the banner of the old
régime, of which we still struggle in vain to rid ourselves. This
accounts for the fact that the Jewish question occupies such a
prominent place in Russian social and political life. Here the
struggle for general rights coincides with the struggle for national
rights. That is why the Jewish problem has come to occupy the centre
of our political stage.
I must add that Russian anti-Semitism, as defined above, is a
comparatively new phenomenon, in fact, it may be asserted that it is a
phenomenon of most recent origin. However ancient may be the instincts
on which our anti-Semites try to play, anti-Semitism itself as a
political motto, as a movement with a party platform and definite
aims, is a new means of political struggle, invented and applied only
in late years. Of course, in the past there can be found
manifestations--very crude and coarse--of what might be termed
"zoological" anti-Semitism. In 1563, Ivan the Terrible conquered
Polotzk, and for the first time the Russian Government was confronted
by the fact of the existence of the Jewish nationality. The Czar's
advisers were somewhat perplexed and asked him what to do with these
newly acquired subjects. Ivan the Terrible answered unhesitatingly:
"Baptise them or drown them in the river."
They were drowned. And the old Russian "zoological" nationalism was
satisfied by this primitive solution of the problem. But the political
wisdom of Czar Ivan's times has long since become obsolete.