The Maccabaean

Professor Carver's views on Zionism are subordinated to his general theory of Sociology and classified specifically under the problem characterized by Professor Giddings as, "Consciousness of Kind." This is the scientific designation of a social principle which operates as inevitably as the law of gravity; and is the basis of all human intercourse, hostile or friendly, according to the particular human emotions and instincts at play. If the "Consciousness of Kind" among a people is clear and definite, enlisting a wide sympathy together with a complete understanding, then the friction inherent in the relations between men will be reduced to a minimum. If, however, this elemental sympathy and this understanding are absent, if the groups are consciously distinct, they do not think in terms of each other, and misunderstanding and hostility are ever latent. But when a group is composed of homogeneous people, with like ideals and like traditions, the same physical characteristics and general habits in life, commingling and intermarrying among themselves, then the "Consciousness of Kind" will express itself beneficently. As soon as this feeling is dissipated by the advent of a new group, in some respects dissimilar, in numbers large enough to be appreciable, the operation of this universal social principle leads to hostility, to the natural disadvantage of the weaker group. This is, therefore, the principle that gives life to the antagonism between the white races and the blacks; the yellow and the red; it is the ultimate source of discord between the employer and the employee; the absentee landlord and the tenant; the rich and the poor; one nation and another; and the Jew and the Gentile. Through the voluntary partial social isolation of the Jew, through his refusal to intermarry, there has forever been kept alive a consciousness of difference between the Jews and all the other peoples,—fostering forever the unfavorable operation of the principle of "Consciousness of Kind."

The Jewish people, consequently, cannot maintain themselves scattered among other peoples without confronting eternally the social problems naturally arising. This is fundamentally the cause for the terrible massacres in Russia and other similar abuses in Germany and Romania. There is, indeed, reason to believe that the direct incitement came from the government; yet it bespeaks a sad reflection against the predispositions of a people who could be moved to such atrocities. It is at least evidence of latent animosity—smouldering and waiting to blaze forth. Without this widespread, ingrained feeling, mere stimulation from the government would be futile.

Superficial thinkers, however, point to America as the great exception. This is a mistake. This law has never failed to produce race antagonism under given circumstances throughout the history of civilization and there is no occasion for complacent optimism in this particular instance. lt may, accordingly, be predicted, without the slightest feeling of emotion, as a strictly scientific proposition, that in America, as elsewhere in the past, anti-Semitism will inevitably come. When the Jewish population had been small and their activities limited, they excited little reaction. They were unobtrusive and unnoticed. The population. however, steadily growing: their activities and influence continually widening: and ever entering into the lives and problems of the people about them, and the feeling of difference arising from non-intermarriage, ever venting itself more and more emphatically, all these lead irresistibly to race hostility. It is merely a question of numbers. The Jews are not the single example illustrating this truth. When the proportion of negroes in some of the mining towns of this country was small, they engendered comparatively little discrimination. But when the mines were opened there and the number of negroes multiplied, rigid distinctions were made and ill feelings arose. The same was true with the Chinese on the Pacific coast. Separate