The critique of Zionism began within the Jewish community it claimed to speak for and was largely initiated by left wing Jews. One of the most important centers of that critique developed in the United States and was theoretically indebted to the work of revolutionary Marxist Jacob Milch. Because he largely wrote in Yiddish, the work of Jacob Milch (Yankev Zoyermilkh) is not widely known among English-speaking Marxists. The Polish-born polymath (he produced a Yiddish version of Plato’s ‘Dialogues’) had a profound impact on the Jewish left in the United States from when he joined the Socialist Labor Party in 1891 as an immigrant carpenter and member of the Hebrew Trades Council until his death co-editing the Communist Party’s Morgan Freiheit in 1945, Milch, who had become a well-to-do chocolatier, was a central figure in the Jewish left. In 1906-1907 he penned this important analysis of the development of the Poale Zion, the Socialist Zionist movement, and their territorial solution to the ‘Jewish question.’ Far more than an essay, this deep look at the state of Jewish workers and their possible futures under capitalism was spread over six issues and will be presented here in three parts. Part two here, part three here.

‘New Movements Amongst the Jewish Proletariat, Part One’ by Jacob Milch from International Socialist Review. Vol. 7 Nos. 6 & 7. December-January, 1907.

I.

The newest stream of Jewish immigration, driven to these shores by the waves of the Russian Revolution, and its counterpart, the atrocious massacres of Jews, has brought in its wake an undercurrent of new ideas and ideals which of late has excited the interest of the Jews in their old homes.

As a result the little world in the so-called Ghetto is teeming with new life, new aspirations, new problems and new hopes.

Until recently the intellectual life of the great East Side of New York was absorbed mainly in social questions of a general nature, or, to be more correct, in Socialism.

To be sure no great event of contemporary life escaped the philosophic mind of the East Side, neither did the inhabitants thereof forget their unfortunate brethren at home, but all these were, so to say, secondary questions. The great problem which has moved the heart of the East Side was Socialism. The victories and the defeats of the proletariat in any part of the world were of greater importance to them than the victory of the Japanese at Port Arthur, or any like event.

This has now been changed to a great extent. The general spread of socialist thought throughout Russia, the deathly struggle now raging between the entire Russian people and the despotic regime, and the cowardly outrages perpetrated against the Jews by the “Black Hundreds” organized and supported by the bureaucracy for the purpose of combating the revolution— all these have made their imprint upon the psychology of the Russian Jews and gave impetus to the organization of innumerable parties, the consequence of which is a mosaic of theories and movements which have for their end the establishment of an independent Jewish state on the one hand and the social revolution on the other. With the newest immigration these theories have now been transplanted to our shores and the little Jewish world was beset by a host of new parties of different descriptions and denominations: we have now Zionists and Territorialists. Zionist-Socialists and Socialists-Territorialists, Poalei Zion, (Workingmen-Zionist) Socialist Revolutionary Territorialists, etc. And it goes without saying that each has its own theory, which is of course the only true one, with its own newspaper and party organization; and it also goes without saying that everlasting discussions, squabbles, quarrels and all sorts of friction is the order of the day.

Upon a close examination we find that these theories and movements, notwithstanding their high-sounding and unpronounceable names, all emanate from, and are very much connected with, the old fashioned Zionism, are indeed only variations of the same. Our accounts must therefore be settled, first of all, with Zionism proper. And Zionism is as old as the Exile itself. From the day when the Jews lost their independence and were dispersed among the nations—from that day to this they have never ceased to hope for a return to their country, and their hopes for a restoration of their Kingdom have never been abandoned. Various ways have they tried and different means employed towards the realization of that everlasting dream of theirs; they have taken advantage of the political condition of their neighbors in the time of Assur and Babel; they have employed “diplomacy” in the time of Cyrus and later on in the time of Darius under the leadership of Ezra and Nehemiah; they made an attempt at the sword under Bar Kochba, until at last they have given up all hope of ever acquiring the land by their own might, and have instead turned over the whole job to the Almighty Father to send his Messiah disguised as a ‘Beggar riding a mule’, while they themselves, in one way or another, settled in exile for good, at times even comfortably.

But the thought and the hope of a speedy return to his cherished land the Jew has never given up altogether. The oath: “Shall my right hand be forgotten if I shall ever forget you, Jerusalem”, which he made on the banks of the rivers of Babylon, he never broke. He now only waited for the Almighty to deliver him with “song”. Every day he prayed: “And thou shalt bring me to thy city of Zion with melody”, but he seemed to have grown reluctant to lift a finger himself after so many disappointments and defeats. And so he has suffered and waited for almost two thousand years.

In the last twenty years of the past century new life has been blown into the movement of Zionism. Under the stress of the Anti-Jewish riots in Russia in the year 1881, and the special laws enacted against them the following year (which laws were, by the way, the result of rather different origin than hatred to Jews by the Russian people) the “Jewish question” assumed a new aspect. The Jew, perforce, asked himself: What is the cause of this persecution? And he came to the conclusion that he is being persecuted, not because he is a Jew, but because he is a foreigner—a foreigner who nowhere has a country of his own, and that his suffering, his misery and persecution will cease only with the acquisition of a country.

Expression to this thought was first given by Dr. Pinsker in his “Auto-emancipation”, The well-known Hebrew author M. L. Lilienblum followed him up in his little book “On the regeneration of the Jewish people in the holy land of their ancient fathers.” The same thought pervades the entire Zionistic movement; the same thought we hear today expressed by the Socialist-Territorialist. The Jew must acquire a country which he may call his own. This much is certain! The problem to settle has only been how was this country to be gotten?

The first step in this direction was to discard the “Beggar riding a mule”. Century after century have they been waiting for him. In vain! The beggar has not shown up. He was therefore repudiated and rejected, and his place was taken by the “Millionaire riding the mule”. The Rothschilds and the Baron Hirsches were to supply the capital, and the poor, downtrodden Russian Jews were to be the beasts of burden. This was the colonization scheme, the outcome of which is well known. The millionaire and the mule did no more good than the “Beggar and the mule”, who never appeared.

Meanwhile the Jews emigrated; everyone helped himself as best he knew how; they ran as if from a fire. Hundreds of thousands emigrated, but very few of them went to Palestine. The immense mass of wanderers turned their eyes, not to the East wherefrom wisdom comes, but to the west of Europe and to the north of America, where they expected to find bread and shelter for themselves and their families.

At this juncture Dr. Th. Hertzel appears in the Zionistic firmament with his “new” scheme of “diplomacy”, and he was at once hailed as the true Messiah, sent by Providence to redeem the people of Israel from thraldom. He who was so well known in diplomatic circles, who was so beautiful of visage, so noble in character, so majestic in stature, so fascinating in speech and so imposing in manners; he who standeth before Kings; who had been all his life estranged from Jews and Jewism; who had been so rich and so great, and who had renounced all this greatness to help his unfortunate brethren whose country was not his and whose language he could hardly understand—is not the finger of God visible in this? Wall he not redeem the children of Israel? And the plan he proposed was, in addition, so plain and so simple that a child could comprehend it: The Jews are persecuted, he reasoned along with others, because they are strangers in all countries; what they need then is a country of their own. But there is a country just suitable for them. Indeed it was once theirs. True enough it is now being held by the Turk, and the Jew has no chance whatever of acquiring it by force of arms. But there is no necessity for that; why not buy it? This is a world of barter, the Jews are reputed to be rich, the Turk chronically and hopelessly poor, and for a consideration, the bargain could be arranged to the mutual satisfaction of all concerned.

How magnificent and how plain!

Why did they suffer so many centuries? Where were their senses all this time? How many sufferings could have been avoided? How many tortures could have been escaped? How many lives could have been saved?

Of course the thing was not so easy of execution. Thedeal was not to be made with an ordinary democratic merchant. but with a great ruler by Divine Grace. Many obstructions. would have to be removed, and many more obstacles encountered. But here is just where the “diplomacy” comes in, and Dr. Hertzel was manifestly destined to great diplomatic affairs. And with all the zeal and energy of a great dreamer he threw himself upon his task. He exhausted all his strength and abilities, he sacrificed his health, his wealth, his very life, for this great dream.

He traveled from country to country, from ministry to ministry, he knocked at the doors of the great and the mighty; received in return recommendations and assurances of aid; he was accepted in special audiences, got promises, negotiated treaties with representatives of great rulers; he urged his plan upon the rich Jew, he reached the Sultan himself. And the Jews the world over have stood with bated breath watching with anxiety the overtures and maneuvering of their great hero, of their new Messiah, in the hope and belief that another while and an end will come to the troubles of the Jews; another while and the eternal wanderer will find a place of repose for his tired limbs, his restless head and his dry bones.

And the result?

The result is known. It turned out that all this tireless activity was based on the assumption that the Sultan could be persuaded or fooled into playing the role of the traditional “mule” in the Messiah legend. But the unspeakable Turk prudently but thankfully declined the honor. He received the doctor civilly, spoke to him in flattering terms about the Jews, professed his great friendship, even love, for them, but further he did not venture—not one step.

Dr. Hertzel had been aware of the collapse of his scheme before anybody else, but there was no retreat, he reached a point wherefrom he could neither advance nor turn backwards, and he had to live through the tragedy which had befallen so many great dreamers before him.

To be practical is characteristic of all great Utopians. They are never discouraged; they never despair at disappointments and are never short of practical schemes. No sooner does one plan fail (because of the shortsightedness and wickedness of the people, of course) than another plan, a better and more practical One is at hand.

Dr. Hertzel was such an Utopian, and although, as is well known, he did not long survive his great disappointment, he did not surrender at once and without another trial. As soon as he convinced himself of the utter impossibility of ever realizing his ambitions with regard to Palestine, he at once hatched another, more “‘practical” plan. And in this new position his reasoning seemed to be as rational and as easy of execution as in the first instance. It is not Palestine that the Jews are in need of, he claimed. It is a country of their own that they most need. What matters it in what part of the world they will be located? He would, of course, prefer Palestine, but as long as Palestine is not in the market, he would, like a good, practical merchant, take the next best thing. And at the Sixth Zionistic Congress at Basel he sprung the Uganda plan, which was accepted by his followers after a great uproar as a “temporary home for the Jews.”

Uganda turned out to be undesirable. In the meantime Dr. Hertzel died, but his new idea took root and blossomed and grew up to a new movement.

From Uganda to any other territory is but a short step, and this step was made the following year under the lead of Israel Zangwill. The idea of Territorialism came into being. Of course not all the Zionists were ready to renounce the land of “their ancient fathers”, but those that did go along were sufficient in number to almost disrupt the Zionist movement.

This short sketch of the history of the “new” Zionism will suffice to show that Territorialism is not a new invention: it is only a further development of the old, very old, Zionistic movement. It therefore inherited all the maladies and weaknesses of its progenitor—Zionism.

II.

It is not within the province of this short work to point out all the shortcomings of political Zionism. Besides, the subject has been thrashed out so many times that there is hardly any new word to be said about it. At best I can only repeat some of the objections that are being made against it, and this I shall do here only to the extent absolutely necessary to the understanding of our discussion.

Zionism, or rather, Zionists, though starting from a common point—the persecution of the Jews, and reaching the same conclusion—the necessity of establishing an independent Jewish state are nevertheless divided and subdivided among themselves as to the reason and ultimate aims of their movements. We shall here touch upon the two main divisions only, namely, the “Materialistic” and the “Idealistic”’.

Materialist Zionism deals mainly with the economic conditions and necessities of the Jews, while the Idealists take for their text the spiritual side of the Jew—the Jew not as an individual but as a nation. The one seeks to acquire the holy land for the purpose of improving the economic condition of the Jews as a nation, while the other refuses to consider this side of the question, claiming that with regard to the question of bread and butter the Jew can work out his salvation in exile. What he most needs, they maintain, is an “intellectual center” where he would be enabled to develop his national genius, to preserve the national “self?” which each nation possesses and has a right to preserve. The author of this latter Zionism is Asher Ginsburg, better known as Akhad Haam.

Both these factions, as can be seen, are one as to the cardinal point, namely, that the Jews are a separate nation; that neither their sojourn in so many different countries, among so many different peoples for almost twenty centuries, nor the various political institutions, nor the degree of civilization of those countries and peoples, has in the least affected or impaired their character as a nation; that they are being persecuted just because of this peculiarity of theirs; that they have, nevertheless, suffered greatly in their economic development, according to the one, and in their intellectual progress, according to the other.

The materialist Zionists have in a great measure already received an answer from life itself. They found, to their great discomfiture, that Palestine is not to be had, and, on the other hand, that the Jews would not go there if it were to be had. Out of the one and a half million souls that have shaken off the dust of their native land for the last twenty years, only a very small portion migrated to the “Yiddish” land, a goodly portion of which have since left it in disgust. And this in spite of the financial aid they received out of the Rothschild funds. Moreover, this immense mass of emigration has not in the least diminished the Jewish population in Russia. This fact alone should have sufficed to convince the Zionists of the futility of their efforts. It should have proven to them that the Jewish problem is not to be solved by emigration; that a whole nation can not, will not, emigrate on account of an imaginary prosperity in a semi-barbarous land where their forefathers of two thousand years ago lived, or out of devotion to ideals, no matter how sublime they may be; that it is rather the immediate necessities, and, to a certain extent, political oppression, that will put the wandering stick in the hands of a great number, and that, consequently, the place of destination would be decided upon by the chances it offers to new comers to win bread and shelter.

This fact alone, I repeat, should have been sufficient to show the Zionists the impossibility of their scheme. Unfortunately such “minor” considerations do not enter the mind of Zionists. Cause and effect seem to have no meaning for them. They reckon little with the cold facts of life, id they listen only to the voice of their mind and desires—the result is, therefore, usually disastrous to them.

But when the facts become so obvious that even the blind can see them, they take refuge in reasoning somewhat like this:

“We know perfectly well,” they say, “that all the Jews can not emigrate; it is in fact not at all desirable they should. It is not desirable, for instance, nor necessary, for the Jews of England, France or North America to emigrate. The Zionist movement is mainly for the benefit of the Russian and Roumanian Jews, and even from those countries it is not necessary they should all emigrate. What we are after is a center, a home, somewhere, for a portion of the nation. There are many foreigners to-day living in Russia without being molested because they have somewhere a fatherland with a government to protect them. So would the persecution of the Jews cease if they had a country somewhere.”

In an article entitled “Zionism or Socialism” in Number 6 of the “Jewish Worker”, Ben Ahud brings out some remarks which are worth while reproducing here. After having shown that Zionism is a dream at best; after having shown that the whole of Palestine is neither sufficiently large in area to hold, nor does it possess the fertility of soil to support, a population of ten millions; that, in addition, the Jews could not prevent non Jews from immigrating to their country, were it ever sufficiently developed industrially to invite foreign immigration; after having pointed out that it would take at least fifty years for two or three millions of Jews to emigrate to the new land, in which time the depletion would be made good by new births—after having shown this, Ben Ahud continues:

“It is true some of the Zionists think that so soon as the Jews will have established their own government, even the smallest, the other nations would refrain from persecuting those that will have remained in exile, because they would all know that there is a Jewish state which would protect its children, that there is a nation which would fight for their brothers…How puerile! It is only to laugh at such expectation. The great majority of the Jews will have remained with such great naval powers as Russia, Germany, Austria, France, England and the United States of America, and these first class naval powers shiver in their boots at the sight of the Lilliputian “Yiddish Land”. They would be frightened to death at the news that the representatives of the “Yiddish Land” in Congress assembled have adopted a resolution protesting against Russia for the expulsion of the Jews from Moskow; against Austria for mistreating the Jews in Galicia; against Germany for not admitting Jewish girls to the profession of teachers; against France for the massacres of Jews in Algiers, etc. Did Russia shrink from oppressing Germans in the Baltic provinces in the face of Germany with its large and modernly equipped army, with its great influence in European politics? Would this same Russia treat its Jews with more consideration because somewhere in Asia existed a little Jewish country under the suzerainty of the Turkish Sultan?…

“It can thus be seen that the plan of Dr. Hertzel, should it ever be realized, could not in any way ameliorate the sufferings of the Jews.”

“A good portion of the Jewish bourgeoisie would make capital out of the scheme; a small portion of the Jewish workingmen would get a chance to sell their labor power, as they do everywhere. This is at best the sum total of the whole Zionistic movement. And with such empty, worthless dreams they try to avert the thoughts of the Jews from their real needs at home!”

So far Ben Ahud as to the argument of the materialist Zionist about a Jewish center to infuse respect for the Jews in exile.

Not much better showing can the argument of an intellectual center make for the “idealist” Zionist, those who try to save the souls of the Jews.

This twin brother of the “materialist” commits the same error, but in a different way. The “materialists” who speak of the economic backwardness forget the economic surroundings of the Jews, and the economic impossibility of their scheme. The “idealist” again, trying to save the Jewish “spirit”, forgets to consider the nature of this spirit. They talk much of the Jewish genius, of the intellectual culture, and they forget that the Jewish ‘spirit’ is not “Jewish” at all; that if the intellectual side of a nation can be developed, modified or mutilated under specific social and economic environments—and there can be no doubt about that—then the Jewish nation has undergone such an evolution for almost two thousand years under exceptional circumstances, and that the results of this evolution cannot be erased because a million or even two million people will emigrate to a semi-barbarous country which once upon a time belonged to their ancestors. This point is very often omitted by our newly baked nationalist.

The truth of the matter is that we can speak of a Jewish nation in a spiritual sense only, because in the sense of a political or social unit the Jews are surely no nation. But this intellect, this spirit, manifested in a special Jewish form (if there be such a thing) is the product, not of the Jewish land, but of the exile, nay, it is because of it! What forms the Jewish culture would have assumed had they lived on their own soil all this time, what shape it would assume should it again settle independently on its land, or any other newly acquired territory is a matter of conjecture. The Jew of to-day is the Jew of the diaspora. His culture, his civilization, his “spirit”, is therefore not Jewish, but western. It is therefore pure nonsense to speak of a Jewish “spirit” that can thrive on the soil of Palestine only. Furthermore, there are many arguments in support of the theory that the Jewish nation, such as it is, is a “nation” in exile only. There are probabilities that the Jews would not have retained their religion and the purity of the race, a thing the Zionist puts much stock in, had they remained in their land. No ruling nation preserved its purity in the same degree as the Jews. The ruling nations usually assimilate with others, either through conquest or immigration. The Jews in their own land were not exempt from such influences. Their language they had lost long before their independence, so much did they mix with the heathen by intermarriage, their very religion was much neglected.

The exile alone united them; in exile the form of their religion developed and crystallized; in exile they stopped intermarriages. The exile then developed the peculiarities of Jewism. If we are therefore to speak of a Jewish nation as an intellectual unity we cannot separate it from the exile spirit. It is utterly incomprehensible how this evolution of twenty centuries can be done away with.

Add to this that the Zionists of all shades admit that the great majority of the Jews will remain where they are at present and the whole proposition of an “intellectual center” becomes ridiculous. A million, at the best two millions, of the poorest and humblest Jews will emigrate to a semi-savage country. At the best it will take tens or even hundreds of years until they will be able to procure a decent livelihood by tilling the soil and doing all kind of manual labor. And this handful of Jews somewhere in Asia or Africa is to become the intellectual and spiritual guides of the ten or more millions that remained under the intellectual influence of European and American civilization, with its famous universities and libraries, museums and laboratories, literature and theatres; with its highly developed art and technic, with its newspapers, etc. Is this not puerile? Is this not ridiculous? Jerusalem in intellectual competition with Paris, London. New York, or even Warsaw. Uganda, or another wilderness somewhere in Africa to compete with Heidelberg, Oxford, Yale or Columbia as teachers. Jaffa racing with the British Museum, or the Paris, or even the New York Library.

It is only to laugh!

Turn Zionism or Territorialism as you may, the whole thing is ridiculous.

But the worst was yet to come.

Before Zionism had time to stand firmly on its feet, before it was able to make the first step, it was already clear to every observer that besides its external deformities it is subject to an. incurable, chronic, internal sickness.

At the time when Zionism made its great efforts social life in Russia took its usual course. Industry, with the aid of foreign: capital, had been greatly developed, and along with it grew the: proletariat and its class consciousness.

The Revolutionary movement progressed immensely, and the Jew did not only not keep aloof from it, he, on the contrary, was found in the front line, and these circumstances helped to tear asunder the Zionist movement. The proletarian Zionist opened his eyes; the working man and his exploiter met face to face and the sweet dream of a united nation was at once scattered to the winds. The united and undivided Jewish “nation” was divided into two hostile camps.

The proletarian Zionists did not, however, awake altogether; they only awoke for a minute, turned on the other side and began to dream again.

Would they dream quietly to themselves we could leave them alone. The trouble with them is that they speak out in their dreams and produce much noise.

We must, therefore, disturb them from their pleasant dream.

III.

The path of new Zionism, of political Zionism, so called, has never been strewn with roses. It had its troubles from the very outset: Intended as a sure cure for all diseases of the Jewish national body, it met the fate of so many cure-all-medicines— the patient resolutely refused to take it. Many devices had been tried by the doctors of Zionism to induce the patient to take it: Appeal was made to his instinct of national self-preservation ; the glorious past of the Jewish nation was brought into play, the blessings that await him in the future: were painted in the most dazzling colors; the great prophets of old were disturbed from their eternal repose to bear witness to the great mission of the chosen people; the great danger to his national existence, its annihilation was demonstrated in a thousand different ways; the doctors themselves each took a “dose,” but all this was of no avail! The real patient, the great mass of the Jewish workman steadfastly and persistently refused to touch it. Instead they have thrown themselves, body and soul, into the socialistic movement which at that time began to show symptoms of life. Here again real life and the ideals resulting from it, proved to be more powerful than the ideals called into life artificially. And what wonder? Social life in Russia was disturbed by the high waves of the revolution; the youth of the country was burning with impatience for activity, the hopes of the proletariat were running high, the hour of liberation seemed at hand, and the Jewish masses threw themselves into the revolutionary whirlpool, brushing aside Zionism with its reactionary contents. Zionism found itself on the verge of collapse, and as a means of self preservation it was compelled in one way or another to adopt some measures, to take some stand towards this feverish activity of the Jews in the revolution. As a result we see a new variety of Zionism looming up — Zionism blended with Socialism. Whether this movement originated in the head of some leader, or came into being spontaneously, by a sort of instinct, does not alter the fact that Zionism, the supposed remedy for the ailments of the Jews, could itself be saved only by the aid of Socialism. Dr. N. Sizkin, the Social-philosophic family physician of Zionism expressed this thought very clearly, in an article entitled “Zionism and the Multitude.”

There seemed to have been no doubt in the mind of the learned doctor that Zionism was the real drug for the diseased Jewish national body. The only thing which seems to have disturbed his tranquility of mind was this very difficult problem of how to administer the medicine to the patient. On the one hand there is Zionism which promises to redeem the nation from bondage, on the other hand it is powerless to accomplish anything without the help of the masses of the Jews, “and the Multitude,” he laments “had not arisen to rally around the flag of Zionism; Zionism not having awakened in him the enthusiasm necessary for the salvation of the nation.”

Zionism, thus, needs the aid of the masses, in the same proportion as the masses needs the help of Zionism. His motto is, therefore, “Zionism for the Multitude and the Multitude for. Zionism.”

But how are we to accomplish this almost impossible fit? How are we to get the multitude to adopt Zionism?

To this question the good doctor replies in the following language:

“In order to make the multitude rally round the banner of the Zionist movement of liberation it is necessary that the ideal of Zionism should be understood not only as a remedy against the national sufferings, but also as a deliverance from all the misery and privations which the masses are subject to in the present order of society. A new social order in the New Land! A social order based on freedom and equality; an order without the contrasts of master and slave, rich and poor, capitalist and proletariat; a society established on new economic principles, and collective ownership of land.”

Here we have the whole scheme in plain words: Zions is the only cure for the poor, downtrodden persecuted Jewish nation, but the great masses will take the bitter pill only when coated with the sugar of Socialism — Socialism is to become the hand-maid of Zionism.

This worked well, for the moment. The patient swallowed the medicine, but, alas! the effect proved to be disastrous. Indeed the very first attempt at compounding the two “elements” proved to be a perilous undertaking.

For the purpose of successfully executing the design of drawing the multitude to Zionism and administering Zionism to the multitude an organization by the name of “Cherus” (Freedom) was formed, and right here at the first step, the incompatibility of the two “elements” was manifested.

As Dr. Sizkin has demonstrated “scientifically”, Zionism must be made to mean the deliverance of the masses from “all the misery and sufferings of the present social order.” In other words: The propaganda of Zionism must include the propaganda of Socialism. But when it came to practical work, the organization decided to exclude from its programme “immediate demands.” It, thus, from the outset declined to do any work which could bring the ideals of Socialism into the minds of the Jewish workingman. But why should the organization that has made it ifs aim to infuse Zionism into the Jewish workingman, with the aid of Socialism, why should this organization refuse to adopt any social policy?

“Cherus” explains it thus:

“Because the work for Zion is of a different nature than the work of ameliorating the condition of the Jew to-day, in the land where he lives, and it would be futile to attempt two conflicting tasks in one and the same organization”. And as if afraid of being misunderstood the organization goes on:

“If we were to meddle in questions of social reform, our policy would of necessity have to be of a reactionary nature. Because in the Zionistic movement are congregated men of different classes and various religious convictions, with the meddling in social problems, class-interests would clash, and this would inevitably lead to the adoption of a reactionary policy.”

And to remove all shadow of doubt as to this meaning, it continues,

“The journeymen of the small and large manufacturers are constantly struggling against their employers for higher wages. The Zionistic organization which undertook to mingle in economic problems of today, would have to take an active part in such contests. And under such circumstances it would have no room in its midst for the manufacturer.

“Again, co-operative stores would be of a great value to the small manufacturer, as well as to his workingman. Should the Zionistic organization undertake to establish such stores, it would have simultaneously to exclude all small traders because the establishment of co-operative stores would be ne ruin of the small storekeeper.”

The whole thing is now clear; there is no room for misunderstanding: The Jewish workingman i is to be told that Zionism is the remedy both for the national as well as economic evils, that a new order, based on the principles of collectivism, would be established in the new land; at present, however, and especially within Zionism, no mention should be made of the whole affair, because, otherwise, the class conflicts would lead to a reactionary policy.

But how is this new society in the new land to be built? By what magic is the Jewish workingman to learn of the blessings that await him in the new land? These questions you would in vain ask of the learned doctor, or his organization.

The difficulties, thus, began at the very beginning, and they went on increasing with every step. Such is the nature of Socialism! Like Yahve it suffers no god besides itself, and if one tries to force upon it any foreign substance an explosion is sure to follow. And in this case the explosion occurred at the seventh Zionistic Congress which took place in 1904 in Basel, Switzerland. And the explosion came with such violence that it disrupted the Zionistic party, destroyed the organization “Cherus,” turned upside down the good Doctor Sizkin and severely injured, almost mutilated, their socialism itself.

On the ruins of this violent eruption a new party arose, the party of Zionists Socialists. From now on Socialism gets the first place. Instead of Socialism, as heretofore, being the means by which to attain the ends of Zionism, it now becomes the end which is to be reached by means of Zionism.

The most remarkable thing in the whole story is that nothing extraordinary has happened to bring about this state of affairs. It was simply the logic of life, the force of socialist doctrine, that has opened the eyes of the Jewish proletariat of Zionistic faith to what the learned doctor could not see as late as the year 1903, namely that Zionism as a cure for economic evils cannot go hand in hand with a policy that must necessarily be reactionary, that, on that account to have no policy at all is just as illogical ; and lastly, that the class-struggle is more powerful than the “national spirit.”

But, alas! The proletarian Territorialist-Socialist-Zionist, as they sometimes euphemistically call themselves, are just as unreasonable, if not more so, than the Zionism which they discard so bombastically.

The International Socialist Review (ISR) was published monthly in Chicago from 1900 until 1918 by Charles H. Kerr and critically loyal to the Socialist Party of America. It is one of the essential publications in U.S. left history. During the editorship of A.M. Simons it was largely theoretical and moderate. In 1908, Charles H. Kerr took over as editor with strong influence from Mary E Marcy. The magazine became the foremost proponent of the SP’s left wing growing to tens of thousands of subscribers. It remained revolutionary in outlook and anti-militarist during World War One. It liberally used photographs and images, with news, theory, arts and organizing in its pages. It articles, reports and essays are an invaluable record of the U.S. class struggle and the development of Marxism in the decades before the Soviet experience. It was closed down in government repression in 1918.

PDF of full issue 1: https://www.marxists.org/history/usa/pubs/isr/v07n06-dec-1906-ISR-gog-Harv.pdf

PDF of issue 2: https://www.marxists.org/history/usa/pubs/isr/v07n07-jan-1907-ISR-gog-Harv.pdf