in one Jewish socialistic organization, the Bund. Originally organized for socialistic purposes only,—in order to spread the knowledge of Socialism among the Jewish proletariat, the Bund had to adopt ultimately a national program, which, thought half-hearted, was sufficient to give proof to the consciousness of a national problem among the Jewish proletariat.
problem among the Jewish proletariat.The Bund was, however, a transitionalstage in the national consciousness of theJewish proletariat. Once it was awakened,it had to go towards its logical and consistent solution, toward the settlement of theJewish people on a territory of their own.And this solution of the Jewish problem,the proletariat has been gradually adoptingin the form of Socialism-Zionism.
Radicalism, if not socialism, within the Zionist movement, may be traced back to the so-called "Democratic Fraction," a party that made itself known, or notorious, at the fifth Zionist Congress by their leaving the Congress hall in a body when one of their demands was not conceded to them. This party was in its positive demands not far from the cultural Zionists of the school of Achad-Haam. They urged a deeper and more scientific understanding of Zionism, based not upon mere opportunism but upon Jewish nationalism, and they presented such other demands, which would be subscribed to with both hands by the Cultur-Zionists. But there were already in the program of that party the germs of the present more radical movements in Zionism, in the shape of the demands that Zionism and its institutions be established upon more democratic principles, "that Zionism should not only be realized for it (the Jewish people) but also by it," and in the endeavor to diminish personal influence in Zionism, such as the demand that the presidency of the Congress be severed from the that of the Actions Committee; and what is more Socialistic—that the lands bought in Palestine by the national fund be nationalised.
This democratic program could not save, however, the existence of the Fraction as a
party within Zionism. On the contrary, in its very program lay the germs of its dissolution. Its positive demands, as regards Jewish culture and the better understanding of Zionism, have since become part and parcel of Zionism as a whole. Its radical demands gradually went over into the hands of those who had a juster claim to them than the students and the professional men of the "Democratic Fraction," into the hands of the Proletariat, that now began to push their claims to the front in Zionism. And the Fraction, the firm ground now removed from under its feet, had to give room to the more Radical or rather socialistic organizations that sprang up in Zionism.
The first Socialist-Zionist organization was Heruth (Liberty), organized in Zurich at the end of 1902. There, an entirely. new theory of Zionism was laid down, based upon the pyschology of the “Hamon,” of the Jewish masses, and upon the economic philosophy of Jewish history, or, in other words, upon historical materialism.
As the Heruth theory of Zionism occupies, in the main, the most important place among the valious Socialist-Zionist organizations of our day, let me give in brief its most salient points:
The Jewish people came to live among: the nations of the world as foreigners, as a separate entity. As such they could’ not occupy the same economic positions as- any of the classes of the native people,. because then they would either not havebeen needed or else they would had to assimilate. In the feudal state of society of the Middle Ages, when non-Jewish society was divided into lords and serfs, a middle class hardly existing, the Jews acted as middlemen between the two classes, and there- his economic position was secured. But in the 19th century when ~~ Feudalism was abolished and capitalism took its place, there arose among all European nations a middle class” that made the Jewish people which had’ served in this capacity, unnecessary. Since then, a twofold divergent process is taking place in Jewish history: