"For the Attainment of that End"
THE difficulty of expressing his views on the vital questions which are to be considered at the forthcoming International Zionist Conference will be felt by every Zionist in proportion to the depth of his Zionism. One should like to view these questions abstractly, objectively, but then he runs the risk of forming conclusions arbitrarily, and without taking into account the "imponderabilea" which are of the essence of Zionism. Or, he may lay too much stress on the imponderabilities at a time when the need is to be pragmatic.
We are face to face with a fact—the mandate! "Public recognition" which is the basic principle of the Basle program, has been attained. Now comes the fulfillment of that task which is now, in and through the Palestine Restoration Fund, in the first stages of execution. But we are face to face with other facts—the facts which the Zionists have confronted this past quarter-century, the facts of Jewish life—spiritual life—in the Diaspora. We are face to face with its planlessness, its petty parochialism, its philanthropic feudalism, its check-book overlordship, its spinlessness and imitativeness, and all of those other facts of Galuth life against which Zionism is the revolt.
The question, therefore, comes to this: What is to be our present attitude toward all the different phases of that composite which during the years have welded themselves into the structure of our nationalistic point of view? This question presses hardest upon the souls of those Zionists who have been through the whole period of "storm and drang," who have been privileged by the fates to participate in every battle since the early days of the movement, to give character and aim to Jewish life. They must answer this question, for themselves and to themselves, even more than they must answer it to the public.
One cannot forget, for example, that all during the years it has been a solemn necessity to save the aspiration for the Homeland from the color of a merely philanthropic enterprise, with all of the spiritual degradation that this would connote. It has been a struggle to save the Jewish soul from the Jewish check-book. One cannot forget his insistence that the Jews are a “people” and that his insistence on this vital fact was actuated by the quickening of his own national consciousness not only, but also by the realization that unless the Jews recognized their kinship, unless the Jews ceased to regard themselves as fellow-communicants, as eco. religionists”” merely, there could be no hope of injecting tone and aim into Jewish life. One cannot forget that his solicitude for Jewish education that should be Jewish, his eagerness for the wider use of Hebrew, his demand that Jewish institutions, or institutions designed for the “uplift” of Jews should be Judaized, was based upon his fear of the consequences of assimilation upon the Jewish future; upon the need of arousing the historic consciousness of the Jew so that he should think and act Jewishly in unison with the Jewish people; to protect the Jewish soul against the corroding influence of a non-Jewish environment and even against a deliberate assimilationist propaganda.
In like terms one is bound to think of all those phases of Jewish endeavor, of the struggles and conflicts in which he so iovously engaged. But the time has come when as a
Zionist one must ask himself what was his motive in thus entering the lists and giving battle to all of the evils of Galuth life. And I venture the opinion that every Zionist will, after some retrospection, acknowledge that he was spurred by the conviction that he was making propaganda for Zionism; that thus he was helping to create that mass-will which would translate itself into acceptance of the aspiration for the Jewish Homeland.
The Jewish Homeland, its reconstruction by the exertion of every spiritual and economic resource of the Jewish people, is now the aim of the Zionist movement. It is the objective of the vast army which we have mobilized during the years. Because our objective lies now immediately before us, are we to parallel it with another objective—"gegenwaerts arbeit"? Are we now to demobilize our army? Are we to diffuse our energies and scatter them over so wide a field that we will have no strength left for our main objective?
Our end is not yet attained. Even the issuance of the Mandate is not "the attainment of the end." "Recognition by public law" has been attained. And this victory is not, must not, be the signal for the demobilization of Zionist forces. It must be the signal for the concentration of every resource the Zionists command, yes, and the calling for reinforcements to give their strength to the even greater task of creating, establishing, the Homeland.
There are many good Zionists who hold the contrary view: who hold that all of the things that we have done in the past are of the essence of Zionism, that the means for the "attainment of the end" are included in and are an integral part of "the end." They point to the evils of Jewish life in the Diaspora, evils that cry aloud for correction, and hold to the thesis that it is the duty of the Zionists to correct them. I venture to hope that my attitude concerning these evils is fairly well known, and that I will not be accused of lacking sympathy with every effort to bring about a healthier Jewish life in the Diaspora. But I will not be of those who "fail to see the forest because of the trees." The Zionist objective is the National Homeland—Palestine.
As a Jew I am bound to give attention and devote effort to the correction of the evils in Jewish life. My Zionism has, obviously, colored my Jewish views. I may hold that some of the "means toward the attainment of the end" are desirable as permanent, as imperative characteristics of Jewish life in the Diaspora. But as a Zionist my paramount consideration is Palestine. Here I will be met with the argument that unless there is a healthy spirituality in the Diaspora we cannot hope for a Jewish Palestine; that a nationally-conscious Diaspora is essential for the influence it will have on the Homeland. It seems to me that the truth lies in the opposite direction. In fact, every Zionist has, in the past, argued just that. And the facts argue just that also. There is no need to go into an elaborate discussion of this point; the recent Yiddish-Hebrew controversy touching Palestine illustrates my meaning. In the Diaspora there was a furious battle of pen and tongue over this question. Palestine settled it offhand; even the Palestinian members of the "fraction" clamoring for Yiddish (Continued on page 182)