Land for Victory

The Jewish Post (Winnipeg), September 25, 1941

Attributed to Z. Alroy.

A thorough evaluation of the year 5701 in Palestine must include a study of the development of agricultural settlement – the basis for any permanent economic existence in a country. Z. Alroy bases this interpretive picture of Palestine on the achievements of the Jewish National Fund, which is preparing to celebrate the 40th anniversary of its land purchasing operations in Palestine and which last year alone provided the land for eight new agricultural settlements. – The Editor.

What fate does the future hold in store for Palestine? If and when the cause of the democracies prevails [in World War II], will Palestine (a) become incorporated in a Federation of Middle Eastern or Arab States? (b) be set up as a bi-national state in which Jews and Arabs will hold political parity? (c) be partitioned into two states, one Arab and the other Jewish? (d) remain mandated territory, as heretofore, and administered by Great Britain? or (e) be admitted into the British Commonwealth of Nations as the Seventh Dominion?

These and similar questions occupy the minds of publicists, political analysts, contact men, negotiators and statesmen, as the second year of World War II, coinciding with the Hebrew year 5701, has drawn to a close. In Cairo, negotiations are said to be going on with Arab leaders regarding the shape of things to come in the Arab world. Political thought, after a self-imposed prolonged silence on the part of Zionist leadership, is also beginning to stir in London, in Jerusalem, in New York and in Washington, D.C.

All this is, of course, predicated on the conviction that the Axis powers will be ultimately defeated, and that the new order that will be established after the war will be determined not by the proponents of the “might is right” principle but by the victorious adherence of individual liberty and national freedom. Of the three parties that are interested in the present and future of Palestine – the British, the Jews, and the Arabs – only the first two cling to this hopeful assumption. The Arabs still retain an open mind on the question. Actually, insofar as the Jewish National Home in Palestine is concerned, the “status quo ante bellum” still prevails. The restrictions in respect to Jewish immigration and land purchase, promulgated in the MacDonald White Paper before the outbreak of the war, when Chamberlainian appeasement was at its height, are still the law of the land. Moreover, these restrictions which violate the very essence of the Balfour Declaration and the League of Nations Mandate do injury to the country’s most vital economic interests that have been and are being implemented by the Palestine Government.

And yet, the objective reviewer of the Palestine scene in the second year of the war is pleasantly surprised at the conclusion which the facts seem to warrant. Considered against the background of the tragedy, chaos and misery that have swept over the Axis conquered and dominated lands, and the catastrophe that has come over the Jewish communities of these lands, the story of the Jewish National Home at war constitutes a remarkable epic of progress and achievement. It is the one bright spot in the Jewish sector of the worldwide Battle for Freedom on which not only no position has been lost, but new bastions of strength have been gained and are being held firmly as a preparation for and a promise of the future. The story is most objectively and, simultaneously, most graphically told in the facts and figures pertaining to the operations of the Jewish National Fund during the Hebrew year 5701. The Fund is one of the two major instruments of the Zionist movement through which national resources are being mobilized and made available for upbuilding and strengthening the Jewish National Home. Its special task is the acquisition of “land,” as national and inalienable property, for current and future needs.

What is the sense of buying land in wartime? Is the application of public funds for such a purpose a “wise” investment? Is there no danger that the land might fall into the hands of the invader? These and similarly “optimistic” questions have been hurled at the leadership of the Jewish National Fund since the collapse of France and the entry of Italy into the war. It is characteristic that these questions came from the “prudent” lips of those who were far removed from the danger zone themselves. The Jews of Palestine, where the danger of invasion seemed imminent several times during the year, entertained no such misgivings or fears. For them – and this occurred long before the psychological V for Victory campaign was launched for the benefit of the subjugated or threatened lands – there was only one orientation: Ultimate victory.

The months of anxiety have only served to stimulate greater exertions, with the result that since September 1939, up to August 1941, the continuity of Jewish constructive as well as defense effort has remained unbroken in Palestine. Vision, determination and unshakeable faith in ultimate victory have borne fruit. After two years of war, in which the country experienced a number of air attacks by Fascist and Nazi bombers, and faced the dangers of invasion from the North, East and South, the Jewish National Home stands on a firmer “land” foundation, has a greater locally-grown food supply, and houses a larger number of agricultural settlers rooted in the soil than it had at the outbreak of hostilities. The same progressive trend has come to the fore in the other parts of the Jewish National Home structure. In these paragraphs, however, the reviewer limits his observations to the progress in [rests of article lost].

Changing Values in American Jewish Fraternities

The Canadian Jewish Chronicle, July 31, 1925.*


The wave of tropical heat which [recently] descended upon the northeast gave way to a lower temperature. People were relieved. However, a new wave has descended. It is the wave of conventions.

The convention is a product “made in America.” Conferences are known everywhere. Conventions, with their large attendance, [a] combination of business and pleasure, politics and amusement, are typical of a great democracy.

“The fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man” – a Jewish idea which has remained an ideal through the centuries – would justify one to believe that brotherhoods, fraternities and orders were an important factor in Jewish life. However, Jewish history has only one record, and that an incomplete one, of the existence of a Jewish fraternal order: the Essenes, a product of Palestinian soil, which left to posterity only an unexplainable name.

The Essenes, as described by Josephus Flavius, were, perhaps, the first fraternity which gathered its membership with caution and held it in a strong common bond of brotherhood, social justice and religious purity. It was, perhaps, also the first effective teacher of hygiene, imposing the duty of cleanliness upon its members. The “sunrise bathers” is the vague expression which they left upon the Jewish mind, giving rise to the movement which preceded the birth of Christianity and precedence to the various Orders of the Bath.

Since then, however, Jewish history represents a “tabula rasa” with regard to fraternities. Perhaps it was due to the environment which prevented such organizations. Perhaps it was due to the common fate which created, as it were, a Jewish fraternity at large. And it was not until the glorious chapter in American Jewry was added to Jewish history that Jewish fraternal orders came into existence.

Perhaps in no other country is the social life of its citizens so colorful as in the United States. The color introduced by the fraternities is particularly radiant against the grey background of the democracy. This is also perhaps one of the motives responsible in this country.

But there were many more and much deeper reasons. Critics of Jewish life have frequently indulged in an accusation, which on the surface might appear true, that when Jews form a community, the first care of the community is to purchase a cemetery. When non-Jews form a settlement, their first care is to create a park. On examination this accusation is only half-truth. Physicians in Jewish districts know better. The Jewish people consider life above everything. “And you who are united in God, you are all alive today” was the commandment of optimism and encouragement which has sounded in Jewish ears since the days of Moses.

But life is not eternal and must be followed by death. The practical Jewish mind cares for both, life and death.

When the wave of immigration to America brought on its crest thousands of newcomers who needed assistance in life and were subject to sickness and death, the fraternity was formed to take care of the sick and the burial of the dead. Numerous orders were in operation. Rituals were composed, by-words created, [and] forms laid down for their increasing membership.

Some of the older fraternities, such as the B’Nai Brith, swiftly abandoned their primate form and ascended to greater heights of social service. Others, with greater individual numbers, underwent a slower process. Large bodies move slowly, but the process is going on with its attending difficulties, obstacles and trying situations.

Observers of Jewish life in America have often given expression to the fact that only a small minority are affiliated with any kind of congregational life, whether it be reform, conservative or orthodox. An observer at the Thirty-Ninth Convention of the Independent Order of B’Nai Abraham, a fraternity with a membership of 135,000, could find a reply to this comment. While the bulk of the membership is apparently of the type which is termed “unaffiliated,” the proceedings of this gathering proved beyond doubt how deeply tradition, and Jewish tradition at that, holds them in its grip.

Not objecting to the new and progressive ideas of widening the scope of the fraternity, and introducing social membership lodges, the convention persistently objected to all attempts of the leaders to do away with the old-fashioned post-mortem assessments and to introduce a modern, scientific system of mutual insurance. With only a $2,000,000 reserve fund and 135,000 members, and with an increasing rate of mortality, the financial situation can be saved by nothing short of a miracle. However, the majority voted for optimism and tradition. “We have existed for thirty-nine years on the post-mortem assessment system; we will continue to do so,” they argued. More than this, adherence to tradition came to the surface when the convention preferred to delay the transaction of business on the agenda to listen to a well-known cantor sing religious songs.

“From dust does man come and to dust doth he return.” There could be no better expression of the spirit of this type of Jewish fraternity in this period of changing values in American Jewish life.

*Note: this essay, it seems, was heavily edited, if not rewritten, by its publisher, and thus barely resembles the author’s other texts.

A Century in Retrospect: Survey of Trends and Events in the Course of the Hebrew Calendar Century Closing on Rosh Hashanah

The New Palestine, September 12, 1939.

When the sun sets on September 13th, the people that counts time from Creation will mark the end of a hundred years in its history. The eighth century in the sixth millennium of the Hebrew calendar will begin.

The history of mankind, examined from the point of view of its progress, is only the story of the periods between natural catastrophes or those catastrophes which mankind brings upon itself through hate and war. The century which has now come to an end (the period between 1839 and 1939), although heralded as the period of enlightenment and progress, did not essentially differ from the centuries that preceded it. Many armed conflicts and large-scale wars ravaged the earth and consumed life and treasure. In fact, this span of time has the dubious distinction of having been the period within which the first World War was fought and the second World War was begun. What will follow may be the subject of speculation but since the past is a preparation for the present, the future cannot be expected to be more than an extension of the latter. One could not indeed derive much comfort from this prospect were it not to be modified by the recognition that at least the present and future are subject to the dynamics of the human will, and to the powers of the human mind at its best, if and when these factors do come into play.

The story of the seventh century in the sixth millennium in retrospect would indeed to a monotonous tale of man’s inhumanity to man – not unlike the story of Jewish life of preceding centuries of exile and persecution – were it not for the dynamics of the Jewish will to live and of its proved ability to survive after seemingly crushing blows and to carry on along the path that started, four millennia ago, at Ur of the Chaldees. It is on this dynamic aspect of the past and the guidance that it provided for the future that our interest centers.

Light From America

As the drama of the seventh century in the sixth millennium opened, the scene was illuminated by the powerful rays of the light that was kindled in 1775 by the American Revolution. Derived from Hebraic sources, the proposition that “all men were created equal” hardened into a principle that was incorporated into the Constitution of the United States thirteen years later. Only an insignificant number of Jews who had trickled across the great expanses of the Atlantic came under the beneficent rays of this light. When, however, the French Revolution burst forth and the cry of “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity” resounded from the banks of the Seine to tyrant-ridden Europe, the most martyred of all members of the human family – the dispersed, oppressed and despised Jew – was emboldened to hope that for him, too, the era of enlightenment and progress would bring deliverance.

The fifty years that elapsed between the French Revolution and the beginning of the Seventh Century (1839) brought, however, only partial relief and proved the Great Hope to have been largely illusory for the Jews of Europe. The Jewish communities were teeming with excitement and expectancy. There was strife between the “enlighteners” who believed that all that their brethren would have to do to gain the desired emancipation would be only to shed a part of their ancient culture and “improve” the forms of their religious worship, and the “reactionaries” who were equally desirous of obtaining their natural rights but insisted on maintaining the loyalty that sustained their people for so long and bitter a period. But even the enthusiastic “enlighteners” were destined to recognize that at best Emancipation meant only a constant struggle for equal rights.

The Inquisition in Spain was officially revoked as late as 1834. The abolition of the legal disabilities against the Jews in the various Kingdoms and Provinces of Germany was not officially decreed until 1869 (to last only until April 1st, 1933 – 64 years!). Even in England, it was not until 1858 that Parliament passed the Jews Disability Bill. Baron Lionel de Rothschild was the first Jew to take a seat in Parliament, in the same year, without taking the oath “On the true faith of a Christian,” which was customary until then.

The light that was kindled in Independence Hall, Philadelphia and flamed into a mighty torch in the French Revolution, required more than half a century before its rays reached in 1848 the plateaus of Central Europe. A popular movement for freedom then reached a temporary zenith followed by swift reaction. Even so, Emancipation of the Jews, in a civic and economic sense, never crossed the Vistula River into the lands of the Russian Czars. True, under the guidance of Benjamin Disraeli, [the] first statesman of Jewish origin to become Prime Minister in England, the Berlin Congress, with the approval of Bismarck, took action to guarantee, by means of an international agreement, the civil and religious rights of Jewish minorities in Serbia, Bulgaria and Romania. But these “guarantees” were never taken seriously by any of the signatories. Romania, which long rivaled Russia in the art of Jew-hatred, has found it easy to evade its international obligations up to this day.

Origins of Hitlerism

The Seventh Century will be known in the history of our people as the span of time in which the most despicable figure that ever trod God’s earth made his appearance among the human species: the anti-Semite.

Not that hatred and persecution of the Jew were unknown or unpracticed before his arrival. Almost everything that the anti-Semite said and did with regard to Jews was said and done many times before. His contribution lay in the fact that he, the anti-Semite, made a “science” and, more often than not, a lucrative profession out of his hatred. Hitlerism, against which England and France have now declared war and against which the sympathies and cooperation of all civilized men are now so fervently invoked, rode into power, unchecked, on the Trojan horse of anti-Semitism. No one could or should have been deluded for the thing was not new. It was conceived and practiced and developed into a political science long before the Hitlerian pestilence made its appearance. It was “made in Germany” and bears the imprint of German politics.

Adolf Stoecker (1835-1909), chaplain at the Emperor’s Court, founder and leader of the “Christian Socialist” Party, was the true forerunner of Adolf Hitler. The term anti-Semite made its appearance in German letters in 1879, when – the irony of history! – Wilhelm Marr, an apostate and former Social Democrat, bewailed the “victory of Judaism over Germanism” in a pamphlet of that name. He founded in Berlin the first “Society of Anti-Semites.” Heinrich von Treitschte (1834-1896), a professor of history at the University of Berlin, was the first German scholar to formulate the foundations of “scientific anti-Semitism.” It suited the politics of Bismarck to employ anti-Semitism in his fight against the progressive elements and particularly against the Social Democrats in Germany, among whom Lasker, Edward Bernstein and Lassalle played a leading part.

The slush fund fittingly described in those days as the “Reptiles Fund,” at the disposal of the German Chancellor, unleashed a flood of “scientific anti-Semitism,” which became in 1880, and for many years after, the leading issue not only in Germany but also in Central Europe and elsewhere. The poisonous gases, foreshadowing Hitlerism, infected wide areas all over the Continent and embittered the lives of generations of Jews.

It never required much argument or persuasion to whip anti-Jewish feeling into fury. In 1840, the first year of the century saw the revival of the ritual-murder accusation. The celebrated Damascus case necessitated the journeys of Sir Moses Montefiore and Adolph Cremieux to the Orient and the unfolding of many efforts before the falsity of the accusation was established. The anti-Semitic agitation under the slogan (Hitler has not been original!) “The Jews are our misfortune” resulted in reviving ritual-murder accusations in Xanten, and in Konic, Prussia, and opened up a series of ritual-murder accusations against Jews in other lands, beginning with the famous Hilsner Affair (1899), in which the late Thomas Masaryk, founder and first President of Czechoslovakia, played a leading part as a defender of the Jewish name, and ending with the Beillis affair in Kiev, Russia, in 1913.

Under the Czars

In Czarist Russia where the largest segment of European Jewry was herded into the “Pale of Settlement,” the drama of Jewish survival against overwhelming odds was enacted during the major part of the century. The several Romanoffs differed only in degree of severity with which they carried through their programs of legalized oppression, forcible “enlightenment,” and outright curtailment of elementary rights of a Jewish population of nearly 6,000,000 souls. The height of cruelty was reached, however, with the anti-Jewish decrees and riots of 1880 which had their sequel in the regime of Nicholas II, the last of the Czars. His ignominious defeat in the World War and death at the hands of the Bolsheviki closed the saddest chapter in the history of Jewry.

It was within the crowded cities of the Pales of Settlement and on the steppes of Russia that Jewish vitality and ability to withstand the heaviest pressure was most severely tested and found not wanting. For Russo-Polish Jewry, yearning as it did for Emancipation and equal rights and persisting in its struggle for them, kept aloft the torch of Jewish loyalty and, unlike its more fortunate but Jewishly less sturdy brethren in Western Europe, it was never willing to attain its coveted Emancipation at a price like that paid by the upper stratum of French Jewry or so eagerly offered by some sections of German Jewry. East European Jewry, far from being ready to denounce its ancient culture and national characteristics, absorbed the ideas and ideals of the modernized West but constantly strove, through various means, to evolve a solution that would not conflict with its past or inner self. To be sure, no unanimity was ever achieved. Various schools of thought, flourishing under the impact of world events and the ideas for social and economic justice that arose in the West in the wake of the industrial revolution, warred with each other for dominance over the Jewish scene. However, the bulk of Russo-Polish Jewry, long the reservoir of Jewish tradition and intellectual strength, remained an immovable rock of Jewish loyalty, acting as a stabilizing and restraining influence on the flight from Judaism in the West.

It was precisely here that the dynamics of the Jewish will to live – and not only to live ad loco, but to seek release through initiative and through daring thought and unflinching action – flourished.

In the West

The flight from Judaism in the West, too, was by far incomplete. The constant remainder of Jewish misery in the East and the recurring pressure in the lands of full or partial Emancipation activated the best elements in Western Jewry. With the new wealth and influence that accrued to an ever-widening circle in France, England and parts of Germany, Western Jewry was in a position to undertake remedial action that was formerly not possible. Thus, the century witnessed the organization and development of Jewish organizations like the Alliance Israelite Universelle (established in 1860) and the Hilfsverein of German Jewry, the Foundation of Baron Maurice de Hirsch, which, after the death of the philanthropist, developed into the Jewish Colonization Association. These instruments of philanthropy rendered, indeed, great service to the masses of Jews in helping to solve some of the acutest problems of the day. Some of these instruments also served as vehicles for diplomatic action at special occasions and under particular circumstances. The first and the last mentioned also acted as disseminators of modern education and European culture, but they never went beyond the philanthropic gesture.

The “poor brethren” had ideas of their own. Drawing from the wells of Jewish yearning for justice, of loyalty to its national tradition and culture, of the ever-present memory of a Homeland lost but to be regained, and of the invaluable treasures of [an] original and unique culture, East European Jewry – fructified, to be sure, by the seeds of progress and enlightenment from the West – labored hard and steadfastly along the paths of creativeness to bring about its deliverance.

Sources of Hope

First in this development during the century was the revival of Hebrew letters. Taking its cue from the “enlighteners” of the West, East European Jewry avidly began the process of the Hebrew Renaissance, which culminated in a Modern Hebrew literature in which thinkers of the stature of Achad Ha’am and poets of the sweeping vision of Chaim Nachman Bialik came to the fore, a growth that flowered in the revival of Hebrew as a spoken language and in the cultural fabric that is now the foundation of the new Jewish life in Eretz Israel. Parallel to this process went the development of what was known in the middle of the century as “jargon” into Yiddish in which a galaxy of gifted novelists, poets and essayists gave expression to their creative genius and established vital and intimate contact between the Jewish masses and the thought and the feeling of the age. A powerful Yiddish press in the United States and in Eastern Europe arose to serve the Jew in his search for freedom at home or in his endeavor to find liberty and opportunity at more hospitable shores overseas and – last but not least – to advocate the realization of the vision of Zion, which he had been cherishing so long in the depths of his soul.

Religious Changes

In the field of religion, the century witnessed a mighty struggle against the alienating influences of the extreme forms of Reform Judaism, which in the early part of the Nineteenth Century threatened, if unchecked, to bring about disintegration of Jewry. As the period opened, a great champion of traditional Judaism appeared in Germany, the birthplace of its new rival, in the person of Samson Raphael Hirsch (1808-1888). As the century rolled into eternity, the desire for adjustment to the outside world through shedding as much as possible of the original forms of Jewish religious observance was definitely checked in Europe [only] to be transplanted – on the crest of the German-Jewish immigration that followed the year 1848 – into the United States, where it was to arise as “American Judaism.”

Untouched by this struggle in the West, the stream of Jewish piety and learning continued in the East and brought to the fore such outstanding and widely recognized authorities on Jewish religious law as Rabbi Chaim Soloveitchcik of Brest-Litovsk, Rabbi Israel Salanter, who enriched the seats of traditional earning with his “Mussar” (ethics), Rabbi Samuel Mohilever (1824-1898), who was one of the first sponsors and leaders of the Chovevei Zion, and Rabbi Abraham Ha’cohen Kook, who became the first Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi in Palestine during the Mandate era.

Cultural Advances

Of Jewish contributions to civilization and the welfare of mankind, the century saw an abundance which can hardly be matched even by more numerous and more firmly established peoples. Ever since the seats of learning were opened to Jews with freedom of thought and expression, Jewish men of genius have left their imprint on nearly all branches of human thought. But three names need be mentioned: Albert Einstein, in physical science; Karl Marx in political science; [and] Sigmund Freud in psychology.

In the field of Jewish culture the outstanding contribution of the century is the development of what has been loosely called the “Science of Judaism,” but which actually represents a scientific evaluation and appraisal of the history of the Jewish people and the literary and cultural heritage of its ancient and medieval periods. The People of the Book, prolific and fruitful in the fields of religion and culture, somehow in the Diaspora lost their aptitude for the systematic recording of their history. This, too, has been remedied in the period under review. Within the century, there arose Jewish historians of note: Heinrich Graetz and Simon Dubnow, whose monumental works, complementing each other, made it possible for the scholar as well as the lay reader to familiarize himself with the authenticated history of the Jewish people.

Searching for a Solution

But more important and more interesting contributions towards a solution of the Jewish problem along three lines originated during the century and still are progressing with full impetus and vitality. These three developments burst forth into life almost simultaneously and stemmed from the same sources: the plight of the Jewish masses, the crying need for their deliverance, and the dynamics of the Jewish will to survive. They were (a) the emergence of American Jewry as the most numerous and powerful Jewish community in the world; (b) the formulation and partial fulfillment of Zionism; and (c) the birth of an organized Jewish labor class.

All three developments received their impetus from the 1880s, when “scientific anti-Semitism” raised its head in Germany and had its repercussion in the form of anti-Jewish violence in Russia with severe decrees of expulsion and persecution. The recently erected juridical structure of Emancipation in Central and Western Europe began to crack. The palliatives of Jewish philanthropic endeavor already then began to show their futility. Organization, based on an inspiring ideal and on self-help, was clearly the need, but recognition of this truth was slow in coming.

Origins of Zionism

Two rival thoughts strove for supremacy as lines of guidance for a mass of people caught in the maelstrom of history. The one – vaguely described as “love of Zion” – played on the strings of the Jewish heart and held out a distant hope for a Homeland that was never forgotten; the other, nurtured by the revolutionary ideas of an emerging proletariat, held out the promise of liberation through the ultimate Social Revolution. The first had just made its initial step on the sand dunes of Palestine under the yoke of the Turks. It had kindled the imagination of Orthodox Rabbis like Mohilever and Kalisher, on the one hand, and intellectuals and students, on the other hand, to whom the clear analyses of Moses Hess’ (1812-1875) “Rome and Jerusalem” and Leo Pinsker’s “Auto-Emancipation” made a strong appeal. “Love of Zion” made its entry into the students’ circles of the Russian universities and into the study rooms of Orthodox Rabbis and Hebrew writers, but it was yet to be equipped with the organization and the power to cope with the problem at hand. The promise of deliverance with the arrival of the social revolution was no less enchanting to the intellectual youth but it, too, required a long and slow struggle which involved many sacrifices and acts of heroism in collaboration with the slowly maturing non-Jewish proletariat before it could attain an initial success. The bulk of East European Jewry, whether in Russia or in Romania, or in the Austrian-Hungarian Empire, was in dire distress and was, except for occasional philanthropic aid, unaided and unguided as it embarked on the great exodus to the Western hemisphere, to the sidewalks of New York, Baltimore and Philadelphia.

U.S. Jewry Emerges

Up to 1880, the Jewish population in the U.S. of America did not exceed 250,000 souls. The exodus that continued almost uninterruptedly from 1880 to a few months prior to the World War brought in its wake the great mass that now composes American Jewry, by now fully integrated into the economic, cultural and political fabric of these United States and which has demonstrated its great worth in an atmosphere of freedom.

The emergence of American Jewry is one of the greatest epics in the history of the Jewish people. This event remained not unrelated to the other two methods of salvation for the Jewish masses. When Herzl appeared in 1897 at the first World Zionist Congress and evolved the idea of political Zionism, he found a warm echo in American Jewry. When the Jewish labor movement began, first in the form of the Bund and several years later in Labor Zionism (the Poale Zion Party was established in 1901), they found their adherents among the Jews of America.

At this stage, the two trends merged, producing the most remarkable and admirable figure in the Jewish life of the century – the Chalutz, the Palestine pioneer.

A Jewish Homeland

It was American Jewry that coalesced into a united body when, towards the end and after the close of the World War, the need for political and relief action for war-stricken European Jewry and in behalf of the Jewish National Home in Palestine arose. It was American Jewry that clothed men like Louis Marshal and Felix M. Warburg in authority and strength to undertake and carry though a gigantic war and post-war relief program and followed, in ever-increasing measure, the leadership of Zionism, as exemplified by Louis D. Brandeis, Chaim Weizmann, Stephen S. Wise, Louis Lipsky and others, to further the realization of Zionism.

The outcome of the first World War, insofar as the Jewish people is concerned, was expressed in two acts of international scope and importance: (a) the insertion of clauses into the peace treaties with the newly established States, guaranteeing minority rights for the Jewish population; and (b) the issuance of the Balfour Declaration and the promulgation, under the aegis of the League of Nations, of the Mandate for Palestine. Of the first, hardly a shred has remained. Of the second, the present Yishuv, 500,000 strong, has emerged as an immovable reality that, for the first time since the destruction of Judaea, raised the issue of a Jewish State in the Land of Israel.

As the seventh century in the sixth millennium of the Hebrew calendar comes to a close, and as the second World War gets under way, the fate of the Jewish people and of Eretz Israel is again at stake. Again it is on American Jewry that the responsibility for timely, wise and effective action devolves.

The Year’s Events in Diaspora Jewry: A Review of the Highlights of 5696

The New Palestine, September 11, 1936.


The division of time into convenient spans for the purposes of review is, historically, a strictly Jewish concept. The New Year of the Hebrew calendar is not, as is well known, an occasion for hilarious celebration, but a day of judgment. The Auditor on High opens on Rosh Ha’Shanah the “Sofer Hazichronoth.” Solemnly and fearfully “all creatures pass in review” before their Creator. Their record of achievement or of failure, within the period under review, is the basis for the award of merit or the infliction of punishment. Individually, the Jew has thus been trained to a knowledge of the facts affecting his own life, to a rigorous discipline of strict accountability in relation to God and fellow man. Diaspora life has made this system of meticulous accounting almost imperative with regard to the acts, facts and conditions affecting Jewry as a whole. Too frequently the view and review have been localized and narrow.

It is to the birth of our national movement and to Zionism in particular that we owe the habit – instituted by Max Nordau at the early Zionist Congress – of assembling the facts of Jewish life from all four corners of the globe and of preparing Jewry’s national balance sheet. For this purpose, the totality of the Jewish scene, as reflected in the events within a given time, had to be studied and reviewed. At the turn of the century and for decades afterwards – how incredibly good those “good old days” now appear by comparison! – the world would hear from the platform of the Zionist Congress a detailed account of events affecting Jewry everywhere. With a penetrating analysis and in lucid accents, the unforgettable Nordau would, on the stones of Jewish misery, hew in relief what the immortal Herzl had diagnosed in brief as the “Juden-not.” On the basis of the facts he would make a presentment before the bar of public opinion, which, in every detail, constituted a true indictment of humanity’s inhumanities to the Jew. Charging the Jewish will to survive with new energy for self-aid and redemption through a national rebirth, his word-picture of the Jewish scene would simultaneously carry with it a ringing challenge to the conscience of a civilized world.

The reviewer of events in 5696, no matter how tenaciously optimistic his belief may be in the ultimate triumph of right, cannot delude himself with the hope that his reader will, however indirectly, derive a measure of dubious comfort that usually fills the heart of the aggrieved in relation to the wrongdoer. The defendant before the bar of public opinion does not deny his guilt; on the contrary, he boasts of it. In a world that cherished liberty, still clinging to the ideals proclaimed by the American and French Revolutions and pretending to be guided by them, there was comfort as well as hope in an appeal to its conscience, although that “conscience” reacted hesitatingly and rather grudgingly to an appeal for right that was not buttressed by might. What comfort or hope, it may seem, can there be found in a world which is driven by fear, consumed by hatred and guided by madness on a road that leads to certain disaster unless the unforeseeable and the miraculous happen? Where is the ray of light to be found on a horizon which is dominated by the nightmare of a Nazism apparently triumphant?

He who contemplates the 5696 scene is not, however, without cheer. That cheer has its origin in the reassurance – call it faith or life instinct – that resides in a people which looks at the world and its history from the height of 5696: a people that has a recorded history of three thousand years, having survived and triumphed over oppression and tyrannies in preceding dark ages.

Nazism Spreads Out

The events which cast their shadow over the 5696 scene may thus be reviewed and understood in their proper relation if the scene is divided into two distinct zones: the areas which have been infested or affected by the Nazi disease; and that fortunately larger part of the globe where quarantine measures, taken in time, have been successful in keeping out or at least in preventing the spread of the plague. From the outset it may be stated that the year under review witnessed a series of amazingly successful moves on the part of the Hitler machine to spread out its tentacles far beyond the frontiers of the Third Reich. Having established itself on a firmer basis within the Reich, Hitlerism put an abrupt end to the gains of the emancipation era obtained by German Jewry after a long struggle. The legal, cultural and economic status of the Jew in Germany has been completely destroyed.

The year opened with the enactment of the infamous Nuremberg Laws which virtually transported German Jewry back to the dark ages. In September, the Reichstag, convening in that ancient German city, “affirmed” Adolph Hitler’s decree which deprives the Jews of their citizenship, excludes them from the army, forbids what has been described as “race shame” (any relations between a Jew and an Aryan), prohibits the employment by Jewish housewives of Aryan female servants up to an advanced age, and imposes numerous other restrictions, all of which have as their purpose the degradation of the Jew to the status of a pariah.

Although it was stated at the time that legislation as to the economic position of the Reich’s Jewry was being postponed to a later date (presumably until after the Olympic Games), a ruthless and relentless process of “liquation” (synonymous in present-day German with practical confiscation) of Jewish business enterprises in various fields was going on throughout the year. Particularly was this process severe in the smaller towns and cities, where the eyes of foreign observers could not easily penetrate. True enough, the Olympic games which Hitler was anxious to retain in the face of a strong opposition abroad, and particularly in the U.S., have served a humanitarian purpose. They provided the bleeding Jews of the Reich with a comparative breathing spell from more drastic measures.

As it was, the pressure upon German Jewry was of such crushing force that, according to a reliable estimate, 100,000 Jews (of whom 35,000 settled in Palestine) left the Reich since the advent of Hitlerism. Within the same time, the number of Jewish deaths exceeded the number of Jewish births in the Reich by 25,000. The problem of the 400,000 Jews still remaining in the Reich was thus reduced to the terrifying formula: emigration or extinction. Coupled with this process was the systematic cultural segregation of German Jewry which now lives in a virtual ghetto. A separate Jewish school system has been established to which a majority of Jewish children have been transferred.

These conditions led the Hon. James G. McDonald, the outstanding American publicist and statesman, to resign from his post as League of Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (Jewish and other) from Germany. His letter of resignation, addressed to the League Council, contained a scathing denunciation of Nazi barbarities and appealed for the League’s intercession. This unprecedented persecution aroused the warmest compassion of Jews throughout the world for their kinsmen. It also led to two acts of violence: an assassination and a suicide. David Frankfurter, a Jewish student, shot and killed Wilhelm Gustloff, chief Nazi propagandist in Switzerland. This occurred in February at Gustloff’s home in Davos, Switzerland. Frankfurter is to be tried for murder by a Swiss court in October. In July, a Jewish newspaperman from Czechoslovakia committed suicide while attending a public session of the League as a means – according to a note left by him – of drawing the attention of the assembled statesmen to the bitter fate of German Jewry.

But the Nazi regime has not remained satisfied with its successes within the Reich. Parallel with its violations of international treaties and the revival of the old dream of a Mittel-Europa under the German heel, a gigantic Nazi propaganda machine has been working overtime on all fronts. Seeking its own political ends and exerting its vilest influence to entangle its near and distant neighbors in its design for conquest and world domination, the Nazi machine used its “exemplary” solution of its Jewish problem as the most effective bait as well as screen. First in the line of the attack came the countries with comparatively compact Jewish populations, where anti-Semitism has had a fertile field even without the example of instigation of the Nazi.

Clouds over the Vistula

Heavy clouds hung over the misty skies on the banks of the Vistula as the Republic of Poland, which had sprung into existence by the magic of President Wilson’s fourteen points, continued its dangerous flirtation with Nazi Germany. While it was doubtful whether the fraternity between Poles and “Szwabs” would withstand the first clash of interests or arms (within the past fortnight Poland has returned to the embrace of its former ally, France), this fraternizing between Warsaw and Berlin has had a most salutary effect on the mood of the Polish urban [masses] as well as [the] rural masses in regard to the three and one-half million Jews of the Republic.

The heirs and successors to the power and glory of the late Marshal Pilsudski cannot be accused of instigating anti-Semitism in a vulgar or wild form. They cannot, however, be exonerated of the charge that governmental policies, often taking the shape of legislation, are directly aimed at destroying the economic foundations of the country’s Jewish population. Nor can they be credited with willingness or ability to enforce law and order – they are somehow very effective when other interests are at stake – when the safety of Jews is being menaced.

And so the year opened with a strong movement in government circles to prohibit the Shechitah in the Republic. A bill to this effect had been introduced in the Sejm by no less a personage than the wife of the speaker of the Polish Senate. A day of fast[ing] and prayer was declared by the Rabbinate of Poland. A wave of indignation and protest against this unjustifiable attack on the Jewish religion swept over the Western world. Suddenly, those interested in the prevention of cruelty dropped their tender feelings for Polish animals. They remained satisfied with passing a law restricting the volume of Kosher slaughtering with the result that a great many Jewish families lost their means of gaining a livelihood.

Political and economic pressure on the Jews of Poland has become so heavy that this vast population, which has had its deep roots in the country since the middle of the 9th century [Christian Era], is literally in a state of a bottled-up exodus. The economic misery of Polish Jewry simply cries to heaven for relief. And while Polish statesmen are not at all adverse to manifesting sympathetic interest in the matter on the international arena (they are preparing now to raised the issue of Jewish emigration at the September session of the League Assembly; incidentally, this may place in their hands an additional powerful argument in support of Poland’s demand for oversea colonies), the authorities that exercise power in the country have done little, if anything, either to alleviate the oppressive conditions or to curb the organized attempts at intimidation, which often take on the character of an anti-Jewish terror.

Illustrative of these conditions, which are particularly acute in the smaller towns, were the events which took place in March in the small town of Przytyk, Poland. Following the prolonged agitation among the local peasantry, a mob attacked the Jewish community in broad daylight. With unusual ferocity, Jewish homes were ransacked, two Jews brutally murdered and scores wounded. The Jewish population throughout the Republic declared a one-day strike in protest against the Government’s failure to prevent the attack or to hold the mob in check. Non-Jewish labor groups joined in the protest. Subsequently, 14 Jews and 43 Poles were tried on charges arising out of the Przytyk events. What ensued cannot be regarded in any other manner but as a mockery of justice, for the Polish judge saw fit to free the murderers of the two Jewish victims while a Przytyk Jew who shot and killed one of the attackers in self-defense was sentenced to death. Stale falsehoods against the Talmud, long disproved, were aired in court by counsel for the defense.

Under the Swastika

The shadow of the Swastika fell gloomily and menacingly on the Jewish communities of Austria, Romania, Hungary and Czechoslovakia.

Austrian Jewry lived through a year of high tension intensified by the unfriendly and discriminatory attitude of the Schussnig government as the Fascist but not officially Nazified regime carried on its zigzag policy of swaying now toward Rome, now toward Berlin. The near future does not appear too bright, now that Berlin and Vienna have become closely linked through the recently concluded pact.

Romania, whose Cuzists and anti-Semites are of many varieties have never ceased to engage in the daily task of annoying and harassing its Jewish population of one million, has welcomed a new addition to the anti-Semitic family: the Iron Guard. The Nazi parentage of this new Romanian offspring is clearly discernible. The country, long an ally of France, has during the past year been torn between two powerful blocks: the pro-French and the pro-German. After a year of extensive Nazi propaganda in which Jew-hatred a la Hitler played no small part, the pro-French forces, headed by the former foreign minister, Titulescu, were pushed into the background. Romania, governed by a new Cabinet in which the Titulescu party has no influence, may definitely be placed in the Nazi column. What this means to the safety and status of Romanian Jewry needs hardly to be pointed out.

In Czechoslovakia, whose government under that truly great statesman, Edouard Benes, maintains the friendliest attitude toward Jews and Jewish problems, the Nazi menace assumed considerable proportions. The Henlein party, professing to represent eight million Germans in the Republic, with irredentist leanings, scored a great victory at the polls in the last general elections. But here, the Jews are not alone, as the growth of the danger is an equal menace to the existence of the Republic [itself].

The saddening picture presented by the state of affairs in the countries enumerated above has its happy contrast in conditions on the Balkan Peninsula. The Balkans, once the powder keg of Europe, are now in close economic connection with Nazi Germany. Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Greece and Turkey are Germany’s best buyers. Germany is also their best customer. And yet quiet prevailed on the Balkan front, except for a minor anti-Jewish disturbance in Yugoslavia and the decree issued by the Greek government prohibiting the teaching of modern Hebrew in the Jewish community school for some unexplainable reason.

Turkey absorbed a considerable number of Jewish scientists, refugees from Germany, making room for them on the faculties of its institutions of learning.

Interest in Zionism and emigration to Palestine have grown considerably in Yugoslavia, Greece and Turkey, even though the country of which Palestine was formerly a province still looks with disfavor on [the] Zionist movement. The Turkish government is placing great obstacles in the way of those Turkish Jews who immigrate to the Jewish National Home.

On the other hand, it should be noted that the tentacles of Nazism have reached as far as South Africa, where Hitler’s agents carried on extensive propaganda in the former German colonies. Nazi influences were also rampant in Shanghai, China, where a strong pro-German and anti-Jewish movement was noticeable in certain press organs.

In the South African Union, where Jews enjoyed tranquility and prosperity, the government officially took a stand against the boycott of Nazi goods and services fostered by Jews. There was also on foot a strong movement pushed by the nationalists to close the Union’s gates to the small stream of refugees from Germany that had been trickling in.

Democracy Stands Guard

Democracy stood guard over its cherished liberties, refusing to fall for the Nazi bait of anti-Semitism in the expansive English-speaking world, in France, in Holland, in Belgium, and in the Scandinavian countries.

In the United States, a marked decline was noted in the public activities of the Nazi societies among the German Americans. Our country was also the battleground for the most energetic fight against the participation of American athletes in the Olympics. This gallant fight, led by the Hon. Jeremiah T. Mahoney, although it failed of its purpose, has served as an occasion as well as an indicator for the abhorrence in which the overwhelming majority of the American people held the Nazi practices.

While the undercover attempts to inject anti-Semitism as an issue in the current presidential campaign may be ascribed to the usual eruptions of the political volcano and may be expected to evaporate after November, considerable concern has been aroused by the emergence of what seems to be a native American anti-Semitic movement with a strong Hitler tinge. Interest is centered in the influence of the none-too-friendly, although only indirectly anti-Jewish radio-priest, [Father] Coughlin. Secret terroristic bands, of which the Black Legion, recently exposed and suppressed in Michigan, have also made their appearance in what may rightfully be described as the anti-Semitic underworld.

British Jewry, too, has had for the first time in decades to take special measures of defense against anti-Semitic agitation and attempts at violence inspired by Fascists. Mosley’s Black Shirts and kindred groups developed a propaganda of growing extent. Attacks on Jewish passersby in the East End of London have had their repercussions in the House of Congress. The ritual-murder accusation was revived and made use of by one of the Jew-baiting journals.

The world watches with the greatest interest the developments in France, where Leo Blum, Socialist and Jew, rose to power as Prime Minister of the Popular Front Government. It is the irony of history that the year which witnessed some of Hitler’s great impudences should be coincidental with the period of the rise of Leon Blum as France’s leading statesman and defender. On the success of the Blum “new deal” policies depend not only the fate of democracy in France, but also the lot of French Jewry. The first Jew to occupy this high position, Blum has been the target of attack on the part of reactionary forces in the country where De La Roque’s “Croix de Feux” had previously developed a not inconsiderable later of anti-Jewish feeling.

The fate of some 30,000 Jews in Spain and in North African positions is bound up with the outcome of the civil war now raging in the country. Tragically enough, some of the Jews in Spain now awaiting with anxiety the outcome have but recently left the land of the Nazis.

U.S.S.R.

In Soviet Russia, where anti-Jewish hooliganism of the old type seems indeed to have been stamped out, the cultural and religious disintegration of a once-virile Jewry continued under the Communist dictatorship. Safe in body, the spirit of Russian Jewry as known for centuries is slowly but surely taking on a new aspect.

Much expectation was aroused by the avowed intention of the Stalin regime to implement a new Soviet Constitution under which freedom of religious worship will be guaranteed. This, it was thought, may possibly lead to the lifting of the severe restrictions on the instruction of Hebrew and to the repeal of prohibitions on Zionism. It was also hoped that under a more liberal procedure the Zionist exiles would be allowed to return home from their internment in the Solovetzky Islands. But the new fundamental law has not yet been implemented and what course events will take is merely a matter of speculation.

Biro-Bidjan, which is now a Jewish Autonomous Region and is slated to become a Jewish Republic within the Soviet Union, if and when its population growth and upbuilding progress warrant it, has not a population of 50,000 souls. Of these, 15,000 are Jews. A considerable number of the first pioneers who could not adjust themselves to their new environment returned to their native towns and villages in the other parts of the Union. Negotiations were, however, under way between the Moscow authorities and Jewish groups abroad with a view to allowing and encouraging the immigration to Biro-Bidjan of non-Soviet Jews.

The swift executions which followed the Zinovieff-Kameneff trial, and the ensuing mass arrests of Trotskyites among whom many Jews were to be found, gave rise to an opinion in some quarters that the Stalin regime is determined to “purge” the party of the influence of its Jewish members.

Constructive Defense

Under the impact of the attack on the status of the Jew and under the pressure of the swiftly occurring events, Jewish life in 5696 took on the aspect of a people fighting with its back to the wall, but exerting every effort for defense of its position. Parallel with the defensive action, there were numerous efforts at reconstruction: relief in the Diaspora countries; constructive upbuilding work in Eretz Israel.

Outstanding on the defense front was the event which took place in the month of August in Geneva, Switzerland. There the first session of the World Jewish Congress was held with the participation of about 300 delegates representing five to six million Jews who reside in 32 countries. The World Jewish Congress, an idea and ideal which occupied the thought of Jewish democracy for several decades and became the subject of bitter controversy, particularly in the United States, was finally fashioned, under the leadership of Dr. Stephen S. Wise and Louis Lipsky, into an authoritative agency for the defense of Jewish rights and the protection of the Jewish position. The sessions, which were held in the League of Nations Assembly Hall and were conducted on a high and dignified level, attracted world-wide attention and resulted in the formulation of constructive plans and the establishment of an apparatus that, it is hoped, will soon be fully equipped to cope with the great responsibilities entrusted to it.

The various plans to cope with the problem of German Jewry through coordinated emigration – a subject which had impelled Sir Herbert Samuel, Lord Bearsfed and Simon Marks to undertake a special trip to the United States for the purpose of conferring with leaders of American Jewry – have finally crystalized into the creation of a Council for German Jewry with Sir Herbert as Chairman of the British section and Felix M. Warburg as Chairman of the American section. The Council is to undertake the gigantic task of transferring 100,000 Jews, up to the age of 35, from Germany to Palestine and other lands. Fifty percent of that number is to be directed to Palestine. A revolving fund of $15,000,000, to be contributed by British and American Jewry, is to be placed at the disposal of the Council.

Plans for extending the scope of Jewish emigration from Eastern and Central Europe have also been formulated and special steps taken to extend immigrant aid service at the HIAS-ICA Emigration Association Conference held in the early part of July in Paris. Representatives of emigrant and immigrant aid societies from 30 countries attended this conference, which marked the 10th anniversary of the establishment of the HICEM, a partnership in service to the cause of the Jewish wanderer between American Jewry’s HIAS and the Jewish Colonization Association.

The American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee, which has a distinguished record of service in the field of philanthropic aid to Jewish communities in many parts of the world, has continued its work during the year under review.

The boycott on Nazi goods and services, adopted by numerous Jewish organizations in cooperation with labor and liberal groups, as a measure of defense against Hitlerism, has continued. Valuable services have been rendered in this field by the Non-Sectarian League, the Boycott Committee of the American Jewish Congress,[1] the Jewish Labor Committee, and the American Federation of Labor. It should be recorded that in the past year the prosecution of the boycott has met with growing difficulties in many countries caused by the political maneuvers of the respective governments.

The American Jewish Committee, the Alliance Israelite Universelle and a number of other organizations have drafted and submitted to the League of Nations a document of international importance relative to the status of German Jewry under the Nazi regime. The document, which bears the form of a petition, urges the intervention of the League and it is expected that one of the leading European powers will sponsor this move at the forthcoming session of the League Council.

Zionism Gains Momentum

Zionism, as the expression of the Jewish people’s will to live, has scored even greater gains during the past year, notwithstanding the disquieting and even alarming reports coming out of Eretz Israel since April 19th, the beginning of the Arab terror.

In the United States, Zionist fundraising agencies have been consolidated into the United Palestine Appeal, which, seeking to raise the amount of $3,500,000, has presented to American Jewry the claim of Eretz Israel to a position of parity in the planning of Jewish communal budgets. Notable has also been the progress made by the Jewish National Fund,[2] which attained an income unprecedented since the peak year of the prosperity period. Corresponding gains have also been recorded by the Keren Hayesod and Keren Kayemeth in their fundraising activities in all parts of the world.

A notable event in the annals of American Zionism was the 39th Annual Convention, held in Providence, Rhode Island, which resulted in the election by acclamation of Dr. Stephen S. Wise as the President of the Zionist Organization of America.

The unshakable faith of Jewry in the Zionist ideal and in the ultimate attainment of the Zionist goal in Eretz Israel, notwithstanding temporary difficulties and setbacks, was demonstrated in the attitude of the Jewish communities toward the events in Palestine during the progress of the Arab campaigns of terror. Admiration for the strength of the Yishub in the face of provocation-protest against the vacillating policy of the Palestine Government and a demand upon the Mandatory Government to live up to the letter and spirit of the Mandate have been the notes, sounded with confidence, courage and hope, in the mighty echo which has vibrated throughout Diaspora Jewry in response to the events in Eretz Israel.

[1] William Z. Spiegelman was the head of the American Jewish Congress’ Boycott Committee in 1934.

[2] William Z. Spiegelman had been the head of the JNF’s publicity campaigns in the U.S. since 1930.

Our New York Letter

The Sentinel, April 30, 1926.


Passengers in the subways, elevated trains and surface cars, as well as the motorists and pedestrians within the metropolitan area of Greater New York, cannot help seeing everywhere a sad-faced woman with distinctly Jewish features, who looks on them from posters and billboards. On her face is an expression of limitless pain and suffering. On her lips there is a challenging, hidden smile.

The leaders of the United Jewish Campaign, who have taken upon themselves the task of arousing the sentiment of American Jews to give in order that this suffering people may be helped, have furnished the following text to this, which is understood to be an authentic picture.

“Tired of giving? You don’t know what it is to be tired!”

One must credit the author of this poster with genuine ability and insight into human nature. It adequately describes the situation on both sides of the ocean. When the Joint Distribution Committee decided, several years ago, to discontinue its activity and persisted in going on with the liquidation of its work, it was done not on the theory that all that was ill in Jewish life in European countries had been remedied, but that American Jews had grown tired of giving. When the misery of the situation was again unfolded and focused attention, action was not undertaken before it was ascertained that American Jews, tired as they may be of giving, are, after all, American Jews. The spirit of the Philadelphia conference, despite its dramatic episodes, resting on a fundamental difference of opinion as to the outlook of Jewish life, brought out this fact.

New York is entering upon its United Jewish Campaign with a quota of $6,000,000. It is expected that the outcome will prove that New York Jewry is [in fact] not tired of giving. That it is not tired of giving for a worthy cause was also proven by the successful conclusion of the United Palestine Appeal, which sought to raise the amount of $1,500,000 in New York City for 1926.

* * *

Jewish education is again coming to the fore. On the initiative of the Zionist Organization of America, a national conference on Jewish education will take place in May. A league for Jewish Education in America is to be the outcome of the call for the conference.

Education is not a new Jewish problem. It was only a hundred years or so ago that when the question of Jewish education was discussed, it was understood to mean general education for Jews. With the setting in of the Emancipation period and its accompanying changes in Jewish life, Jewish education has come to mean just the reverse, that is, providing a specifically Jewish religious, cultural or ethical background for what is accepted to be the general standard of education, according to the standards of culture and learning in the respective countries. What a complete change these hundred years in Jewish history have wrought!

There was no difference of opinion at that time as to what comprised Jewish education. Jewish education in the United States is a name into which every group and tendency reads its own definition. To the ultra-orthodox rabbinical group, Jewish education might mean an extensive study in Talmud; to the liberal tendency it might mean religious training of the Sunday school content; to the distinctly Zionist mind, it might aim at acquaintance with modern Hebrew literature; to the less informed, it may mean the ability to recite the Bar Mitzvah prayers at the age of 13 and, of course, the accompanying “speech,” and “after 20 years,” the recital of the Aramaic Kaddish.

What the national conference on Jewish education will decide to define as Jewish education will determine its own success or failure. Should it succeed in handling the problem which affects not only the synagogue and the temple, but also the home and the status of the Jewish community, if judged from a broad viewpoint, and [if it] should succeed in directing its activities toward the provision of a Hebraic background, which is common to all the tendencies and not alien to America, it will make American Jewish history.

* * *

Interest in Jewish sport has been increased with the arrival of the soccer team of the Viennese sport club, Hakoah, and their matches with picked teams of professional players in the United States.

Jews in sport are still a novelty, although since many American Jews have taken their place[s] as leaders in American sport, this should not be so new. Nevertheless, the opinion prevails that Jews are new participators in sports.

Some time ago a well-known writer went to the extent of constructing a theory that the difference between Jew and Gentile is that the Gentile lives for the purpose of sport and play, while the Jew lives his life earnestly. This contention is not entirely based on facts or on historic conception. When the original meaning of the word “sport” is consulted, it is found to mean “amusement.” One can search the early Jewish literature from Aleph to Tav and find not a single injunction against wholesome amusement. The misleading impression that Jews are opposed to sport gained ground due to the recorded fact that the Jews opposed the athletic sports of the Greeks in Palestine during the scission between Hellenism and Judaism. This, however, was due to the fact that it was an hour of national danger. Just as the fact that many countries introduced prohibition during the war cannot be used as a basis for the argument that these countries are permanently in favor of prohibition, so it cannot be argued that the Jews are opposed to sport.

If, however, by sport is meant that the game is to be played fairly, ancient Jewish lore might provide some argument proving the existence of this conception.

The fact in the Bible that Jacob was renamed Israel, following his gallant, singlehanded fight with the unknown “man” who injured him, tells the story. Jacob was named Israel because he “fought with God.” The many references in the Bible to the Book of Yashar, always mentioned when poems concerning the life and achievements of heroes are given, is, in the opinion of many scholars, an indication of the existence of a special “Book of Heroes,” giving thus new meaning to the old name of Israel: Israel-Yashar El, or the Knight of God.

Builders of American Cities: Isaac Meister, Founder of American Venice

The Sentinel, July 2, 1926.
(Attributed to Z. Alroy)

The road of civilization as developed by the inhabitants of this globe is, on the surface, a short one. Originating in the caves, it proceeded to the village, from the village to the town, from the town to the city and – in its present form – from the city to the residential section.

Life is probably the same as it was when it started; it is new forms, added comforts and increased beauty that history has accomplished.

In the early records of this process of building, usually laconic, the ancients never failed to add to the record of this or that hero that he “lived . . . had children and ‘Va liven Iir’ (and he built a city).”

The building of a city was a milestone in the progress of this globe’s population.

The Jewish people in Palestine, as well as in their later wanderings over the various continents, have been builders, if not of cities, which they were not often permitted to engage in, at least of quarters, later to be known as ghettos, of synagogues and of commercial enterprises and industries. This circumstance resulted in an impression, which was quickly picked up by the anti-Semites, that the quality of the Jew is not in creating or in building, but in making use of things already built.

The latest chapter in Jewish history, which is unfolding before our eyes today, the achievements of American Jews, is a striking example of the lack of foundation of such an opinion. The record of the achievements of many Jewish men in the development of American sections and cities, investing huge capital in improving land properties and turning forests and the wilderness into places of habitation, awaits intensive study and an able pen. It beggars description.

This charge which was forwarded against Jews in general has been stressed in particular against East European Jewry. This prejudice found expression not only in the Immigration Act of the United States, but also in several undeveloped countries which have set up barriers against those immigrants who are not, as the Secretary of Labor recently termed it, of the “beaver type.”

A testimony to just this “beaver type” is the life story of Isaac Meister, builder of American Venice.

The treasurer of the Zionist Organization of America began his career in a manner similar to that of tens of thousands of his people. Born in Teplik, in the dark Ukraine, where he grew to manhood, in a vicinity where brick houses are rare and well-paved roads are not to be trodden upon, where elementary education was the privilege of the few, Isaac Meister, a young man, attracted by tales of America, went, unaccompanied, to the new world.

Singlehanded, he made his way in the new environment. Starting as a laborer and jewelry peddler, he soon discovered America for himself and, without jewels to finance his project, but equipped with powers of observation, enterprise, and honesty of purpose, he concentrated on that which many previous generations had been kept from, on developing and building.

Many a high structure that supports the symmetry of New York’s skyline, many a virgin forest in which the traces of the Indian tribes were still discernible, were transformed into places of habitation through the efforts of Isaac Meister.

Trading in real estate in the United States today is no longer a new enterprise. Projects for development and opening up new districts for the branching out of the urban population is common. While serving, no doubt, a necessary need and creating new values highly desirable from the communities’ viewpoint, they do not contribute anything substantially new. The builders of the old cities had this distinction that they were comprehensively planned and each locality was given a peculiar touch of its own in conformity with the geological and ethnological conditions, so the structures which were raised on the new sites represented a new style or followed a particular shade of an old style in architecture, thus creating new values in art and beauty, in addition to utility.

Isaac Meister had a new idea. It was not enough for him to open up a district or to erect a new skyscraper. He looked for a development with an idea of its own.

On his way to Palestine, he stopped off in Italy. For centuries the saying “See Venice and die” has been quoted. Meister, headed for Palestine, went to see Venice with not the slightest intention of dying. He wanted to see Venice and live and not only live himself but to let others live in Venice. There the idea came to his mind: why not an American Venice?

Venice, the beautiful, was the result of its own geographical situation. How could there be an American Venice without a similar situation? The enterprising Meister is not afraid of geography. Zionism is a fight against geography, Dr. Weizmann has said. Why cannot a Zionist builder fight geography on Long Island?

The corner strip of land on Long Island on the shores of South Bay presented the opportunity to him. Water was on two sides of the site of the future city. All that was necessary was an investment of millions of dollars, the making of canals similar to those in Venice, the erection of bridges in Venetian style, the placing of Venetian gondolas in the canals. With thirty years of experience in developing American land, with directness of purpose and constructive ability, Isaac Meister proceeded to the task. American Venice [Copiague] is now a reality.

Some have been fond of referring to the Jew with a hint at “The Merchant of Venice.” They will have to change. Here is the builder of American Venice.

Our New York Letter

The Sentinel, November 5, 1926.


Dr. Chaim Weizmann, president of the World Zionist Organization, arrived on his fourth visit to the United States, cheered by Zionists, received cordially and with interest by non-Zionists.

Dr. Weizmann’s visit to the United States is an event in Jewish life. It makes Zionist history and also Jewish history.

The echoes of the recent controversy between Zionists and non-Zionists in this country having subsided, the irritation caused by the friction having been appeased, the situation in Palestine being, as it is, fraught with many problems, the course of action which will be chosen by the Zionist leader is a matter of interest to Zionists and non-Zionists [alike].

Of course, the outstanding problem facing the Zionists at present is the unemployment situation and what is termed the crisis which followed in its wake. When the facts in the situation are considered, when the human side of the problem is looked upon, the matter is of deep concern not only to affiliated Zionists but to all American Jews. No doubt this will be the dominant note in the discussions and the public receptions which will be given “from now on.” It should be recalled that it was Dr. Weizmann who, months ago, before the crisis in Palestine reached its present state, with his usual courage and vision, analyzed the situation and, as it were, predicted events.

“It is true that not all of the human material which has attempted to find refuge in agriculture in Palestine was fitted for it. We take note of this certainly with regret and deep sorrow. But we have no right to close our eyes to the fact that a certain part of the new settlers will be compelled to leave their places. This happens not because those settlers don’t want to work. The contrary is true. They have shown, and are still showing, a sacred devotion to the ideal of work and the national resettlement. But there are physical and psychological obstacles over which no effort can avail.” He described the situation upon his return from Palestine in the early spring.

“We were all glad to observe the large immigration of last year and we were inclined to see in it the beginning of the redemption, a symbol and a proof of the realization of the Zionist ideal. At the same time we did not give sufficient consideration to the possibility that such an overwhelming immigration can also bring disaster, if we do not simultaneously increase in the same measure our own efforts in order to increase the capability of the country to absorb the incoming masses.”

“If we do not increase our efforts.” “If” is one of the shortest words in the dictionary, but it is like many other monosyllables – the fate of a man, of a nation, of a movement, of a country, of an ideal, depends not on the large words, but on monosyllables. The Palestine situation has exercised a tremendous appeal for Jewish public opinion in the last ten years. If there was a time when Dr. Weizmann was called upon to bring the influence of his personality to bear upon conditions, it is now when he has before him one of the most difficult situations he has ever faced. However, Dr. Weizmann, a chemist by profession has, during his Zionist work, developed a new kind of chemistry. It is the chemistry of the public mind, the secret of international success, the blending of a variety of colors into the Blue and White. His new formula in the chemistry of shaping the American Jewish public mind, to be applied to remedying the Palestine situation, is looked forward to with more than interest.

* * *

History does not belong to the popular subjects; Jewish history much less. American Jewish history is in its infancy as yet. It is not surprising, therefore, that the American Jewish Historical Society is not heard of frequently. It is a pity, however, that the facts brought out at its last annual convention in Philadelphia were not more widely broadcast. I believe that they are of interest even to those who have no particular inclination for the study of history.

American Jews were the principal backers in the development of the West. Philadelphia Jews were the prime movers in the settling of the early West and were employers of Col. George Grogham and Daniel Boone. They owed the sites of Chicago and St. Louis. So says Dr. A. S. W. Rosenbach, president of the society, on the basis of extensive research work in the early records of the expansion of the West. The fact that many American Jews have succeeded so well as realtors is merely a reversion to type. This is interesting and instructive. What a fine thing it would be if prominent American Jewish realtors would make it possible for the accomplishment of “their ancestry” to be more widely known! They can certainly take pride in it.

By the way, those early backers of the development of the West were in partnership with Benjamin Franklin, George Washington and Robert Morris.

* * *

Dr. Chaim Tchernowitz, professor of Rabbinics at the Institute of Jewish Religion, finds fault with all three types of Jewish congregations in the United States. He is satisfied neither with Orthodoxy nor with Reform; not even with the Conservatives, who are in between. He objects particularly to the deviation from the substance of Jewish law. He cannot agree to the enthronement of the cantor, instead of the scholar. He cannot submit to the rule of the congregational president, instead of the leadership of the Rabbi. He is not attuned to the melodies sung in the present-day synagogues. He wishes that the center of Jewish life would be directed from the synagogue, the house of prayer, and return to the Beth Ha’Medrash, the house of learning.

How can all this be accomplished?

To Professor Tchernowitz it is a simple matter. He proposes that a Rabbinic Council, composed of recognized scholars, well-versed in the Jewish law and lore, be endowed with the authority to revise whatever is necessary in the Jewish religious laws in accordance with the requirements of the time. This Council would, he believes, bring about the fusion of the now disagreeing elements. A sort of “Council of Forty-Eight States” instead of the olden Council of Four States.

While some may agree with his criticism, it is difficult to see how a Rabbinic Council can remedy it.

Our New York Letter

The Sentinel, September 17, 1926.


Bialik, the Hebrew poet who received such a warm welcome from American Jews, is far away from these shores. Dispatches state that a similarly warm reception was accorded him in Paris last week. His impression of American Jewry and particularly of the Zionist public, with whom he came in closer contact, as summarized in his interview before his departure, was not very complimentary. The public, which is usually extremely sensitive to criticism, however, has its own way with poets. It was not long ago that the artist, particularly the man of Jewish letters, was a total stranger within the gates. The artist of old would have been grateful for even being noticed, be it with criticism, let alone applauded and welcomed.

But times have changed. The artists are overwhelmed with attention and the limelight of publicity. They have a hard time escaping to the seclusion so necessary for their creative work.

Perhaps it was in this sense that the American Jewish public did not deliver the “consequences” of Bialik’s criticism. Besides, Bialik, as the quintessence of the Hebraic aspiration, is entitled to ask for more and to aspire to a higher level, the level which he probably knows so well.

However, even Bialik was not entirely spared from the consequences of controversy, with which Jewish life in America was so rife during the recent heat wave. In the noise of New York metropolitan life, of public banquets and money-raising gatherings, to the accompaniment of subways, elevators and streetcars, Bialik found a moment of seclusion in which to pick up a thread of his creative genius, which has been silent for a number of years. He wrote a poem of the Great City. . . .

The great American metropolis under whose pressure of life the poem was written did not fare better at Bialik’s pen than did American Jewry.

“Yenasser Lo Chilvavo” is the name of the beautiful poem, which is the center of discussion in New York’s Hebrew literary circle.[1] The burden of the poem is the arrival and penetration of Spring through the asphalt, brick, iron and steel structure of the Great City and the perpetual superiority and beauty of the smallest blade of grass over the huge and powerful structures of modern civilization.

“Let the noise of the metropolis roar as it passes,
“Let the exploiter and exploited perish in the stench of their exploitation,
“Let the smoke of its chimneys darken the blue of the seven skies,
“Spring in its eternal law, sweet, pure and tender,
“Will come through millions of cracks and will flourish.”

Thus Bialik begins his description of Spring in the Great City.

“And I said in my heart, Nest of Satan
“The source of all mankind’s plagues, the bosom of all horrors, the city which God’s grace has despised and where God’s eye will not rest,
“Your end is the end of Sodom and Nineveh.
“When the Day will come, the Day of Judgment,
“When you will have grown very high,
“And your burden will be too heavy,
“When your yoke will become too irksome,
“You will fall to pieces
“Like a straw hut.”

Here are a few of the poet’s visions of the Great City. Those who read poetry with prosaic eyes resent these visions. “New York has not treated the poet so badly that he should predict for it the end of Nineveh,” they mutter. The lovers of poetry laugh at the resentment and are happy that New York, with its splendor and hugeness, has awakened in the Hebrew poet his harp and has brought out tones reminiscent of those of the Hebrew prophets of old.

* * *

The “national minorities” or the “minority rights” with which American Jewish leadership had much to do in the post-war days are again on the agenda. They came up for discussion in connection with the act of the seventy Turkish Jewish notables who met in what was termed a “Jewish national assembly of Turkey” to renounce the claim of Turkish Jewry to the national minority rights guaranteed to it under the terms of the Treaty of Lausanne. This step of the Turkish notables was taken under the pressure of Kemal Pasha’s dictatorial government and under promise of stopping the reprisals and returning confiscated property. The right of the Turkish Jews to arrange their internal religious affairs, [and to] maintain their educational and communal organizations, is now left to the mercy of the all-powerful Kemal Pasha government.

Have the Turkish Jewish notables done well? ask some. Was it expedient? Will the deal bring beneficial results? others ask. There is confusion and misunderstanding on the subject. The other day I was surprised when an otherwise learned gentleman displayed great astonishment when he heard that Jews were fighting for minority rights. Why, he said, “minority rights,” do they fight for less rights? What is the idea of guaranteeing them minority rights?

That is the point. The minority rights were intended to prevent a situation where Jews who are citizens of East European countries would have less rights than were coming to them and less than the rights guaranteed to every American by the United States Constitution. They were written into the international peace treaties and America, as well as American Jews, had a whole lot to do with it.

It was under the influence of Wilson’s fourteen points and his theory of the self-determination of small peoples that these clauses were made a part of international law. European Jews were then grateful to the leadership of American Jews, headed by Louis Marshall, who, in Paris, worked indefatigably toward that end. It is tragic to see that now, eight years later, disappointment with the slow realization of these treaties has led to this action of [the] Turkish Jewish leaders and to a growing misunderstanding of the original intentions of these clauses. It is reassuring to again hear the voice of Louis Marshall thundering powerfully to instill confidence and self-respect in the hearts of the Jewish minorities.

“I would rather die ten thousand deaths than to show myself so lacking in manly courage as to sell my birthright of liberty and equality for temporary safety.”

His words will be heard throughout Europe.

[1] The translation from the Hebrew original into English seems to have been done by William Z. Spiegelman himself.

Our New York Letter

The Sentinel, June 4, 1926

The resignation of Al Jolson, famous Broadway comedian, from membership in the Westchester Biltmore Country Club at Rye, N.Y., is quite a bit of first-class American Jewish “social news.” Al Jolson, the son of a cantor, has never made any secret of his Jewish origin and faith. He could not, out of respect to himself, his friend and his people, remain any longer a member of the exclusive country club, which reprimanded him for bringing undesirable guests to the club, referring to Harry Richman, nightclub entertainer and proprietor, whom Mr. Jolson had brought to the Club as his guest.

“If you want it straight, I’ll tell you. Mr. Richman is undesirable for the simple reason that he is a Jew,” Mr. Jolson was told by the manager of the club when he asked the reason for the objection to Mr. Richman. On asking whether it was not known that he, too, was a Jew, Jolson was told, “Of course, but you are an exception.”

“You are an exception” has been the mask under which rabid anti-Semitism sailed everywhere. Self-respecting Jews everywhere have always refused to be accepted as an exception. This “social event,” in itself insignificant as it may be, carries a lesson to many of our golf-playing co-religionists. It also should be a reminder to those who look to Great Britain for standards and comparison.

This American Jewish “social event” coincides with the conferring upon the former Mr. Isaac Rufus and the former Alice Cohen of the title of Marquis and Marquise of Reading. The Court of St. James and the British Nordic aristocracy do not treat outstanding Jews as “exceptions.”

They could, if they sought, also find standards here. As the New York $6,000,000 drive of the United Jewish Campaign is nearing its successful conclusion, along comes John D. Rockefeller, Jr., with a $100,000 contribution “for the relief of the Jewish people in Poland and Russia.”

Are there many of these exclusive country-club members who would applaud John D. Rockefeller when he says [the following] in the letter accompanying the gift?

“In a matter of this kind, there ought to be no barriers of race or creed. Therefore, although my participation in the movement has not been solicited, I hope you will allow me to enclose herewith my check for $100,000 toward the fund, which I do with the best wishes for the successful consummation of the campaign.”

Many throughout the country will no doubt applaud the decision of the National Conference on Jewish Culture and Education which was called the Zionist Organization of America. The conference, which formed the association for Jewish Education and Culture, has succeeded in eliminating from its program those edges which would be most likely to create friction on the question of Jewish education.

In addition to its purely Zionist activities, of which the new Association makes no secret, it also intends, according to its program, to encourage Jewish educational work on a larger scale, on the need of which there seems to be no division.

There can be no objection to “fostering in American Jewish life an appreciation of Jewish cultural values; to create a better understanding of Jewish traditions and aspirations; and the cultivation and dissemination of the Hebrew language and literature.”

The fears entertained by those who are interested in religious education, in the various Sunday schools and Talmud Torahs, either of Orthodox or reform, were allayed by the fact that direct interference in the work of the various religious and educational institutions will not be attempted by the new association.

Our New York Letter

The Sentinel, October 29, 1926.
(Attributed to Z. Alroy.)

A clever New York headline writer is to be credited with the sentence “Orthodox Jews and Henry Ford Agree on One Point.”

It concerns the introduction of the five-day industrial week. From the discussions in the press and the attempts in various parts of the country to test this proposal, it appears that the five-day industrial week, although the American Federation of Labor at its recent convention in Detroit did not come out for it as fully as it might have, is within the realm of possibility. It is true Henry Ford in introducing the five-day system in his Detroit plant has, reports say, gone no further than a five-day weekly payment, but the move to shorten the working week and allow additional time to the working classes for recreation and educational development is a great step forward.

Incidentally, it is balm to the heart of Orthodox Jewry in America, which has been sighing under the burden of the problem of the observance of the Sabbath. There is a pathetic note in the statement made by Dr. Bernard Drachman, president of the Sabbath Alliance of America, when he says, “Although Mr. Ford, to our sorrow, can hardly be classed as a friend of our people, we must in justice divorce his present action from his otherwise narrow-minded policy, and trust that his example in adopting the five-day week will be followed.”

Rabbi Drachman and Henry Ford agree.

* * *

It was on the deck of the “Leviathan” that 200 American newspapermen assembled to greet Her Majesty, the Queen of Romania, in behalf of the American reading public. In the wayward light which has accompanied Queen Marie on her route from Bucharest to the Statue of Liberty, the highest point was reached at that moment. It was a conspicuous moment; it was a crucial moment.

The Queen, a guest of the American nation; the Queen, ruler of a country where not all is well, not alone with the Jews but with many other peoples. Among the many questions of the American newspaper representatives, sandwiched in between a question on her manner of eating corn on the cob and on the New York skyline, the Jewish question was hurled at her by a zealous Jewish newspaperman.

Was it right? Was it proper?

Opinion may be divided, but it is difficult to condemn the action.

That this sentiment is shared not only by American Jews, but also by American Christians, there is ample evidence. On that very day, when the Queen returned from the glorious reception accorded her by the Chief Executive and stopped at Baltimore, the 91st annual convention of the Maryland Baptists Union Association was in session there. And what did the Baptists do? They framed a set of appeals in the form of resolutions, which were submitted to the Queen. In these resolutions attention was drawn to the situation of intolerance in which Baptists and Jews in Romania find themselves.

Those who need non-Jewish support before every move can be justified have it now in the action of the Maryland Baptists. Queen Marie, who is so liberal in quickly conveying to the public her impressions of America, may also find occasion to comment on this circumstance.

From Cleveland to Cleveland: American Zionism from 1921 to 1930 in Review

The New Palestine, June 27, 1930

At a crucial moment in the history of the movement, the Zionists of America will gather in Cleveland, Ohio, on June 29th for their thirty-third annual convention. As in 1921, when American Zionists last met in that city, the session comes after a critical and turbulent period in Palestine and in the movement generally. Now, as then, Jewish immigration to Palestine has been suspended. Now, as then, uncertainty and anxiety are uppermost in the minds of Zionists. Now, as then, readjustment to new conditions and the formulation of a new program of work are the order of the day. Whatever problems pertaining to the movement generally and to the situation in Palestine in particular are to be discussed and determined, the forthcoming Cleveland convention will devote much attention to a specific American Zionist issue – the reorganization and strengthening of the Zionist Organization of America.

In American Zionist parlance the term “Cleveland” has a special connotation. It signifies the rift which occurred in 1921, resulting in the ascension of the administration which has conducted the affairs of the movement in the United States for the last nine years. “From Cleveland to Cleveland” constitutes an important chapter in the annals of the movement. An objective presentation of the major events which transpired since 1921 will be helpful to all concerned.[1]

When the scene opens in 1921 an assembly of several hundred delegates is singing the Hatikvah in acclamation of the new leadership which came into power following a period of severe [internal] strife. Whatever were the issues – the supremacy of the economic character of the Palestine upbuilding work, the place of Jewish nationalism in this work, the founding and development of the Keren Hayesod, the necessity of political work in the Zionist movement, the character of the administrative machinery – the will of the majority of American Zionists was clearly and unmistakably expressed both by the action of the Cleveland convention and the support which the victorious party continued in the main to enjoy throughout the past nine years. By a vote of 153 to 71, the 1921 Cleveland convention passed a resolution withholding approval of the report of the administration which had been in power practically since 1914. A leadership which had great accomplishments to its credit during the war and post-war period found itself at variance with the views then held by the majority of the Zionists of America concerning future policies and methods. Placed in the position of a minority, it resigned and throughout the succeeding period did comparatively little to bring its views before the rank and file and to seek recognition if its program. The field of the American Zionist movement, with a few exceptions, was left clear for those whose views were accepted in 1921.

Engrossed in the battle between the Weizmann and the Brandeis-Mack forces, the Zionists of America at the Cleveland convention acted hesitantly. The mantle of leadership which had fallen from the shoulders of the former leaders was not given to one or two men. An administrative committee was chosen to act as a body. (The committee consisted of the following: Herman Conheim, Abraham Goldberg, Louis Lipsky, Louis Robinson, Bernard A. Rosenblatt, Morris Rothenberg and Peter J. Schweitzer. No officers were chosen. The only designations made were that Mr. Lipsky was to serve as general secretary and the late Mr. Schweitzer as treasurer.) The affairs of the Zionist Organization of America were placed in its charge. Active as the new leaders had been in the Zionist movement for many years previous, devoted to the ideal as they had shown themselves to be, none possessed at the time what might be termed a national reputation outside of the Zionist movement.

This group undertook the steering of the movement in America under most extraordinary circumstances. Principally, the mandate given to them by the 1921 Cleveland convention was a commitment of the Zionist Organization of America to uphold the policies of the World Zionist Congress as expounded by Dr. Chaim Weizmann. This applied in equal measure to the political and economic aspects of the Zionist work. A difficult situation confronted the new administration. The brilliant political success achieved by Dr. Weizmann and his associates in London and by the Zionist Provisional Committee in the United States were followed by the first intimations of trouble. The first foreboding of the Arab anti-Jewish agitation which was to reach its climax in 1929 had found expression in two riots. The Zionist movement, ever since its inception, had to travel along a difficult road. Rooted though it was in the traditions of the synagogue, bound up with the essence of Judaism, inseparably connected with the sentiments and views of the Jewish masses, none the less Zionism had always to seek its way while combatting antipathy and indifference and often active hostility on the part of powerful factors in Jewish life.

The phenomenal growth of the movement in the United States during the war and the immediate post-war period was not rooted in solid ground. The enthusiasm of the war period, stimulated by the alluring “self-determination” slogan and the pronunciamento of the Balfour Declaration, was already in the process of cooling off. The hopes which had been kindled when the movement was, by the fortunes of the war, lifted from its narrow and difficult path to the dazzling heights of the international scene and to the intoxicating atmosphere of the Peace Conference were beginning to weaken. The easy satisfaction derived from expressions of sympathy by the powers that were began to give way to a searching for plans for the execution of a gigantic task. The Zionist movement had to make a swift turn to the speedy performance of the actual task of reconstruction in Palestine in conformity with the new political conditions which were taking shape. The Mandate for Palestine had not yet been ratified. The jubilation of the so-called “Balfour Zionists” had to be replaced by the constant efforts of the Zionist worker and campaigner. A people which had suffered much during the war, a people of which large sections had been uprooted and shaken out of their economic, political and cultural strongholds, were eager to seize the opportunity it saw for realizing the national aim which had for centuries been the object of its dreams.

Men and money were needed. The situation clearly called for a division of labor. Eastern Europe was ready with its manpower. Economic necessity combined with the powerful sentiment which had been aroused recruited an impressive contingent of prospective pioneers. American Jewry, the strongest Jewish community in the world following the war, had shown its leadership by its gigantic accomplishments in the relief furnished [to] the war-sufferers. It was clearly the source from which financial resources for the rebuilding of Palestine were to be drawn.

The unfortunate London 1920 conference failed to bring about unity between the European leaders and the Brandeis regime. The Zionists of America, by their vote at Cleveland, endorsed the London plan for setting up a Keren Hayesod which was to have raised the amount of $25,000,000 for a five-year period. The covering of the Palestine budget through the Keren Hayesod had become the principal concern of Zionists throughout the world and the lion’s share had to come from America.

The obligation imposed upon American Zionism by the situation in the world movement was undertaken by the new regime. Most of the Palestine upbuilding work, the political advancement and strengthening of the movement and its expression in the United States were thus placed in the hands of the new administration. It is with the record of this work that this review is concerned.

Remittances to Palestine

Since the principal task of the Zionist Organization of America, under the prevailing conditions, was to secure the funds needed for the rebuilding operations as determined by the Zionist Congress and as conducted by the Zionist Executive, it is clear that the results of its work in this field must be considered first. As the parent organization, the Zionist Organization of America was responsible for the organization and conduct of a series of campaigns for Palestine funds waged throughout the country for the past nine years, up to the formation of the Jewish Agency for Palestine. In the face of dissension within the Zionist ranks, the opposition of anti-Zionists and the indifference of many [others], these drives, when judged by their results, may be taken as a barometer of the strength of the movement and of the penetration of the Palestine idea into ever-widening circles. To be sure, the financial results of the nine drives have not always been the same, the response rising and falling with the ebb and flow of the economic status of American Jewry on the one hand, with the reaction to the successes and failures of the upbuilding work in Palestine on the other.

The records show that under the auspices of the Zionist Organization of America, through the Keren Hayesod and the United Palestine Appeal, the amount of $20,044,160.32 was raised over the period beginning May, 1921 and ending April 30, 1930. Of this sum, the amount of $14,619,527.02 was remitted to Palestine, 26.90% having been expended in the United States on the money-raising apparatus throughout the entire period. During the period beginning August, 1914, and ending May, 1921, the Provisional Zionist Committee and the Palestine Restoration Fund had raised $5,738,998.32 and remitted to Palestine $3,761,279.40, 34.49% having been expended in the United States on the money-raising apparatus throughout that period.

Political Influence

Three major events transpired during the period under review which best express the political influence the Zionist Organization of America exercised in the general field, in the Jewish world and in Zionist affairs, acting in cooperation with the Zionist Organization of America for the furtherance of the ideals and interests of Palestine and the movement.

Its outstanding achievement in the political field was its work which culminated in the passage by the Congress of the United States of the Joint Resolution endorsing the Jewish National Home policy. This was accomplished by the organization in the face of strong hostility on the part of certain Jewish groups which actively opposed the passage of the resolution. Coming as this action of the United States Congress did at a time when opposition to the League of Nations and the general trend towards aloofness from European affairs were at their height in this country, the support of the Jewish National Home policy by Congress was a political event of [the] first international importance. The resolution was passed by the United States Senate on May 3, 1922, and by the House of Representatives on June 30th of that year. It placed the United States government on record as favoring the establishment of the Jewish National Home at a time when the fate of the Mandate was in the balance. This action was greatly instrumental in facilitating the ratification by the Council of the League of Nations of the Mandate for Palestine.

Notable is the achievement of the Zionist Organization of America in its struggle for the consummation of the plan for the extension of the Jewish Agency. Beginning June 18, 1923, and ending with the vote at the Zionist Congress at Zurich in August, 1929, the Zionist Organization of America constantly fought for the extension of the Agency. It gave support to the Weizmann policy in the face of numerous difficulties and obstacles often reaching a state of crisis, despite a determined opposition to the plan both at home and abroad. This policy, which has now become a pillar of strength in the upbuilding of Palestine, had first been tested through the Keren Hayesod which the American organization inaugurated and through which it strove to attract non-Zionists as well as Zionists.

In the councils of the world Zionist movement, the Zionist Organization of America held a leading position. Represented on the Executive Committee in London and in the Zionist General Council, it had a leading part in shaping the policies of the movement. American Zionists served on the London and Jerusalem Executives. It was the influence of the American delegation to the 1927 Congress which was responsible for bringing about the “consolidation policy” which had then become necessary.

Propaganda

Propaganda is admittedly the main function of a movement such as Zionism which strives to embrace within its fold the majority of the people whose national ideals and dreams it set out to realize. The Zionist Organization, in the conception of its founders, was principally to act as the spokesman of the Jewish people in relation to Palestine, while making every effort to enlist the sympathy and active support of the people for that purpose to which the active minority had pledged its energies.

Even after the issuance of the Balfour Declaration and the ratification of the Mandate, the Zionist movement was still a force which had to make continuous conquests in order to maintain its position and to create such conditions as would accelerate the realization of its program. The membership of the Zionist Organization, even at its height, never represented the full strength of the sentiment that lay behind it. No matter how many Zionists were enlisted in the Organization, the number of sympathizers, prospective members and workers was always vastly greater. The field for Zionist propaganda was limited only by the size of the Jewish population. With the advent of the period of active work in Palestine, these limits had to be extended. Zionist enlightenment had to be carried into the non-Jewish field as well. The raising of funds which had to be undertaken created wider and greater opportunities in that direction.

During the period under review, the work of the Zionist Organization of America in this field reached an unparalleled scope. Whereas previously sporadic Zionist publications brought the message of the movement to a limited number of readers, the ZOA during the past nine years maintained a continuous stream of Zionist information and enlightenment through these channels. The first was that of its weekly publications, “The New Palestine,” “Dos Yiddishe Folk,” and, for some time, the “Palestine Pictorial.” For nine years “The New Palestine” and “Dos Yiddishe Folk” appeared every week, reaching at times in the case of “The New Palestine” as many as 60,000 Jewish families and, in the case of “Dos Yiddishe Folk,” about 10,000. On these publications the Zionist Organization of America expended for the period an amount close to $800,000. Throughout this period the publications maintained a high standard and some of the issues, such as the University number and the Herzl memorial number, it is universally conceded, have permanent Zionist cultural value.

A powerful factor for spreading Zionist thought and intensifying interest in the upbuilding work in Palestine was the coming to America of distinguished Zionist delegates from Europe. The arrival and departure of the members of these delegations usually coincided with the opening and closing of the Palestine fund drives, but the interest they created and the impression they left were of a stimulating character throughout the entire period.

In addition to Zionist delegations, the Organization, in conjunction with the Keren Hayesod and the United Palestine Appeal, maintained an almost continuous speakers’ service which reached nearly every Jewish community in the United States. The number of meetings both in and out of campaign season addressed by Zionist speakers runs into the thousands. Speakers’ fees during the period amounted to $92,629.62. There were also the services of volunteers, among them nearly every Jewish public speaker of note.

The immediate result of this propaganda generated by the Zionist Organization through its various channels was the notable widening of the scope of the movement which found its expression both in the amounts of money raised for Palestine and in the number of people whose interest was enlisted in one form or another. The actual membership of the Zionist Organization may have risen and fallen in the succeeding years, but whatever the membership may have been at any given time, one must not fail to take into account the number of contributors to the United Palestine Appeal for the same period. Although the $6 membership never, during the period, exceeded the figure of 30,597 [members], the number of small and large contributors to the Keren Hayesod and the United Palestine Appeal reached as high as 60,000. Some of the contributors to the Palestine funds were still non-Zionists, but there can be but slight doubt that persons who have maintained their interest in the work through continuous annual contributions have been enlisted for the cause.

The outstanding feature of the work of the Zionist organization under the regime which came into power in 1921 was the sweeping conquests it made among the middle classes of American Jewry. Even the Reform Rabbinate, which previously had been a leading source from which opposition to the movement emanated, had become in many cases predominantly Zionistic. The cultural values and the interests of a living Palestine seemed to bring new Jewish content to the Reform congregations. Previously, active interest in Zionism and in the Palestine work was primarily centered in the upper-middle class and among the Jewish intelligentsia. To raise huge funds it was necessary to enlist larger numbers in the work. This was accomplished through the Keren Hayesod and the United Palestine Appeal. By drawing in the middle class, the organization succeeded in opening up a vast field whose resources and capacities have not yet been fully exploited. Advantageous as this has been for the cause of Palestine and for the movement as a whole, it brought with it certain features which may not be pleasant. The Zionist whose imagination was wholly captured by the ideal of the movement and who entered into the work for the sake of the cause alone now found as his companions many who, though they subscribed to the purpose of the movement, saw in that work, as usual in popular movements, a vehicle for local purposes as well. Zionist work as it developed with the aid of the large middle class became in some cases a stepping stone for individual ambitions. Zionism, which set out to bring national values into Jewish life, to bring about a renaissance of Jewish culture, had been unavoidably caught in the wheels of American Jewish adjustment. The large number of men and women who were drawn into the service in various local and national committees in all parts of the country naturally brought with them standards and ways expressive of the classes and communities to which they belonged. However, when the advantages and disadvantages are weighed in the scale of accomplishment, the gain is on the side of the services performed and the results achieved.

One of the impressive results of this development is the fact that toward the middle of the period, even before the Jewish Agency extension began to assume concrete form, rabid anti-Zionism, with which the movement had had to contend, was stamped out in the United States. Hardly an organ of public opinion or a Jewish leader of prominence, in lay or religious life, could be found to be engaged in active anti-Zionist propaganda.

Membership and Strength of Movement

The membership of the Zionist Organization, since the $6 basis was adopted, rose and fell. When the new administration came in into power, the membership, including women, showed an enrollment of 30,579 for the period October 1, 1920 to December 31, 1921. The new regime, however, entered into an arrangement by which the Hadassah, the Women’s Zionist Organization, though it remained an integral part of the ZOA, was given an opportunity for autonomous development along lines of work which were regarded by the women’s leaders as best suited to drawing in large numbers of women as members. Beginning with 1922, the membership of the Zionist Organization, unlike the procedure followed in other countries, was strictly divided according to the sexes.

With attention concentrated on the Palestine fund drives, with the $6 membership fee as a basis, the enthusiasm of the war period subsiding and with the conception in the minds of many contributors to the Palestine funds that their subscriptions expressed their affiliation with the movement, the struggle for maintaining and increasing the actual membership of the Zionist Organization was naturally one of great difficulty. Thus, the organization ended the year 1929 with an enrollment of 18,031 [and an annual income from the membership of $144,850].

The full strength of Zionist Organization of America, however, would be greatly underestimated if one’s judgment would rest only on the foregoing figures. The total strength of the Zionist Organization in the United States can best be estimated when the situation is reviewed as a whole and when the total number of its supporters of various types and in various forms is considered, as seen in the following figures:

ZOA district members in good standing: 18,181
ZOA district members in arrears: 7.565
Order Sons of Zion: 3,200
Roll Call Registrars, December 1929: 45,200
Shekel Payers (non-members): 2,068
Histadruth Ivrith: 1,815
Avukah: 1,000
Young Judaea: 11,300
Hadassah: 35,195
Junior Hadassah: 8,500
United Palestine Appeal contributors: 60,606

The Administration

The administration of the Zionist Organization of America for the past nine years was carried mainly by the impetus which had its origin in the events of 1921. However, it would be inaccurate to maintain that it produced a one-pattern leadership. An examination of the personnel of the important committees and the lists of honorary and active officers who functioned during the period suffices to demonstrate the multiplicity of characters, viewpoints and energies which went into the making of the leadership which carried on. The not-infrequent cases of friction, which found expression in the several opposition groups within the administration and which stormed the administration fortress toward the end of the period, and the various changes that were made, clearly prove the point.

The administration succeeded in drawing in a considerable number of co-workers both in the administrative tasks as well as in the development of the campaigns for Palestine funds. Although the attempt made at the 1922 convention to bring about a reconciliation with the previous leadership brought no result, time seemed to be healing the breach and members of the Mack-Brandeis group lent their cooperation in one form or another to the administration. Notable were the services rendered by Dr. Stephen S. Wise as national chairman of the 1925 United Palestine Appeal, coming as it did during the period of controversy over the Russian colonization plan, and of Judge Julian W. Mack, who served as honorary vice-chairman of the United Palestine Appeal in 1928. Messers. Rosensohn and Berenson and the late Mr. Lindheim, who might be regarded as representatives of the group, were a part of the administration elected at the 1927 convention.

Yeoman service was rendered in the early organization and conduct of the Keren Hayesod and the United Palestine Appeal by Mr. Emanuel Neumann, in various executive capacities, by Morris Rothenberg, as Chairman of the Board of Directors of the United Palestine Appeal and by Judge William M. Lewis, of Philadelphia, as National UPA Chairman.

Notwithstanding the changes and transformations through which the administration passed, the man whose leadership held sway and whose mental energies vitalized the movement was Louis Lipsky. However, the leadership was not conferred upon him by one stroke. One of the seven elected to the administrative committee in 1921, his elevation to the presidency of the Zionist Organization of America did not occur until June, 1926, he having acted before in the capacity of chairman of the national executive committee and chairman of the administrative committee. The services he rendered to the Zionist movement for a period of thirty years and the qualities he displayed so impressed themselves upon the majority of the rank and file of the movement that notwithstanding the fierce attacks made by the various opposition groups at the 1927 convention in Atlantic City and the 1928 convention in Pittsburgh, his leadership was upheld.

For the purpose of conducting the work of the Zionist movement in the United States, the Zionist Organization of America received a total of $1,786,645.65 over the nine-year period. Of this amount $1,123,190.31 came from membership dues. An amount of $167,927.71 was refunded to the districts for local administrative and propaganda work. Out of the membership income received by the administration and $28,506.18 received from shekel prayers, $209,267.72 was remitted to the Zionist Organization as the American federation’s membership fee to the world organization for the maintenance of the international headquarters in London.

From the total net income of $1,779,059.10, the amount of $931,606.80 was expended for general administration purposes. The amount of $791,967.58 was expended on the publication of the Zionist weeklies, “The New Palestine” and “Dos Yiddishe Folk.” It must be noted that the periodicals had an income of $617,609.31, part of which, $409,434, was derived from subventions given them by the Keren Hayesod and the United Palestine Appeal for services rendered to the various campaigns. The amount of $206,321.70 was paid by the Zionist Organization of America to subventions to the Young Judaea, the Avukah, the “Hadoar,” a Hebrew weekly, the “Hatoren,” a Hebrew journal, and other bodies engaged in furthering Jewish cultural aims. Against the net income of $1,779,059.10, the total expenditure amounted to $1,930,096.08, leaving a deficit of $151,036.98.

The Deficit

Deficits are not uncommon in organizations whose purpose is not financial profit but rather service to a cause. The figures of the Zionist Organization of America for the period July 14, 1918, to October 31, 1920, under the former regime, show a deficit in the organization department amounting to $144,743.29. This deficit was covered from other sources than membership income. The deficit of the Zionist Organization of America on May 31, 1929, stood at $130,374.90. By a resolution of the 1929 convention, the organization took over the deficit of Young Judaea amounting to $16,000, bringing the deficit as of June 1st to $146, 374.90.

Since 1923 the question of the deficit was being grappled with and periodic attempts to wipe it out were made.

It will be noted that the amount of $206,321.70 paid in subventions exceeds the deficit.

Solution of the Amzic Problem in Sight

Greater than the troubles of the deficit were the difficulties which beset the organization on account of the entanglement of the American Zion Commonwealth. It must be stated that the difficulties of the American Zion Commonwealth were due to the economic crisis which enveloped Palestine after the collapse of the Fourth Aliyah, but it is likewise conceded that the Commonwealth found itself in difficulties because of its methods of financing and management.

The Commonwealth was organized in 1914 and had the moral backing of the Zionist Organization both prior to and after 1921. The Organization recognized its moral responsibility to the American purchasers of land and, in cooperation with the Zionist authorities in London and Jerusalem, made every effort to help the Commonwealth disentangle its affairs and see to it that the land stretches which came into Jewish possession should remain in Jewish hands. It was for this purpose that the United Palestine Appeal loaned the Commonwealth $523,699.33 which will be returned to the Keren Hayesod when the assets of the company will again become liquid.

According to a statement by Mr. S. A. Van Vriesland, who was appointed by the Palestine courts as the representative of the interests involved in the disentanglement of the Zion Commonwealth affairs, a successful solution of the problem is at last within sight.

Readjustment to New Conditions

Again the Zionist Organization of America stands on the threshold of readjustment. The conditions which imposed grave responsibilities upon the Zionist movement in 1921 have basically not changed, with the exception that the task of raising funds required for the Palestine upbuilding work is now being shared by the new forces which joined in the work of the Agency for Palestine.

The Zionist Organization of America no longer shoulders the responsibility alone for the Palestine funds. A part of its energy has thus been freed for the tasks which are peculiar to Zionism, and the Organization, which since 1921 has been compelled to devote most of its time and effort to the raising of funds can now undertake the work of strengthening its ranks so that it may discharge its functions as a strong and influential factor in the life of American Jewry, in the affairs of the world Zionist movement and in the enterprises of the Jewish Agency for Palestine which came into being due mainly to the continuous battles fought by the Zionist Organization of America for its realization.

In this readjustment, the purity of Zionist ideology, the strengthening of the movement in the United States and abroad, the safeguarding of the positions in Palestine, and the lessons learned during the past decade must be taken into account.

-----------------------

[1] The writer finds it necessary to state that he has never been connected with the Zionist Organization of America. He is indebted to the ZOA for permitting him access to the facts and figures which are mentioned here. They are taken from the official records of the Zionist Organization of America.