community where the master bankers and the master analysts of conditions
lived. And back from the central community flowed information of an
invaluable character and assistance wherever needed. It is not difficult
to understand how, under such a condition, the nation that did not deal
kindly with the Jews was made to suffer, and the nation that yielded to
them their fullest desire was favored by them. And it is credibly stated
that they have made certain nations feel the power of their displeasure.
This system, if it ever existed, exists in greater power today. It is
today, however, threatened as it has never been. Fifty years ago,
international banking, which was mostly in control of the Jews as the
money brokers of the world, was on top of business. It exercised the
supercontrol of governments and finance everywhere. Then came that new
thing, Industry, which expanded to a degree unguessed by the shrewdest
prophets and analysts. As Industry gathered strength and power it became
a powerful money magnet, drawing the wealth of the world in its train,
not, however, merely for the sake of possessing the money, but of making
it work. Production and profit on production, instead of loans and
interest on loans, became the master method for a time. The war came, in
which the former broker-masters of the world had undoubtedly their large
part. And now the two forces, Industry and Finance, are in a struggle to
see whether Finance is again to become the master, or creative Industry.
This is one of the elements which is bringing the Jewish Question to the
bar of public opinion.
To state this and to prove it may be nothing more than to establish the
superiority of Jewish ability. Certainly it is not a tenable position to
say that the Jew is extraordinarily successful and therefore must be
curbed. It would be equally aside from the truth to say that the
co-ordination of Jewish activity has been, on the whole, a harmful thing
for the world. It may be possible to show that up to this point it has
been useful. Success cannot be attacked nor condemned. If any moral
question arises at all, it must concern the use made of the success
which has been attained. The whole matter centers there, after the
previous fact is established. May the Jew go on as he has gone, or does
his duty to the world require another use of his success?
This inquiry obviously leads to further discussion, as well as a
gathering up of the remaining threads of the present discussion, which
future articles will attempt to do.
[Issue of June 12, 1920.]
"To this end we must organize. Organize, in the first place, so that the
world may have proof of the extent and the intensity of our desire for
liberty. Organize, in the second place, so that our resources may become
known and be made available . . . .
"Organize, organize, organize, until every Jew must stand up and be
counted--counted with us, or prove himself, wittingly or unwittingly, of
the few who are against their own people."
--Louis D. Brandeis, Justice of the United States Supreme Court,
"Zionism," pp. 113, 114.
V.
Anti-Semitism--Will It Appear in the U. S.?
Anyone who essays to discuss the Jewish Question in the United States or
anywhere else must be fully prepared to be regarded as an Anti-Semite,
in high-brow language, or in low-brow language, a Jew-baiter. Nor need
encouragement be looked for from people or from press. The people who
are awake to the subject at all prefer to wait and see how it all turns
out; while there is probably not a newspaper in America, and certainly
none of the advertising mediums which are called magazines, which would
have the temerity even to breathe seriously the fact that such a
Question exists. The press in general is open at this time to fulsome
editorials in favor of everything Jewish (specimens of the same being
obtainable almost anywhere), while the Jewish press, which is fairly
numerous in the United States, takes care of the vituperative end.
Of course, the only acceptable explanation of any public discussion at
present of the Jewish Question is that some one--writer, or publisher,
or a related interest--is a Jew-hater. That idea seems to be fixed; it
is fixed in the Jew by inheritance; it is sought to be fixed in the
Gentile by propaganda, that any writing which does not simply cloy and
drip in syrupy sweetness toward things Jewish is born of prejudice and
hatred. It is, therefore, full of lies, insult, insinuation, and
constitutes an instigation to massacre. These terms are culled at random
from Jewish editorial utterances at hand.
It would seem to be necessary for our Jewish citizens to enlarge their
classification of Gentiles to include the class which recognizes the
existence of a Jewish Question and still is not anti-Semitic.
There are four distinct parties traceable among the Jews themselves.
First, those whose passionate purpose is to keep Jewish faith and life
alive at the cost of any sacrifice of popularity or success; second,
those who are willing to make whatever sacrifice may be needed to
preserve Jewish religion, but are not so particular about the
traditional customs of Jewish life; third, those who have no very strong
convictions either way, but are opportunists, and will always swerve in
the direction of success; and, fourth, those who believe and preach that
the only solution of the differences between the Jew and other men is
the complete absorption of the Jewish race by the other races. The
fourth is the weakest, most unpopular and least to be considered of all
the parties.
With the Gentiles there are only two classes, as far as this special
question is concerned: those who dislike Jews, they cannot tell why; and
those who are disposed to fairness, in spite of the accident of
congeniality or uncongeniality, and who recognize the Jewish Question
as, at least, a problem. Both these attitudes, whenever they become
apparent, are subject to the charge of "anti-Semitism."
Anti-Semitism is a term which is bandied about too loosely. It ought to
be reserved to denote the real anti-Jewish temper of violent prejudice.
If used indiscriminately about all who attempt to discuss Jewish
characteristics and Jewish world-power, it may in time arrive at the
estate of respectability and honor.
Anti-Semitism in almost every form is bound to come to the United
States; indeed, it may be said that it is here now, and has been here
for a long time. If it be mislabeled now, the United States will not be
able to work within it the transformation which has been effected upon
so many other ideas that have arrived here in their journey round the
globe.
I.
It may be a serviceable clearing of the ground to define what
anti-Semitism is not:
1. It is not recognition of the Jewish Question. If it were, then it
could be set down that the bulk of the American people are destined to
become anti-Semites, for they are beginning to recognize the existence
of a Jewish Question and will steadily do so in increasing numbers as
the Question is forced upon them from the various practical angles of
their lives. The Question is here. We may be honestly blind to it. We
may be timidly silent about it. We may even make dishonest denial of it.
But it is here. In time all will have to recognize it. In time the
polite "hush, hush" of over-sensitive or intimidated circles will not be
powerful enough to suppress it. But to recognize it will not mean that
we have gone over to a campaign of hatred and enmity against the Jews.
It will only mean that a stream of tendency which has been flowing
through our civilization has at last accumulated bulk and power enough
to challenge attention, to call for some decision with regard to it, to
call for the adoption of a policy which will not repeat the mistakes of
the past and yet will forestall any possible social menace of the
future.
2. Again, the public discussion of the Jewish Question is not
anti-Semitism. Publicity is sanitary. The publicity given the Jewish
Question, or certain aspects of it, in this country has been very
misleading. It has been discussed more fully in the Jewish press than
elsewhere, but not with candor or breadth of vision. The two dominant
notes--they are sounded over and over again with monotonous regularity
in the Jewish press--are Gentile unfairness and Christian prejudice.
These apparently are the two chief aspects of life which impress Jewish
publicists when they look over the line of their own race. It is said in
all soberness that it is fortunate for Jews generally that the Jewish
press does not circulate very widely among Gentiles, for it is probably
the one established agency in the United States which, without altering
its program in the least, could stir up anti-Jewish sentiment by the
simple expedient of a general reading among non-Jews. Jewish writers
writing for Jewish readers present unusual material for the study of
race consciousness and its accompaniment of contempt for other races. It
is true that in the publications referred to, America is constantly
praised, but not America as the land of the American people; America,
rather, as the land of the Jews' opportunity.
On the side of the daily press, there has been no serious discussion at
all. This is neither surprising nor reprehensible. The daily press deals
with matters that have reached the overheated stage. When it mentions
the Jews at all, it has stock phrases for the purpose; the effort
includes a list of the famous Jews of history, and usually closes with
complimentary references to certain local Jews of commendable qualities,
whose advertisements are not infrequently found in another part of the
paper. Summing up, it may be said that the publicity given the question
in this country consists in misrepresentative criticism of the Gentiles
by the Jewish press and misrepresentative praise of the Jews by the
non-Jewish press. An independent effort to give a constructive publicity
cannot, therefore, be laid to anti-Semitism, even when some of the
statements which are made in the course of it arouse the resentment of
Jewish readers.
3. Nor is it anti-Semitism to say that the suspicion is abroad in every
capital of civilization and the certainty is held by a number of
important men that there is active in the world a plan to control the
world, not by territorial acquisition, not by military aggression, nor
by governmental subjection, not even by economic control in the
scientific sense, but by control of the machinery of commerce and
exchange. It is not anti-Semitism to say that, nor to present the
evidence which supports that, nor to bring the proof of that. Those who
could best disprove it if it were not true are the international Jews
themselves, but they have not disproved it. Those who could best prove
it would be those Jews whose ideals include the good of the whole of
humanity on an equality and not the good of one race only, but they have
not proved it. Some day a prophetic Jew may arise who will see that the
promises bestowed upon the Ancient People are not to be fulfilled by
Rothschild methods, and that the promise that all the nations were to be
blessed through Israel is not to be fulfilled by making the nations the
economic vassals of Israel; and when that time comes we may hope for a
redirection of Jewish energy into channels that will drain the present
sources of the Jewish Question. In the meantime, it is not
anti-Semitism, it may even be found to be a world service to the Jew, to
throw light on what purpose motivates certain higher circles.
If the above propositions are true, then the term "anti-Semitic," so
freely bestowed on this series of articles, betrays a worse spirit in
the critics than in the author. But enough of that. There is much yet to
do, and what is done must stand on what merit remains after friend and
foe alike are through with praise and blame.
II.
Anti-Semitism has unquestionably swayed large sections of humanity at
various times, warping the vision, twisting the characters and staining
the hands of its victims, but the most amazing statement that can be
made of it is that it has never accomplished anything in behalf of those
who used it, and it has never taught anything to the Jews against whom
it was used.
The grades of anti-Semitism are fairly numerous, and a few of them may
be cited here:
1. There is first that degree of anti-Semitism, if it may be so
described, which consists in plain dislike of the Jew as a person, no
matter whom he may be. This is often found in people of all grades. It
is found mostly, however, in those whose contact with Jews has been very
limited. It begins sometimes in childhood with an instinctive dislike
for the word "Jew." It is encouraged by the misuse of the word "Jew" as
an epithet, or as an adjective generally descriptive of unpopular
practices. The feeling is not different from that which exists toward
Gentiles, concerning whom the same notions are held, but it differs in
that it is extended to the race of unknown individual Jews instead of
being restricted to known individuals who may justify such a feeling.
Congeniality is not within our choice, but control of the sentiment of
uncongeniality is. Every fair-minded person is compelled at times to
reflect that it is not impossible that the person for whom he feels a
dislike may be as good and possibly a better person than he. Our dislike
merely registers the result of attraction and repulsion as they operate
between another person and oneself; it does not indicate that the
disliked person is unworthy. Of course, wherever intelligence is joined
with this instinctive withdrawal from social contact with members of the
Jewish race, prejudice is forestalled, except, of course, in those
persons who hold that there are no individuals among the Jews worthy of
respect. This is an extreme attitude and is composed of other elements
beside natural dislike. It is possible for people to dislike Jews and
not be anti-Semitic. Indeed, it is not at all uncommon, it grows more
and more common, that intelligent and refined Jews themselves do not
relish the society of their own people except in cases of exceptional
refinement.
This reality calls for some comment on the manners and characteristics
of the ordinary member of the Jewish race, the accidents of behavior
which stand out most obnoxiously and of which Jews themselves are often
the most unsparing critics, but these comments must fall into place
later.
2. A second stage of the spirit of anti-Semitism may be designated as
hatred and enmity. It should be noted that the antipathy referred to
immediately above was not hatred. Dislike is not hatred, nor is it
necessarily enmity. One may dislike sugar in his tea without troubling
to hate sugar. But undoubtedly there are people who because they have
let their dislikes deepen into prejudice, and perhaps also because of
unpleasant experiences with members of the Jewish race (probably a
million Americans have been brought to the verge of becoming Jew-haters
this winter because of contact with Jewish merchants and landlords) may
be classified as, at least, incipient anti-Semites. This is most of all
unfortunate for the persons who harbor these emotions. It is unfortunate
in that it unfits the mind to consider intelligently the facts which
constitute the Jewish Question, and also unfits it to deal with them in
a fair and constructive way. For one's own sake, whatever the
provocation otherwise, it is better not to let passion deflect the
needle of one's mind. Hatred at the wheel means hazard on the course.
Enmity lives in the vicinity of the Jews more than of any other race,
and the reason for this is one of the puzzles of the ages. The Jewish
nature itself, as shown in ancient and modern history, is not without
its own share of enmity, and it either evokes or provokes enmity where
it comes in contact with those Aryan races which follow their natural
impulses unchecked by cultural and ethical influences. This age-long
conflict of the Jew has puzzled the minds of students for generations.
Some explain it Biblically as the curse of Jehovah upon His Chosen
People for their disobedience to the discipline by which He would have
made them the Prophet Nation of the world. If this offense must come, if
it is part of the Jew's heritage, an old saying--Christian and
Scriptural, by the way--would still remain true: "It must needs be that
offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh."
3. In some parts of the world at various times this feeling of hatred
has broken into murderous violence, which has roused, as wholesale
physical outrage always does, the horror and resentment of humanity.
This is the extreme form in which anti-Semitism has exhibited itself,
and it is the charge of intending to stimulate it here and elsewhere
which every public discussion of the Jewish Question has to bear. There
is, of course, no excuse for these outbreaks, but there is sufficient
explanation of them. The Jews usually explain them as expressions of
religious prejudice, and the Gentiles as rebellion against an economic
yoke which the Jews have woven for the people. It is an astonishing fact
that, to take one country, the parts of Russia where anti-Semitic
violence has been most marked are the most prosperous parts, so
prosperous indeed and with a prosperity so unquestionably due to Jewish
enterprise that the Jews have openly declared that they have the power
to throw those parts of Russia back into commercial lethargy again by
simply withdrawing. It is utterly idle to throw denials at this
statement. It is confirmed time and time again by men who have gone to
Russia full of resentment against the attitude of the Russians toward
the Jews, as that attitude is represented in the Anglo-Saxon press, and
who have come home with a new light on the cause of these outbreaks,
though not excusing their character. Impartial observers have also found
that some of the outbreaks have been precipitated by the Jews
themselves. A correspondent, known the world over for his trenchant
defense of the Jews under Russian persecution, was always bitterly
attacked by the Jews themselves whenever he stated the truth about this,
notwithstanding his protest to them that if he did not tell the truth
when they were in the wrong the world would not be ready to believe him
when he said they were blameless. To this day, in every country, the
Jews are slow to admit blameworthiness for anything. They must be
excused, whoever else may be accused. It is a trait which will have to
be disciplined before they can be brought to assist, if ever they can,
the removal of those characteristics which arouse the antagonism of
other peoples. Elsewhere in the world, it may be said that out-and-out
enmity to the Jews has an economic basis. This, of course, leads to the
question whether the Jew shall have to become a deliberate failure, or
deny his genius, and forego his just meed of prosperity before he can
win the approval of the other races--a question which will arise for
discussion later.
As to the religious prejudice which the Jews are, as a rule, readiest to
affirm, it is safe to say that it does not exist in the United States.
Yet it is charged up to Americans by Jewish writers just as freely as it
is charged up to Russians. Each non-Jew reader is competent to settle
this for himself. He can easily do so by asking himself whether in all
his life he has ever felt a moment's resentment against the Jew on
account of his religion. In an address recently delivered in a Jewish
lodge and reported in the Jewish press, the speaker, a Jew, stated that
if 100 non-Jews on the street were approached at random and casually
asked what a Jew is, the reply of the majority would be, "He is a
Christ-killer." One of the best known and most highly respected rabbis
in the United States said recently in a sermon that children in
Christian Sunday schools were taught to regard the Jew as a
Christ-killer. He repeated it in a conversation several weeks later.
It would probably be the testimony of Christians generally that they
never heard this term until they heard it in a Jewish complaint, and
certainly themselves never used it. The charge is absurd. Let the
20,000,000 now in the Christian Sunday schools of Canada and the United
States testify as to the instruction given. There is no hesitation in
stating that there is no prejudice whatever in the Christian churches
against the Jew on account of his religion. On the contrary, there is
not only a deep sense of indebtedness, but a feeling of sharing with the
Jew in his religion. The Sunday schools of the Christian churches of the
world are spending six months of this year studying the International
Lessons which are appointed for the Books of the Judges, Ruth, First and
Second Samuel and the Books of the Kings, and every year is devoted in
part to the Old Testament.
Here, however, is something for Jewish religious leaders to consider:
there is more downright bitterness of religious prejudice on the part of
the Jews against Christianity than could ever be possible in the
Christian churches of America. Simply take the church press of America
and compare it with the Jewish press in this regard, and there is no
answer. No Christian editor would think it either Christian or
intelligent to attack the Jewish religion, yet any six months' survey of
the Jewish press would yield a mass of attack and prejudice on the other
side. Moreover, no religious bitterness in America attains within
infinite distances to that bitterness visited upon the Jew who becomes a
Christian in his faith. It amounts almost to a holy vendetta. A
Christian may become a Jewish proselyte and his motives be respected; it
is never so when a Jew becomes a Christian. These statements are true of
both the orthodox and liberal wings of Judaism. It is not his religion
that gives prominence to the Jew today; it is something else. And yet,
with undeviating monotony, it is repeated wherever the Jew takes
cognizance of the feeling toward him that it is on account of three
things, first and most prominent of which is his religion. It may be
comforting to him to think that he is suffering for his faith, but it is
not true. Every intelligent Jew must know it.
Every Jew ought to know also that in every Christian church where the
ancient prophecies are received and studied, there is a great revival of
interest in the future of the Ancient People. It is not forgotten that
certain Promises were made to them regarding their position in the
world, and it is held that these prophecies will be fulfilled. The
future of the Jew, as prophetically outlined, is intimately bound up
with the future of this planet, and the Christian church in large
part--at least by the evangelical wing, which the Jews most
condemn--sees a Restoration of the Chosen People yet to come. If the
mass of the Jews knew how understandingly and sympathetically all the
prophecies concerning them are being studied in the Church, and the
faith that exists that these prophecies will find fulfillment and that
they will result in great Jewish service to society at large, they would
probably regard the Church with another mind. They would at least know
that the Church does not believe that it will be the instrument in the
conversion of the Jews--a point on which Jewish leaders are tragically
misled and which evokes more bitterness than anything else--but that it
depends on quite other instruments and conditions, which it is not the
function of this article to point out except to say that it will be the
Jews' very own Messiah which will accomplish it and not the "wild
olive," or the Gentile.
Curiously enough, there is a phase of anti-Semitism having to do with
religion, but not in the way here discussed. There are those, very few
in number and of atheistical tendencies, who assert that all religion is
a sham, being the invention of Jews for the purpose of enslaving the
minds of the people of the world to an enervating superstition. This
position, however, has had no effect on the main issue. It is a far
extreme.
III.