that is of importance to us, we, indeed, can fearlessly assert that we have remained faithful to the will of Herzl, who a short time before his death declared at the meeting of the Greater Actions Committee "that for us the solution of the question is possible only in Palestine." The attainment of Palestine is possible only by concessions; of course, it is necessary to adapt ourselves to all the existing circumstances within and without.
Thus it happened that accusations arose, that Herzl and his followers had in view a social political movement, and that we, who are for real work, advocate colonization enterprise. This accusation is especially heard from the territorialists. The accusation resulted in two opposing parties: on one hand, the "social political" party, opposed to the "colonization" party, and on the other hand "the movement," opposed to "enterprise."
Is the accusation a truthful one? Is a systematic colonization, carried on along a predetermined course, with definite objects of an organization of people, if not a social, a political movement? If colonization alone would be the object, then there would be no necessity to limit ourselves exclusively to Palestine; it would suffice then to regulate an equal distribution of the people throughout the world. Zionism pursues with the greatest determination colonization in Palestine only; with this alone it endorses not only de jure, but de facto the social political character of all its actions, even if it apparently pursues very small aims. The main thing is not with whom the negotiations are carried on, and what about, but what for and with what object in view? Everyone must bear in mind that in the present time every colonization scheme is of a social political character; especially Zionism, which strives for the colonization of Palestine, not with the purpose of establishing a few poor Jews, or to found a Jewish academy in Jerusalem, but for the integral regeneration of the Jewish people. Concessions or charter are but questions of tactics and possible realities—no more. The acquirement of a concession is considered a very great social political achievement, not only for us Jews, but for any large Power,
who for this purpose employ at times not only their most skillful diplomacy, but a very large army. The significance of charter can best be learned from the conference at Algeciras. The Palestinian Zionism, not waiting for a charter, is as much social political in its nature as the most orthodox charterism.
What concerns the accusation that we advocate "enterprise" and ignore "movement" we must state most emphatically that our opponents lay their own faults at someone else's door.
It is the very “charterists’ who kill the movement, because the securing of charter is not the work of the organized movement, but is the work of a party, of a few individuals. It was Herzl before, and now Zangwill takes his place, but this does not alter the fact. All the S. S., together with all the bourgeois territorialists, cannot accomplish anything in their endeavors to secure immediately a charter. That is why the work of the present (Gegenwartsprogram) absorbs all our energy. : There is no room for the masses in the work for the future—the charter. This also caused the rise of “seimism,” against which even the S. S. are so greatly opposed. By proposing immediate work in Palestine, corresponding to the accumulated energies of the Jewish people, we bring the movement forward, we enable the Jewish masses to participate actively in all the work—in the work not for others, but for themselves. Only the immediate work in Palestine can connect the present with the future, by affording the masses the opportunity to participate right now in the progress of the upbuilding of the new structure If the practical results will not be very significant, and if the first concession will enable only some tens of thousands of Jews to cstablish, even then, in the sense of the movement, very much will be achieved, because at once a normalization of Jewish life will begin, and this will influence greatly our work in the Diaspora. Zionism must not be a passive enterprise, in which the masses are waiting for their salvation to come from above, depending on the diplomatic successes of one or the other leader. It is of the most vital importance that Zionism become an active, regulated movement, in which the whole