The Maccabaean

ZIONISTS generally are to be congratulated on having passed almost serenely through the recent political storm. Almost for the first time, actually so in the world-wide publicity given the situation, the individual Zionist has seen his movement apparently checked by the "impossible" declaration of the Turkish deputies in Paris and again in London, and still proceeded on his way, perhaps somewhat doubtful, but still progressing.

To my thinking, one of the greatest tasks of the Zionists is to create a generation which shall at once be hopeful and patient, to group as followers of a cause men and women, young and old, whose loyalty is battle proof. Fair weather Zionists there are by the tens of thousands; the foul weather Zionist is the precious one and the creation of a huge corps of that type is no easy matter. I lay stress on this because I foresee that in the natural course of events—under the conditions now prevailing in Turkey—there will be much more publicity given to every check of our movement than to our successes. Everyone is looking for notoriety, every Jew looking for a place with the I. C. A., or the Alliance Israelite Universelle will promote his good fortune by making known his views of the “disloyalty” of Zionism, and every petty Turkish politician with an eye to the good graces of the same organizations will add his “impossible” to the chorus so that the American Israelite will have endless opportunities to say Kaddish over the unborn whilst the puzzled Zionist waits anxiously for the actual birth and no one of us can cast the horoscope. The new Turkey is too new to contemplate Zionism; is too anti-Abdul Hamidian to favor what he sympathized with; it is too full of the-

oretic constitutionalists to know just what line of conduct, what international policy, will serve it best. All that the twos and twos of history suggest—and there is no exact parallel—is that the monarchial United States of Turkey will have a much better chance of success than an empire whose only unit was an autocrat. For what we generalize as the Mohammedan, is as great a mixed multitude as the Catholics or the Protestants and what we loosely designate as the Turks, are peoples of diverse history, experience and tendency, whose agglomeration was only possible as long as they had not emerged into full political life as groups or individuals. Given the ballot they may do more tricks with it than were ever invented by a Tammany ward boss. Armenian, Albanian, Montenegrian, Greek, Jew, Arab, Levantine; Smyrniote, Black Arab, Lebanonite, Ben Ali, Macedonian—all these are not a tithe of the varied colored stream that will pass you in a few minutes on the Galatea bridge in Constantinople, and behind each is group, tradition, experience and ambition. For the Young Turks there is the task of forcing into each of these individuals a certain sense of that unity of idea and purpose which we call national consciousness—a thing that follows much quicker from acts than from words. And there is for the Zionist, the task of inspiring the teachers of this people with acquiescence to his ideals—which too, results quicker from acts than from words.

Impossible? Not a whit more than it was for the Cubans to impress the American people with the advisability of helping them to independence. The self-interests are the same and the Turkish need of