THE JEWS

THE JEWS     BY THE SAME AUTHOR:     EUROPE AND THE FAITH   "Mr. Belloc has developed a side  of history which is a wholesome  antidote to self-satisfied Angli-  canism; and he has produced a  brilliant and burningly sincere  historical essay which sweeps his  reader along. It is certainly the  best book he has written." The  Church Times.   THE OLD ROAD   With Illustrations by William  Hyde, a Map and Route Guides.  New Edition.   THE STANE STREET   A Monograph. With Illustrations  by William Hyde, and Maps.     THE JEWS     By HILAIRE BELLOC     \     CONSTABLE & COMPANY, LIMITED  LONDON BOMBAY SYDNEY     First Published ig*e  Second Impression 192*     To  MISS RUBY GOLDSMITH   MY SECRETARY FOR MANY YEARS AT KING'S   LAND AND THE BEST AND MOST INTIMATE OF   OUR JEWISH FRIENDS, TO WHOM MY   FAMILY AND I WILL ALWAYS OWE   A DEEP DEBT OF GRATITUDE     PREFACE   /.   THE object of this book is more modest, I fear,  than that of much which has appeared upon that  vital political matter, the relation between the  Jews and the nations around them.   It does not propose any detailed, still less, any  positive legal solution to what has become a press-  ing problem, nor does it pretend to any complete  solution of it. It is no more than a suggestion  that any attempt to solve this problem ought to  follow certain general lines which are essentially  different from those attempted in Western Europe  during the time immediately preceding our own.  I suggest that, if the present generation in both  parties to the discussion, the Jews and ourselves,  will drop convention and make a principle of  discussing the problem in terms of reality, we shall  automatically approach a right solution.   We have but to tell the truth in the place of the  falsehoods of the last generation. Therefore, of  the three principles upon which this essay reposes,  the principle that concealment must come to an end  seems to me more important than the principle of  mutual recognition, or even the principle of mutual  respect. For it may well be that my judgment is  at fault in the matter of Jewish national conscious-  ness ; it may well be that I exaggerate it, and it   vii   6(3  1405     viii PREFACE   is certain that one party to a debate cannot be  possessed of the full knowledge required for its  settlement; the other side must be heard. But  neither my judgment nor the judgment of any man  can be at fault on the value of truth and the  ultimate evil consequences of trying to build upon  a lie.   The English reader (less, I think, the American)  will often find in my sentences a note that will  seem to him fantastic. The quarrel is already  acute here in London, but it has not here approached  the limits which it has reached long ago elsewhere ;  and a man accustomed to the quieter air in which  all public affairs have, until recently, been debated  in this country, may smile at what will seem to  him odd and exaggerated fears. To this I would  reply that the book has been written not only in  the light of English, but of a general, experience.  I will bargain that were it put into the hands of a  jury chosen from the various nationalities of Europe  and the United States it would be found too mod-  erate in its estimate of the peril it postulates. I  would further ask the reader, who may not have  appreciated how rapidly the peril approaches, to  consider the distance traversed in the last few  years. It is not very long since a mere discussion  of the Jewish question in England was impossible.  It is but a few years since the mere admission of it  appeared abnormal. The truth is that this ques-  tion is not one which we open or close at will in  any European nation. It is imposed successively  upon one nation after another by the force of  things. It is this force of things, this necessity  for national well-being, and for the warding off of  disorder, which has thrust the Jewish question     PREFACE ix   to-day upon a society still reluctant to consider it  and still hoping it may return to its old neglect.  It cannot so return.   I will conclude by asking my Jewish, as well as  my non- Jewish, readers to observe that I have left  out every personal allusion and every element of  mere recrimination. I have carefully avoided the  mention of particular examples in public life of the  friction between the Jews and ourselves and even  examples drawn from past history. With these I  could often have strengthened my argument, and  I would certainly have made my book a great deal  more readable. I have left out everything of the  kind because, though one can always rouse interest  in this way, it excites enmity between the opposing  parties. Since my object is to reduce that enmity,  which has already become dangerous, I should be  insincere indeed if from mere purpose of enlivening  this essay I had stooped to exasperate feeling.   I could have made the book far stronger as a  piece of polemic and indefinitely more amusing  as a piece of record, but I have not written it as a  piece of polemic or as a piece of record. I have  written it as an attempt at justice.     CONTENTS     PAGE   CHAPTER I  THE THESIS OP THIS BOOK 3   The Jews are an alien body within the society they  inhabit hence irritation and friction a problem is  presented by the strains thus set up the solution of  that problem is urgently necessary.   An alien body in any organism is disposed of in one  of two ways : elimination and segregation.   Elimination may be by destruction, by excretion or  by absorption in the case of the Jews the first is abomin-  able and, further, has failed the second means exile :  it has also failed the third, absorption, the most pro-  bable and most moral, has failed throughout the past,  though having everything in its favour.   There remains segregation, which may be of two  forms : hostile to, or careless of, the alien body, or friendly  to it and careful of its good in this latter form it may  best be called Recognition. The first kind of segregation  has often been attempted in history it has been par-  tially successful over long periods but has always left  behind it a sense of injustice and has not really solved  the problem also it has always failed in the end.   The true solution is in the second kind of segregation,  that is, recognition on both sides of a separate Jewish  nationality.   CHAPTER II  THE DENIAL OF THE PROBLEM ..... 17   In the immediate past the problem was shirked in  Western Europe by a mere denial of its existence some  were honestly ignorant of the existence of a Jewish   xi     xii CONTENTS   PAGE   nation some thought the difference one of religion  only more admitted the existence of a separate nation  but thought a convenient fiction, that it did not exist,  necessary to the modern state.   This ignorance or fiction has broken down in our own  time partly through the necessary reaction of truth  against any falsehood partly through the increasing  numbers of the Jews in Western countries more through  the great increase of their power.   Yet, though this old " Liberal " fiction about the  Jews is dead, having proved unworkable in the face of  fact, it had something to be said for it it secured peace  for a while it chose models from the past and it was  based on a certain truth, to wit, that the Jew takes on  very rapidly the superficial characters of the nation in  which he happens for the time to be living moreover it  was desired by the Jews themselves example of the  old Jewish Peer and his claim "to be let alone "  practical proof of the failure in his case.   At any rate the old " Liberal " fiction is now quite  useless the problem is admitted and must be solved.   CHAPTER III  THE PRESENT PHASE OF THE PROBLEM ... 43   The Jewish problem, present throughout history, has  assumed a particular character to-day it is the char-  acter of a sharp reaction against the old pretence that  Jews were identical with the nations in which they  happened to live it first took the form of irritation  only it was suddenly exasperated in a very high degree  by the Jewish revolution in Russia but long before  this the increasing power of Jews in public life, the anti-  Semitic writing on the Continent, the Dreyfus agitation,  the South African War, and the Jewish leadership of  Socialism had prepared the way The situation on the  outbreak of the Great War Bolshevism a short  description to be expanded in a later chapter Bolshe-  vism is a Jewish movement, but not a movement of the  Jewish race as a whole its particular effect was to  release criticism of Jewish power which had hitherto  been silent from fear of, or sympathy with, Capitalism.  Men hesitated to attack the Jews as financiers because  the stability of society and of their own fortunes'was  bound up with finance but when a body of Jews also     CONTENTS xiii   PAGE   appeared as the active enemies of existing society and of  private fortune, the restraint was removed since the  Bolshevist movement open (and hostile) discussion of  the Jewish problem has become universal   CHAPTER IV  THE GENERAL CAUSES OF FRICTION .... 69   The strain between Jewry and its hosts in Islam and  Christendom much older than any modern cause can  account for the true causes are both general and par-  ticular I call those general which are ineradicable and  proceed from the contrasting natures of the two races,  particular those which depend upon the will on either  side and can be modified to the advantage of both.   The general cause of friction being a contrast in funda-  mental character, we note that the common accusations  brought against Jews are false, as are the common praises  given him by those not of the race. In each case what has  to be noted is not a series of virtues or vices special to  the Jew, but the racial character or tone of each quality.   These examined the Jewish courage examples  the Jewish generosity the strength of Jewish patriotism  the consequent indifference to our national feelings  accusations arising therefrom, especially in time of war  the Jewish power of concentration of eloquence the  Jewish tendency to " push " a Jewish success and hide  a Jewish failure or danger the evil effects of this ten-  dency in our mutual relations.   The poverty of the Jewish people false effect produced  by a few great Jewish fortunes the instability of these  cringing of wealthy Europeans to Jewish money-dealers  dependence of our politicians on wealthy Jews evil  effect of this in the attempt to regulate domestic affairs  of Eastern Europe.   The ill effect of the partially Jewish financial monopoly  especially with Parliamentary corruption as pro-  nounced as it is to-day.   CHAPTER V-  THE SPECIAL CAUSES OF FRICTION .... 99   I have called " Special " causes of Friction those  which are remedial at will by either party they would     xiv CONTENTS   PAGE   seem to be, on the Jewish side, the habit of secrecy and  the habit of expressing a sense of superiority on our  side a disingenuousness and unintelligence in our treat-  ment of Jews and a lack of charity.   The deplorable Jewish habit of secrecy the use of  false names examples excuses for same not adequate  a regular code of such names which deceive us but can  be decoded by fellow Jews.   The expression of superiority by the Jew our states-  manship has never sufficiently allowed for it examples  of this expression Jewish interference in our religion  or national quarrels and other departments which are  alien to Jewish interests on the other hand this quality  has been a preservation of the race the Jew should  note the corresponding sense of superiority on our side  even the poor hack-writer, if he be of European blood,  feels himself superior to the Jewish millionaire.   CHAPTER VI   THE CAUSE OF FRICTION UPON OUR SIDE . . .123   This department of our inquiry often neglected  through an error it is presumed that, because we are  the' hosts and the Jew alien to us, no responsibility falls  on us this error forgets that the Jew is permanently  with us and that every permanent human relation  involves responsibility.   The first cause of friction on our side is disingenuous-  ness in our dealings with the Jew examples of this  we conceal from the Jew our real feelings we deceive  him the richer classes who intermarry with Jews and  enter into business partnership with them especially  to blame the populace more straightforward this  deceiving of the Jew leaves him troubled when the quarrel  comes to a head he has not heard what is said behind  his back.   Disingenuousness in our suppression of the Jewish  problem in history gross examples of it in contemporary  life and particularly in the popular press Jews called  " Russians," " Germans," anything but what they are.   Unintelligence a second cause of friction example :  our treatment of Jewish immigration we hate it, yet  allow it because we dare not give it its right name  unintelligent treatment of the Jew in fiction unintelli-  gence in our astonishment at his international position     CONTENTS xv   PAGE   example of the cabinet minister's cousin who got into  trouble.   Last cause, lack of charity people won't put them-  selves in the shoes of the Jew and see how things look  from his side we do not (as we should) mix with Jews  of every class and address their societies Summary  A warning against the idea that the friction between the  Jews and ourselves is unimportant it has bred catas-  trophe in the past and may in the future.   CHAPTER VII  THE ANTI-SEMITE 145   Error of neglecting to study Anti-Semitism on account  of its extravagance it is a most significant thing, how-  ever ill-balanced character of the Anti-Semite he does  not recognize a Jewish problem to be solved but only a  Jewish race to be hated this hatred his whole motive  his self-contradictions his delusion his strength the  press still on the whole boycotts the Anti-Semitic move-  ment but it is growing prodigiously its great power  of documentation its vast accumulation of evidence  effect this will have when it comes out.   The Jews met Anti-Semitism by nothing but ridicule  this weapon insufficient and bound to fail their enemies  have countered it by accumulating facts the latter a  much stronger weapon so long as the erroneous Jewish  policy of secrecy is maintained.   Danger to the Jews of the Anti-Semitic movement  (1) because of its intensity (2) because of its formidable  accumulation of evidence, which cannot be permanently  suppressed (3) and most important, because it is  allied to a now widespread and more moderate, but very  hostile, feeling, to which it acts as spear-head   CHAPTER VIII  BOLSHEVISM 167   The revolution in Russia will be the historical point of  departure whence will date the renewed hostility to the  Jew in Western Europe.   Examination of that revolution it was (as said in  Chapter III) " a Jewish movement, but not a movement  of the Jewish race:" importance of this distinction     xvi CONTENTS   PAQK   unfortunately the two different terms " Jewish race "  and " a Jewish movement " are confused in the popular  mind.   The Revolution not the result of an accident or of a  universal plot element of racial revenge the Jew not  a revolutionary special character of the Russian situa-  tion Industrial Capitalism, the great evil of our time,  there recent and weak therefore open to special attack  an international evil the only two international  forces applicable were the Jews and the Catholic Church  why the Catholic Church cannot directly attack indus-  trial Capitalism why the Jew who happens to be opposed  to it can and does directly attack it neither our instinct  for property nor our Nationalism an obstacle in his  case.   Grave perils to the Jew arise from his identification  with Bolshevism the more reason to meet these perils  by a sane treatment of the Jewish problem.     CHAPTER IX  THE POSITION IN THE WORLD AS A WHOLE . . 180   The Jewish problem varies (1) according to the extent  to which Jews have acquired control and domination in  various places; (2) according to the tradition of each  community in approaching the problem ; (3) according to  the strength in each community of the four international  forces, which are the Catholic Church, Islam, Industrial  Capitalism, and the Socialist revolt against this last.   The individual Jew does not feel that he is in a position  of control or even that he is interfering with his hosts  yet that is the universal complaint against him it is a  corporate or collective power more and more resented.   The position in Russia repeated in the Marches of  Russia and Roumania and Poland in Central Europe  in Occidental Europe Ireland an exception.   The position in the United States Mr. Ford and the  great effect of his action.   The Western tradition more favourable to the Jews  than the Eastern problem of the Jews and Islam  position of the Catholic Church effect of Industrial  Capitalism and of its converse, Socialism, upon the  problem.     CONTENTS xvii   CHAPTER X   PAGB   THE POSITION OF THE JEWS IN ENGLAND . . . 215   England has gone to both extremes with the Jew.  The Jew in the Roman time and in the Middle Ages  his monopoly of Usury in early Middle Ages The  exile of all English Jews under Edward I their return  under Cromwell followed by a growing alliance between  the English State and the Jews largely due to cosmo-  politan commercial interests of Britain also to common  hostility towards the Catholic Church aided by great  wealth and security of this country in the later nine-  teenth century the Jews, in spite of their small numbers,  colour every English institution, especially the Univer-  sities and the House of Commons the interests of the  two races began to diverge before the Great War none  the less a formal alliance maintained through the control  of the politicians by Jewish finance its culmination in  the attempt to form an Anglo-Judaic state in Palestine.   CHAPTER XI  ZIONISM 231   The chief interest of the Zionist experiment lies in its  reaction upon the international position of the Jew  yet that point is not yet discussed what will be the  effect of the experiment on the position of Jews outside  Palestine, necessarily the vast majority of the race ?  an inevitable alternative either the Jews lose their  international position through loss of the fiction that  they are not a nation or the Zionist experiment breaks  down effect especially in Eastern Europe.   Special effect of the experiment on Great Britain  difficulty of maintaining sacrifice for purely Jewish  interests which now clash with British unpopularity  of such sacrifice inevitable grave error of first appoint-  ment to the headship of the New State unworthiness of  the politician chosen for that position.   CHAPTER XII  OUR DUTY . , 249   This but a consequence of the conditions established in  Chapters IV, V and VI our double duty of mixing with     xviii CONTENTS   PAGE   the Jews and of recognizing their separate nationality  necessity of openly admitting this separate nationality  in conversation and social habits in spite of difficulties  opposed by convention in this the wealthier classes  should follow the lead of the populace folly and danger  of Fear in this matter the fear of Jewish power a  degrading and exasperating thing to the European  delay makes it worse our plain duty is to recognize  this alien nation, to respect it, and to treat it frankly as  we do every nationality other than one's own.   CHAPTER XIII  THEIR DUTY 271   Only a brief mention for interference or advice in  domestic concerns of Jewry would be an impertinence  but it is clear that all specially Jewish institutions favour  the right policy for which I plead those already in  existence schools, newspapers, Jewish societies all  increase of these institutions should be welcome, because  they emphasize and make clear the separate nationality  of the Jew.   CHAPTER XIV  VARIOUS THEORIES 277   This chapter is a digression on the various theories on the  Jewish race and its fortunes which have arisen in history  and some of which are still present.   The theory that reconciliation is impossible its  attachment to the idea of a special curse or blessing.   The theory of a mysterious necessary alliance between  Israel and Britain its most extravagant forms.   The theory that the Jews are the necessary flux of  Europe, without which our energies would decline  note on the intellectual independence of the Jew and  on his original effect on our thought demand for a  Jewish history of Europe and Islam combined.   The theory that the Jewish problem is domestic only  and no concern of ours its error, since the relations are  mutual.   The two theories of the Jew as a malignant enemy  of our innocent selves, and of our malignant enmity     CONTENTS xix   PAGE   against the innocent and martyred Jew both erroneous.   The theory that the Jewish problem is now solving  itself by absorption this theory false and due to a  misunderstanding of history and a neglect of acute  modern and recent differentiation Mr. Ford's epigram  on " the melting-pot."   Fantastic theory that no Jewish national type exists !   CHAPTER XV  CONCLUSION. HABIT OR LAW ? 301   Granted that the solution I advance (a full recog-  nition of separate nationality) is the just solution, should  it be expressed in law ? Not, I think, until it has first  appeared in our morals and social conventions to begin  with laws and regulations on our side would inevitably  breed oppression but the suggestion of separate insti-  tutions coming from the Jewish side should be welcomed  urgency of a settlement modern quarrels are growing  fiercer, not less but for my part I say, "Peace to  Israel"     THE THESIS OF THIS BOOK     CHAPTER I  THE THESIS OF THIS BOOK   IT is the thesis of this book that the continued  presence of the Jewish nation intermixed with  other nations alien to it presents a permanent  problem of the gravest character : that the wholly  different culture, tradition, race and religion of  Europe make Europe a permanent antagonist to  Israel, and that the recent and rapid intensification  of that antagonism gives to the discovery of a  solution immediate and highly practical impor-  tance.   For if the quarrel is allowed to rise unchecked  and to proceed unappeased, we shall come, unex-  pectedly and soon, upon one of these tragedies  which have marked for centuries the relations  between this peculiar nation and ourselves.   The Jewish problem is one to which no true  parallel can be found, for the historical and social  phenomenon which has produced it is unique. It  is a problem which cannot be shirked, as the last  generation both of Jews and of their hosts attempted  to shirk it. It is a problem which cannot be  avoided, nor even lessened (as can some social  problems), by an healing effect of time: for it is  increasing before our eyes. It must be met and  dealt with openly and now.   3     4 THE JEWS   That problem is the problem of reducing or  accommodating the strain produced by the presence  of an alien body within any organism. The alien  body sets up strains, or, to change the metaphor,  produces a friction, which is evil both to itself and  to the organism which it inhabits. The problem  is, how to relax those strains for good and to set  things permanently at their ease again.   There are two ways to such a desirable end.   The first is by the elimination of what is alien.  The second is by its segregation. There is no other  way.   The elimination of an alien body may take three  forms. It may take a frankly hostile form elimina-  tion by destruction. It may take a form, also  hostile but less hostile elimination by expulsion.  It may take a third form, an amicable one (and  that far the most commonly found in the natural  process of physical nature and of society) elimina-  tion by absorption; the alien body becomes an  indistinguishable part of the organism in which it  was originally a source of disturbance and is lost  in it. These three ways sum up the first method,  the method of elimination.   The second method, if elimination shall prove  impossible or undesirable, is that of segregation;  and this again may be of two kinds hostile and  amicable. We may segregate the alien element  without regard to its own ends or desires: the  segregation of it being upon a plan framed solely  from the point of view of the organism invaded,  and the reduction of the strain or friction it creates  effected by the mere cutting of it off from all avenues  through which it can affect its host.   But we may also segregate the alien irritant by     THE THESIS OF THIS BOOK 5   an action which takes full account of the thing  segregated as well as of the organism segregating  it, and considers the good of both parties. In this  second and amicable policy the word segregation  (which has a bad connotation) may be replaced  by the word recognition.   This book has been written under the conception  that all solutions of the Jewish problem other than  this last are either impracticable, or bad in morals,  or both.   It is written to advocate a policy wherein the  Jews on their side shall openly recognize their  wholly separate nationality and we on ours shall  equally recognize that separate nationality, treat  it without reserve as an alien thing, and respect it  as a province of society outside our own.   It is written under the conviction that any  attitude which falls short of this policy or is very  different from it will now soon breed disaster.   The solution by way of destruction is not only  abominable in morals but has proved futile in  practice. It has been the constant temptation of  angry popular masses in the past, when the Jewish  problem has come to a head not once but a  thousand times in various parts of our civilization  during the last twenty centuries. From the pitiless  massacres of Cyrenaica in the second century to  the latest murders in the Ukraine that solution has  been attempted and has failed. It has invariably  left behind it a dreadful inheritance of hatred upon  the one side and of shame upon the other. It has  been condemned by every man whose judgment is  worth considering and especially by the great moral  teachers of Christendom. It is, indeed, hardly a  policy at all, for it is blind. It is a gesture of     6 THE JEWS   mere exasperation and not a final gesture at that.   The second form of elimination expulsion  though theoretically sustainable (for a community  has a right to organize its own life and no aliens  therein have a claim to modify that life or to disturb  it), is none the less in practice, and as regards this  particular problem, only one degree less odious than  the first. It means inevitably a mass of individual  injustice, as well as common spoliation and every  other hardship. It is almost impossible to dis-  sociate it from violence and ill deeds of all kinds.  It leaves behind it almost as strong an inheritance,  if not of shame on the one side, at any rate of  rancour upon the other, as does the first. And  what condemns it finally is that it is not, and cannot  be, complete.   For it is in the nature of the Jewish problem that  this solution is only attempted at moments and in  places where the strength of the Jews has declined ;  and this invariably means their corresponding  strength in some other quarter.   A particular society attempting this solution of  expulsion may succeed for a time so far as itself  is concerned, but that inevitably means the recep-  tion of the exiled body by another district, and,  sooner or later, the return of the force which it was  hoped to be rid of. The greatest historical example  of this is, of course, the action of the English. The  English alone of all Christian nations did adopt  this solution in its entirety. A strong national  kingship, a government highly organized for its  time, an insular position and a singular unanimity  of national purpose promoted the expulsion of the  Jews from England at the end of the thirteenth  century ; for more than three and a half centuries     THE THESIS OF THIS BOOK 7   that expulsion was maintained, and England alone  of the various divisions of Christendom was in  theory free of the alien element and nearly as free  in practice as it was in theory.   But, as we all know, in the long run the experi-  ment broke down. The Jews were readmitted in  the middle of the seventeenth century, and nowhere  have they come to greater strength than in the  very nation which attempted this solution of the  problem with such drastic thoroughness five hun-  dred years ago. None of the other parallel attempts  up and down Europe were of the same thoroughness  as the English attempt. Their failure came, there-  fore, more quickly. But such failure would seem in  any case to be inevitable. Quite apart, therefore,  from the moral objection which attaches to it,  there is the practical experience that a solution is  not to be found upon such lines.   Lastly, there is elimination by absorption. This  would obviously be the most gentle, as it is the  most evident, of all methods. It is further a normal  and most usual method of nature herself when a  living organism has to deal with disturbance excited  by the presence of an alien body. So natural and  so obvious is it that it has been taken by many  men of excellent judgment upon both sides as a  matter of course. It has been taken for granted  that if absorption has not taken place in the past  it has only been due to an ill-will artificially nour-  ished and maintained against the Jews on our side,  or by the unreasoning exclusiveness of the Jews on  theirs.   Even to-day, in spite of a vast increase during  our own generation, both in the public appreciation  of the problem and in its immediate gravity, there     8 THE JEWS   are very many men who still regard absorption as  the natural end of the affair. These, though  dwindling, are still numerous upon the non- Jewish  side ; upon the other, the Jewish side, they are, I  think, a very small body. For I note that even those  Jews who think absorption will come, admit it  with regret, and certainly the vast majority  would insist with pride upon the certain survival  of Israel.   But here again I maintain that we have the index  of history against us. In point of fact absorption  has not taken place. It has had a better chance  than any corresponding case can show : ample time  in which to work, wide dispersion, constant inter-  marriage, long periods of tolerant friendship for  the Jew, and even at times his ascendancy. If  ever there were conditions under which one might  imagine that the larger body would absorb the  smaller, they were those of Christendom acting  intimately for centuries, in relation with Jewry.  Nation after nation has absorbed larger, intensely  hostile minorities: the Irish, their successive  invaders; the British, the pirates of the fifth  and eighth centuries and the French of three cen-  turies more ; the northern Gauls, their auxiliaries ;  the Italians, the Lombards ; the Greeks, the Slav ;  the Dacian has absorbed even the Mongol : but the  Jew has remained intact.   However we explain this mystically or in  whatever other fashion we cannot deny its truth.  It is true of the Jews, and of the Jews alone, that  they alone have maintained, whether through  the special action of Providence or through some  general biological or social law of which we are  ignorant, an unfailing entity and an equally unfail-     THE THESIS OF THIS BOOK 9   ing differentiation between themselves and the  society through which they ceaselessly move.   It is not true that conditions in the past differed  from present conditions sufficiently to account  for so strange a story. There have been genera-  tions and even centuries (not co- incident indeed  throughout the world, but applying now to one  country, now to another) where every oppor-  tunity for absorption existed ; yet that absorption  has never taken place. There was every chance  in Spain at one moment, in Poland at another,  but there was the best chance of all in the short  but brilliant period of Liberal policy which has  dominated Western Europe during the last three  generations. That policy has had the fullest  play : it has left the Jews not only unabsorbed, but  more differentiated than ever, and the political  problem they present more insistent by far than  it was a century ago.   The thing might have come where there was a  chaos of peoples, as in pagan Alexandria in the  four centuries from 200 B.C . to 200 A. D. , or in modern  New York. It might have come where there was  a particularly friendly attitude, as in mediaeval  Poland or modern England. It might even have  come, paradoxically, through the very persecution  and strain of times and places where the Jews  suffered the most hostile treatment: for their  absorption might have been achieved under pres-  sure though it had failed to be achieved under  attraction. As a fact it has never come. It has  never proved possible. The continuous absorp-  tion of outlying fractions, a process continually  going on wherever the Jewish nation is present,  has not affected the mass of the problem at all.     10 THE JEWS   The body as a whole has remained separate, differ-  entiated, with a strong identity of its own under  all conditions and in all places, and the a priori  reasoning, by which men come to think this solu-  tion reasonable, is nullified by an experience appar-  ent throughout history. That experience is wholly  against any such solution. It cannot be.   There remains, then, only the solution of segre-  gation; a word which (I repeat) I use in a com-  pletely neutral manner though it has unhappily  obtained in this and other issues a bad connotation.   Segregation, as I have said, may be of two kinds.  It may be hostile, a sort of static expulsion: a  putting aside of the alien body without regard to  that body's needs, desires or claims; the build-  ing of a fence round it, as it were, solely with the  object of defending the organism which reacts  against invasion, and suffers from the presence  within it of something different from itself.   Or it may take an amicable form and may be a  mutual arrangement: a recognition, with mutual  advantage, of a reality which is unavoidable by  either party.   The first of these apparent solutions has been  attempted over and over again throughout history.  It has had long periods of partial success, but never  any period of complete success ; for it has invari-  ably left behind it a sense of injustice upon the  Jewish side and of moral ill-ease upon the other.   There remains, I take it, no practical or perma-  nent solution but the last. It is to this conclusion  that my essay is meant to lead. If the Jewish  nation comes to express its own pride and patriot-  ism openly, and equally openly to admit the neces-  sary limitations imposed by that expression ; if we     THE THESIS OF THIS BOOK 11   on our side frankly accept the presence of this  nation as a thing utterly different from ourselves,  but with just as good a right to existence as we  have ; if we renounce our pretences in the matter ;  if we talk of and recognize the Jewish people freely  and without fear as a separate body ; if upon both  sides the realities of the situation are admitted,  with the consequent and necessary definitions  which those realities imply, we shall have peace.   The advantage both parties the small but  intense Jewish minority, the great non- Jewish  majority in the midst of which that minority acts  would discover in such an arrangement is mani-  fest. If it could be maintained as I think it  could be maintained the problem would be  permanently solved. . At any rate, if it cannot be  solved in that way it certainly cannot be solved  in any other, and if we do not get peace by this  avenue, then we are doomed to the perpetual  recurrence of those persecutions which have  marred the history of Europe since the first con-  solidation of the Koman Empire.   It has been, a series of cycles invariably follow-  ing the same steps. The Jew comes to an alien  society, at first in small numbers. He thrives.  His presence is not resented. He is rather treated  as a friend. Whether from mere contrast in type  what I have called "friction" or from some  apparent divergence between his objects and those  of his hosts, or through his increasing numbers,  he creates (or discovers) a growing animosity. He  resents it. He opposes his hosts. They call  themselves masters in their own house. The  Jew resists their claim. It comes to violence.   It is always the same miserable sequence.     12 THE JEWS   First a welcome ; then a growing, half- conscious  ill- ease; next a culmination in acute ill- ease;  lastly catastrophe and disaster ; insult, persecution,  even massacre, the exiles flying from the place  of persecution into a new district where the Jew  is hardly known, where the problem has never  existed or has been forgotten. He meets again  with the largest hospitality. There follows here  also, after a period of amicable interfusion, a  growing, half -conscious ill- ease, which next becomes  acute and leads to new explosions, and so on,  in a fatal round.   If we are to stop that wheel from its perpetual  and tragic turning, there seems to be no method  save that for which I plead.   The opposition to it is diverse and formidable  but can everywhere be reduced upon analysis to  some form of falsehood. This falsehood takes  the shape of denying the existence of the problem,  of remaining silent upon it, or of pretending  friendly emotions in public commerce which are  belied by every phrase and gesture admitted in  private. Or it takes the shape of defining the  problem in false terms, in proclaiming it essen-  tially religious whereas it is essentially national.  Worst of all, it may be that very modern kind of  falsehood, a statement of the truth accompanied  by a statement of its contradiction, like the precious  modern lie that one can be a patriot and at the  same time international. In the case of the Jews,  this particular modern lie takes the shape of admit-  ting that they are wholly alien to us and different  from us, of talking of them as such and even writing  of them as such, and yet, in another connection,  talking and writing of them as though no such     *UX.?' ***     THE THESIS OF THIS BOOK 13   violent contrast were present. That pretence of  reconciling contradictions is the lie in the soul.  Its punishment is immediate, for those who indulge  it are blinded.   All opposition that ever I have met to the solu- ,  tion here proposed is an opposition sprung from  the spirit of untruth ; and if there were no other  argument in favour of an honest and moral settle-  ment of the dispute, the one argument based on  Truth would, I think, be sufficient. It is a social,  truth that there is a Jewish nation, alien to us and  therefore irritant. It is a moral truth that expul-  sion and worse are remedies to be avoided. It  is an historical truth that those solutions have  always ultimately failed ; the recognition of those  three truths alone will set us right.   Such is the main thesis of this book, but it  needs an addition if its full spirit is to be appre-  hended, and that addition I have attempted to  express in the last chapter.   If the solution I propose be the right solution,  it yet remains to be determined whether it should  first take the form of new laws from which a new  spirit may be expected to grow, or first take the  form of a new spirit and practice from which new  laws shall spring. The order is of essential import-  ance ; for to mistake it, to reverse the true sequence  of cause and effect, is the prime cause of failure  in all social reform.   As will be seen by those who have the patience  to read to the end of my book, I have, in its last  pages, pleaded strongly for the second policy. It  would be impossible to frame in our society, and  in face of the rapidly rising tide of antagonism  against the Jews, new laws that would not lead     14 THE JEWS   to injustice. But if it be possible to create an  atmosphere wherein the Jews are spoken of openly,  and they in their turn admit, define, and accept  the consequences of a separate nationality in our  midst, then, such a spirit once established, laws  and regulations consonant to it will naturally follow.  But I am convinced that the reversing of this  process would only lead first to confusion and next  to disaster, both for Israel and for ourselves.     THE DENIAL OF THE PROBLEM     CHAPTER II  THE DENIAL OF THE PROBLEM   I HAVE stated the Problem. There is friction  between the two races the Jews in their dispersion  and those among whom they live. This friction  is growing acute. It has led invariably in the  past (and consequently may lead now) to the most  fearful consequences, terrible for the Jew but  evil also for us. Therefore that the problem is  immediate, practical and grave. Therefore a solu-  tion is imperative.   But I may be and indeed I shall be met at  the outset by the denial that any such problem  exists. Such was the attitude of all our immedi-  ate past; such is the attitude of many of the  best men to-day on both sides of the gulf which  separates Israel from our world.   I must meet this objection before going further,  for if it be sound, if indeed there is no problem  (save what may be created by ignorance or malice),  then no solution is demanded. All we have to  do is to enlighten the ignorant and to repress the  malicious : the ignorant, who imagine there is an  alien Jewish nation among them, the malicious, who  treat as though they were alien, men who are, in fact,  exactly like ourselves and normal fellow- citizens.   I do not here allude to the great mass of conven-  tion, hypocrisy and fear which pretends ignorance   17 C     18 THE JEWS   of a truth it well knows. I am speaking of the  sincere conviction, still present in many particu-  larly those of the older generation that no Jewish  problem exists.   It is honestly denied by a certain type of mind  that there is any such thing as a Jewish nation ;  there can therefore be no friction between it and  its hosts : the thing is a delusion. Let us examine  that mind and see whether the illusion is on our  side or no.   It was the attitude familiar to the nineteenth  century, and agreeable to that one of its political  moods in which it found itself best satisfied: the  negative attitude of leaving the Jewish nation  unrecognized; of creating a fiction of single  citizenship to replace the reality of dual allegiance ;  of calling a Jew a full member of whatever society  he happened to inhabit during whatever space of  time he happened to sojourn there in his wanderings  across the earth. That was the attitude agreeable  on the political side to everything which called  itself " modern thought." Such was the doc-  trine proposed by the great men of the French  Revolution. Such was the attitude accepted  almost enthusiastically by Liberal England, that  is, by all the dominant public life of England  during the Victorian period. Such was the policy  which once obtained universal favour throughout  the whole of our Western civilization. That was  the attitude which the West actually attempted  to impose upon Eastern States, and the last  effect of its rapidly-declining credit is to be found  in certain clauses of the Treaty of Versailles:  for that attitude is still the official attitude of all  our governments.     THE DENIAL OF THE PEOBLEM 19   In the Treaty of Versailles and the other treaties  following the Great War the Jews of Eastern Europe  were put under a sort of special protection, but not  in a straightforward and positive fashion. The  word "Jew" was never blurted out it was  replaced by the word " minority" but the inten-  tion was obvious. The underlying implication  was : " We, the Western governments, say there  is no Jewish problem. The idea of a Jewish nation  is a delusion and the conception of the Jew as  something different from a Pole or a Rumanian  is a mania. If you in the East are still benighted  in this matter, at any rate we will prevent your  ignorance or obsession from leading you to persecu-  tion." The same men who made these declarations  proceeded to erect a brand-new highly- distinct  Jewish state in Palestine, with the threat behind  it of ruthlessly suppressing a majority by the  use of Western arms.   Both actions were the consequence of that con-  fused position I have just defined (history will  call itihelast example), which, though much weak-  ened in public opinion, was still honestly taken  for granted by some of the Parliamentarians who  framed the Treaty, and was certainly felt to be  of personal advantage to all : the position that  there is no Jewish nation when the admission of  it may inconvenience the Jew, but very much of  a Jewish nation when it can advantage him.   Those who defended this position did so from  various standpoints ; but these may all be regarded  as so many degrees in a certain way of looking at  the Jewish people. It was till lately the attitude  of the majority of educated Frenchmen, English-  men and Italians. It was, so to speak, the official     20 THE JEWS   political attitude of Western Europe with its  parliamentary governments and other correspond-  ing institutions.   The most extreme form of this opinion was to  be found in people who spoke of the Jew as nothing  other than a citizen with a particular religion. A  state would be dominantly Catholic or Protestant,  but it would contain smaller religious bodies, eager  minorities, for which a place had to be found, side  by side with the more or less indifferent majority.  Catholic France had a five per cent and wealthy  Huguenot minority. Protestant England had a  seven per cent and poor Catholic minority. Protes-  tant Holland had a large minority more than a  third of Catholics, and so forth. It had become  odious to nineteenth century thought that religious  differences (which it regarded as nothing more than  shades of doubtfully -held private opinion) should  be the concern of the State. A large number of  people thought of the Jews, not as a race, but only  as a religion ; and regarding all religion thus, they  concluded that it could involve no diminution of  citizenship.   At the other end of the scale you had public  men who fully appreciated the ultimate difficulties  which would certainly arise from this inconclusive  settlement of the matter. These regarded the  Jews as a quite distinct nationality, and even as  a nationality likely to clash with the national  needs of its hosts; they would even (in private)  express their hostility towards that nationality.  None the less, they thought it must be treated in  public life as though it did not exist. These men  were most emphatic in their private letters and  conversation that the Jewish problem was not a     THE DENIAL OF THE PROBLEM 21   religious but a national one. Nevertheless (they  said) it was necessary to-day to mask that problem  by a fiction and to pretend that the Jew was just  like everybody else save for his religion. All  other solutions (they said) demanded a knowledge  of history and of Europe not to be expected of the  public at large ; again, the Jews were so powerful  that if they desired the fiction to be supported they  must be humoured. At any rate, recourse must  be had, in our time at least, to this make-believe.   To the new and already antagonistic attitude  towards the Jews now rising so strongly everywhere  throughout Western Europe (which is in part a  reaction from the nineteenth century position),  this old-fashioned way of denying the Jewish race  or ignoring its existence by a fiction appears  morally odious, and we wonder to-day why it  commanded universal support. It involved a  falsehood, of course, often a conscious falsehood;  and it was also undignified; for there appears to  our generation something as grotesque in denying  the existence of the Jewish nation as in denying  our own. But that the fiction was maintained  sincerely, and that the grotesque and undignified  side of it went unperceived, we can assure ourselves  in a few moments' converse with any one of that  older generation which maintained it and still  represents it among us.   It might have continued to flourish for yet  another generation, at any rate among the leading  classes of this commercial community, but for two  new developments which broke it down, each  development the result of so large a toleration.  The first was the growth of numbers, the second of  influence. What made that old falsehood glaring     22 THE JEWS   and that old grotesque apparent was the enormous  increase throughout all the West of the Jewish  poor, accompanied by the enormous increase of the  power exercised by the Jewish rich in public affairs.  Men grew angry at finding themselves pledged to  a pretence that Jews were not, when their presence  was everywhere unavoidable, in the streets, and  in the offices of government. The fiction was  possible when a very few financiers, mixed with  and lost in the polite world, were alone concerned.  It became impossible in the face of the vast new  ghettoes of London, Manchester, Bradford, Glas-  gow, and the formidable and growing list of Jewish  and half -Jewish Ministers, Viceroys, ambassadors,  dictators of policy.   This contempt for and irritation with what I  have called the nineteenth century attitude, the  Liberal attitude, was already apparent before the  end of that century. It was muttering during  the South African war in England and the Dreyfus  case in France ; it became vocal in the first years  of this century, especially in connection with  parliamentary scandals ; with the Bolshevist rising  in 1917 it became clamorous. It will certainly  grow. We already have a formidable minority  prepared to act against the interest of the Jew.  It will in all probability become, and that shortly,  a majority. It may appear at any moment, on  some critical occasion, on some new provocation,  as an overwhelming flood of exasperated opinion.   All the more does it behove us to treat the  old-fashioned neutrality and fiction fairly; to  examine it even with a bias in its favour; to set  down all that can be said in its defence before we  reject it, as I think we must now all reluctantly     THE DENIAL OF THE PKOBLEM 23   reject it. I say " reluctantly "; for after all it  was the fixed mood of our fathers, who did great  things: we feel their reproach when we abandon  it, and there are still present with us very many of  our elders to whom our new anxiety is abhorrent.   We must remember in the first place that the  treating of the Jew in the West as no Jew at all,  but a plain citizen like the rest, worked well enough  for a time. One might almost say that there was  no Jewish problem consciously present to the  mind of the average educated Englishman or  Frenchman, Italian, or even western German,  between, say, the years 1830 and 1890. A very  small body of Jews in England and France, in  Italy and the rest of the West, were vaguely  associated with wealth in the popular mind; a  large proportion of them were distinguished for  public work of various kinds ; many of them with  beneficence. The presence of such men could  not conceivably lead to political difficulties or at  least, so it then seemed. The stories of persecution  that came through from Eastern Europe, even  examples of friction between great bodies of Jews  there and the natives of the States where they  happened to find themselves, were received in the  West with disgust as the aberrations of imperfectly  civilized people.   Even in the valley of the Rhine, where the Jew  was more numerous and better known " in bulk,"  the convention of the more civilized West was  accepted. The doctrines, the abstraction of the  French Revolution in this matter had prevailed.   Here any reader with an historical sense will at  once point out that the space of time I have just  quoted 1830 to 1890 is ridiculously short. Any     24 THE JEWS   treatment of a very great political problem,  centuries old, which works for only sixty years  and then begins to break down is no settlement  at all. But I would reply that this period was  especially a time in which historical perspective  was lost. Men, even highly educated men, in the  nineteenth century, greatly exaggerated the fore-  ground of the historical picture.   You may note this in any school manual of the  period, where all the four centuries of our Koman  foundation are compressed into a few sentences,  the dark ages into a few pages, the whole vast  story of the Middle Ages themselves into a few  chapters ; where the mass of the work is invariably  given to the last three centuries, while of these  the nineteenth is regarded as equal in importance  to all the rest put together.   This false historical perspective is apparent in  every other department of their political thought.  For instance, although capitalism, huge national  debts, the anonymity of financial action and the  rest of it, did not begin to flourish fully until after  the first third of the nineteenth century, and though  anyone might (one would think) have been able  to discover the exceedingly unstable character of  that society, yet our fathers took it for granted as  an eternal state of things. Your Victorian man  with 100,000 in railway stock thought his family  immutably secure in a comfortable income, and  what he thought about capitalism he thought also  about his newly- developed anonymous press, his  national frontiers, his tolerance of this, his intoler-  ance of that, his parliaments and all the rest of it.  It is no wonder if, under such a false sense of  permanence and security, he lost historical per-     THE DENIAL OF THE PROBLEM 25   spective in this other and graver matter we are  here discussing.   But apart from the argument that what I have  called the nineteenth century or Liberal attitude  towards the Jews worked well for its little day  (at least, in Western Europe), there is also the  fact that under special circumstances something  very like it has worked well for much longer periods  in the past. Take, for example, the position of  the Jews in such a town as Amsterdam. The  reception of a Jew as a citizen exactly like others,  though he was present in very large numbers, the  fiction denying his separate nationality, has held  for generations in that community and it has  procured peace and apparent contentment upon  both sides. And what is true to this day of Amster-  dam has been true in the past for long periods  in the life of many another commercial and  cosmopolitan society: that of Venice, notably,  and, in a large measure, that of Rome ; in that of  Frankfort, of Lyons, and of a hundred cities at special  times. It was true of all Poland for generations.   One might add to the list indefinitely, but  always with the uncomfortable knowledge, as one  wrote, that the experiment invariably broke down  in the long run.   Again, there was to be advanced for this Liberal  attitude of the nineteenth century the very powerful  argument that while to one party in the issue, the  Englishman, the Frenchman, the Italian, etc., it  seemed well enough and certainly did no harm, it  was highly acceptable to the other. The Jew as a  rule not only accepted but welcomed this particular  way of dealing with what he at any rate has always  known to be a very grave problem indeed. For     26 THE JEWS   the Jew has a racial memory beyond all other  men. The arrangement seemed to give him all  the security of which his racial history (a thing of  which every Jew is acutely conscious) had made  him ardently desirous. I think we should add  (though the phrase would be quarrelled with by  many modern people) that this fiction satisfied  the Jew's sense of justice. For it is no small part  of the problem we are examining that the Jew does  really feel such special treatment to be his due.  Without it he feels handicapped. He is, in his  own view, only saved from the disadvantage of a  latent hostility when he is thus protected, and he  is therefore convinced that the world owes him  this singular privilege of full citizenship in any  community where he happens for the moment to  be, while at the same time retaining full citizenship  in his own nation.   Now, if in any conflict an arrangement seems work-  able enough to one party and is actually acclaimed  by the other, it is not lightly to be disregarded.   If, for instance, a man and his tenant quarrel  about the tenure of a field upon a very long lease,  the tenant caring little about nominal ownership  but very much about his inviolable tenure, the  landlord quite agreeable to a very long lease but  keen on retaining the titular ownership, that  quarrel can be easily settled. One could give any  name to the tenant's position other than the name  of " owner," yet satisfy all his practical demands.  A rough parallel exists between such a position  and the attempt at a settlement which marked the  nineteenth century.   What the Jew wanted was not the proud privilege  of being called an Englishman, a Frenchman, an     THE DENIAL OF THE PROBLEM 27   Italian, or a Dutchman. To this he was completely  indifferent (for his pride lay in being a Jew, his  loyalty was to his own, and what is more, he might  at any moment fold up his tent and go off to  another country for good). What the Jew wanted  was not the feeling that he was just like the others  that would have been odious to him what he  wanted was security ; it is what every human being  craves for and what he of all men most lacked:  the power to feel safe in the place where one happens  to be. On the other hand, his hosts had not yet  found any practical inconvenience in granting  this demand. They did not know the historical  argument against it, or they thought it worthless,  because they thought the past barbarous and no  model for their own action. So a compromise  was arrived at, the fiction was solidly established,  and the Jew, though remaining a Jew, became  a German in Hamburg, a Frenchman in Paris, an  American in New York, as he wandered from place  to place, and for a long lifetime no one felt himself  much the worse for the false convention.   The next argument in favour of this policy was  the fact that it drew upon a number of ideas, each  one of which at some time or another had been  taken for granted by our ancestors in each one of  their numerous (but unsuccessful) attempts to  deal with the problem after their own fashion.   For instance, a modern objector says: " What  rubbish to treat Jews as though they merely  represented a religion ! We all know they represent  a nation \ " But all manner of legislation in the  past, even in times and places where the difference  between Jews and Europeans was most marked,  has perpetually fallen back upon that very point     28 THE JEWS   of religion alone. Over and over again you find  it the test of policy : in early, and again in fifteenth  century Spain, under Charlemagne's rule in Gaul,  in early mediaeval England, at Byzantium, and  to this day in Eastern parts where the Jew is  subject t6 perpetual interference. Exception was  in all these made for the Jew who abandoned his  religion. His nation was left unmentioned.   It is pertinent to quote such a simple and recent  example as the body of Prussian officers, now  happily extinct. It was a standing rule in the  smarter Prussian regiments (I believe in nearly  all) that no Jew could get his commission. The  Prussian system left the granting of commissions,  in practice, to the existing members of the regi-  mental staff; they treated their mess as a Club  and they blackballed Jews. But they would admit  baptized Jews, and did so in considerable numbers.  Was the Jew less of a Jew in race through his  baptism ? Throughout all the centuries that  religious criterion, which the modern reformer  cries out against as a piece of humbug and a mask  for the real political problem, has been the criterion  taken. It is true that the modern solution did  not attempt a religious segregation. On the  contrary, the Liberal thought of the nineteenth  century held all such segregation in abhorrence;  but it had this in common with the older fashion,  that it made religion the point of interest, and to  that extent masked the more real point of nation-  ality and allegiance.   Lord Palmerston, making his famous speech  on the sanctity of a Greek Jew's bedstead, and  insisting that the said Greek Jew was an English  citizen ; Lord Palmerston carefully avoiding the     THE DENIAL OF THE PROBLEM 29   word "Jew" and pretending throughout his  speech that the Greek Jew in question was as  much an Englishman as himself, was in a very  different mood from a Spanish fifth- century Bishop  admitting a Jew to Office on condition of his  conversion. Yet the two had this in common, that  neither regarded the Jew as the member of another  nation, but each (for very different reasons) as no  more than the member of a religion.   To Palmerston, this Greek Jew about whose  bedstead he made his famous speech, and on to  whose bedstead hangs to this day the phrase  " Civis Romanus Sum," was above all a fellow-  citizen. He may have seemed to Palmerston a  doubtful sort of Englishman because his home was  Greece, but he certainly did not seem doubtful  because he happened to be a Jew. Palmerston  would have thought that only a matter of private  opinion, and would no more have regarded a Jew  as an alien on account of this private opinion than  he would have regarded as alien a fellow-Member  of the House of Commons who preferred roast  mutton to boiled.   Take, again, another aspect of the nineteenth  century liberal idea : the recognition of citizenship.  You have had that over and over again in the  attempted solutions of the past. It was the very  essence of the Roman method. For though the  Government of the Roman Empire was much too  concerned with realities and with enduring work to  accept any fiction in the matter, or to pretend in  practice that the Jew was not a Jew ; though, on the  contrary, the Romans recognized at once the gulf  between the Jews and themselves, and recognized  it not only by their cruelty to the Jew but also by     30 THE JEWS   the privileges they granted him ; yet it was always  their policy to admit citizenship as the primary  distinction. The Jew who could claim that he was  a full Roman citizen was, in the eyes of a Roman  Tribunal, much more important in that capacity  than in his social capacity as Jew. His " point,"  as we should say in our modern slang, was his  citizenship, not his Judaism. So, I say, this  solution has for a further argument the fact that  in one part or another it is in touch with the various  attempts our race has made in the past to solve  the problem.   There is yet another argument strongly in favour  of the Liberal fiction which was attempted in the  immediate past, and thought to have been success-  fully established. It is the consonance of that  fiction with the whole body of modern custom and  law, with the whole mass of modern economic and  social habit.   We travel so much, we mix so much, our economic  activities are at once so complicated, so interlocked,  and (unhappily) for the most part so secret, that  any other way of meeting the Jews would have  seemed at any rate if it had appeared in the shape  of a positive law a monstrous anachronism. A  man must meet his friends' friends and treat them  as a normal part of the general society in which  he moves. As the Jew permeated the society of  the West everywhere (small though his numbers  were in the West), as he everywhere intermarried  with Europeans of the wealthier class, to insist in  his presence upon his separate nationality would  have been odious ; it would have been like making  a guest feel out of place in one's home.   What is more, to by far the greater part of the     THE DENIAL OF THE PKOBLEM 31   wealthier and governing classes of the Western  States the difference of race was so far masked  that it had almost come to be forgotten. Some-  times a shock would revive it. An English squire  would find, for instance, that a relation of his by  marriage, whose Jewish name and descent he had  never bothered about, was cousin to, and in close  connection with, a person of a totally different  name an Oriental name mixed up in some  conspiracy, say, against the Russian State. Or he  would learn with surprise that a learned University  man with whom he had recently dined was the  uncle of a socialist agitator in Vienna. But the  shock would be a passing one, and the old mood  of security would return.   With the growth of plutocracy the anomaly of  treating Jews as individuals separate from the  rest of the community increased. The most  important men in control of international finance  were admittedly Jewish. The Jew's international  position made him always useful and often  necessary in the vast international economic  undertakings of our time. The anonymity which  had come to be taken for granted throughout  modern capitalism made it seem absurd or  impossible, always highly unusual, and probably  futile, to search for a separate Jewish element in  any particular undertaking.   There is one last argument for this Liberal policy,  which has a strong practical value, though it is  exceedingly dangerous to use it in the defence of  that policy because it cuts both ways. It is the  argument that the Jew ought to be thus treated  as a citizen exactly like the rest and given no  position either of privilege or disability, because     32 THE JEWS   he does, as a fact, mould himself so very rapidly  to his environment.   When men say as they are beginning to do  that a Jew is as different from ourselves as a  Chinaman, or a negro, or an Esquimaux, and ought  therefore to be treated as belonging to a separate  body from our own, the answer is that the Jew is  nothing of the kind. Indeed, he becomes, after a  short sojourn among Englishmen, Frenchmen, Ger-  mans or Americans, so like his hosts on the surface  that he is, to many, indistinguishable from them ;  and that is one of the main facts in the problem.   That is the real reason why to the majority of  the middle classes in the nineteenth century, in  Western countries, the Jewish problem was non-  existent. Were you to say it of any other race  negroes, for instance, or Chinamen it would  sound incredible; but we know it in practice to  be true, that a Jew will pass his life in, say, three  different communities in turn, and in each the  people who have met him will testify that he seemed  just like themselves.   I have known a case in point which would amuse  my non- Jewish readers but perhaps offend my  Jewish readers were I to present it in detail. I  shall cite it therefore without names, because I  desire throughout this book to keep to the rule  whereby alone it can be of service, that nothing  offensive to either party shall be introduced ; but  it is typical and can be matched in the experience  of many.   The case was that of the father of a man in  English public life. He began life with a German  name in Hamburg. He was a patriotic citizen  of that free city, highly respected and in every     THE DENIAL OF THE PEOBLEM 33   way a Hamburger, and the Hamburg men of that  generation still talk of him as one of themselves.   He drifted to Paris before the Franco- German  War, and, there, was an active Parisian, familiar  with the life of the Boulevards and full of energy  in every patriotic and characteristically French  pursuit ; notably he helped to recruit men during  the national catastrophe of 1870-71. Everybody  who met him in this phase of his life thought of  him and talked of him as a Frenchman.   Deciding that the future of France was doubtful  after such a defeat, he migrated to the United  States, and there died. Though a man of some  years when he landed, he soon appeared in the  eyes of the Americans with whom he associated to be  an American just like themselves. He acquired  the American accent, the American manner, the  freedom and the restraints of that manner. In  every way he was a characteristic American.   In Hamburg his German name had been pro-  nounced after the German fashion. In France,  where German names are common, he retained it,  but had it pronounced in French fashion. On  reaching the United States it was changed to a  Scotch name which it distantly resembled, and  no doubt if he had gone to Japan the Japanese  would be telling us that they had known him as  a worthy Japanese gentleman of great activity in  national affairs and bearing the honoured name of  an ancient Samurai family.   The nineteenth century attitude almost entirely  depended upon this marvellous characteristic in  the Jews which differentiates them from all the  rest of mankind. Had that characteristic power  of superficial mutation been absent, the nineteenth     34 THE JEWS   century policy would have broken down as com-  pletely as the corresponding Northern policy  towards the negro broke down in the United  States. Had the Jew been as conspicuous among  us, as, say, a white man is among Kaffirs, the  fiction would have broken down at once. As it  was, all who adopted that policy, honestly or  dishonestly, were supported by this power of the  Jew to conform externally to his temporary  surroundings.   The man who consciously adopted the nineteenth  century Liberal policy towards the Jews as a mere  political scheme, knowing full well the dangers it  might develop ; the man only half conscious of  the existence of those dangers ; and the man who  had never heard of them but took it for granted  that the Jew was a citizen just like himself, with  an exceptional religion each of those three men  had in common, aiding the schemes of the one,  supporting the illusion of the other, the amazing  fact that a Jew takes on with inexplicable rapidity  the colour of his environment. That unique charac-  teristic was the support of the Liberal attitude and  was at the same time its necessary condition.   The fiction that a man of obviously different type  and culture and race is the same as ourselves, may  be practical for purposes of law and government,  but cannot be maintained in general opinion. A  conspiracy or illusion attempting, for instance, to  establish the Esquimaux in Greenland as in-  distinguishable from the Danish officials of the  Settlement, would fail through ridicule. Equally  ridiculous would be the pretence that because they  were both subjects of the same Crown an English-  man in the Civil Service of India was exactly     THE DENIAL OF THE PROBLEM 35   the same sort of person as a Sikh soldier. But with  the Jews you have the startling truth that, while  the fundamental difference goes on the whole  time and is perhaps deeper than any other of the  differences separating mankind into groups;  while he is, within, and through all his ultimate  character, above all things a Jew; yet in the  superficial and most immediately apparent things  he is clothed in the very habit of whatever society  he for the moment inhabits.   I say that this might seem to many the last and  strongest argument in favour of the old-fashioned  Liberal policy, but I repeat that it is a dangerous  argument, for it cuts both ways. If a food which  disagrees with you looks exactly like another  kind of food which suits you, you might use the  likeness as an argument for eating either sort of  food indifferently. You might say: "It is silly  to try to distinguish ; one must admit, on looking at  them, that they are the same thing "; but it would  turn out after dinner a very bad practical policy.   There is indeed one last argument which to me,  personally, and I suppose to most of my readers,  is stronger than all the rest, for it is the argument  from morals.   If the Liberal attitude of the nineteenth century  had proved a stable one, omitting that element in  it which is a falsehood and therefore a factor  of instability, one could retain the rest; then it  would satisfy two appetites common to all men  appetite for justice and the appetite for charity.   Here is a man, a neighbour present in the midst  of my society. I put him to inconvenience if I  treat him as an alien. I like him; I regard him  as a friend. To treat such a man as though he     36 THE JEWS   were, although a friend, something separate, not  to be admitted to certain functions of my com-  munity, offends the heart, as it also offends the  sense of justice. Such a man may possess a great  talent for, say, administration. Like all men  possessed of a great talent, he must exercise it.  You maim him if you do not allow him to exercise  it. A rule forbidding him to take part in the admin-  istration of the society in which he finds himself,  or even a feeling hindering him in such activities,  creates, not only in him, but in those who are his  hosts, a sense of injustice ; and if it were possible  to adopt a policy wherein the separate character  of the Jew should be always in abeyance, so that  he could be at the same time an Englishman and  yet not an Englishman, or a Frenchman and yet  not a Frenchman, then we should have a settlement  which all good men ought to accept.   Unfortunately that solution is false because,  like many appeals to a virtuous instinct, it is  sentimental. We call " sentimental " a policy  or theory which attempts to reconcile contra-  dictions. The sentimental man will equally abhor  crime and its necessary punishment; disorder  and an organized police. He likes to think of  human life as though it did not come to an end.  He likes to read of the passion of love without its  concomitant of sexual conflict. He likes to read  and think of great fortunes accumulated without  avarice, cunning or theft. He likes to imagine an  impossible world of mutually exclusive things.  It makes him comfortable.   Now we commit the fault of the sentimental man  (the gravest of practical faults in politics) when we  cling at this late date to a continuance of the old     THE DENIAL OF THE PROBLEM 37   policy. You cannot have your cake and eat it  too, you cannot at the same time have present in  the world this ubiquitous fluid, yet closely organized  Jewish community, and at the same time each of the  individuals composing it treated as though they  were not members of the nation which makes  them all they are. You cannot at the same time  treat a whole as one thing and its component  parts as another. If you do, you are building on  contradiction and you will, like everybody who   builds on contradiction, run up against disaster.  *,****   I am minded to give the reader another anecdote  (again taking care, I hope, to suppress all names  and dates to prevent identification, which might  irritate my Jewish readers or too greatly interest  their opponents). As a younger man it was my  constant pastime to linger at the bar of the House  of Lords and listen to what went on there. I shall  always remember one occasion when an aged Jew,  who had begun life in very humble circumstances,  had accumulated a great fortune and had pur-  chased his peerage like any other, rose to speak  in connection with a resolution or with a bill  dealing with "aliens" the hypocrisy of the  politician, and the popular ferment against the  rush of Jewish immigrants into the East End  between them gave rise to that non-committal  name. This old gentleman very rightly pushed  all such humbug aside. He knew perfectly well  that the policy was aimed at " his people" and  he called them " my people." He knew perfectly  well that the proposed change would introduce  interference with their movement and would  subject them to humiliation. He spoke with     38 THE JEWS   flaming patriotism, and I was enthralled by the  intensity, vigour and sincerity of his appeal. It  was a very fine performance and, incidentally  (considering what the man was !),it illustrated the  vast difference between his people and my own.  For a life devoted to accumulating wealth, which  would have killed nobler instincts in any one of  us, had evidently seemed to him quite normal and  left him with every appetite of justice and of love  of nation unimpaired. He clinched that fine  speech with the cry, " What our people want is  to be let alone." He said it over and over again.  I am sure that in the audience which listened to  him, all the older men felt a responsive echo to that  appeal. It was the very doctrine in which they  had been brought up and the very note of the great  Victorian Liberal era, with its national triumphs  in commerce and in arms.   Well, within a very few years the younger  members of that very man's family came out in  Parliamentary scandal after scandal, appearing  all in sequence one after the other a sort of  procession. They had been let alone right enough !  But they had not let us alone. I ask myself, some-  times, How would it sound if some years hence  any one of those descendants having by that  time been given his peerage (for they are rich  men and all of them in professional politics)  should return to that cry of his ancestor and ask  to be " let alone" ? There would be no response  then in the breasts of the contemporaries who  might hear him. Manners will so much have  changed in this regard that he would be interrupted.  But I do not think that my hypothetical descendant  of that rich old Jew is likely to make any such     THE DENIAL OF THE PROBLEM 39   speech. I think that when the time comes for  making it, the whole idea of " letting alone" will  be quite dead.   I have quoted this old man's speech with no  invidious intention but only as an actual example  of the way in which the " letting alone " of this  great question breaks down. I am as familiar as  any Jewish reader of mine with names that have  dignified public life in the past, Jewish names,  Jewish peers : and I recall in particular the honoured  name of Lord Herschell, to the friendship between  whose nearest and my own I preserve a grateful  and sacred memory.   But to return to the failure of the sentimental   argument.   * * * * *   The sentimental argument fails because it involves  contradictions that is, incompatibility of fact.   Even if one had not this strictly rational principle  to guide one, there is the whole of history to guide  one. It is true that the pretence of common citizen-  ship has worked now for a shorter, now for a longer,  period, but never indefinitely. You always come  at last to a smash. The Jew is welcomed in  mediaeval Poland; he comes in vast numbers;  all goes well. Then the inevitable happens and  the Jew and the Pole stand apart as enemies,  each accusing the other of injustice, the one  crying out that he is persecuted, the other that the  State is in danger by alien activity within. Spain  alternatively pursued this policy, and its opposite ;  the whole history of Spain the original seat of  Jewish influence in Europe after the general exile  is a history of alternating attempts at the senti-  mental solution and a savage reaction against it :     40 THE JEWS   the reaction of the man, who, fighting for his life,  strikes out violently in terror of death. That is  the history not only of Spain but of every other  country at one time or another.   Indeed, we have before our very eyes to-day the  beginning of exactly such a reaction in the West  of Europe and the United States of America, and  it is the presence of that reaction which has caused  this book to be written. The attempt at a Liberal  solution has already failed in our hands; if it  had not failed there would be no more to be said,  or, at any rate, we could postpone the discussion  until the actual difficulty began. But we have  only to look around us to see that, after these few  years, this one lifetime, during which the experi-  ment has flourished in the highest part of civilization,  it is already breaking down. Everywhere the old  questions are being asked; everywhere the old  complaints are being raised, everywhere the old  perils are reappearing. We must seek some solution,  for if we fail to find it we know from the past what  tragedies are in store for us both. There is a prob-  lem, a most direct and urgent problem. Once it is  recognized, a solution of it is necessarily demanded.   But it is not enough to show that the mere denial  of the existence of that problem the old nineteenth  century Liberal policy was false and bound to  break down. It is just as necessary, if we appre-  ciate how practical and immediate the problem is,  to state it and illustrate it from contemporary  events. It is not enough to show that the attempted  Liberal policy has failed. One must also, before  trying to discover a solution, analyse the nature  of the problem as it presents itself at the moment,  and that is what I propose to do in the next chapter.     THE PRESENT PHASE OF THE  PROBLEM     CHAPTER III  THE PRESENT PHASE OP THE PROBLEM   I SAID in my last that the old solution of ignoring  or denying the Jewish problem was bound to break  down and had broken down, and this was tanta-  mount to saying that the problem persists. But I  said one must go farther and state the full nature  of that problem as it stands at this moment before  one could attempt a practical solution.   It is not enough to say that a person who imagines  himself immortal and immune from disease is, as  a fact, dangerously ill, and that the break- down  of his health has disproved his theory. One must  go on to find out exactly what is the matter with  him, and, if possible, what the cure for the trouble  may be.   The Jewish problem in its larger sense I have  defined in the first chapter of this book, and that  as I think every one defines it, including all the  many Jews who have discussed the matter. It is  the presence within one political organism of  another political organism at friction with it : the  strains set up by such an unnatural state of affairs ;  the risk of disaster to the lesser body and of hurt  to both if it remain unremedied. The true solu-  tion therefore is only to be discovered in some  policy which will permanently relieve the strain   43     44 THE JEWS   /   and re-establish normal relations. The end of such  a solution should be the functioning, as far as  possible, of both parties, at their ease and without  disturbance one to the other.   But this general statement of the problem that  it is the presence to each party of an alien body  and the consequent irritation and friction on each  is not enough. We must pursue it more closely  and develop it in greater detail, describing how  the friction and the irritation are increasing :  insisting that they have even become a menace.  Then only can we set out to discover as far as  possible by analysis what exact character the  disease bears and why it is of this character. Only  after all this can we explore a remedy.   When we look round the modern world, say the  last twenty years, we discover, in widely separate  places, and among very different interests, and  inhabiting the most diverse characters, the pre-  sence of what is for many a new political feeling :  it runs from irritation to exasperation, from  grumbling to invective ; it is everywhere directed  against the Jews. One activity after another, in  which the Jews are variously in the right or in the  wrong, or indifferent, has aroused hostility in  varying degrees but increasing and though the  danger- spots are still, as I have said, dissociated  in the main, yet they are beginning to coalesce  and to form large areas inimical to Israel.   It is objected of the Jew in finance, in industry,  in commerce where he is ubiquitous and powerful  out of all proportion to his numbers that he seeks,  and has already almost reached, dominion. It is  objected that he acts everywhere against the  interests of his hosts ; that these are being inter-     PRESENT PHASE OF THE PROBLEM 45   f ered with, guided, run against their will ; that a  power is present which acts either with in-  difference to what we love or inactive opposition  to what we love. Notably is it said to be  indifferent to, or in active opposition against,  our national feelings, our religious traditions,  and the general culture and morals of Christendom  which we have inherited and desire to preserve :  that power is Israel.   These feelings grew as one example after another  of the Jewish strength, the Jewish cohesion,  arrived to feed them. How violent they were to  become might be seen by taking as a special ex-  ample their extreme form, called" Anti-Semitism."  When we come, later in this book, to examine that  modern phenomenon, we shall find it to be not only  a proof of the insistence and gravity of the problem  we are trying to solve, but also some explanation of  its nature.   Upon a world thus already exasperated, and in  some large sections exasperated to the point of  unreason for the anti-Semitic drive was, and is,  full of unreason there suddenly fell the double  effect of the Bolshevist revolution: a revolution  which struck both at the benevolent who would  hear no harm of the Jews, and those who had  hitherto shielded or obeyed them as identified  only with the interests of large Capital. It was a  blow in flank under which staggered both the  supporters of Jewish neutrality and the dependants  upon Jewish finance.   The old Liberal policy still officially held the  field ; but when this shattering explosion came it  compelled attention. Bolshevism stated the Jewish  problem with a violence and an insistence such     46 THE JEWS   that it could no longer be denied either by the  blindest fanatic or the most resolute liar.   Such was, in its largest lines, the recent historical  sequence leading up to the state of affairs we now  find. Let us trace that sequence in more detail  and from a little farther back.   A lifetime ago, when the Liberal policy was  founded and when conditions were favourable to  its establishment, the populace might still nourish  its traditional antagonism to the Jew, but in the  West of Europe his numbers were very limited  (only a few thousand in France and England  combined, and hardly as many in Italy).   He belonged for the most part to the classes that  did not come into direct competition with the poor  of the large towns. From the countrysides he  was absent. He had not attempted to govern his  hosts as a politician, nor, in any large measure, to  indoctrinate them through the Press. The rapid  decline of religion at that time broke down one  barrier, and the transformation of the governing  classes from the old territorial Lords to the modern  plutocracy broke down another. The convention  that the Jew was indistinguishable from the  citizens of the country in which he happened to live,  or, at any rate, from that in which he had last lived,  was further fostered by the break-up of that cosmo-  politan aristocratic society which had marked the  eighteenth century, and which could note and  register the movements of prominent individuals  from nation to nation. The new industrial for-  tunes and the new international finance both  contributed to the same end, while the Jew also  began to compete successfully in every one of the  liberal professions without as yet dominating any     PRESENT PHASE OF THE PROBLEM 47   of them. No conflicts had arisen between the  Jewish race and the national interests of any  European people, with the exception perhaps of  the Poles ; and these were subject and silenced.   Throughout all this time, from the years after  Waterloo to the years immediately succeeding the  defeat of the French in 1870-71, the weight and  position of the Jew in Western civilization increased  out of all knowledge and yet without shock,  and almost without attracting attention. They  entered the Parliaments everywhere, the English  Peerage as well, and the Universities in very large  numbers. A Jew became Prime Minister of Great  Britain, another a principal leader of the Italian  resurrection ; another led the opposition to Napoleon  III. They were present in increasing numbers  in the chief institutions of every country. They  began to take positions as fellows of every important  Oxford and Cambridge college; they counted  heavily in the national literatures; Browning  and Arnold families, for instance, in England;  Mazzini in Italy. They came for the first time  into European diplomacy. The armies and navies  alone were as yet untouched by their influence.  Strains of them were even present in the reigning  families. The institution of Freemasonry (with  which they are so closely allied and all the ritual  of which is Jewish in character) increased very  rapidly and very greatly. The growth of an  anonymous Press and of an increasingly anony-  mous commercial system further extended their  power.   It is an illusion to believe that all this great  change was Jewish in origin. The Jew did not  create it, he floated upon it, but it worked manifestly     48 THE JEWS   to his advantage, and we find him at the end of it  represented on the governing institutions of Western  Europe fifty or one hundredfold more than was  his due in proportion to his numbers. The Jews  intermarried everywhere with the leading families  and, before any sign that a turn of the tide had taken  place, they had already achieved that position in  which they are now being assailed and to oust them  from which such strong efforts are preparing.   Perhaps the first event which cut across this  unbroken ascent was the defeat of the French in  1870-1. Not that its effects were immediate in  this field, but that a nation defeated is the more  likely to raise a grievance, real or imaginary; in  seeking a cause for social misfortunes following on  its. military disasters, it will naturally fix upon an  international rather than a national one, and  blame its alien population rather than its own.  Moreover, the date of the French defeat was also  the date on which was overthrown the temporal  power of the Papacy. In this also the Jews had  played their part. It gave them the opportunity  to play a still greater part in the immediate future  of the new Italy. Within a few years Rome was  to see a Jewish Mayor who supported with all his  might the unchristianizing of the city and especially  of its educational system.   One small but significant factor in the whole  business of these 70' s and early 80' s the beginning  of the last quarter of the nineteenth century  was the rise to monopoly of the Jewish international  news agents, among which Reuters was prominent,  and the presence of Jews as international corre-  spondents of the various great newspapers, the  most prominent example being Opper, a Bohemian     PKESENT PHASE OF THE PROBLEM 49   Jew, who concealed his origin under the false name  of " de Blowitz," and for years acted as Paris  correspondent ioiThe Times, a, paper in those days  of international influence.   The first expression of the reaction that was at  hand was to be found in sundry definitely anti-  Semitic writings appearing in Germany and France,  most noticeable in the latter country.   Their effect was at first slight, though they had the  high advantage of extensive documentation. The  great majority of educated men shrugged their  shoulders and passed such things by as the extrav-  agancies of fanatics; but these fanatics none  the less laid the foundation of future action by  the quotation of an immense quantity of facts  which could not but remain in the mind even of  those who were most contemptuous of the new  propaganda. In these books special insistence was  laid upon exposing what the Jews themselves call  " crypto- Judaism" that is, the presence every-  where throughout Western Europe of men in  important public positions who passed for English,  French or what not, but were really Jews.   In many cases (I have already quoted the poet  Browning and the distinguished family of Arnold)  these people were not hiding their religion but  had simply drifted from the original Jewish com-  munity of which their ancestors had been members,  but in most others there was more or less present  an element of conscious secrecy. It was evidently  the object of those who produced the literature I  am describing to attack that secrecy in particular  and to undo its effects ; and, as I have said, even  where their fanaticism was most ridiculed, the  vast array of facts which they marshalled could     50 THE JEWS   not be without its effect upon the memory of their  contemporaries.   There next appeared a series of direct inter-  national actions undertaken by Jewish finance,  the most important of which, of course, was the  drawing of Egypt into the European system, and  particularly into the system of Great Britain.   Of more effect upon public opinion was the  excitement of the Dreyfus case in France and,  immediately afterwards, of the South African War,  in England.   The characteristic of the Dreyfus case was not  the discussion upon the guilt or innocence of the  unfortunate man from whom it takes its title, but  the immense international clamour with which it  was surrounded. This local affair was made an  affair of the whole world, and men took as passionate  an interest in it in the remotest corners of civiliza-  tion as though they had been the principals actually  engaged.   Such a phenomenon could not but astonish the  mass of onlookers who had hitherto not given the  Jewish question a thought, and when there was  added to it the great ordeal of the South African  War, openly and undeniably provoked and pro-  moted by Jewish interests in South Africa, when  that war was so unexpectedly prolonged and proved  so unexpectedly costly in blood and treasure, a  second element was added to the growing feeling,  not yet, indeed, of antagonism to Jewish power  (half cultured France was Dreyfusard, and much  more than half England favoured the Boer War at  its origin) , but of interest in the Jewish question,  of curiosity, on the part of the average citizen,  who had not hitherto heard of it.     PRESENT PHASE OF THE PROBLEM 51   The original minority which had begun to oppose  Jewish power, with their extreme left wing of Anti-  Semites, and their core of men whose quarrel was  rather with the financial control of the modern  world than with any racial problem, tended to  grow. As always happens with a growing move-  ment, events appeared to suit themselves to that  growth and to promote it.   The Panama scandals in the French Parliament  had already fed the movement in France. The  later Parliamentary scandals in England, Marconi  and the rest, afforded so astonishing a parallel to  Panama that the similarity was of universal  comment. They might have passed as isolated  things a generation before. They were now con-  nected, often unjustly, with the uneasy sense of a  general financial conspiracy. They were, at any  rate, connected with an atmosphere essentially  Jewish in character.   Meanwhile there had already begun one of those  great migratory movements of the Jews which  have diversified history for two thousand years  and which are almost always the prelude to each  new disturbance in the equilibrium of the Jews  and each new resuscitation of the Jewish problem  in its most acute form.   The great reservoir of the Jewish race was, of  course, that country of Poland which had so nobly  succoured the Jews during the persecutions of the  late Middle Ages. Poland had made itself an  asylum for all the Jews who cared to go to it, and  was now, after the infamous partition inaugurated  by Prussia, still the home of something like half  the Jews of the world. The hatred of the Jews  entertained by all classes of Russians, the persecu-     52 THE JEWS   tions they suffered from the fact that Russia, since  the partition, governed that part of Poland where  they were most numerous, started the new exodus.  The movement was a westerly one, mainly to the  United States, but there also arose in connection  with it a novel growth of great ghettoes in the  English industrial towns, more particularly in  London, while New York was slowly transformed  from a city as free of Jewish population as London  and Paris had been in the past, to one in which a  good third or more of its inhabitants became either  entirely Jewish or partly Jewish.   This vast immigration, which was in full swing  just before the outbreak of the great war, and  which was adding so active a leaven to the increas-  ing ferment, which had even planted the beginnings  of a ghetto in Paris and which was affecting the  whole of the West, was supplemented by one more  factor of the first importance.   Modern capitalism, by which the Jew had so  largely benefited, but which he did not originate  and in which prominent, though few, Jewish  names, were so immixed, had for its counterpart  and reaction the socialist movement. This, again,  the Jews did not originate, nor at first direct;  but it rapidly fell more and more under their  control. The family of Mordecai (who had  assumed the name of Marx) produced in Karl a  most powerful exponent of that theory. Though  he did no more than copy and follow his non-  Jewish instructors (especially Louis Blanc, a  Franco- Scot of genius), he presented in complete  form the full theory of Socialism, economic, social,  and, by implication, religious; for he postulated  Materialism.     PRESENT PHASE OF THE PROBLEM 53   After Karl Marx came a crowd of his compat-  riots, who led the industrial proletariat in rebellion  against the increasing power of the capitalist  system, and began to organize a determined revolt.   Before the Great War one could say that the  whole of the Socialist movement, so far as its  staff and direction were concerned, was Jewish;  and while it took this purely economic form in  the West, in the East in the Russian Empire  it took a political form as well, and the growing  revolutionary force in that Empire was equally  Jewish in direction and driving power.   Such was the situation on the eve of the Great  War. Men were beginning to be thoroughly alive  to what was meant by the Jewish problem. The  old security was dispelled for ever; but as yet  only a minority, though now a large one, was  prepared to deal with that problem and to discuss  it openly. All that was official, and particularly  the Press, with its vast influence, had as yet  refused in any department to face the realities of  the position. The convention forbidding public  allusion to the Jewish question was still very  strong. On the surface it seemed as though  the old Liberal policy still stood firm and,  indeed, unshakeable. The Jews were in every  place of 'vantage : they taught in the Universities  of all Europe; they were everywhere in the  Press; everywhere in finance. They were con-  tinually to be found in the highest places of  Government and in the chanceries of Christendom  they had acquired a dominant power which none  could question. But the challenge against this  unnatural position necessarily worked against  great odds, it remained private and had great     54 THE JEWS   difficulty in finding expression. None the less, it  extended, and by 1914 had become serious.   The immeasurable catastrophe of the war  with which the Jews had nothing to do and which  their more important financial representatives did  all they could to prevent fell upon Europe. It  seemed at first as though, in the face of that over-  whelming tragedy, what had been so rapidly  growing I mean the debate and conflict upon  Jewish claims would be silenced. The Jews  were found fighting gallantly in all the armies.  Their services were generously acknowledged,  though the cruel ambiguity of their situation was  hardly realized. Considering that they had no  national interest in the fight, it must have seemed  to them a mere insanity, crucifying their nation  to no purpose. For Zangwill put the matter well  indeed when he said that those who eagerly and  spontaneously joined the first recruiting (and  these were numerous) did so " for the honour of  Israel." The sacrifice was not without fruit. In  its presence many a complaint was silenced and  much was revealed which, but for it, would have  remained unprobed. The Christian family in its  bereavement saw at its side a Jewish neighbour  who had lost his son in what was no concern of his  race ; the Christian priest witnessed the agony of  the young Jewish soldier. The defender of the  Western nations saw at his side not only the Jewish  conscript (who should never have been called) but  the Jewish volunteer. Thus, the first to enlist  from the United States was a Jew, later promoted,  whom I had the pleasure and honour of meeting  on Mangin's staff at Mayence. I hope he may  see these lines.     PKESENT PHASE OF THE PEOBLEM 55   It looked as though in the presence of such  a suffering, which the Jews shared with us, the  growing quarrel between them and ourselves would  be appeased. Men who had been prominent not  only for their discussion of the Jewish problem,  but for their direct and open antagonism to  Jewish power and even to the most legitimate of  Jewish claims, were now compelled to silence.  Keconciliation was in the air ... when, in the  very heat of the struggle, came that factor, in-  calculably important, which now rules all the  rest ; I mean the factor of what is called Bolshevism.   This new Jewish movement changed the whole  face of things and, coming on the top of the rest,  has transformed the problem for all our generation.   Henceforth it was to be discussed quite openly.  Henceforth it could only become, more and more,  the chief problem of politics and give rise to that  menacing situation upon a solution of which  depends the security of our future.   For the Bolshevist movement, or rather explo-  sion, was Jewish.   That truth may be so easily confused with a  falsehood that I must, at the outset, make it exact  and clear.   The Bolshevist Movement was a Jewish move-  ment, but not a movement of the Jewish race as  a whole. Most Jews were quite extraneous to it ;  very many indeed, and those of the most typical,  abhor it; many actively combat it. The impu-  tation of its evils to the Jews as a whole is a grave  injustice and proceeds from a confusion of thought  whereof I, at any rate, am free.   With so much said let me return to the affair.   What is called " Labour," that is, the direction     56 THE JEWS   of the proletarian revolt against capitalist condi-  tions, had, as we have seen, been directed in the  main by the Jew. His energy, his international  quality, his devotion to a set scheme, prevailed.  All this was not peculiar to Russia but present  throughout the industrialized areas of the West.   By the word " directed" I do not mean any  conscious plan. I mean that the Jews, with their  perpetual movement from country to country,  with their natural indifference to national feeling  as a force counteracting class feeling, with their  lucid thought and their passion for deduction, with  their tenacity and intellectual industry, had  naturally become the chief exponents and the  most able leaders. They formed, above all, the  cement binding the movement together through-  out the world. It was they, more than any others,  who insisted on a clear-cut solution upon the lines  which their compatriot Karl Marx had copied from  his greater European contemporaries, and made  definite in his famous book on Capital.   But there was all the difference in the world  between this intellectual leadership, this organiza-  tion of socialism by Jews while Socialism still  remained a mere theory, and the control and actual  management of it in a great State when it passed  from theory to practice.   The words ". social revolution" were still but  words in 1914 and men did not take them too  seriously. But when in 1917 a socialist revolution  was accomplished suddenly at one blow, in one  great State, and when its agents, directors and  masters were seen to be a close corporation of Jews  with only a few non- Jewish hangers-on (each  of these controlled by the Jews through one     PKESENT PHASE OF THE PROBLEM 57   influence or another), it was quite another matter.  The thing had become actual. The menace to  national traditions and to the whole Christian  ethic of property was immediate. More important  than all, so far as the Jewish problem is concerned,  many who had remained silent upon it on account  of convention, avarice or fear, were now compelled  to speak. From that moment, in early '17, it  became the chief political problem of our time:  coincident with, intimately mixed with, but in all  its implications superior to, the great economic  quarrel on to which it was now grafted.   The story may be briefly told. The Russian  State, ill- equipped for modern war, had passed  during the end of the year 1916 through a strain  which it had found intolerable. Russian Society,  after the mortal losses sustained, was upon the eve  of dissolution, and the formidable revolutionary  movement which had for years left its direction  and organization in Jewish hands broke out, for  the third time in our generation: but this time  successfully.   After rapidly accelerating phases it settled into  the situation which has endured from the early  part of 191 8 to the present day. In the towns the  freely- elected Parliament was repudiated and a  ;c Dictatorship of the Proletariat" was declared.  The workshops were in future to be run by Com-  mittees, in the Russian " Soviets," and similar  organizations were to control agriculture in the  villages, where the peasants had already seized  the land and were streaming back from the dis-  solved armies to their homes.   In practice, of course, what was set up was no  proletarian Government, still less anything so     58 THE JEWS   impossible and contradictory in terms as a  " dictatorship" of proletarians. The thing was  called " The Eepublic of the Workmen and  Peasants." It was, in fact, nothing of the sort. It  was the pure despotism of a clique, the leaders of  which had been specially launched upon Russia  under German direction in order to break down  any chance of a revival of Russian military power,  and all those leaders, without exception, were Jews,  or held by the Jews through their domestic  relations, and all that followed was done directly  under the orders of Jews, the most prominent of  whom was one Braunstein, who disguised himself  under the assumed name of Trotsky. A terror  was set up, under which were massacred innumer-  able Russians of the governing classes, so that the  whole framework of the Russian State disappeared.  Among these, of course, must specially be noted  great numbers of the clergy, against whom the  Jewish revolutionaries had a particular grudge.  A clean sweep was made of all the old social  organization, and under the despotism of this  Jewish clique the old economic order was reversed.  Food and all necessities were controlled (in the  towns) and rationed, the manual labourer receiving  the largest share; and none any share unless he  worked at the orders of the new masters.   The agricultural land was in theory nationalized,  but in practice the Jewish Committees of the towns  were unable to enforce their rule over it, and it  reverted to the natural condition of peasant  ownership. But the Jewish Committees of the  towns were strong enough to raid great areas of  agricultural production for the support of them-  selves and their troops and of their dependants in     PRESENT PHASE OF THE PROBLEM 59   the cities, who had come close to starvation through  the breakdown of the social system.   What followed later is of common knowledge:  the attempts at counter-revolution, led by scattered  Russians and other military leaders, all failed  because the peasants believed that their newly-  acquired farms were at stake and eagerly volun-  teered to defend them, the greatly increased  misery of the towns, the slow decline of industrial  production (in spite of the most rigid despotism,  enforcing conscript labour), and the general  deliquescence of society.   If the motives of the men who thus brought the  whole of a Christian State into ruins within a few  weeks were analysed, we should, it is to be pre-  sumed, discover something of this sort: their  main motive was the pursuit of the political and  economic ideals of which they were the spokesmen  and which already so many of their compatriots,  the Jews, throughout the rest of Europe, had  espoused communism so far as property was  concerned ; the Marxian doctrine of socialist pro-  duction and distribution; the Socialist doctrine  imposed by arbitrary and despotic arrangements,  favouring those who had in the past been least  favoured. In this economic and political group of  motives the leading motive was probably enough,  the doctrine of Communism in which these men,  for the most part, sincerely believed.   To this must be added an equally sincere hatred  of national feeling, save, of course, where the  Jewish nation was concerned. The conception  of a Russian national feeling seemed to these new  leaders ridiculous, as, indeed, the conception of a  national feeling must seem ridiculous to their     60 THE JEWS   compatriots everywhere; or, if not ridiculous,  subsidiary to the more important motives of  individual advantage and to the righting of such  immediate wrongs as the individual may feel.  The Christian religion they naturally attacked, for  it was abhorrent to their social theory.   They also had a certain crusading, or propa-  gandist, ideal running through the whole of their  action the desire to spread Communism far  beyond the boundaries of what had once been the  Russian State. It is this which has led them to  intrigue throughout Central, and even in Western,  Europe, in favour of revolution.   Though these were the main motives, other  motives must also have been present.   It is impossible that Committees consisting of  Jews and suddenly finding themselves thus in  control of such new powers, should not have  desired to benefit their fellows. It is equally  impossible that they should have forgone a senti-  ment of revenge against that which had persecuted  their people in the past. They cannot but, in  the destroying of Russia, have mixed with a  desire to advantage the individual Russian poor  the desire to take vengeance upon the national  tradition as a whole ; it has even been said but  denied, and I know not where the truth lies that  Jews were among those guilty of the worst incident  which we now know in all its revolting details the  murder of the Russian Royal family father, mother  and girls, and the unfortunate sickly heir, the only  boy. Further, it is impossible, with Jewish Commit-  tees thus in control of the Russian treasury and of  Russian means of communication, that they should  not have had some sympathy with their com-     PRESENT PHASE OF THE PROBLEM 61   patriots who were so largely in control of Western  finance. However sincere their detestation of  capitalism (for probably in most of them the  opinion is held sincerely enough), it is in the nature  of things that one of their blood and kind should,  however misguided they may think him, appeal to  them more than one of ours. And it is this which  explains the half alliance which you find through-  out the world between the Jewish financiers on  the one hand and the Jewish control of the Russian  revolution on the other. It is this which explains  the half-heartedness of the defence against Bol-  shevism, the perpetual commercial protest, the  continued negotiations, the recognition of the  Soviet by our politicians, the clamour of " Labour "  in favour of German Jewish industrialism and  against Poland : all that has taken place wherever  Jewish finance is powerful, particularly at West-  minster.   But, be this as it may, the tremendous explosion  which we call Bolshevism brought the discussion  of the Jewish problem to a head. The two forces  which had hitherto held back the discussion of that  problem were that Liberal fiction which had ruled  for more than a generation, according to which it  was indecent even to mention the word Jew, or to  suggest that there was any difference between the  Jew and those who harboured him ; and, secondly,  the fact that the Jews were erroneously regarded  by most of the well-to-do people in the West  that is, by most of those who had the control of  the Press and therefore of all public expression  as so controlling wealth that they were at once the  natural guardians of property and so placed that  an attack upon them jeopardized the wealth of     62 THE JEWS   the critic. The man who had gone into the City,  or who had his life spent upon the Bourse in Paris,  or who was negotiating any great capitalist enter-  prise, who had to do in whatever capacity with  the running of the great banks or with the inter-  national means of communication by sea and land,  even the man who got his precarious living by  writing each and all had hitherto felt that a  public silence upon the Jewish problem was  necessary to his private welfare.   Those who recognized the gravity of the problem  had hitherto been moved by fear to be silent upon  it, at least in public, though in private they were  often voluble enough. Those who recognized it  in a lesser degree had also been affected by  the same fear. Lastly, you had the large class  who were under no necessity for restraint, whether  from fear or any other cause, but who were quite  content to leave things as they were so long as they  received their regular salary or dividends, and who  were profoundly convinced that any interference  with the Jew would imperil those dividends or  that salary.   The Jewish Bolshevist movement put an end to  that state of mind. The people who had hitherto  been silent through avarice, convention, or fear,  now found themselves between an upper and a  nether millstone. Hitherto they had at least  believed that to keep silence was to secure or to  advance their economic position. Now they found,  suddenly risen upon the flank of that position, a new  and formidable Jewish force determined upon the  destruction of property. There was no longer any  reason to keep silent. There was a growing need  to speak. And though the old habit, the old     PEESENT PHASE OF THE PROBLEM 63   secrecy, was still strong upon them, the necessity  for combating Jewish Bolshevism was stronger  still. All over Europe the Jewish character of the  movement became more and more apparent. The  leaders of Communism everywhere proclaimed  that truth by adopting the asinine policy of  pretending that the revolution was Russian and  national; they attempted far too late to hide  the Jewish origins of its creators and directors,  and made a childish effort to pretend that the  Russian names so innocently put forward were  genuine, when the real names were upon every  tongue. Yet at the same time they were receiving  money and securities of the victims through Jewish  agents, jewels stripped from the dead or rifled from  the strong boxes of murdered men and women. In  one specific instance the promise of a subsidy to a  Communist paper in London was traced to this  source; it was proved that the Englishman  involved was a mere puppet and that the Jewish  connections of the family through marriage were  the true agents in the transaction. In another  a Trade Deputation was pompously announced  under Russian names, which turned out upon  inspection to consist, as to its first member, of a  man engaged all his life in the service of a Jewish  firm, as to the other, of a Jew who was actually  the brother-in-law of Braunstein ! The diplomatic  agent nominated and partially accepted by the  British Government to represent the new authority  of the Russian towns was again a Jew, Finkelstein,  the nephew by marriage of a prominent Jew in this  country. He passed under the name of Litvinoff.  So it was throughout the whole movement, in every  capital and in every great industrial town.     64 THE JEWS   We must not neglect the very obvious truth that  in all this there was ample fuel for the flame. The  industrial proletariat throughout the world was  equally disgusted and equally ready for revolt.  The leadership of the movement may be Jewish  but its current was not created by the Jew. To  imagine that is to fall into the most childish errors  of the " Anti-Semite." The stream of influence  arose from the sufferings and the burning sense of  injustice which industrial capitalism had imposed  on the dispossessed mass of wage earners. They  were (and are) naturally indifferent as to  whether those whom they hope may be their  saviours come from Palestine, Muscovy or Tim-  buctoo. They are interested in economic freedom :  in the doctrine of socialism and in its results, not in  the personality of those who guide them.   Their position is comprehensible enough : but my  point is, that the directing minority of Western  European capitalism which had hitherto been  silent upon the Jewish problems from the motives  I have described were now released; they were  free to speak their mind, and began to speak it.  The volume of their protest cannot but increase.  The cat, as the expression goes, is out of the bag,  or, to put it in more dignified language, the debate  will now never more be silenced. It is admitted  that the revolutionary leadership is mainly  Jewish. It is recognized as clearly now as it has  long been recognized that international finance was  mainly Jewish ; and even those who would tolerate  silence upon the one peril will certainly not tolerate  it upon the other.   The danger is, indeed, not over. The debate  will take place that is no peril, but a good; the     PRESENT PHASE OF THE PROBLEM 65   danger is rather that, as restraint is gradually  removed, the natural antagonism to the Jewish  race, felt by nearly all those who are not of it and  among whom it lives, may take an irrational and  violent form, and that we may be upon the brink  of yet one more of those catastrophes, of those  tragedies, of those disasters which have marked  the history of Israel in the past.   To avert this, to discover some solution of the  problem while there is yet time, to prevent deeds  which would bring us to shame and that small  minority among us to suffering, should be the  object of every honest man.     THE GENERAL CAUSES OF  FRICTION     CHAPTER IV  THE GENERAL CAUSES OF FRICTION   THE immediate cause of the new gravity apparent  in the Jewish problem is the Revolution in Russia.  The completely new feature of open discussion now  attaching to it (a thing which would have seemed  incredible in England twenty years ago) is the leader-  ship the Jews have assumed in the economic quarrel  of the proletariat against capitalism.   Most people, therefore, on being asked the cause  of friction between the Jews and their hosts at this  moment will reply (in England, at least) that it lies  in the anti- social propaganda now running loose  throughout Industrial Europe. " Our quarrel with  the Jews," you will hear from a hundred different  sources, " is that they are conspiring against Chris-  tian civilization, and in particular against our own  country, under the form of social revolutionaries."   Such a reply, though it is the almost universal  reply of the moment in this country, is most  imperfect.   The friction between the Jews and the nations  among which they are dispersed is far older, far  more profound, far more universal. For a whole  generation before the present crisis arose, the com-  paratively small number of men who were hammer-  ing away steadily at the Jewish problem, trying to     70 THE JEWS   provoke its discussion, and insisting on its import-  ance, were mainly concerned with quite another  aspect of Jewish activity the aspect of inter-  national finance as controlled by Jews. Before  that aspect had assumed its modern gravity the re-  proach against the Jews was that their international  position warred against our racial traditions and  our patriotisms. Before that again there had been  the reproach of a different religion and particularly  of their antagonism to the doctrine of the Incarna-  tion and all that flowed from that doctrine. And  there had been even, before that great quarrel, the  reproach that they were bad citizens within the  pagan Roman Empire, perpetually in rebellion  against it and guilty of massacring other Roman  citizens.   In another civilization than ours, in that of  Islam, another set of reproaches had arisen, or  rather another species of contempt and oppression.  After long periods of peace there would come, in  particular regions, the most violent oppression.  Within the last few years, for instance, a Jew in  Morocco was treated as though he was hardly  human. He had to turn his face to the wall when  any magnate was passing by. He had to dress in a  particular manner to mark him off as something  degraded among his fellow-beings. He might not  ride through the gate of a town, but had to dis-  mount. There were twenty actions normal to  civic life in the Moroccan city which were forbidden  to the Jew.   All this is as much as to say that the friction  between the Jews and those among whom they  live is always present, and has always been present,  now latent, now rising furiously to the surface,     THE GENEEAL CAUSES OF FRICTION 71   now grumbling through long periods of uncertain  peace, now boiling over in all the evils of persecu-  tion which is as much as to say that this friction  between Jew and non-Jew, while finding different  excuses for its action on different occasions, has  been a force permanently at work everywhere and  at all times.   What is the cause of it ? What is its nature ?   The matter is very difficult to approach, because  we are not dealing with things susceptible of positive  proof. You can prove from historical record that  the thing has existed. You can show its terrible  effects, ceaselessly recurrent throughout all our  history. But it is another matter to analyse the  unseen forces which produce it, and any such  analysis can be no more than an attempt.   I take it that the causes of this friction, with  all its lamentable results, are of two kinds. There  are, first, general causes for it, by which I mean those  causes which are always present and are ineradic-  able. Their effort may be summed up in the truth  that the whole texture of the Jewish nation, their  corporate tradition, their social mind, is at issue  with the people among whom they live. There  are, next, special causes, by which I mean social  actions and expressions which lead to friction and  could be modified, the two chief of which are the  use of secrecy by the Jews as a method of action  and the open expression of superiority over his  neighbours which the Jew cannot help feeling but  is wrong to emphasize.   I will deal with these in their order, and first  consider the general causes ; though I must admit  at the outset that a mere summary of them is no  sufficient explanation of the phenomenon. There     72 THE JEWS   would seem to be something more profound and  even more mysterious about it. For it will be  universally conceded that, while the closest intimacy  and respect is possible between individuals of the  two opposing races, the moment you come to great  groups, and especially to the popular instinct in  the matter, the gravest friction is apparent. It  is an issue too deep than to be accounted for  by mere differences of temper. It is as though  there were some inward force filling men on either  side, not indeed with necessary hostility it is  against any such necessity that all this book is  written but certainly with conflicting ends.   It is first to be noted that most of the accusations  made against the Jews by their enemies and most  of the very proper rebuttals of those accusations  advanced by the Jews and their defenders, miss  the mark because they attempt to put in abstract  form what is really something highly concrete.  And this is equally true of the praise bestowed  upon the Jews, of the special virtues ascribed to  them and of the denials of these virtues.   They miss the mark because they attempt to  express in terms of one category what should be  expressed in terms of another. They are doing  what a man does when he compares two pictures  by their outline while in point of fact their interest  lies in colour, or when he affirms something of a  tune the fundamental point of which something is  not the air at all but the instruments upon which  it is played : as who should say that " God save  the King " was " shrill " because he heard it played  on a penny whistle or " booming " because he heard  it played on a violoncello. The real point to note  is not that the Jews appear to us (or we to them)     THE GENERAL CAUSES OF FRICTION 73   to possess certain abstract qualities and defects,  but that in their case each quality or defect has a  special character, a special national timbre which it  lacks in ours.   Thus you will hear the Jews arraigned by their  enemies for three such vices as cowardice, avarice  and treason to take three of the commonest  accusations. You examine their actions and you  find innumerable instances of the highest courage,  the greatest generosity and the most devoted  loyalty : but courage, generosity and loyalty of a  Jewish kind, directed to Jewish ends, and stamped  with a highly distinctive Jewish mark.   The man who accuses the Jews of cowardice  means that they do not enjoy a fight of his kind,  nor a fight fought after his fashion. All he has  discovered is that the courage is not shown under  the same circumstances, nor for the same ends, nor  in the same mode. But if the word courage means  anything, he cannot on reflection deny it to actions  of which one could make an endless catalogue even  from contemporary experience alone. Is it cowar-  dice in a young man to sacrifice his life deliberately  for the sake of his own people ? Did that young  Jew show cowardice who killed the Russian Prime  Minister, the antagonist of his people, after the first  revolution following on the Russo-Japanese war ?  Was it cowardice to walk up in a crowded theatre,  surrounded by all the enemies of his race, and shoot  their chief in their midst? Is it cowardice to  stand up against the vast alien majority, and to  do so over and over again, perhaps through a whole  lifetime, insisting on things that are grossly un-  popular with that majority and running a risk the  whole time of physical violence ? You find Jews     74 THE JEWS   adopting that attitude all over Europe. Can one  think it is cowardice which has permitted the  individuals of this nation to maintain their tradition  unbroken through two thousand years of inter-  mittent torture, spoliation and violent death?  The thing so stated is ridiculous, and it is clear  that those who make such an accusation are con-  founding their own form of courage with courage  as a universal attribute.   They think that because Jews show courage  under other circumstances and in another way from  themselves, corresponding to another appetite, as  it were, therefore it is no longer courage : to think  like that is to confess yourself very limited.   I can testify, myself, to any number of courageous  acts which I have seen performed by Jews. I am  not alluding to acts of courage in warfare, of which  there is ample evidence, but to acts of a sort in  which our race would not have shown the same  quality or timbre of courage. I will cite one case.   Rather more than twenty years ago, when feeling  on the Dreyfus case was at its height and when  the feeling of the French Army in particular was  at white heat, I happened to be in the town of  Mmes, through which, at the time, a body of  troops was passing. The cafe in which I sat was  filled with young sergeants. There were hardly  any civilians present beside myself. There came  into the place an elderly Jew, very short in stature,  highly marked with the physical characteristics of  his race, an unmistakable Jew. He was somewhat  bent under the weight of his years, with fiery eyes  and a singularly vibrating intonation of voice.  He was selling broadsheets of the most violent  kind, all of them insults against the Army. He     THE GENERAL CAUSES OF FRICTION 75   came into this cafe with the sheets in his hand so  that all could see the large capital letters of the  headlines, and slowly went round the assembly  ironically offering them to the lads in uniform with  their swords at their side, for they were of the  cavalry.   Every one knows the French temper on such  occasions a complete silence which may at any  moment be transformed into something very dif-  ferent. One sergeant after another politely waved  him aside and passed him on. He went round the  whole lot of them, gazing into their faces with his  piercing eyes, wearing the whole time an ironical  smile of insult, describing at intervals the nature  of his goods, and when he had done that he went  out unharmed.   It was an astonishing sight. I have seen many  others as astonishing and as vivid, but for courage  I have never seen it surpassed. Here was a man,  old and feeble, the member of a very small minority  which he knew to be hated, and particularly hated  by the people whom he challenged. Because he  held one of his own people to be injured, he took  this tremendous risk and went through this self-  imposed task with a sort of pleasure in that risk.  You may call it insolence, offensiveness, what you  will : but you cannot deny it the title of courage.  It was courage of the very highest quality.   I repeat : you may see evidence of that sort of  courage in Jewish action throughout the world and  in every age. You have the beginning of it in the  Siege of Jerusalem; to-morrow, if the fear which  we now all entertain should unhappily prove well  founded, we shall see it again upon the same scale.   Take avarice. When the Jew is accused of     76 THE JEWS   avarice by his enemies they are reading into him  that vice in a form of which they know themselves  capable, which they themselves practise, which  they fully understand, but which he never practises  in their fasliion. The Jew is adventurous with his  money. He is a speculator, a trader. He is also  a man who thinks of it in exact terms. He is  never romantic about it. But he is almost invari-  ably generous in the use of it. Our race, when it  yields to the vice of avarice, is close, secretive,  uncharitable. He is pitiless and sly in accumula-  tion. He is vociferous in his insistence upon the  exact terms of an agreed compact. He is also  tenacious in the pursuit of anything which he has  set out on, the accumulation of money among the  rest. He is almost fanatical in his appetite for  success in whatever he has undertaken, the accumu-  lation of money among the rest. But to say that the  money, once accumulated, is not generously used,  is nonsense. There is not one of us who could not  cite at once a dozen examples of Jewish generosity  upon a scale which makes us ashamed.   Nor is it true to say that this generosity has  ostentation for its root, or, as it is called, " Ran-  some," either. Though a love of magnificence is  certainly a great passion in the Jewish character,  it does not account for the most of his generosity.  It is a generosity which extends to all manner of  private relations, and if you will take the testimony  of those who have been in the service of the Jews  and are not Jews themselves, that testimony is  almost universally in favour of their employers, if  those employers be men of large means.   They will tell you that they felt humiliated in  serving a Jew ; that the relations were never easy ;     THE GENERAL CAUSES OF FRICTION 77   that there was always distance. But not often that  they were treated meanly. Just the other way.  There has usually been present a spontaneous gener-  osity. The same argument applies to the cry of  " Ransome." It is true that some of the more  scandalous Jewish fortunes have thrown up defences  against public anger by the return of a small pro-  portion in the shape of public endowments : it is  an action and a motive not peculiar to them. But  that does not explain the mass of private and  unheard benefaction to which we can all testify  and which is as common with the middle- class Jew  as with the wealthy. It is here as in the matter  of courage a question of kind. Those of our people  who happen to be generous (they are rare) do not  calculate. They often forget or confuse the sums  they have made away with, as though it were mere  extravagance. The Jew knows the exact extent  of his sacrifice, its proportion to his total means.  Is he then less generous ? By no means. He is,  in scale more generous but in a different fashion.  It might be argued that this generosity of the  Jew is a consequence of the way in which he regards  money. It comes and goes with him because he  is a speculator and a wanderer. It has been said  that no great Jewish fortune is ever permanent ;  that none of these millionaires ever founded a  family. This is not quite true ; but it is true that  considering the long list of great Jewish fortunes  which have marked the whole progress of our  civilization it is astonishing how few have taken  root. But though this conception of money may  be an element in the generosity of the Jew it does  not fully explain it, and at any rate that generosity  is there, and contradicts flatly the accusation of     78 THE JEWS   avarice. Indeed the general accusation of avarice  fails : and that is why it is a sort of standing jest  permitted even where the Jews are most powerful.  It is a jest they themselves do not resent because  they know it to be beside the mark.   The accusation of treason is on the same footing  save that it is even more " to one side" than  the others quoted. There is no race which has  produced so few traitors. It is not treason in the  Jew to be international. It is not treason in the  Jew to work now for one interest among those who  are not of his people, now for another. He can  only be charged with treason when he acts against  the interests of Israel, and there is no nation nor  ever has been one in which the national solidarity  was greater or national weakness in the shape of  traitors less. Indeed, that is the very accusation  their enemies make against them; that they are  too homogeneous; that they hold too much  together and are too fierce in self-defence; and you  cannot have that accusation coupled with an  accusation of treason. What is true is that the  Jew lends himself to one non- Jewish group in its  action against another. He will serve France  against the Germans, or the Germans against  France, and he will do so indifferently as a resident  in the country he benefits or the country he wounds :  for he is indifferent to either. The moment war  breaks out the intelligence departments of both  sides rely upon the Jew : and they rely upon him  not only on account of his indifference to nationalism  but also on account of his many languages, his  travel, the presence of his relations in the enemy  country. And this is true not only of war but of  armed peace.     THE GENERAL CAUSES OF FRICTION 79   But it is clear that in all this there are examples  of what in us , would be treason. In him such actions  are not treasons, for he does not betray Israel.  But they all have an atmosphere repellent to us.  They are things which if we did them (or when we  do them) degrade us. They do not degrade the  Jew.   One might continue the list of such accusations  indefinitely, and in every one you would find that  the root of the quarrel is not the presence of a  particular defect but the presence of a difference in  circumstances, temperament, character: a dif-  ferent colour and taste in the quality or defect  concerned. It is that which offends. It is that  which causes the misunderstandings and which  leads to the tragedies.   While this is true of the accusations made against  the Jewish people it is unfortunately equally true  of the corresponding qualities which they and their  defenders advance in the rebuttal. The Jew is  essentially patriotic : that is true. But not patri-  otic to our ends or in our way. He is essentially  self-respecting. But not self-respecting to our  ends or in our way. A personal obligation which  he cannot meet, a personal and intimate contract  in which he may default, especially to one of his own  people, is abhorrent to the Jew i but not in our  way. He has not our shame of bankruptcy for  instance, but much more than our shame of personal  borrowing. Drunkenness, a vice most offensive to  human dignity, is with him the rarest vice : with  us the commonest. But our sense of dignity in  repose he has not, nor does he feel our sense of  injured dignity in mummery. His tenacity, which  all know and all in a sense admire and which is far     80 THE JEWS   superior to our own, is also a narrower tenacity,  or at any rate a tenacity of a different kind. He  will follow one end where we will follow many.  His wonderful loyalty to all family relations we  know: but we do not appreciate it because it is  outside our own circle. Even his intellectual gifts,  which are less affected by this matter of timbre,  have something alien to us in them. They are  undeniable but we feel them to be used for other  ends than ours : they are coldly used when ours  are used enthusiastically: they are used with  intensity when we use them with carelessness.   If we leave the controversial field and concern  ourselves with an appreciation of Jewish qualities,  apart from our like or dislike of them and apart  from their difference in intimate texture, as it were,  from our own, they may be summarized I think  as follows:   The Jew concentrates upon one matter. He does  not disperse his mind. And this concentration  carries with it strength and weakness. It has been  said in connection with it (all such terms are  metaphorical) that his mind is not elastic. But  this is a great element in his success. I have  noticed that the Jew having once taken up a  particular task shows an indifference to other  tasks which, from our standpoint, is marvellous.  How many instances could not one cite of two  Jewish brothers, the one occupied in finance, the  other in science, or the one in politics, the other in  music, and how clearly do we see in those instances  the complete indifference of the Jew to things  outside the province he has undertaken ! How  remarkable in our eyes is his resistance to any  temptation which might lead him away from his     THE GENERAL CAUSES OF FEICTION 81   end. The Jew who is devoted to science, for  instance, remains completely indifferent to its  opportunities for enrichment. The Jew who is  devoted to philosophy (and what great names he  can show in this sphere throughout the centuries !)  lives in poverty and is perfectly content so to live.  The Jew devoted to any particular ideal of social  change devotes himself entirely to that, and ends  his task often more powerful, hardly ever more  wealthy, nearly always much poorer than when he  began it. Above all he refuses to 'be distracted  for a moment from his goal.   Another character which is affiliated to this first  leading character of the Jew would seem to be the  lucidity of his thought. The Jew's argument is  never muddled. That is one of his prime assets  not only in all discussion but in all action. It is  also, if a cause of strength, a cause of the enmity  he arouses: or (to use my milder term) of the  " friction."   For an exactly constructed process of reasoning,  from which there is no escape, has in it (for those  less capable of it) something of the bully. A man  may feel the conclusion to be false : perhaps he  knows it to be false. He lacks the power to express  his reasons. He may not know how to state the  principles which his adversary has left out of account,  or when to bring them into discussion, and he feels  the iron logic offered to him like a pistol presented  at the head of his better judgment. But for  strength and for weakness also, lucidity is the mark  of the Jew's mind. He carries that lucidity into  the smallest details of whatever he may perform.   One must add to all this a certain intensity of  action which is very noticeable and which again is a     82 THE JEWS   cause of friction between himself and those about  him. Hear a Jew speaking, especially a Jew  speaking upon the revolutionary platform, and note  the high voltage at which the current is working.  The energy which he uses is not the energy of a  large flame but of a well-directed blow- pipe: a  stream of heat. He is wholly absorbed, not in his  own expression, but in actively penetrating the  mind of his hearers. And here again is that dif-  ference in quality to which I have alluded. One  might say indifferently that the Jew is never  eloquent or that he is always eloquent when he  speaks upon things that possess his soul. He is not  eloquent in our fashion; but he is at any rate  astonishingly effective in his own.   The Jew has this other characteristic which has  become increasingly noticeable in our own time,  but which is probably as old as the race : and that  is a corporate capacity for hiding or for advertis-  ing at will: a power of " pushing" whatever the  whole race desires advanced, or of suppressing what  the whole race desires to suppress. And this also,  however legitimately used, is a cause of friction.   Men get the feeling of a swarm in the presence  of such action. They also get the feeling of being  tricked : and it breeds bad blood.   In the aspect of the deliberate use of secrecy I  shall deal with this character in my next chapter,  for I think in that aspect it is a particular cause of  friction which can be eliminated. But the general  capacity and instinct of the Jew for corporate action  in the " booming" of what he wants " boomed"  and the " soft pedalling" of what he wants " soft  pedalled " is ineradicable. It will always remain a  permanent irritant in its effect upon those to whom     THE GENERAL CAUSES OF FRICTION 83   it is applied. The best proof of it is that after the  most violent " boom," after the talents of some  particular Jew, or the scientific discovery of another,  or the misfortunes of another, or the miscarriage of  justice against another, has been shouted at us,  pointed and iterated until we are all deaf ened, there  comes an inevitable reaction, and the same men who  were half hypnotized into the desired mood are  nauseated with it and refuse a repetition of the  dose.   The converse is true. Men who find that some  important matter has been suppressed, some bad  scandal in the State or some trick in commerce  because Jewry desired it to be suppressed, are soon  on the alert. They will not suffer the operation as  quietly the second time as they did the first.  Indeed they tend if anything to grow too suspicious.  Anyhow, in both cases this ineradicable racial  habit, a cause perhaps of Jewish survival and  certainly an element of Jewish strength, is also a  cause of acute friction between them and us.   But a mere category of this kind is, as I have  said, useless to explain the fundamental quality,  the hidden root, of the ceaseless conflict between the  very soul of the Jew and the soul of the society  around him. All these points are but manifesta-  tions of some profound, some subterranean power  for contrast, the value of which we cannot grasp,  but the effects of which are only too apparent. And  there remains in the minds of those who most rely  upon this race and of those who most suspect them  the sense of an impassable gulf between them and  ourselves. It is the recognition, the admission of  such a contrast, the telling of the truth about it,  the working upon it as a necessary condition, which     84 THE JEWS   must form the foundation for any solution at which   we can arrive.   *****   There is one feature in the European's attitude  towards the Jews which must be specially dealt  with, and that is the false impression that the  friction between us and them is in the main a  quarrel with their wealth.   That impression has been greatly weakened by  the recent revolutionary activity of the Jew surging  up from the depths, appearing upon the surface,  and producing the great upheaval in Kussia, and  the attempted upheavals elsewhere. But though  the new Jewish revolutionary movement has  shaken the old insistence on Jewish wealth it is  hard to eradicate it. It has been present through-  out the ages, and will remain at the back of people's  minds perhaps for ever, because the few Jews who  do concentrate on piling up great fortunes concen-  trate on that task so entirely. Yet the impression  is false and is the fruitful cause of the worst mis-  understandings.   For the Jews are not a rich nation, and the very  fact that they stand in the popular mind and  especially in the mind of rich people in times  of corruption for wealth, is an example of the  way in which they are misunderstood and of the  way in which injustice to the Jew arises.   The Jews are a poor nation. An enemy would  say that they were poor because they did not  work, but this again would be an injustice, because  the Jew works exceedingly hard and has often in  the past and does still in many places work hard,  not only in negotiation and commerce but with  his hands.     THE GENERAL CAUSES OF FRICTION 85   We see the Jews in the Middle Ages monopolizing  important manual occupations in some districts  -dyeing and shipbuilding, for instance. And  there are many parts of Eastern Europe where  they work upon the land to-day.   The Jews are a poor nation because they are an  alien nation and because their activities are for  the most part condemned to working against the  grain, in a society which is not their own. But  that they are a poor nation is not only true but  abundantly evident to any one who has travelled  and watched their various settlements with any  sympathy.   Now that they have arrived in such great  numbers in the West people are beginning to  appreciate this. We have already seen how, a  lifetime ago, when the Jews of the West (I mean  especially in France and England and America)  were a small number of merchants and financiers,  the great wealth of a very small number among  them was not counterbalanced in our experience  by the exceeding poverty of the mass. But to-day  we can see for ourselves how true it is that, once  you get below the exceptional fortunes and a  comparatively small middle- class, the Jewish nation  is no more than millions of exceedingly poor  families.   Those who have watched them outside the West,  those who have seen them in their great eastern  communities where the bulk of the race still resides,  in the Marches of Russia, will abundantly agree.  It helps us to understand the Jewish problem if  we grasp the fact that a great part of the Jewish  complaint against us is precisely this poverty to  which the bulk of the Jews are condemned. It is     86 THE JEWS   all very well to sneer at the Jewish complaint of  persecution and oppression and to cite ironically,  whenever it arises, the immense fortunes of a few  families like the Rothschilds and the Bassoons,  the Monds, the Samuels and the rest. From the  point of view of the average Jew that is not the  way the thing looks at all. What he notices, and  notices rightly, is that he has no part in that well-  distributed, solid, permanent, inherited wealth  which is the mark of a healthy European com-  munity.   Further (a most important point already touched  on in passing), these great fortunes are ephemeral.   In the European nations you have a mass of  great fortunes far larger in number, and even in  total, than the Jewish financial fortunes. But  those great fortunes have been in the past and are  still, wherever our society is healthy, permanent.  They run through European history in the shape  of the great families, in the shape of the nobility.   The great territorial families in this country  have been wealthy for centuries and remain in  established wealth, and the same is in the main  true of the great Italian families, it is obviously  true of the great German families, and, in spite of  the great changes of the last century and a half,  it is still largely true of the old French families.  It is not true of the Jewish families. The vast  Jewish fortunes which have marked history rise  suddenly and melt again almost as suddenly. A  Jew will begin in some very small way as a  pawnbroker in Liverpool, for instance, or a very  small bookseller in Frankfort. You will find his  son a great banker, his grandson so wealthy as to  command politics for a generation, and then (if you     THE GENERAL CAUSES OF FRICTION 87   will watch the process in the past to take a modern  unfinished instance is of course misleading) at last,  and soon, the name disappears again, and disappears  for ever.   Whom have you representing to-day the few great  Jewish fortunes of the early Middle Ages in  England ? They were all ruined before the end  of the thirteenth century. Whom have you repre-  senting the later great Jewish fortunes on the  Rhine, the fortunes of the sixteenth century and  the early seventeenth ? They have utterly gone.  Who have you left representing the considerable  Jewish houses of Medieval Venice ? of Genoa ? of  Rome?   The causes of this rapid fluctuation are many.  They all attach to the peculiar position, as well as  to the peculiar character, of the Jew. We find  them partly in the passion for speculation which  the Jewish intelligence naturally harbours. We  find them still more, I think, in the instinctive  opposition to the Jew which his alien surroundings  perpetually arouse.   It is, however, important to remember this last  point. From our point of view the Jew, when he  does get rich, seems to get much too rich and to  get rich much too quickly, and he exercises far  too much power through his wealth ; for we think  of him the whole time as an alien with no right to  any position. But the Jew sees it in a very different  light. In his point of view his effort to accumulate  wealth is always heavily handicapped. When he  succeeds he only succeeds through his own tenacity  and the patriotic co-operation of his fellows, and  he always holds his new-found wealth on an insecure  tenure. What looks to us like the breakdown of a     88 THE JEWS   Jewish fortune through speculation, seems to the Jew  the fatal recurrent result of unending opposition.   In connection with the illusion of a wealthy  Jewish race, you have, of course, the matter which  I briefly mentioned above, the connection between  our wealthier, and therefore governing classes, and  the Jewish wealth of the moment. A great part  of the illusion, as I have said, is due to the fact  that the gentry of every epoch come into contact  with the Jew only as a rich man, and it is the  capital modern vice of our own gentry, their passion  for mere wealth and their subservience to it,, which  has largely accounted for this dangerous misunder-  standing.   Look around you in Western Europe to-day and  see what people mean by this story of Jewish  wealth. See who the people are that allude con-  tinually to it and spread the idea of it. They are  the rich Europeans, who, in their subservience to  crude wealth, in their habit of gauging everything  by that wealth and of submitting to almost any  indignity for the purpose of obtaining more wealth,  marry their daughters to Jews, serve Jewish  interests, and, while perpetually sneering at the  Jew behind his back, call him to his face by his  most intimate name and make the most of his  hospitality. Which of them ever knows a middle-  class Jew, let alone a poor Jew ? Why, most of  them are actually ignorant of the fact that this  mass of poor Jews exists at all ! They serve the  Jew when he is wealthy and only when he is  wealthy. They envy him basely as a wealthy  man and only as a wealthy man. They prostitute  their dignity, they sell their fellow-Europeans, not  from any genuine affection for the Jewish race     THE GENERAL CAUSES OF FRICTION 89   indeed there is no class in the community, closely  intermixed with the Jews as they are, which feel  the friction more than the gentry but simply  from a thirst for money, which they happen to find  held in great masses by a few Jewish families.   It is most noticeable that other aspects of Jewish  activity remain unused by the wealthy class, the  gentry and therefore by the State. Whether it  would be wise to use them or not is another matter.  At any rate, the motive for leaving them unused  is the fact that they are not connected with wealth.  The Jewish intelligence which might so often have  served the policy of a Statesman is largely left  unused. The cosmopolitan position of the Jew  when it is used is used for little more than spying ;  and that profound force, the historical memory of  the Jew, is neglected almost altogether. With this  neglect goes a natural and evil result, the failure  on the part of the European governing classes,  especially to-day, to safeguard the community  against the troubles which are bound to arise from  the clashing of interests between the Jews and  the people among whom they dwell.   It may sound paradoxical, but it is true, that if  the Statesmen of Europe, and the hereditary  families of the European nations who still take so  much part in the conduct of those nations, had  thought less of the Jewish money power and more  of the Jews as a whole they would have benefited  both parties in a very different fashion. We have  seen the artificial protection of the Jews of Eastern  Europe because individual Statesmen have been  subservient to the commands of very rich individual  Jewish bankers. But the thing has been done  blunderingly. It has served only to anger the     90 THE JEWS   independent nationalities of the East, notably the  Poles, the Roumanians and the Hungarians who  have experience of the difficulties inseparable from  an alien minority. Our politicians have treated the  whole affair externally and mechanically,merely  obeying orders without trying to understand.   The ultimate result of such interference by our  Western politicians is unhappily certain. The  last state of the Jews in Eastern Europe will be  worse than the first. Their sufferings will be  greater than in the past, and that because, instead  of acting from attempted comprehension and  sympathetic comprehension of the Jewish difficul-  ties the politicians, who have acted as the servants  of a few wealthy Jews, have merely obeyed the  orders of these rich men and have done so with the  secret reluctance that always accompanies self-  surrender to a wage.   Is it not apparent, as we look through history,  that the permanent power of the Jew or, at any  rate, the celebrity of his nation is utterly distinct  from those chance accumulations of wealth which  a few individuals owe to the national passion for  speculation and a cosmopolitan position ?   One after another the striking Jewish names of  history are the names of Jews who have ardently  pursued some moral or intellectual thesis; most  of them I had nearly said all of them were poor  men, and for the most part men deliberately poor  because they preferred, as it is in the Jewish nature  to prefer, the immediate work in hand to any other  consideration.   It is these names that remain and are permanent  and are the glory of the Jewish race.     THE GENEKAL CAUSES OF FKICTION 91   There is one aspect of this Jewish wealth which  I hesitate whether to put among the general or  among the particular causes of the friction between  that nation and its hosts.   It falls certainly among the general causes in  the sense that it is connected with the Jewish  character as a whole and not with any special  method in that character's action. It is connected,  I mean, with their very nature, and they cannot  change that nature. On the other hand, it might  be put among the particular causes on account of  its quite modern and probably ephemeral char-  acter: it is, as it were, a particular cause of the  friction proceeding from the general causes of  character just enumerated, and this cause of friction  is the presence of Jewish MONOPOLY.   It is an exceedingly dangerous point in the  present situation. I do not think that the Jews  have a sufficient appreciation of the risk they are  running by its development. There is already  something like a Jewish monopoly in high finance.  There is a growing tendency to Jewish monopoly  over the stage for instance, the fruit trade in  London, and to a great extent the tobacco trade.  There is the same element of Jewish monopoly in  the silver trade, and in the control of various other  metals, notably lead, nickel, quicksilver. What  is most disquieting of all, this tendency to monopoly  is spreading like a disease. One province after  another falls under it and it acts as a most powerful  irritant. It will perhaps prove the immediate  cause of that explosion against the Jews which we  all dread and which the best of us, I hope, are  trying to avert.   It applies, of course, to a tiny fraction of the         92 THE JEWS   Jewish race as a whole. One could put the Jews  who control lead, nickel, mercury and the rest into  one small room : nor would that room contain very  pleasant specimens of their race. You could get  the great Jewish bankers who control international  finance round one large dinner table, and I know  dinner tables which have seen nearly all of them  at one time or another. These monopolists, in  strategic positions of universal control are an  insignificant handful of men out of the millions of  Israel, just as the great fortunes we have been  discussing attach to an insignificant proportion  of that race. Nevertheless, this claim to an  exercise of monopoly brings hatred upon the Jews  as a whole.   The thing is deservedly hated because it is  exceedingly unnatural and exceedingly tyrannical.  It would be tyrannical even for one of our own  people to hold us up in the supply of things essential  to us. It is intolerable in a people alien to us.  When we come to discuss, in the next chapter,  the unfortunate use of secrecy by the Jews (the  most potent, perhaps, of the particular causes  which have lead them into their present peril) we  shall better understand another odious feature in  this modern monopoly of control, which is the  way in which it spreads underground and out of  sight leaving the world in general ignorant that  this, that and the other individual Jew is its master  in the matter of some essential thing which he  controls.   To put it plainly, these monopolies must be put  an end to.   Before the Great War there was only one of  which Europe as a whole was conscious, and that     THE GENERAL CAUSES OF FRICTION 93   was the financial monopoly. Yet here the mono-  poly was far less perfect than in the case of the  metals. The Great War brought thousands upon  thousands of educated men (who took up public  duties as temporary officials) up against the  staggering secret they had never suspected the  complete control exercised over things absolutely  necessary to the nation's survival by half a dozen  Jews, who were completely indifferent as to whether  we or the enemy should emerge alive from the  struggle.   Incidentally, the wealth of these few and very  wealthy Jews has been scandalously increased  through the war on this very account. And at  the moment in which I write the French press,  which has a longer experience in the free discussion  of the Jewish question than any other, is exposing  the abominable increase in value of the Rothschild's  lead mines, an increase mainly due to the use of  lead for the killing of men.   But lead is only one of the monopolies, as I  have said. A whole group already exists and the  extension of the system is going on as rapidly as  an epidemic. Not only must it cease before any  solution of the Jewish question can be attempted,  but the process must be reversed. If the various  national Cabinets do not interfere to protect these  monopolies, then good-bye to any attempt at  j ustice for the Jew. In the legitimate anger against  a few pitiful dozens among the worst specimens  of the nation, Israel as a whole will be sacrificed.   There is in this formation of monopolies, as in  the more reputable activities of the nation, even  in its more justly famous activities, even in its  glories, that element of racial character which is     94 THE JEWS   never absent from any Jewish action. And that  is why I have put the point, modern and ephemeral  as it is, among the general causes of trouble.   The reason these general monopolies are formed  by Jews is that the Jew is international, tenacious  and determined upon reaching the very end of his  task. He is not satisfied in any trade until that  trade is, as far as possible, under his complete  control, and he has for the extension of that control  the support of his brethren throughout the world.  He has at the same time the international know-  ledge and international indifference which further   aid his efforts.   *****   But even were the quite recent monopolies in  metal and other trades taken, as they ought to be  taken, from these few alien masters of them, there  would remain that partial monopoly (it is not  at all a complete monopoly) which a few Jews  have exercised not only to-day, but recurrently  throughout history, over the highest finance:  that is, over the credit of the nations, and therefore  to-day, as never before, over the whole field of the  world's industry.   Should that partial financial monopoly remain  uncorrected it will produce a sufficient hostility  against the Jews to precipitate, of itself, the next  general attack upon them.   It may be argued that this fear is groundless  because the control has now lasted for a long time.  It has lasted a lifetime even in its present hardly  complete form : and it is secure because its opera-  tions are removed from general observation, and  because it is mixed up with the interests of all  the wealthier classes.     THE GENERAL CAUSES OF FRICTION 95   I am afraid these arguments will not hold.  Although the Jewish control of finance is not a  thing which touches the public at large, yet all  educated men down to a comparatively low stratum  of society are fully aware of it, and every man who  is aware of it resents it. It is resented almost as  much by the mass of poor Jews as by the non- Jews,  but in a different way.   Again, although this financial monopoly does not  directly affect the economic life of the private  citizen, he is beginning to understand more and  more how it indirectly affects it. It affects him,  for instance, through his patriotism. He will not  submit to be told that, in order to suit the con-  venience of these alien bankers, he must forgo the  rights of victory and allow some enemy whom he  has justly chastised to escape the consequences of  that chastisement. Still more urgently will he  deny the right of the Jewish bankers to interfere  with the national reparation due to him for damage  wantonly done in the course of hostilities.   Again, international finance does not live  separate from private activities. It touches at last  a mass of individual enterprises, and through those  individual enterprises its action is questioned and  examined by a host of private citizens.   Yet again, the Jews who thus control international  finance are at work in many other capacities. For  instance, some of them stand behind those great  Industrial Insurance schemes which are so detest-  able to the mass of the people. Action against  these may arise any moment. If such action  comes one may be certain that the individual  attacked will be remembered in his capacity of  international financier quite as much as in his     96 THE JEWS   capacity of a battener upon the lapsed premiums  of the poor. Sooner or later the character of  this monopoly, to which men of a lifetime ago  were indifferent through ignorance but of which  to-day all the educated part of the community  is aware and deeply resents, will be appreciated  and equally resented at a lower level still. When  society is sufficiently filled with indignation against  it, then the explosion will come. If that explosion  only affected the rich Jews immediately concerned  no one would much regret it. There would be  little harm done. But the trouble is that it will  almost certainly affect the whole nation to which  those individuals belong.   I may be told that to put an end to this state  of affairs is impossible so long as parliamentary  government, with its profound corruption, endures ;  that the only force capable of dealing with the  plutocratic evil of alien monopoly upon this scale  is a king; and that a king we have not, among  modern nations. To which I answer that the  parliamentary system will not last for ever. It is  already in active dissolution among ourselves, and  badly hit elsewhere. The king may not be so far  off as people think him to be.   At any rate, in one way or another the thing will  cease, and will probably cease in violence. The  danger is that if it ceases in violence a vast number  of innocent will be involved with the guilty.     THE SPECIAL CAUSES OF  FRICTION     H     CHAPTER V  THE SPECIAL CAUSES OF FRICTION   THERE are two special forces upon the Jewish  side which nourish and exasperate the inevitable  friction between the Jewish race and its hosts.  It will be well to deal with these before passing  to the corresponding forces upon our side. For to  find a remedy it is necessary to diagnose the disease.  The two main Jewish forces which exasperate  and maintain the sense of friction between the  Jews and their hosts are first of all the Jewish  reliance upon secrecy, and, secondly, the Jewish  expression of superiority.   1. THE JEWISH RELIANCE UPON SECRECY   It has unfortunately now become a habit for  so many generations, that it has almost passed into  an instinct throughout the Jewish body, to rely  upon the weapon of secrecy. Secret societies,  a language kept as far as possible secret, the use  of false names in order to hide secret movements,  secret relations between various parts of the Jewish  body: all these and other forms of secrecy have  become the national method. It is a method to  be deplored, not because its indignity and false-  hood degrade the Jew that is not our affair  but rather on account of the ill- effects this policy   99     100 THE JEWS   produces on our mutual relations. It feeds and  intensifies the antagonism already excited by  racial contrast.   But before we go further it is essential to be just ;  for no one understands anything if he attacks it  unjustly.   The Jewish habit of secrecy the assumption  of false names and the pretence of non- Jewish  origin in individuals, the concealment of relation-  ships and the rest of it have presumably sprung  from the experience of the race. Let a man put  himself in the place of the Jew and he will see  how sound the presumption is. A race scattered,  persecuted, often despised, always suspected and  nearly always hated by those among whom it  moves, is constrained by something like physical  force to the use of secret methods.   Take the particular trick of false names. It  seems to us particularly odious. We think when  we show our contempt for those who use this  subterfuge that we are giving them no more than  they deserve. It is a meanness which we associate  with criminals and vagabonds ; a piece of crawling  and sneaking. We suspect its practisers of desir-  ing to hide something which would bring them  into disgrace if it were known, or of desiring to  over- reach their fellows in commerce by a form of  falsehood.   But the Jew has other and better motives.  As one of their community said to me with great  force, when I discussed the matter with him many  years ago at a City dinner, " When we work under  our own nmes you abuse us as Jews. When we  work under your names you abuse us as forgers."  The Jew has often felt himself so handicapped     THE SPECIAL CAUSES OF FRICTION 101   if lie declared himself, that he was half forced, or  at any rate grievously tempted, to a piece of base-  ness which was never a temptation for us. Surely  all this carefully arranged code of assumed patro-  nymics (Stanley for Solomon, Curzon for Cohen,  Sinclair for Slezinger, Montague for Moses, Benson  for Benjamin, etc.> etc.) had its root in that.   The Jew can plead something further in extenua-  tion of this practice. Family names did not grow  up naturally with them, as with us, in the course  of the Middle Ages. The Jew retained, as we long  retained in the middle and lower ranks of European  society, the simple habit of possessing one personal  name and differentiating a man from his fellows  by introducing the name of his father. Thus a  Jew in the sixteenth century was Moses ben  Solomon, just as the Cromwells' ancestor of the  same generation was Williams ap Williams. He  had not what we call a surname or family name.  In the same way until varying dates, early in  France and England and other Western countries,  much later in Wales, Brittany, Poland and the  Slav countries of the East, a man was known only  by his personal name, distinguished, if that were  necessary, by mentioning also the name of his  father, or, in some cases, of his tribe.   Properly speaking the Jews have no surnames,  and they may say with justice : " Since we were  compelled to take surnames arbitrarily (which was  the case in the Germanies and sometimes else-  where as well), you cannot blame us if we attach  no particular sanctity to the custom." If a Jew  of plain Jewish name was compelled by alien force  to take the fancy name of Flowerfield, he is surely  free to change that fancy name, for which he is     102 THE JEWS   not responsible, to any other lie chooses. There  was a good reason for the Government to force  a name upon him. Only thus could he be regis-  tered and his actions traced. But forced it was,  and therefore, on him, not morally binding.   All this is true, but there remains an element not  to be accounted for on any such pleas. There are  in the experience of all of us, an experience repeated  indefinitely, men who have no excuse whatsoever  for a false name save that advantage of deceit.  Men whose race is universally known will unblush-  ingly adopt a false name as a mask, and after a  year or two pretend to treat it as an insult if their  original and true name be used in its place. This  is particularly the case with the great financial  families. Some, indeed, have the pride to main-  tain the original patronymic and refuse to change  it in any of their descendants. But the great mass  of them concealed their relations one with another  by adopting all manner of fantastic titles, and  there can be no object in such a proceeding save  the object of deception. I admit it is a form of  protection, and especially do I admit that in its  origin it may have mainly derived from a necessity  for self -protection. But I maintain that to-day  the practice does nothing but harm to the Jew.  There are other races which have suffered persecu-  tion, many of them, up and down the world, and  we do not find in them a universal habit of this  kind.   Again, who can say that the bearing of a Jewish  name to-day, or at any rate in the immediate past,  is or was a handicap in commerce where Occidental  nations were concerned ? And as for the Eastern  nations, the Jews there are so sharply differentiated     THE SPECIAL CAUSES OF FRICTION 103   that a false name can be of no service merely to  hide the racial character of its bearer. There  must be another motive present.   The same arguments apply for and against other  forms of secrecy. A man may plead that if secrecy  in relationship were not maintained the dislike of  Jews would lead to false accusations. The Jew  is highly individual, especially in intellectual affairs.  He takes his own line. He expresses his opinions  with singular courage. And such individual opin-  ions will often differ violently from those of men  with whom he is most closely connected. " Why,"  I can understand some distinguished Jewish publi-  cist in England saying, "should I be compro-  mised by people knowing that such-and-such a  Bolshevist in Moscow or in New York is my cousin  or nephew ? I am conservative in temperament ;  I have always served faithfully the state in which  I live; I heartily disapprove of these people's  views and actions. If their relationship with me  were known I should fall under the common ban.  That would be unjust. Therefore I keep the  relationship secret."   The plea is sound, but it does not cover the  ground. It is not sufficient to explain, for instance,  the habit of hiding relationships between men  equally distinguished and equally approved in  the different societies in which they move. It  does not explain why we must be left in ignorance  of the fact that a man whom we are treating as  the best of fellow-citizens should hide his connection  with another man who is treated with equal honour  in another country. There are occasions where  national conflicts make the thing explicable. A  Jew in England with a brother in Germany and a     104 THE JEWS   father, at Constantinople might well be excused  in 1915 for calling himself Montmorency. Yet  we note that often where there is most need to  hide the connection, the connection is not hidden  at all. On the contrary, it is openly advertised.  We all recollect the name of one Jewish financier  who was most unjustly treated during the war.  He had faithfully served this country and the  breach of his connection with it was (to n.y mind  at least, and I think to most people who can judge  the matter) a very bad thing for Britain in the  conflict. Yet there was here no change of name  and no attempt to hide the connection between  himself and his brother, who stood, in another  capital, for the financial policy of our enemies.   Again, the Rothschilds, present in the various  capitals of Europe, have never pretended to hide  their mutual relationships, and no one has thought  any the worse of them, nor has this open practice  in any way diminished their financial power.   There must be more than necessity at work;  I suggest that there is something Uke instinct,  or, at any rate, an inherited tradition so strong  that recourse to it seems natural.   Now it cannot be too forcibly emphasized that  secrecy in any of these forms working through  secret societies, using false names, hiding of relation-  ships, denying Jewish origin specially exasperates  this, our own race, among which the Jews are  thrown in their dispersion. It is invariably dis-  covered, sooner or later, and whenever it is dis-  covered men have an angry feeling that they have  been duped, even in cases where the practice is  most innocent and is no more than the following  of something like a ritual.     THE SPECIAL CAUSES OF FBICTION 105   I doubt whether the Jews have any idea how  strongly this force works against them. If a man  were to say "my name is so-and-so; my father  was bom at such-and-such a place in Galicia ; my  brother is still there in such-and-such a business"  if he told us all that, he would not suffer  upon our appreciating later on that members of  his family abroad were connected with move-  ments we disapproved: no, not even with a  Government in active hostility to our own. Every-  body knows the international position of the  Jew. Everybody knows that he cannot avoid  that position. Everybody makes allowances for  it. And I conceive that the abandonment of this  habit of secrecy is not only possible but would  be very greatly to the advantage of the whole  race.   Perhaps its most absurd form (not its most  dangerous form) is the secrecy maintained by  distinguished men with regard to their Jewish  ancestors. They and their Jewish relations often  suppress it altogether or, at best, touch on it rarely  and obscurely. Why should they act thus ?  Take the case of two men at random out of hun-  dreds whose names are universally known and  by most people respected, the name of Charles  Kingsley, the writer, and the name of Moss-Booth,  the founder of the Salvation Army. Here are  two men who in very different fields played a great  part in English life and who both owed their  genius and nearly all their physical appearance  to Jewish mothers. I should have thought it to  the advantage of the Jewish race and of the indi-  viduals concerned that this fact should be widely  known. The literary abilities of Charles Kingsley,     106 THE JEWS   the organizing and other abilities of Booth are  not lessened in people's eyes, but, if anything,  enhanced, by a knowledge of their true lineage.  Yet the mention of that lineage is treated as though  it were a sort of insult. I have heard it wrung  out in some passionate plea for the Jewish race  as a proof that they are not devoid of abilities,  but never generally published.   Surely it would be more sensible to emphasize  in every possible case the Jewish or partially  Jewish origin of men who distinguished themselves,  and thus to show under what a debt Europeans  stand to the Jewish blood. To treat the matter  as a sort of sacred labyrinth, as a mysterious  temple into which one may now and then be  allowed to peep is ridiculous. The Jews cannot  have their cake and eat it too. If it is surely  it must be in their eyes a matter for pride to  belong to blood which they hold to be superior  and to a tradition of such immense antiquity,  then it cannot be at the same time a matter of  insult. Yet the convention is desperately main-  tained by the Jews themselves. If a man tells  me that he hates the English, and in reply I say,  " That's because you are an Irishman," he does  not fly at my throat. He takes it as a matter of  course that the history of the English government  in Ireland excuses his expression. So far from  being insulted at being called an Irishman he would  be insulted if you said he was not an Irishman.  And so it is with many another nationality which  has suffered oppression and persecution. I can  find no rational basis for a contrary policy in the  case of the Jews. Moreover the habit does this  further harm: it makes men ascribe a Jewish     THE SPECIAL CAUSES OF FKICTION 107   character to anything they dislike, and thus extends  undeservedly the odium against the race.   A foreign movement against one's nation, an  unpopular public figure, a detested doctrine, are  labelled " Jewish " and the field of hate, already  perilously wide, is broadened indefinitely. It is  useless to say, " The Jews do not admit the connec-  tion, the names are not Jewish, there is no overt  Jewish element." He answers, " Jews never do  admit such connection; Jews admittedly hide  under false names ; Jewish action never is overt."  And as things are, until they change there is no  denying what he says. His judgment may be as  wild as you will (I have heard Sinn Feiners called  Jews !), but, so long as this wretched habit of secrecy  is maintained, there is no correcting that judgment.  A universal suspicion is engendered and spreads.   Meanwhile the same vice drags into publicity  every ill-sounding Jewish act and name and leaves  in obscurity the honoured names and useful public  actions of Jewry. For a false name, like a forgery,  advertises itself.   It is not always recognized in this connection  that the Jewish " booms," which are so fruitful  a cause of exasperation, depend on this same policy  of concealment and on that account add to the  volume of anger as each new trick is discovered.   Not that the objects of these world- wide cam-  paigns are unworthy of attention. The Jewish  actor, or film- star, or writer or scientist selected is  usually talented; the victim of injustice whose  case is advertised on the big drum has often a  genuine grievance. But that the notice demanded  is out of all proportion and that its dependence  on Jewish organization is always kept hidden.     108 THE JEWS   So much for the element of secret action. A  great deal more might be written upon it, but  there are two reasons against enlarging thereon.  First, a full discussion would take up far  too much of my space; secondly, it would tend  to add what I particularly wish to avoid in these  pages, I mean emphasis upon the errors of the  Jew. It would continue a quarrel, our whole object  in which is to find peace.   2. THE EXPEESSION OF SUPERIORITY BY THE JEW   This is a very different matter. The mere  sense of superiority is not something in which any  special policy can be recommended, because it  is there and cannot be remedied. It is part of  the whole position. But it is possible to restrain  its expression. For that purpose it is of value  to define it, to put it upon record and to estimate  its effect upon our issue.   The Jew individually feels himself superior to  his non- Jewish contemporary and neighbour of  whatever race, and particularly of our race ;  the Jew feels his nation immeasurably superior  to any other human community, and particularly  to our modern national communities in Europe.   The frank statement of so simple and funda-  mental a truth is rarely made. It will sound,  I fear, shocking in many ears. To many others  it will sound not so much shocking as comic,  and to many more stupefying.   The idea that the Jew should think himself  our superior is something so incomprehensible  to us that we forget the existence of the feeling.  If it be constantly reiterated, for the purpose  of dealing with this great political difficulty, it     THE SPECIAL CAUSES OF FRICTION 109   is perhaps reluctantly admitted, but still held as  sort of abnormal, bewildering truth. I contend  that the forgetfulness of that truth, the attempt  to solve the problem without that truth remaining  constant and fixed in the mind of the statesman,  is in a very large measure the cause of our failure  in the past; and that the way the Jew openly  acts upon it in gesture, tone, manner, social  assertion, is a very important factor in the quarrel  between his race and ours.   Consider the attitude of statesmanship in the  past towards this vital conflict. In every such atti-  tude I think the Jewish conviction of superiority  has been omitted.   For the attitudes taken up by European states-  men in the past towards the alien Jewish element  in their midst have always been one of three sorts :   (1) Either they have acted as though there were  no Jewish nation, as though the Jew were merely  a private citizen like any other who happened  to have peculiar opinions and customs of his own  but who was not substantially different from the  men around him.   (2) Or they have attempted to suppress, or to  expel, or to destroy the Jew with ignominy and  violence.   (3) Or, while recognizing the existence of the  Jewish nation as something separate from their  own fellow-nationals whom they have to admin-  istrate, the statesmen have tried to arrive at  equilibrium by a sort of pact in which Jewish  separateness was recognized, but under conditions  of disability.   Now in all these three methods there is absent  all recognition of the Jewish feeling of superiority.     110 THE JEWS   In the first it is obviously lacking because the  whole idea of a Jewish nation is absent. It is  equally obviously lacking from the second method,  that of persecution: the persecutor instinctively  acts as though the Jew felt himself to be an inferior.  In the third method it is also absent, not in theory  but in practice. For the statesmen who have  acted thus in the past have not attempted to give  the Jews a separate status only, they have in point  of fact nearly always given them an inferior status.  By so doing they have exasperated the Jewish  national sentiment.   For instance, certain nations have treated Jews  as a separate people, as aliens, by forbidding th^m  untrammelled residence, and enforcing registration.  But when it came to taxation or freedom from  military service, then there was no special recog-  nition of the Jew.   There is indeed a fourth attitude which has  occasionally appeared in history when States  have been in active decline or have fallen into  the hands of base and weak men, and that is the  exaggerated flattery and support of a few power-  ful wealthy Jews by administrators who were  bribed or cowed. We are suffering from that  to-day. But these exceptional cases (they have  always led to national disaster) do not form a  true category of Statesmanship in the matter.  Nor is there even in those who thus actually advan-  tage a few Jews above their own fellow-citizens,  and give them special prominence and power, so  much a recognition of the Jewish sense of superiority  as a secret hatred of their Jewish masters.   Bitter as is everywhere the secret attack on the  Jews by those who have subjected themselves for     THE SPECIAL CAUSES OF FKICTION 111   gain or publicity, it is nowhere so bitter as in the  private speech of the politicians.   It would seem in the presence of so many failures  in policy, and all these failures having in common  the non- recognition of this Jewish feeling, that  success can never be obtained unless we fully  allow for it. I submit that there will never be  peace between any Jewish alien minority and the  community within which it may happen to reside  until those who administrate that community  fully accept, and studiously avoid the exaspera-  tion of, this state of the Jewish mind.   In statesmanship, as in every other form of  human activity, exact definition is of the first  importance. We must distinguish at the outset  between this Jewish sense of superiority and any  real superiority. The statesman is not concerned  with the Tightness or wrongness of the Jewish  attitude. It may be a most absurd illusion, or  it may be a most profound vision. He has nothing  to do with that. Having made up his mind that  the small and quite alien minority must be tolerated  and must be allowed to live as happily as possible  in the midst of a community from which it so  profoundly differs, his next duty is to know thor-  oughly the nature of the material upon which he  is acting and with which he, has to deal.   He may smile at the Jewish sense of superiority ;  he may even be privately indignant; but he  must be quite sure that it is a permanent part of the  nation with which he has to settle. It will never  be removed. The Jew in the East End of London,  the poorest of the poor s feels himself the superior  of the magistrate before whom he is hauled, of the  policeman who keeps order in the streets, and     112 THE JEWS   immensely the superior of the simple- faced soldiers  and sailors, whose trade is the most typical of our  own race. He even feels himself the superior of  those whom he better understands the negotia-  tors: the people who live by cunning. The  expression of our faces, our gesture, our manner;  the very fact that our minds, less acute, are also  broader 3 confirms his feeling.   This fixed idea of superiority which appears in  every phrase and implication, is taken for granted  by the Jew. It is felt, I say, by the poorest and  most oppressed, the least rich and the most unfor-  tunate of the Jewish people in our midst. Unfor-  tunately and this is the crux it proceeds to  unrestrained expression. It is this which is so  violently resented. It is this which aggravates  the quarrel. It is this which must be kept in  control if we are to have peace; not the sense  of superiority, that is ineradicable, but the expres-  sion of it. It appears, as we all know, with extra-  ordinary emphasis in the action and manner of  the few very wealthy Jews with whom the directing  classes of the nation are better acquainted. But  whether he be a rich man suffering only from alien  and hostile surroundings, or a poor man suffering  from all the lowering forces of squalor, of destitu-  tion and of contempt, the Jew feels himself the  potential master of his hosts and shows it. He  reposes in the same confidence as was felt by  Disraeli when he said: "The Jew cannot be  absorbed ; it is not possible for a superior race to  be absorbed by an inferior." But unfortunately  he does not only repose on that foundation; he  also acts upon it, and that is intolerable.   We must, I say, allow for this feeling in any     THE SPECIAL CAUSES OF FRICTION 113   settlement we make; we have also to study its  consequences. Otherwise we shall be baffled by  phenomena which would seem inexplicable. But  we need not allow for on the contrary, we should  actively condemn an open attitude of Jewish  contempt for ourselves.   Here are some consequences of this open  expression of superiority consequences which we  all discover to-day in the relations between the  Jewish people and ourselves and which are leading  us into a situation very dangerous for them and  for us.   First, you have that familiar handling of Euro-  pean things by the Jew, which is continually stirring  the wrath of the European and as continually  leaving the Jew in wonderment what possible  harm he can have done. Thus, the Jew will  write of our religion, taking for granted that it  is folly, and will marvel that we are offended.  He will appear in our national discussions, not  only giving advice, but attempting to direct policy,  and will be puzzled to discover that his indifference  to national feeling is annoying. He will postulate  the Jewish temperament as something which,  if different from ours, must, whether we like it or  not, be thrust upon us.   He acts in all these things as every one acts  instinctively in the presence of those whom they  take for granted to be inferiors, and when men  talk of the " Jewish insolence," or the " Jewish  sneer," they imply that attitude. We are wrong  if we take these things as calculated insult. The  action of the Jew, in so far as it proceeds from  this sense of superiority, is no more calculated and  no more deliberately hostile than are our own actions     114 THE JEWS   whenever we find ourselves in relations which  those whom we think inferior to ourselves. But  we are right to point them out, to resent them,  to reprove them, and, if it became necessary, to  end them.   The Jewish problem will never be solved unless  we make allowances for the sense of superiority,  take it for granted as an unavoidable evil, and  restrain our indignation in its presence ; but  neither will it be solved if we permit its more and  more open expression.   Another consequence of this attitude : The Jew,  on account of it, makes no effort to get into touch  with the mass of the race in the midst of which  he may happen to be living. He is content to  remain separate from it, and thinks he cannot  help remaining separate from them. And he  shows it. He consents to associate with the elite,  with those who direct, with those who have some  special sort of function, but it seems to him a waste  of time to attempt communion with the rest.  And he shows it. That is what Renan meant  when he said that the Jews were the least demo-  cratic of all people. Renan, who was supported  by Jewish money and lived, while he was doing  his best work, dependent on a Jewish publisher;  Renan, who was so fascinated by the history of  Israel, and who decided himself to become a  scholar in all Hebraic things, understood the Jew  not at all. His judgments upon them are invari-  ably superficial and to one side of the truth ; the  judgments of a foreigner an admiring foreigner  but not a sympathetic foreigner. And when he  said that the Jews were not democratic he was,  instead of passing a judgment upon an intimate     THE SPECIAL CAUSES OF FRICTION 115   political instinct of the Jewish people, simply  noting an external phenomenon. For the Jews  are, as a fact, strongly democratic no nation more  so in their national relations among themselves ;  they only appear undemocratic to us because they  openly look down on us among whom they live.  Another form taken by that open expression of  the sense of superiority among the Jews: It  lends to all their actions in our State a certain  assurance and solidity which vastly strengthens  their power of resistance, no doubt, but also pro-  vokes their misfortunes. The religious interpreter  of history might say that they had been specially  endowed with this sense by Providence because  Providence intended them to survive as a national  unit miraculously, in the face of every disability ;  to remain themselves for 2,000 years under condi-  tions which would have destroyed any other  people in perhaps a century: and yet intended  to suffer. The rationalist will say that the expres-  sion of a sense of superiority, and the power of resist-  ance that accompanies it are but different names  for the same thing; that but for the presence of  that expression of superiority the resistance could  not have succeeded, but for the resistance there  could have been no persecution ; that there was  no design in the matter, only the chance presence  of a particular quality which has produced its  necessary and logical effect. But whichever be  the true explanation, the historical fact remains,  that this sense of superiority produced an open  and overweening expression of it whenever the  Jews have been free to give vent to their feelings,  and that while it has had, as one great consequence,  the strengthening of the identity, permanence,     116 THE JEWS   survival of the Jewish people, it has also had,  for another great consequence, their recurrent  oppression following on every period of freedom.   There is one last thing to be said, which it is  almost impossible to say without the danger of  giving pain and therefore of confusing the problem  and making the solution more difficult. But it  must be said, because, if we shirk it, the problem  is confused the more. It is this: While it is  undoubtedly true, and will always be true, that  a Jew feels himself the superior of his hosts, it is  also true that his hosts feel themselves immeasur-  ably superior to the Jew. We can only arrive at  a just and peaceable solution of our difficulties by  remembering that the Jew, to whom we have  given special and alien status in the Common-  wealth, is all the while thinking of himself as our  superior. But on his side the Jew must recognize,  however unpalatable to him the recognition may  be, that those among whom he is living and whose  inferiority he takes for granted, on their side regard  him as something much less than themselves.   That statement, I know, will be as stupefying to  the Jew as its converse is stupefying to us. It  will seem as extraordinary, as incredible, and all  the rest of it ; but it is true, and it is a permanent  truth. Unless the Jews recognize that truth  the trouble will go on indefinitely. There is no  European so mean in fortune or so base in  character as not to feel himself altogether the  superior of any Jew, however wealthy, however  powerful, and (I am afraid I must add) however  good. True, virtue has a superiority of its own  which cannot be hidden, and the cruel, or the  treacherous, or the debauched European cannot     THE SPECIAL CAUSES OF FRICTION 117   but feel himself morally inferior to a Jew who is  just, self- governed, merciful, generous, and the  rest of it. But we know how it is with national  feelings. The type is stronger for us than the  individual; and while we may recognize certain  superior characteristics in the individual, we are  thinking all the while of the race, of the communal  form, and contrasting our own with the alien  form to the disadvantage of the latter.   So difficult is it for the Jew to appreciate this  factor in the problem that his lack of appreciation  has been almost as great a cause of difficulty in  the past as the same lack upon our side. We  seem to him insolent when, in our own eyes, we  are merely acting normally as superiors.   What emotion does it not create, I wonder, in  some Jewish merchant or money-dealer who has  purchased a high directing place in our plutocracy  when he discovers from the gesture, the tone,  the expression of some chance poor Englishman,  perhaps no more than an embarrassed hack writer,  a clear feeling of superiority? Must it not seem  to him mere insolence? " What possible claim"  (he will say within himself) " has thisgoy, and a poor  unsuccessful goy at that, to treat me as though  I were less than he ! I, who am worth millions,  who am ruling and doing what I will with his own  national leaders, who dispose of his State very much  as I choose, and who belong to that nation which  is wholly above all others, the Jewish people ? "  Everywhere the Jew discovers the consequences  of this feeling, even though that feeling be to him  so incomprehensible that he can hardly admit its  existence.   Well, whether he likes to admit it or not, it is     118 THE JEWS   there. Individual Jews may be flattered for the  sake of their wealth or because of the fear of them,  in which a commercial community stands. Such  Jews as mistake the current printed word which  they read for the spoken words they never hear  may fall into the error of thinking that this sense  of superiority on our part did not exist. They  must be warned, if ever the problem is to be solved,  that it does.   In their case, just as in ours, a right solution can  only be arrived at by the frank admission that the  feeling is there and by the fixed knowledge that,  whether the feeling be an illusion or represent a  reality, it will not change ; but also by a repression  of it in our mutual relations.   We may add to our summary of this subtle but  profound cause of disturbance the further truth  that a paradox of the sort is to be found, though  perhaps less emphasized, in every other political  problem. The diplomat resident in a foreign  capital has to consider not only his own certitude  that his hosts are inferior, but their certitude  of their own superiority to him and his. The  general in the field may be certain of his mastery  over an opponent, but if that opponent is as yet  undefeated he will do ill to forget that he is matched  by a confidence equal to his own. Still more does  the negotiator in commerce act upon this principle  and recognize it, or at least if he fails to do so, he  invites disaster. For when the commercial man  is occupied in overreaching his neighbour, his  chances of success very largely depend upon his  treating that neighbour as though he really  were what he believes himself to be. He may  be dealing with a stupid and vain man easily     THE SPECIAL CAUSES OF FRICTION 119   to be overmatched and impoverished, but if he lets  it appear that he regards his proposed victim as a  vain and stupid man, then he will miss his bargain.   In general, there is no success over others, nor  even (which is much more necessary), any permanent  arrangement possible with others, unless we know,  allow for, and act upon the self- judgment of others,  however wrong we may believe that self-judgment  to be.   It is clear that in this conflict between the Jew  and, let us say, the European (for it is between  the Jew and the white Occidental race that our  present problem lies, though the same problem  arises with all other races among whom the Jew  may find himself), both parties cannot be right.  A being superior to the race of man and looking  on our petty quarrels might be able to decide  which of the two opponents were nearer reality,  and whether we are the better justified in our  contempt of the Jew or the Jew in his contempt of  us. But in working out our own solution without  the aid of such guidance, there is no rule but for  both parties to take for granted what each regards  as an illusion in the other ; to restrain its expression  for the sake of reaching a settlement ; and in the  settlement they arrive at, to admit as a factor  necessarily and permanently present what each  still secretly regards as a folly, but an incurable  folly, in the other.   The alternative to such self-restraint is a falling  back into the old circle of submission, consequent  anger accompanied by shame and violence, and  these followed by remorse.     THE CAUSE OF FRICTION  UPON OUR SIDE     CHAPTER VI  THE CAUSE OF FRICTION UPON OUR SIDE   HAVING concluded a brief review of the causes of  friction upon the Jewish side, we must turn to the  cause of friction upon our own.   At first sight it might seem that the task was  superfluous. Action and reaction are equal and  opposite. If you have shown why A irritates B,  you have also presumably shown why B irritates  A. Or again, if you regard an alien minority in  a community as an irritant (which it nearly always  is and which it certainly is in the case of the  Jews), you have, it would seem, sufficiently defined  the position and need not trouble to examine what  part the irritated play in the matter. What is  parasitical at the worst preys upon the general  body, at the best disturbs it. The general body  would appear passive. It has no part in the business  but to react against the cause of the disturbance  and if possible get rid of it. As that cause is  none of its making, one need not seek for any  responsibility on its side.   The house is ours: the Jew is an intruder (an  objector may say), and there is an end of it.   But the situation is not as simple as that. Quite  apart from the fact that the Jew will certainly Hot  allow such a description of his activity, there is   123     124 THE JEWS   the obvious truth that where you are dealing with  two human factors, that is, with two factors which  have a common nature and therefore common  duties, you are also dealing with two known and  analysable organic things. You are also dealing  with two sets of wills, and these wills we know to  be free, in spite of sophists. A man and a group  of men can do well or ill, both absolutely, and  relatively to some particular question in hand;  and no group of men can escape responsibility  in relation to any other group with which it is in  contact. It is certain that we play a part ourselves  in this quarrel between us and the Jews. It is  a part which is in a measure inevitable, because it  proceeds in a measure from the mere contrast  between two racial characters. But there is a  remaining part which can be remedied by the action  of the will.   Though we cannot change that element which is  inherent in our nature any more than the Jews  can change theirs, yet an understanding of it makes  all the difference; and we can certainly change  those elements which are inherent in our wills.   The proof of this is that in the long story of the  relations between the two races, there have been,  in various times and places, those exceptional  chapters of calm to which I have alluded on an  earlier page, and these could not have been main-  tained had not the causes of friction been modified  on either side, but especially upon ours.   All that cause of friction which arises from the  mere contrast of character may be set down very  briefly. It is included in what has just been said  on the general causes, the difference in nature  between the Jews and ourselves. If their form of     CAUSE OF FRICTION UPON OUB SIDE 125   courage, their form of generosity, their form of  loyalty is, as it is, of a different quality from ours ;  if their defects show the same difference of quality  or colour ; if we perpetually feel, as we do feel,, the  friction caused by this contrast, so do they, pre-  sumably, feel a corresponding friction in their  dealings with us. We shall neither of us be able  to change that state of affairs. We must admit it,  and we must try to understand its nature.   Above all, we must not take it for granted that  a difference from ourselves is in itself an evil in  another. That is a point to be insisted upon.  When we are dealing with inanimate nature, or  with unintelligent animate nature, we do not  ascribe motive, for there is no motive to ascribe.  A man does not go about with bitterness in his  heart against wasps, though the purpose of the  wasp is very different from the purpose of the man  and their interests clash. He does not call the  wasp wicked, nor, save as a relief to his feelings,  give it moral names. He does not condemn the  wasp. Still less does he condemn all wasps, or  anything else in nature around him that works  against his interest. But when he has to deal with  other human beings, man at once begins to ascribe  a motive. He must do so, because he knows that  motive is the spring of all human action, includ-  ing his own. When that motive differs from his,  contrasts with his and is therefore in any degree  inimical to his, he is inclined to ascribe an evil  motive. All that is a truism as old as the hills.   If you have not to live with those who thus differ  from you there is no great harm done, but if you  have to accept them as part of your life, it  is a different matter. It is then essential     126 THE JEWS   to the order of the State that this illusion of  directly antagonistic motive should be watched  and restrained.   But all this concerns rather our duty in the matter  than the mere cause of friction.   The first cause of friction is that contrast which  is the same whether we describe it from the aliens'  point of view, as has just been done, or from our  own.   The causes of friction which lie within the pro-  vince of the will, and which are, therefore, directly  a matter for reform, are of another kind. The first  of them undoubtedly is our disingenuousness in our  dealings with the Jew.   This disingenuousness extends from our daily habit  to our treatment of history. It is more deep-rooted  than most people are aware of, more widespread  than those who are aware of it like to admit. It  affects our relations with the Jews just as much  when we are attempting to defend their position  in the State as when we attack them. Indeed, I  think it affects our relations more when we are  trying to defend them than when we attack them.  The only two kinds of men who show perfect  candour in their dealings with the Jews are the  completely ignorant dupe who can hardly tell a  Jew when he sees one and who accepts as a reality  the old fiction of there being no difference except a  difference of religion (which he has been taught to  think unimportant) and the person called an " Anti-  Semite."   Both these types certainly say what they think.  That is why in their heart of hearts the Jews are  grateful to both, although both are intellectually  contemptible. The Jew feels, I think, when he     CAUSE OP FRICTION UPON OUR SIDE 127   meets either of these types, " At any rate I know  where I am." But the great bulk of men, especially  among the more cultivated, are grossly disingenuous  in all their dealings with the Jews. It is the great  fault of our side which corresponds to the fault of  secrecy upon theirs. And when you have allowed  for routine, for the necessities of social intercourse,  for convention and the rest, it remains a deliberately  conceived moral evil.   A man and his friend meet in the street a  Jew whom they know; they exchange ordinary  civilities with him; they pass on. The moment  his back is turned each comments to his companion  upon the Jewish character of the man they have  just left, and almost invariably to his disadvantage.   Now to blame this way of going on does not imply  that when you meet your Jewish acquaintance you  are to offend him by saying to his face the kind of  things you say behind his back; that would be a  monstrous piece of cynicism and, in practice, insane.  We do not act thus in any relation of life. But it  does mean that in the attitude, the gesture, the  tone of the voice, we play a deliberately false part  in our relations with Jews, which we do not play  in our relations with any other people. A peculiar  pretence, a pretence only practised with Jews, is  elaborately maintained. There is no allusion to  or admission of our real attitude, our sense of con-  trast. We therefore suffer an unnatural strain;  and we relieve of the strain immediately after-  wards by an exaggeration of the contrast we have  pretended to ignore. It is blameworthy in a special  degree because it is peculiar to that one case. If  we admitted the Jew as a Jew, talked to him of  the things that were uppermost in his mind and     128 THE JEWS   in ours, and treated him as we treat any other  foreigner in our midst, there would have been no  harm done. As it is the lie has done a double  harm to him and to us. To us by an exasperation  which is entirely our own fault, to him by deceiving  him as to his true position.   The Jews who mix with the wealthiest classes  to-day, especially in London, have no true idea of  their real position in the eyes of their guests ; and  the fault is with their guests.   I have cited an obvious daily example, but it is  the least important, for it is passing and shallow.  This disingenuousness spreads to relations more  permanent. A man goes into business with a Jew,  accepts him as a partner, works with him constantly  and yet nourishes in his heart a disloyalty to that  relationship. It is a phenomenon of constant  recurrence and it poisons the relations between the  two races. If a man is prepared to enter into one  of these permanent relations with another man who  differs fundamentally from himself in tradition and  human character, he must face the consequences.  One of those consequences, if he is to remain an  honest man, is the acceptation of the position with  all that it implies. He cannot have the advantage  as he hopes to have it of the Jewish sobriety, the  Jewish tenacity, the Jewish lucidity of thought, the  Jewish international relationships, the Jewish  opportunity of advancement through the aid of his  fellows, and at the same time secretly indulge in a  contempt and dislike for his companion, and relieve  that suppressed feeling in his absence. Yet that is  what men are doing daily throughout the business  world.   Listen to the conversation of such a man as,     CAUSE OF FRICTION UPON OUR SIDE 129   having thus engaged in intimate commercial  relationship with the Jew, falls upon misfortune.  He spends the rest of his life denouncing the Jews  as a race and his own companion in misfortune in  particular. He has no right to do it. It is undig-  nified ; it is puerile, but, worst of all, it is unjust.  He presumably knew what he was doing when he  entered into what could not but be a difficult  relationship. The consequences of that relationship  he should accept whether they turn out well for  him or ill.   We find something perhaps even worse to note  in the attitude of those who are successful in their  business through an alliance with the Jew. For in  this case gratitude should be added to justice,  and that gratitude is very rarely shown. On the  contrary, the non- Jewish partner is for ever in  a mood of complaint about his share. He is  perpetually in a grievance that he has been over-  reached, or that he has been bullied, or that he has  been robbed, save in those very rare cases where  the success is so overwhelming, the fortunes so  rapid, that there is no room for a grudge. In  almost every other case that I have come across  there is that element of recrimination behind the  Jew's back even under conditions of success.   I know very well what can be said upon the other  side. It can be said that what I have called upon  a former page the " ruthlessness " of the Jew in  commercial relations, as well as his tenacity and  all the rest, make the contest unequal ; that in a  partnership between Jew and non- Jew the non- Jew  is, as a fact, often overreached and is, as a fact,  often left (as the pretty vocabulary of modern  commerce has it) " in the cart." But pray why did     130 THE JEWS   the non- Jew enter into the alliance at all ? Was  it not precisely in order that he should benefit, if  he could, by those very qualities which he later  denounces ? He expected that those qualities  which make for the success of the Jew in commerce  would also benefit himself. He knew that there  must always be a certain amount of competition,  even within such an alliance. He backed himself  to watch his own interests under conditions which  he knew perfectly well when he entered into them.  He has not a leg to stand upon in quarrelling with  the results of the relationship, for in so doing he  is merely quarrelling with his own judgment and,  for the matter of that, his own plot.   If a man cannot tolerate the contrast between the  Jewish race and our own, or if he regards that race  as possessing energies which will invariably defeat  him in the competition of commerce, then let him  keep away from a Jewish alliance altogether. It  is the simplest plan. But to immix himself with  the Jewish commercial activity and then to grumble  at the results is despicable.   All this is worse, of course, when one is dealing  with relations even closer than those of commerce.  Those relations are numerous in the modern world,  and disingenuousness in them takes the worst  possible form. Men, especially of the wealthier  classes of the gentry, will make the closest friends of  Jews with the avowed purpose of personal advant-  age. They think the friendship will help them to  great positions in the State, or to the advancement  of private fortune, or to fame. In that calcu-  lation they are wise. For the Jew has to-day  exceptional power in all these things. They there-  fore have the Jew continually at their tables, they     CAUSE OF FRICTION UPON OUR SIDE 131   stay continually under the Jew's roof. In all the  relations of life they are as intimate as friends can  be. Yet they relieve the strain which such an  unnatural situation imposes by a standing sneer at  their Jewish friends in their absence. One may say  of such men (and they are to-day an increasing  majority among our rich) that the falsity of their  situation has got on their nerves. It has become a  sort of disease with them ; and I am very certain  that when the opportunity comes, when the public  reaction against Jewish power rises, clamorous,  insistent and open, they will be among the first to  take their revenge. It is abominable, but it is true.   And this truth applies not only to friendships,  it even applies to marriages. Marriage between  Christian and Jew is, in that rank, an affair of  interest, and the bitterness the relation breeds is  excessive.   This disingenuousness, then lack of candour on  the part of our race in its dealings with the Jew  a vice particularly rife among the wealthy and  middle classes (far less common among the poor),  extends, as I have said, to history. We dare not,  or will not teach in our history books the plain facts  of the relations between our own race and the Jews.  We throw the story of these relations, which are  among the half-dozen leading factors of history,  right into the background even when we do mention  it. In what they are taught of history the school-  boy and the undergraduate come across no more  than a line or two upon those relations. The  teacher cannot be quite silent upon the expulsion  of the Jews under Edward I or upon their return  under Cromwell. A man cannot read the history  of the Roman Empire without hearing of the     132 THE JEWS   war. A man cannot read the Constitutional  History of England without hearing of the special  economic position of Jews under the Mediaeval  Crown. But the vastness of the subject, its  permanent and insistent character throughout two  thousand years; its great episodes; its general  effect all that is deliberately suppressed.   How many people, for instance, of those who  profess a good knowledge of the Roman Empire,  even in its details, are aware, let alone have  written upon the tremendous massacres and counter-  massacres of Jews and Europeans, the mass of  edicts alternately protecting and persecuting Jews ;  the economic position of the Jew, especially in the  later empire ; the character of the dispersion ?   There took place in Cyprus and in the Libyan  cities under Hadrian a Jewish movement against  the surrounding non- Jewish society far exceeding  in violence the late wreckage of Russia, which  to-day fills all our thoughts. The massacres were  wholesale and so were the reprisals. The Jews  killed a quarter of a million of the people of Cyprus  alone, and the Roman authorities answered with a  repression which was a pitiless war.   One might pile up instances indefinitely. The  point is, that the average educated man has never  been allowed to hear of them. What a factor the  Jew was in that Roman State from which we all  spring, how he survived its violent antagonism to  him and his antagonism to it ; the special privilege  whereby he was excepted from a worship of its  gods ; his handling of its finances all the intimate  parallel which it affords to later times is left in  silence. The average educated man who has been  taught, even in some fullness, his Roman History,     CAUSE OF FRICTION UPON OUR SIDE 133   leaves that study with the impression that the Jews  (if he had noticed them at all) are but an insig-  nificant detail in the story.   So it is with history more recent and even con-  temporaneous. In the history of the nineteenth  century it is outrageous. The special character of  the Jew, his actions through the Secret Societies  and in the various revolutions of foreign States, his  rapid acquisition of power through finance, political  and social, especially in this country all that is left  out. It is an exact parallel to the disingenuousness  which we note in social relations. The same man  who shall have written a monograph upon some point  of nineteenth century history and left his readers  in ignorance of the Jewish elements in the story  will regale you in private with a dozen anecdotes :  such-and-such a man was a Jew ; such-and-such a  man was half a Jew ; another was controlled in his  policy by a Jewish mistress; the go-between in  such-and-such a negotiation was a Jew ; the Jewish  blood in such-and-such a family came in thus and  thus And so forth: but not a word of it on the  printed page !   This deliberate falsehood equally applies to  contemporary record. The newspaper reader is  deceived so far as it is still possible to deceive him  with the most shameless lies. " Abraham  Cohen, a Pole"; "M. Mosevitch, a distinguished  Roumanian" ; " Mr. Schiff, and other representa-  tive Americans" ; " M. Bergson with his typically  French lucidity" ; " Maximilian Harden, always  courageous in his criticism of his own people" (his  own being the German) . . . and the rest of the  rubbish. It is weakening, I admit, but it has not  yet ceased.     134 THE JEWS   Now this form of falsehood corrodes, of course,  the souls of those who indulge in it. But that does  not concern the matter of this book. Where it  comes in as a cause of friction between the two races,  and a removable cause of friction, is in the effect  it has upon the Jewish conception of their position  in our society. It falsifies that conception alto-  gether. It produces in the Jew a false sense of  security and a completely distorted phantasm of the  way in which he is really received in our society.  The more this disingenuousness is practised the  more the surprise which follows upon its discovery  and the more legitimate the bitterness and hatred  which that surprise occasions in those of whom we  are the hosts. It is not only true of this country ;  it is true of every other country in which the Jew  has been harboured and for a time protected.  Invariably he has complained that his awakening  was rude, that he was bewildered by what seemed to  him a novel and inexplicable feeling against him;  that he had thought he was among friends and  found himself suddenly among treacherous enemies.  All this would have been saved to others in the past,  and will be saved to ourselves in the near future, if  this pestilent habit of falsehood were eliminated.   Disingenuousness is, on our side, the first main  cause of the friction between the two races.   The second main cause of friction upon our side  is the unintelligence of our dealing with the Jews.  That unintelligence is allied, of course, to the dis-  ingenuousness of which I have spoken ; but it is a  separate thing none the less, and we can learn from  the Jews its opposite, for their dealings with us are  always intelligent. They know what they are  driving at in those relations, though they often     CAUSE OF FRICTION UPON OUR SIDE 135   misunderstand the material with which they deal.  But we, over and over again, would seem not even  to know what we are driving at.   What could be more unintelligent, for instance,  than the special forms of courtesy with which the  Jew is treated ? I am not talking of the elaborate,  false friendship which I have just dealt with under  the head of disingenuousness, but of the genuine  attempts at courtesy towards this alien people  the courtesy expressed by those who have no  intimate relations with them, and do not desire to  have intimate relations with them. It is almost  invariably, in those who commonly avoid the Jews,  a courtesy which expresses patronage on the surface  of it. It may be compared with the courtesy that  rich men show to poor men as offensive a thing as  there is in the world.   And how unintelligent is our dealing with any  particular Jewish problem; for instance, the  problem of Jewish immigration ! We mask it  under false names, calling it " the alien question,"  " Russian immigration." " the influx of undesir-  ables from Eastern and Central Europe," and any  number of other timorous equivalents. The process  is one of cowardly falsehood, but the falsehood is  not more remarkable than the stupidity, for no  one is taken in and least of all the Jews them-  selves.   This unintelligence extends to many another  field. How unintelligent are the efforts of the  writers who would, as it were, make amends to the  Jews for former persecution by putting imaginary  Jew heroes into their books. In this particular we  offend less than did our fathers of the Victorian  period. Dickens' offence was grave. He disliked     136 THE JEWS   Jews instinctively; when he wrote of a Jew  according to his inclination he made him out a  criminal. Hearing that he must make amends  for this action, he introduced a Jew who is like  nothing on earth a sort of compound of an Arab  Sheik and a Family Bible picture from the Old  Testament, and the whole embroidered on an  utterly non- Jewish a purely English character.   How unintelligent are the various defences of the  Jew by the non- Jew, even with the best intentions !  You will hear people tell you solemnly, as a sort of  revelation, that there are kindly, witty Jews, Jews  who are good prize-fighters or good fencers. I well  remember one old gentleman who tried hard to  convince me (as though I needed convincing) that  there were Jews who had taste. He said to me, " I  do not myself go into Jewish houses, but my son  does, and he assures me that much of the decoration  is in good taste." How unintelligent is the idea  that because a man's motives are not open and  because he has not the same reasons for serving the  State that you have, therefore he is to be perpetually  under suspicion ! How ".till more unintelligent is  the conception that, although he is alien, yet you  cannot use him in certain special services for the  State.   This unintelligence is specially apparent in the  treatment of the Jew in his international relations.  The Jew is a nomad, the non- Jew a man with a  fixed habitation. The Englishman, the Frenchman  and the rest are perpetually approaching the Jew  as though he also had a fixed habitation. We seem  never to be able to get over the shock of surprise  when we learn that a particular Jew abroad is the  cousin, or nephew, or brother of another Jew with a     CAUSE OF FRICTION UPON OUE SIDE 137   different name in England, or with another Jew with  yet another name in Pinsk or San Francisco. Yet,  surely, this is of the very essence of the Jewish  position. We ought to take it for granted that the  Jew is thus nomadic, international, spread all over  the world, migratory, as we take the same thing for  granted in birds of passage. To adopt the attitude  which we almost invariably dp and to feel a shock  of surprise when we discover what must in the  nature of things be the most regular feature in the  civic situation of the Jew, is to fall into that most  stupid of all stupid errors, the reading of oneself  into others.   I remember the horror and scandal with which  men whispered their discovery that a man with a  German name, who had got into trouble a few years  ago, was the first cousin of a Cabinet Minister. Why  not ? They seemed to be struck all of a heap by  the dreadful revelation that the names borne by  Jews were not always their original names, that  rich and important men often have poor rela-  tions, and that poor relations often get embar-  rassed.   In terms of their own society the thing would  have been simple enough. They would have felt  no surprise to hear that some man of our own race,  who had made a rapid fortune and purchased a  political position, suffered from a disreputable  relative, also of our own race. But because in the  case of the Jew there were the two unusual elements  of a foreign name and distant origin, they were  bewildered. They even thought it in some way  specially scandalous. They had not appreciated the  material with which they were dealing, and that is  the mark of unintelligence. But the cream of unin-     138 THE JEWS   telligence, the form in which unintelligent treatment  of him most exasperates the Jew, is undoubtedly  that typical, that ceaseless case of the man who is  perpetually crying out against Israel, and purpos-  ing nothing the man who nourishes a sterile  grievance ; who has not even the clarity or vigour to  attempt suppression; who would be horrified at  persecution, almost equally horrified at any breach  of convention, and yet continues to cry out against  a state of affairs which he does nothing to put right  and for which he has not even a theoretic solution.  The last of the main causes of friction between  the Jews and ourselves is lack of charity, and that  in the simplest form of refusing to go half way to  meet the Jew, and of refusing to put ourselves in  the shoes of the Jew so as to understand his position  in our society and his attitude towards it. It is a  universal fault just as common in those who daily  associate with, live off, and fawn upon Jews  as in those who keep aloof from them. It never  seems to occur to anyone on our side who has to  deal with the Jewish problem, to make the imagin-  ative effort required. And yet we have the parallel  ready to our hands. The Jew feels among us, only  with far greater intensity, what we feel when we are  resident in a foreign country a sense of exile, a  sense of irritation against alien things, merely  because they are alien; a great desire for com-  panionship and for understanding, yet a great  indifference to the fate of those among whom he  finds himself ; an added attachment, not, indeed,  to his territorial home, for he has none, but to his  nation. If we could perpetually bear in mind  that parallel, the friction on our side would be  greatly modified,     CAUSE OF FEICTION UPON OUE SIDE 139   There are many Jewish societies which ask  nothing better than to have occasional addresses  from non-Jews. Those addresses are given, those  Societies are visited, but not nearly as much as they  should be.   There is a great Jewish literature I mean a great  mass of books dealing specially with the Jew's  position from the Jew's own point of view. It is  not read or known. I may be told that the fault  of all this is largely that of the Jews themselves on  account of their use of secrecy. I do not think the  objection applies. With all his use of secrecy the  Jew is there present among us for us to approach,  if we will, and to understand as best we can. And I  say that the approach is not made.   It is an effort, of course. No one knows it better  than I; for on more than one occasion when I  have addressed a Jewish audience I have found  myself the ob j ect of very severe language. But it is  an effort which every one ought to make who admits  that there is a Jewish problem at all, and it is an  effort very rarely made. It is not only an effort  because it involves the crossing of a gulf, it is also  an effort because we find this alien thing in many  ways repugnant to us. Yet people make that  effort for the purposes of the State continually  where other races are concerned. It is far more  important that they should make it where the Jews  are concerned. For those other alien races,  administrated for the moment by officials of our  own race, will not permanently be so administered.  The relations between them and us are for a brief  time, and they are relations that constantly change.  The Jew is with us always ; and the type of contact  between his race and ours will remain much the     140 THE JEWS   same through an indefinitely long future as they  have through so very long a past.     Here, then, is the summary, as I see it, of the  causes of friction between the two races.   First, a general cause, which lies in the con-  trasting nature of the two and upon the irritant  effect of that contrast. This cause is not to be  eliminated, though its effects may be modified.  It is a profound contrast and a sharp irritant con-  stant in its activity. The essential is to recognize  its real nature, not to give to it general terms of  faults and vices, but to appreciate the difference of  quality involved : above all, not to tell lies about it  and pretend it is not present.   Secondly, as to special causes of friction I  mean causes which on their side, as on ours, can be,  if not eliminated, at any rate modified I suggest  that the most prominent are: 1. The sense of  superiority which, though it cannot be destroyed,  can at least be checked in expression and which,  by a pretty irony, is equally strong upon both sides.   2. The use of secrecy by the Jews themselves;  partly as a weapon of defence, partly as a method of  action, always to be deplored, and of a nature  particularly exasperating to our temperament.   3. Upon our side, a persistent disingenuous-  ness in our treatment of this minority. Unintelli-  gence in their treatment: the whole made  worse by an indifference or lack of charity, a  refusal to make the effort necessary for meeting and  understanding as well as we can the race which  must always be with us and which is yet so different  from our own.     CAUSE OF FRICTION UPON OUR SIDE 141   Now these causes of friction permanently present  tend to produce what I have called the tragic  cycle: welcome of a Jewish colony, then ill- ease,  followed by acute ill- ease, followed by persecution,  exile and even massacre. This followed, naturally,  by a reaction and the taking up of the process all  over again.   In our own time we have seen, quite lately, the  succession of the second to the first of these stages ;  we have passed from welcome to ill- ease. That pas-  sage threatens a further passage from the second to  the third; from the third to the terrible conclusion.   We feel quite secure to-day from the last  extreme of this cycle. We are certain it will never  come to persecution: that is still inconceivable.  But it is not inconceivable everywhere: and no  society is free from change. Some now alive may  live to see riots even in this quiet polity and worse  in newer or less settled states.   Such a catastrophe is to be avoided by every  effort in our power and a solution to the problem  presented must imperatively be sought. But in  passing we should note, for the consideration of  those who may doubt the acuteness of the problem  and the immediate practical necessity for a solution,  the presence of a phenomenon which amply proves  that it is acute and that the solution is necessary.  That phenomenon is the presence to-day of a new  type, the Anti-Semite, the man to whom all the  Jews are abhorrent.   It is a phenomenon which has increased pro-  digiously ; its rate of increase is accelerating, and as  a warning of the peril, as a proof of its magnitude,  I propose to examine that phenomenon closely in  my next chapter.     THE ANTI-SEMITE     CHAPTER VII  THE ANTI-SEMITE   To understand any problem one must study not  only its real factors as they appear to a reasonable  man who sees the whole affair steadily ; one must  also understand the insanities and distortions the  problem has provoked, for they singularly illus-  trate its character and force.   It is not enough to consider only the actual in  any difficulty to be solved, it is necessary also to  consider the imaginary; because the legend or  illusion is a direct product of the truth and shows  how the truth has acted on other minds.   Thus a caricature brings out what we uncon-  sciously know to be present in any personality,  emphasizes it, and though false in its exaggeration,  forbids us to forget it in the future. Thus any  extreme, no matter how false its lack of proportion,  is of the highest value to judgment.   In a practical problem of politics there is another  most weighty reason for examining extreme and  distorted opinion : which is, that in politics we deal  not only with real things but with the liking or  disliking of these things by living men: their  exaggerated or ill-informed affection or repulsion.  All statesmanship lies in the apprehension of enthu-  siasm and indifference.   145 L     146 THE JEWS   Now there are in this great political problem  presented by the Jewish race in our midst two  extremes. One we have already studied: it is the  extreme folly of falsehood, of pretending that the  problem is not there.   That extreme was an almost universal folly in  the immediate past, especially in this country. It  is now abandoned by all of our generation save a  few people of an official sort, and these will not  long maintain an attitude outworn and already  ridiculous.   But the other extreme remains to be studied. It  is, in our society, quite a recent phenomenon, though  it has gained very great strength in recent years  and is increasing alarmingly. It is the extreme of  hatred. It is the extreme manifested by those who  have but one motive in their action towards the  Jewish race, and that motive a mere desire for its  elimination. It implies that there is no peace  possible between the two races ; no reasoned political  solution. It relies upon nothing but antagonism.  It is already very strong, and its adherents believe  themselves to be on the eve of a sort of blundering  triumph.   Every one who desires to deal with this grave  political matter practically, that is, to establish a  permanent policy, will be much more concerned  with the extreme here examined than with the  other extreme, which ignores the problem altogether.  For this new extreme of active hatred is flourishing ;  that other, older extreme no longer functions.   The near future will have to deal, in practical  politics, not only with the problem presented by  the Jews as an alien power within the State, but  (what will probably prove a more difficult matter)     THE ANTI-SEMITE 147   with the hater of the Jew, who is claiming, and  rapidly achieving, power on his side. The type is  as old as the problem ; it is two thousand years old.  But it waxes and wanes. Its modern name of  " Anti-Semite" is as ridiculous in derivation as it is  ludicrous in form. It is partly of German academic  origin and partly a newspaper name, vulgar as one  would expect it to be from such an origin, and also  as falsely pedantic as one would expect, but the  exasperated mood of which it is a label is very  real.   I say the word " Anti-Semite" is vulgar and  pedantic : that I think will be universally admitted.  It is also nonsensical. The antagonism to the Jews  has nothing to do with any supposed " Semitic "  race which probably does not exist any more than  do many other modern hypothetical abstractions,  and which, anyhow, does not come into the matter.  The Anti-Semite is not a man who hates the modern  Arabs or the ancient Carthaginians. He is a man  who hates Jews.   However, we must accept the word because it has  become currency, and go on to the more essential  matter of discovering how those to whom it applies  are moved, what the result of their action would  be if ( or when) they could act freely ; and, most  important of all, of what they are a sign.   The Anti-Semite is a man marked by two main  characters. In the first place he hates the Jews in  themselves. His motive is not a hatred of their  presence in our society. His motive is not the  hatred of concealment, falsehood, hypocrisy, corrup-  tion and all the other' incidental evils of that false  position. These things, indeed, irritate him, but  they are not his leading motive. His leading motive     148 THE JEWS   is a hatred of the Jewish people. He is in intense  reaction against this alien thing which he perceives  to have acquired so much power in his society. The  way in which it has exercised this power especially  exasperates him. But he will remain a hater of the  Jewish nation when they are despised, insignificant,  and neglected, and he will remain a hater of it even  if there be then attached to its position no accidents  of secrecy, falsehood and financial corruption. The  type increases rapidly when Jews have power : it  becomes almost universal when they begin to abuse  that power. It dwindles as that power declines.  But it is always the same and is an index of peril.   The Anti-Semite is a man who wants to get rid of  the Jews. He is filled with an instinctive feeling in  the matter. He detests the Jew as a Jew, and would  detest him wherever he found him. The evidences  of such a state of mind are familiar to us all. The  Anti-Semite admires, for instance, a work of art;  on finding its author to be a Jew it becomes dis-  tasteful to him though the work remains exactly  what it was before. The Anti-Semite will confuse  the action of any particular Jew with his general  odium for the race. He will hardly admit high  talents in his adversaries, or if he admits them he  will always see in their expression something  distorted and unsavoury.   When an accusation is made against a Jew he  cannot adopt the judicial attitude any more than  could that other extremist, the humbug who denies  the Jewish problem altogether. Just as that other  person, now passing out of our lives, would not admit  a Jew to be guilty under the most glaring evidence  and was particularly unable to admit guilt in a  Jew who might be wealthy ; just as he proclaimed     THE ANTI-SEMITE 149   the Jews as a whole impeccable, so does the Anti-  Semite approach every Jew with a presumption of  his probable guilt, so does he exaggerate this pre-  judice when he has to deal with a wealthy Jew, and  so does he consider the whole Jewish race in the  lump as probably guilty of pretty well any charge  brought against it.   The contrast was very well seen in the Dreyfus  case, when the old type of extremist was still strong.  He would not look at the evidence against Dreyfus,  he would not, if he could help it, mention his race.  All he knew was that Dreyfus was and must in the  nature of things be innocent and that all the diverse  men who testified against him were wicked con-  spirators. The new type of extremist, then but  rising and not yet master, would not listen to the  strong evidence in Dreyfus' favour, refused to re-  examine the case after the chief witness had been  found guilty of forgery, made up his mind that  Dreyfus was necessarily guilty and was convinced  that all his supporters were dupes or knaves.   The mere fact that the Jews exist, let alone that  they are powerful, poisons life for such a man. He  is led by his lop-sided enthusiasm into the most  ridiculous errors. In this country every name of  German origin at once suggests a Jew to him. Every  financial operation, especially if it be of doubtful  morality, must certainly have a Jew behind it;  wherever a number of partners, Jewish and non-  Jewish, are engaged in some bad work (as, for  instance, in one of our innumerable Parliamentary  scandals), a Jew must always for this sort of person  be the prime mover and the evil genius of the whole.   As is the case with every other mania, this mania  rapidly obscures the general vision of its victim.     150 THE JEWS   His prejudices soon lose proportion altogether. He  comes to see the Jew in everything and everywhere,  and to accept confidently propositions which he  would himself see to be contradictory, could he give  a moment's quiet thought to the matter.   Thus I have heard on all sides in the last few  years these strange assertions proceeding from the  same source, yet obviously incompatible one with  the other : That modern scepticism was Jewish in  its origin; that modern superstition, our modern  necromancy and crystal gazing and all the rest of  it, was Jewish in its origin ; that the evils of demo-  cracy are all Jewish in their origin ; that the evil  of tyrannical government, in Prussia, for instance,  was Jewish in its origin ; that the pagan perversions  of bad modern art were Jewish in their origin ; that  the puerility of bad church furniture was due to  Jewish dealers ; that the Great War was the product  of Jewish armament firms ; that the anti- patriotic  appeals which weakened the allied armies came from  Jewish sources and so on. It is indeed true that  there is a Jewish quality in all these diverse and  contradictory things where a Jew mixes in them;  just as there is a Scotch, or French, or English  quality when a Scot, a Frenchman, or an English-  man is the agent. But to ascribe the whole boiling  to the Jew, and to make him the conscious origin of  all, is a contradiction in terms.   The Anti-Semite is a man so absorbed in his  subject that he at last looses interest in any matter,  unless he can give it some association with his  delusion, for delusion it is.   In a sense, of course, this state of mind is a sort  of compliment to the Jewish nation. If such a  preoccupation with them be not amicable it is at     THE ANTI-SEMITE 151   least intense, and those against whom it is directed  may well regard it as a proof of their importance in  the world. But that aspect of the phenomenon is  not consoling for the future of either of us the  Jew who now nervously awaits attack, and we who  desire to forestall and prevent such attack.   The Anti-Semite is very much more numerous  and very much more powerful than might be ima-  gined from the reading of the daily press ; for the  press is still, for the most part, under the convention  of ignoring the Jewish problem and under the terror  of the financial results which might follow from a  discussion of it. His universal activity is not yet  to be read of in the great newspapers ; but in con-  versation and in the practice of daily life we hear  of it everywhere.   And here I may digress upon a modern feature  which applies to all political problems and therefore  to this Jewish problem among others. The great  movements of our time have never originated in the  press of the great cities. They rise and store up  their energies in political cliques, in popular gather-  ings, and spoken rumours long before they appear  in this main instrument for the spreading of news.  That is because the press of our great cities is con-  trolled by very few men, whose object is not the  discussion of public affairs, still less the giving of  full information to their fellow- citizens, but the  piling up of private fortune. As these men are not,  as a rule, educated men, nor particularly concerned  with the fortunes of the State, nor capable of under-  standing from the past what the future may be,  they will never take up a great movement until it is  forced upon them. On the contrary, they will waste  energy in getting up false excitement upon insig-     152 THE JEWS   nificant matters where they feel safe, and even in  using their instruments for the advertisement of  their own insignificant lives. In all this, the  modern press of our great cities differs very  greatly from the press of a lifetime ago. It  was not always owned by educated men, but it  was conducted by highly educated men, who were  given a free hand. It therefore concerned itself  with problems of real importance and it debated  upon either side real contrasts of opinion upon those  matters. This modern press of ours does none of  these things ; but precisely because it is so reluctant  to express real emotion it does, when the emotion is  forced upon it, let it out in a flood. Just as it would  not tell the truth when a thing was growing, so when  it reaches an extreme it will not exercise restraint.  On the contrary, if the " stunt" be an exciting  one, it will push it (once it has made up its mind to  talk of it at all) in the most extreme form and to the  last pitch of violence.   We have seen that plainly enough in the mon-  strous expressions of foreign policy during the last  ten years, and we have seen it in the abominable  hounding of individuals to which that same press  has lent itself.   Now in the matter of Anti-Semitic feeling we shall  have, I think, exactly the same phenomenon re-  peated. That feeling is now ubiquitous. It is spread-  ing with an alarming rapidity, and the increase  of its intensity is even more remarkable than the  increase in the numbers of its adherents. Sooner  or later and fairly soon I imagine the press will  give it voice. When it does, it will give it voice, we  may be certain, in the most extreme, the most  passionate, the most irrational form and when     THE ANTI-SEMITE 153   that happens, in a field where passion is already so  wild> God help its victims !   The Anti-Semitic passion, largely based though  it is on imaginary things, has adopted one method  of action highly practical. It is a method of action  closely in touch with reality, and productive of  formidable results. I mean its compiling of docu-  ments. It has here noted, all over Europe and  America, with exactitude, and continues to put upon  record, everything which can be said to the detriment  of its victims.   It discovered at its origin, presented as a barrier  against it, the Jewish weapon of secrecy. The folly  of the Jews in using such a weapon was never better  shown, for of all defences it is the easiest to break  down. The Anti-Semites countered at once by  making every inquiry, by collecting their informa-  tion, by finding out and exposing the true names  hidden under the mask of false ones, by detecting  and registering the relationships between men who  pretended ignorance one of the other ; it ferreted  all through the ramifications of anonymous finance  and invariably caught the Jew who was behind the  great industrial insurance schemes, the Jew who  was behind such and such a metal monopoly, the  Jew who was behind such and such a news agency,  the Jew who financed such and such a politician.  That formidable library of exposure spreads daily,  and when the opportunity for general publication  is given there will be no answer to it.   It is the greatest mistake in the world to regard  the Anti-Semite in the vast numerical strength he  has now attained all over our civilization as wholly  unpractical and therefore negligible, as a man who  cannot construct a formidable plan of action simply     154 THE JEWS   because lie has lost his sense of values. While the  movement was growing the method of meeting it  was always that of ridicule. It was a false method.  The strength of Anti-Semitism was and is based not  only on intensity of feeling, but also on industry,  an industry very accurate in its methods. The  Anti-Semitic pamphlets, newspapers and books,  which the great daily press is so careful to boycott,  form by now a mass of information upon the whole  Jewish problem which is already overwhelming and  still mounting up : and all of it hostile to the Jews.  You will not find in it, of course, any material for  the Defendant's Brief, but as a dossier for the Prose-  cution it is astonishing in extent and accuracy and  correlation.   Now it is to be remembered in this connection  that the human mind is influenced by documenta-  tion in a special manner. The exact citation of  demonstrable things with chapter and verse con-  vinces as can no other method, and the Anti-Semite  is ready with such citation on a very large scale  indeed, at the first moment when a general pub-  licity, now denied, shall be granted to it.     Moreover, this reliance of the Jew upon the  futility of the Anti-Semitic propaganda omits one  very important feature. The Anti- Semitic group  is built up of men differing greatly in experience, in  judgment and policy. And it is built up of strata  differing greatly in the intensity of their hatred. It  includes many a man with administrative experi-  ence, many a man of great business capacity, of  acquired fortune, of talent in affairs. It in-  cludes men with a thorough knowledge of European     THE ANTI-SEMITE 155   diplomacy ; it includes men (in great numbers) with  the literary gift of expression for persuading their  fellows. Not only is this true, but, as I have said,  it includes a large " right wing " which, because they  are more restrained in expression than the rest, will  exercise a greater weight ; men who are not at all  blinded by their hatred, though hatred has become  their chief motive; men who retain full capacity  for organizing a plan of action and for carrying it  out. It is true that there is a definite line which  divides the Anti-Semite from the rest of those who  are attempting to solve the Jewish problem. It is  the line dividing those whose motive is peace from  those whose motive is antagonism. It is the line  dividing those whose object is action, against the  Jew, and those whose object is a settlement. But  on the Anti-Semitic side of that line that is, among  those whose determination is to suppress and elimi-  nate Jewish influence to the extreme of their power  there are now very many more than the original  enthusiasts who created the movement.   The Jews should further remember that to-day  every one outside their own community is potentially  an Anti-Semite. Not every one, perhaps not even  yet a majority, at least in the directing and wealthier  classes, is other than friendly or indifferent to the  Jews, but there has grown up in every one not a Jew  something of reaction against the Jewish power. It  requires but an accident to change this from the  latent and slight thing it is in most men to an angry  passion. I have noticed that among the most  violent of Anti-Semites are those who had passed  some considerable portion of their early manhood  in ignorance of the whole problem. These come  across a Jew unexpectedly in some relation hostile        156 THE JEWS   to them -they lose money through some Jewish  financial operation, or they connect, for the first  time, in middle age, several misfortunes of theirs  with a common element of Jewish action, or they  find Jews mixed up in some attack on their  country: thenceforward they become and remain  unrepentant Anti-Semites.   The dupe, when he discovers he has been duped,  is dangerous, and there is even a considerable cate-  gory of those who have suffered nothing, even by  accident, at the hand of the Jew, yet who, when they  discover what the Jewish power is, feel they have  been played with, and grow angry at the trickery.   It has been and will be with Anti-Semitism as  with all movements. When they begin they are  ridiculed. As they grow they come to be feared  and boycotted ; but of those that are successful it  may be justly said that the moment of success  begins when they turn the corner and from a fad  become a fashion.   It is still (doubtfully) the fashion to separate one-  self from the Anti- Semitic movement. You still  hear men, when they write or speak upon the Jewish  problem, no matter with what hostility to the Jew,  excuse themselves as a rule at the beginning of their  remarks by saying, " I am no Anti-Semite." For  some flavour of the old ridicule still attaches to the  name. But fashions change rapidly and the new  fashion which comes in to support a growing thing,  when it does arrive, arrives in a flood.   We can all of us remember the time when the  talk of nationalization, the old State Socialist talk,  was the talk of a few faddists who were everywhere  ridiculed and despised. To-day it is the fashion ;  and the practice of State control, State support,     THE ANTI-SEMITE 157   the universality of State action, is such that it is  those who oppose it who are now the faddists and  the cranks.   We can all of us remember the day when, in the  United States, a prohibitionist was a faddist, and a  very unpopular faddist at that. We have seen  fashion catch him up with a vengeance.   We can all of us remember the day when the  supporters of women's suffrage in England were a  very small group of faddists indeed : we know what  has happened there!   The forces driving men towards the Anti-Semitic  camp are far stronger than the forces acting upon  these old hobbies of women's suffrage, of prohibition  and the rest. They are personal, intimate forces  arising from the strongest racial instincts and the  most bitter individual memories of financial loss,  subjection, national dishonour.   For instance, any German to-day to whom you  may talk of his great disaster will answer by telling  you that it is due to the Jews : that the Jews are  preying upon the fallen body of the State ; that the  Jews are " rats in the Reich." For one man that  blames the old military authorities for the misfor-  tunes following the war, twenty blame the Jews,  though these were the architects of the former Ger-  man prosperity, and among them were found a  larger proportion of opponents of the war than in  any other section of the Emperor's subjects. That  is but one example ; you will find it repeated in one  form or another in almost every other polity of the  modern world.   The Anti-Semite has become a strong political  figure. It is a great and dangerous error at this  moment to think his policy is futile. It is a policy     158 THE JEWS   of action, and a policy which may proceed from plan  to execution before we know it.   There used to be quoted years ago and I have  myself quoted it with approval a famous question  put by a close and reasonable observer of public  affairs upon the Continent, to the most prominent  of Continental Anti-Semites in that day. The  question was this : " If you had unlimited power in  this matter, what would you do ? " The implied  answer was that the Anti-Semite could do nothing.  He could not make a law which would segregate the  Jews for they could escape that law by mixing with  those around them. He could not make a law  exiling them; for, first, it would be impossible to  define them ; secondly, even if that were possible,  those defined would not be received elsewhere.  What could he do ? The implication was, I say,  that he could do nothing; he was supposed, in the  presence of that question, to admit his futility.   Unfortunately we now know that he can do some-  thing. The Anti-Semite can persecute, he can  attack. With a sufficient force behind him he can  destroy. In much of this destruction he would have,  in a present state of feeling and in most countries,  the mass of public opinion behind him. He could  begin with a widespread examination of Jewish  wealth and its origins and an equally widespread  confiscation. He could use the dread of such con-  fiscation as a weapon for compelling the divulgence  of Jewish origins where a man desired to conceal  them. He could do this not only in the case of the  wealthy men, but, through the terror of wealthy  men, over the whole field of the Jewish community.  He could introduce registration and with it a segre-  gation of the Jews. Inspired as he would be by no     THE ANTI-SEMITE 159   desire for a settlement agreeable to them, but  solely for a settlement agreeable to himself, he could  aim at that harsh settlement, and even though he  might not reach his goal, it is not pleasant to  envisage what he might do on his way to it.   But even though the Anti-Semite fail to acquire  full power, there remain attached to his great  increase in numbers and intensity of feeling the  prime questions, " What is the meaning of the  thing ? Why has it arisen ? Why is it spreading ?  What are the forces nourishing it ? "   These are the main questions which those who  regret the presence of such a passion in the body  politic, which those who are alarmed about it, which  those who, like the Jews themselves, must, if they  are to avoid a catastrophe, defend themselves against  it, would do well to answer. There has not been as  yet sufficient time to answer those questions fully  or to appreciate this great reaction in its entirety,  but we can already judge it in part. The Anti-  Semitic movement is essentially a reaction against  the abnormal growth in Jewish power, and the new  strength of Anti-Semitism is largely due to the Jews  themselves.   When this angry enthusiasm re- arose in its modern  form, first in Germany, then spreading to France,  next appearing, and now rapidly growing, in Eng-  land, it was novel and confined to small cliques. The  truths which it enunciated were then as unfamiliar  as the false values on which it also reposed. That  universal policy of the Jews against which it is part  of my thesis to argue, a policy natural but none the  less erroneous, the policy of secrecy, the policy of  hiding, at once took advantage of what was absurd  in the novelty of Anti-Semitism. The Jew, in spite     160 THE JEWS   of his age-long experience of menace and active  hostility, in spite of his knowledge of what this  sort of spirit had effected in the past, did not come  out into the open. He did not act against the new  attack with open indignation, still less with open  argument, as he should have done. He took  advantage of its absurdity, at its beginnings, in the  eyes of the general public. He used all his endea-  vours to make the word " Anti-Semitic " a label for  something hopelessly ridiculous, a subject for mere  laughter, a matter which no reasonable man should  for a moment consider seriously.   For something between a dozen and twenty years  this policy was successful. The method though less  and less firmly established as time went on, has not  yet quite failed. None the less that policy was  very ill-advised. It was used not only to ridicule  the Anti-Semite, but what was quite illegitimate,  quite irrational (and bound in the long run to be  fatal), it was used to prevent all discussion of the  Jewish question, though that question was increas-  ing every day in practical importance and clamour-  ing to be decided.   It was the instinctive policy with the mass of the  Jewish nation, a deliberate policy with most of its  leaders, not only to use ridicule against Anti-Semi-  tism but to label as " Anti-Semitic " any discussion  of the Jewish problem at all, or, for that matter, any  information even on the Jewish problem. It was  used to prevent, through ridicule, any statement of  any fact with regard to the Jewish race save a few  conventional compliments or a few conventional  and harmless jests.   If a man alluded to the presence of a Jewish  financial power in any region for instance, in India     THE ANTI-SEMITE 161   he was an Anti-Semite. If he interested himself  in the peculiar character of Jewish philosophical  discussions, especially in matters concerning  religion, he was an Anti- Semite. If the emigrations  of the Jewish masses from country to country, the  vast modern invasion of the United States, for  instance (which has been organized and controlled  like an army on the march), interested him as an  historian, he could not speak of it under pain of  being called an Anti-Semite. If he exposed a  financial swindler who happened to be a Jew, he  was an Anti-Semite. If he exposed a group of Par-  liamentarians taking money from the Jews, he was  an Anti-Semite. If he did no more than call a Jew  a Jew, he was an Anti-Semite. The laughter which  the name used to provoke was most foolishly used  to support nothing nobler or more definitive than  this wretched policy of concealment. Anyone with  judgment could have told the Jews, had the Jews  cared to consult such an one, that their pusillani-  mous policy was bound to fail. It was but a  postponement of the evil day.   You cannot long confuse interest with hatred,  the statement of plain and important truths with  mania, the discussion of fundamental questions with  silly enthusiasm, for the same reason that you can-  not long confuse truth with falsehood. Sooner or  later people are bound to remark that the defendant  seems curiously anxious to avoid all investigation  of his case. The moment that is generally observed,  the defence is on the way to failure.   I say it was a fatal policy ; but it was deliberately  undertaken by the Jews and they are now suffering  from its results. As a consequence you have all  over Europe a mass of plain men who so far from   M     162 THE JEWS   being scared off from discussing the Jewish problem  by this false ridicule are more determined than ever  to thrash it out in the open and to get it settled upon  rational and final lines.   That would perhaps be no great harm in itself.  It would merely mean that a false policy had failed,  and that proper frank and loyal discussion would  succeed all this hushing up and boycott. Unfortu-  nately the false policy had other and much worse  consequences. It exasperated men who had already  begun to interest themselves in the political dis-  cussion and who would not tolerate undeserved  ridicule. It heaped up a world of determined oppo-  sition to the Jews. It is not exactly that the Anti-  Semite has already won or even is as yet certainly  on his way to winning, but he now has his chance  of winning. Whereas, some few years ago, he had  the tide against him, he is now, through the fault  of the Jews themselves, at its turn. He now  finds himself on an extreme wing, it is true, but  attached to a very large body which is already  strongly biassed against the Jews, dislikes their  presence among us, and is determined to act against  them, not only where they still have great power,  but also where that power is visibly declining, and  even where they are in danger.   It must not be forgotten, as we survey this grow-  ing menace, that a policy which reaches no finality  is not on that account futile. It must not be for-  gotten that in the minds of many men (one might  say in the minds of most men) during periods of  excitement, a policy of repression, though always  failing to reach finality, may still be continuous:  it may become a habit and may endure indefinitely  in the vast suffering of its victims. The Jews have     THE ANTI-SEMITE 163   seen that happen in many a small nationality other  than their own. They have seen, no doubt, that  continued repression acting in an atmosphere of  equally continuous rebellion has usually in the long  run failed, but they must admit that the mainte-  nance of such repression, with all its accompaniments  of moral and physical torture, confiscation, exile  and all the rest, has often been a policy long drawn  out. It has been drawn out in some cases for  centuries. It is not true that, because a policy does  not aim at a complete settlement, therefore it can-  not be undertaken and vigorously pursued. It can.  Time and again a hostile force has attempted to  eliminate opposition, or even contrast, and to elimin-  ate it by every instrument, including massacre itself.  Sometimes, very rarely, it has succeeded. Usually  it has, in the long run, failed. But in the great  majority of cases it has at any rate continued long  after its failure was apparent. That is the danger  which menaces from the phenomenon I have  examined in this chapter. It would be madness in  the Jews to neglect that phenomenon. It is now so  strong in numbers, intensity of conviction, and  passion that it menaces their whole immediate  future in our civilization. Its ultimate causes we  have explored. Its immediate cause, the cause of its  sudden development and present startling growth,  we have seen to be the Jewish action in Russia, and  to this, which I have already touched upon in my  third chapter, where I sketched the sequence of  events leading up to the present situation, I will  next turn, in order to make a more detailed examina-   ance of Jewish Bolshevism that has brought things  to their present crisis.     BOLSHEVISM     CHAPTER VIII  BOLSHEVISM   THE Bolshevist explosion, which will appear in  history I think as the point of departure from  which shall date the new attitude of the Western  nations towards the Jews, is not only a field in  which we can study the evil effect of secrecy,  but one in which we can analyse all the various  forces which tend to bring Israel into such cease-  less conflict with the society around it.   It merits, therefore, a very special examination,  both as an opportunity for the study of our sub-  ject and as a turning-point of the first moment in  history.   Why did a Jewish organization thus attempt  to transform society ? Why did it use the methods  which we know it used ? Why was that particular  venue chosen ? What aim had the actors in  view? What measure of success did they hope  to achieve ? By what method do they propose  to extend their influence ? When we can answer  those questions we shall have gone far to discovering  the almost fatal causes of conflict between this  peculiar nation and those among whom they move.   The answers usually given to these questions  by the avowed enemies of the Jewish race are  always inadequate and often false. When they   167     168 THE JEWS   contain an element of truth (which they often do)  that truth is quite insufficient to account for the full  phenomena. But the accretions of falsehood and  exaggeration render the whole thing inexplicable  indeed, these explanations of the Russian revolu-  tion are very good specimens of the way in which  the European so misunderstands the Jew that he  imputes to him powers which neither he nor any  other poor mortal can ever exercise.   Thus we are asked to believe that this political  upheaval was part of one highly- organized plot  centuries old, the agents of which were millions  of human beings all pledged to the destruction  of our society and acting in complete discipline  under a few leaders superhumanly wise ! The thing  is nonsense on the face of it. Men have no capacity  for acting in this fashion. They are far too limited,  far too diverse.   Moreover, the motive is completely lacking.  Why merely destroy and why, if your object is  merely to destroy, manifest such wide differences  in your aims ? One may say justly that there  is always a tendency to reaction against alien  surroundings, and in so far as that reaction is  intense and effective it is destructive of those  surroundings. One may point out that such  reaction in the case of the Jews, as in the case of  all other alien bodies, is in the main unconscious  and instinctive. All that is true enough ; but the  conception of a vast age-long plot, culminating  in the contemporary Russian affair, will not hold  water, any more than will the corresponding halluci-  nation which led men to believe that the French  revolution (a thing utterly different in kind from  the Russian) was the mere outward expression     BOLSHEVISM 169   of a strictly disciplined secret body. In the case  of the French Kevolution everything was put down  (by the forerunners of to-day's Anti-Semitic  enthusiasts) to the secret agency of The Order of  Templars acting unweariedly through six centuries,  and finally bringing down the French monarchy.  In the case, of course, of the Bolshevist anarchy  a still longer range is given to the final result:  for "Templars" read "Jews," and for "600"  read " 2,000 " years. It is all smoke.   More serious is the statement that this combina-  tion of Jews for the destruction of the old Kussian  society was an act of racial revenge. There is a  great element of truth in that. There is no doubt  that the greater part of the Jews who took over  power in the Russian cities four years ago felt an  appetite for revenge against the old Russian State  comparable to that felt by any oppressed people  against their oppressors. Probably it was more  intense even than any other example that could  be quoted. We are all witnesses to the way in  which the Russian people, religion, and govern-  ment, and particularly the person and office of  the Emperor were attacked and decried by the  Jews in Western Europe, of the way in which the  Jews ceaselessly conspired against the Russian  State, and of the brutal repression to which they  were subject. When you release a force of hatred  so violent it may run to any length. That sudden  release, that sudden opportunity for satisfying  the thirst for vengeance, must explain a very large  part of what followed. But even that does not  account for the whole. It would account for mere  massacre and mere chaos. It would not account  for the attempts rather pitiful attempts at     170 THE JEWS   construction and for the obviously designed system  of direction which has continued on the same lines  since the Jews first assumed power and is still  fully manifest after nearly five years of that power.   Still less is it sufficient to say that the Jew is  everywhere the organizer and leader of revolution  and that we only see him at work in Eussia with  greater vigour and thoroughness because the oppor-  tunity is there greater.   The Jew is not everywhere a revolutionary. He  is everywhere discontented with a society alien to  him : that is natural and inevitable. But he does  not exercise his power invariably, or even ordinarily,  towards the oversetting of an established social  order by which, incidentally, he often largely  benefits.   You do not find the Jew in history perpetually  leading the innumerable revolts which citizens in  the mass make against the privileged or the superior  conditions of the minority. He has sometimes  benefited by these movements in the past; more  often suffered. We often find individual Jews  sympathizing with the revolutionary side, but  we also find many individual Jews sympathizing  with the other. The Jew is not, in the history  of Europe, the prime agent of revolution : quite  the contrary. The great acts of violence,  successful and unsuccessful, which have marked  our society from the agrarian troubles of pagan  Rome to the French Revolution, the land war  in Ireland, the Chartist Movement in London,  or whatever modern movement you will, have  appealed much more to the fighting instincts and  political traditions of our race than they have to  the Jews. They are marked everywhere by an     BOLSHEVISM 171   attitude towards property and patriotism which  are the very opposite of the Jews' characteristics.  The Eevolutions of the past were for the better  distribution of property and for the betterment  of the State. Often they were openly undertaken  because patriotism had been offended by defeat  in war and because the Nation was thought to  be betrayed. Usually they were jingo and always  for distribution of wealth.   It is the unique mark of the Russian revolution  and of its attempted extension elsewhere that it  repudiates patriotism and the division of property.  In that, it differs from all others ; and it is markedly,  obviously, Jewish. But why had the Jews a  chance of action in Russia which they lacked else-  where ?   What were the special characters in the Russian  opportunity which made the Jew the creator of the  whole movement?   There are, I take it, three main factors present  in this case peculiarly suitable to the Jewish effort.   In the first place, this revolution fell upon, and was  directed towards, a particular social phenomenon  in which that profound instinct in the European,  the desire for settled property, had decayed. It fell   the chief mark of which is the destruction in the  mass subjected to it (or, at any rate, the atrophying)  of that essential part of the European soul owner-  ship. The Jew is, undoubtedly, unable to sym-  pathize with us in that central core of our civic  instincts. He has never understood the European  sense of property and I doubt if he ever win.   But in Russia Industrial Capitalism was quite  new. The resentment against it was keen. The     172 THE JEWS   victims were the sons of peasants, or had them-  selves been born peasants, so that this proletarian  mass in the Russian towns, though less than a  tenth of the whole nation, was peculiarly open to  propaganda against its masters. And an attack  successfully conducted, on that weakest point of  modern Capitalism, might easily succeed and then  spread to neighbouring industrialized centres in  Poland, Germany, and so westward.   Now the attack on this international phenomenon,  an attack directed against Industrial Capitalism,  required an international force. It needed men  who had international experience and were ready  with an international formula.   There are two, and only two, organized inter-  national forces in Europe to-day with a soul and  identity in them. One is the Catholic Church,  and the other is Jewry. But the Catholic Church,  for reasons which I will discuss in a moment,  cannot and never will directly attack industrial  capitalism. It will undoubtedly attack that system  in flank and indirectly destroy it in the long run  wherever the Faith has a strong hold upon masses  of people. But it will not and cannot directly  attack it. The Jew, on the other hand, is free to  attack it precisely because our sense of property  means nothing to him, is to him something strange,  and even. I think, comic. Further, the Jew was  present, he was on the spot. The Church was not.   Of the two international forces present, therefore,  the Jews alone could act.   Here I must digress and say why the other great  international force, the Catholic Church, has not  been able and will never be able to attack Indus-  trial Capitalism as a whole and directly, though,     BOLSHEVISM 173   as I have said, it acts indirectly as a solvent of  this evil and will destroy it wherever society  remains Catholic. The Catholic Church, not only  in its abstract doctrine, but acting as the expres-  sion of our European civilization, is profoundly  attached to the conception of private property.  It makes the family the unit of the State and it  perceives that the freedom of the family is most  secure where the family owns. It perceives, as  do all Europeans, instinctively or explicitly, that  property is the correlative of freedom, or, at any  rate, of that only kind of freedom which we  Europeans care to have : that it is the safeguard  of spiritual health (the mark of which is humour),  of breadth and diversity in action, of elasticity in  the State, of permanence in institutions. Pro-  perty, as widely distributed as possible, but sacred  as a principle, is an inevitable social accompaniment  of Catholicism.   Apart from this, it is also a definite feature of  Catholic doctrine to deny that private property  is immoral. No Catholic can say that private  property is immoral without cutting himself off  from the Communion of the Church, any more  than he can say that the authority in the State  is immoral. He cannot be a communist in abstract  morals any more than he can be an anarchist.   Now Industrial Capitalism is a disease of pro-  perty. It is the monstrous state of affairs in which  a very few men derive their vast advantage from  the corresponding fact that most men whom they  exploit do not own.   But it remains true that the sheet-anchor of  Capitalism is a sense of ownership in the mass as  well as in the privileged few. The only moral     174 THE JEWS   force remaining to Industrial Capitalism, the only  spiritual tie which prevents its dissolution, is this  admission by the European mind that property is  a right even property in a diseased and exaggerated  form.   The whole of the operations of Industrial Capital-  ism rely upon the sanctity of property and the  sanctity of contract which develops from the  sanctity of property. And whenever society loses  this sense, industrial capitalism will fall into chaos.  The Church cannot deny that one moral principle.  Its action will always be towards the dissolution  of the great accumulations promoted by capitalism.  It always will work indirectly for the establish-  ment of well- divided property, an ideal defined  by the voice of its great modern Pope, Leo XIII,  who explicitly states it in his Rerum Novarum.  But the Church can never take the short cut of  destroying Industrial Capitalism root and branch  and at once, by erecting against it the doctrine of  Communism or (as many people call diluted Com-  munism) " Socialism." It never can do so in  theory, and still less will it ever do so in practice.  A Catholic society will always tend to be a society  of owners: with all the elements of co-operation,  with the Guild, with masses of corporate property  attached to the State or connected with the city,  with the college, with the corporation. For without  such corporate property in a State, property is  never well founded.   The Jew has neither that political instinct in  his national tradition nor a religious doctrine  supporting and expressing such an instinct. The  same thing in him which makes him a speculator  and a nomad blinds him to, and makes him     BOLSHEVISM 175   actually contemptuous of, the European sense of  property. When therefore we have reached, through  Industrial Capitalism, or any other social disease,  a state of affairs in which the practical denial of  property is possible because the mass of men have  lost the desire for it, and when the repudiation of   evils, then the Jew can appear at once as a leader.   One must find in such a movement an inter-  national leader because the disease is international,  and still more because the proposed cure of that  disease, through Communism, must be international  if it is to succeed. A Communist society may  stand apart from the general society of owners in  other countries, but if it is to succeed in competition  with them it must convert them to its own creed.   The Jew took international action for granted.  He took the narrow and false economic view of  property that it was a mere institution to be  modified indefinitely, and, if necessary, abolished.  He had an obvious opportunity for leadership  accorded to him when international action against  property was demanded. Again, our national  sense, patriotism, which is incomprehensible to  the Jew save on the false analogy of his own  peculiar nomadic and tribal patriotism, is a check  upon Communism, and, indeed, against revolution  of any kind. The process of thought in the  patriotic citizen largely unconscious but none the  less efficacious is somewhat as follows:   " I cannot function save as a citizen of my  nation, and, what is more, that nation made me  what I am. It is my creator in a sense and so  has authority over me. I must even give up my  life in its defence if necessary, because but for its     176 THE JEWS   existence I and those like me could not be. My  happiness, my freedom of individual action, my  self-expression are all bound up with the existence  of the civic unit of which I am a part. If something  which appears to me good in the abstract, or which  apparently will procure for me a material good,  involves danger to that civic unit, I must forego  the good, regarding the continued existence and  strength of my people as a greater good to which  the lesser should be sacrificed."   That, I say roughly, is the expression of the  patriotic instinct in the European man. That  is what he has felt for many and many a great  State in the past and for every polity to which he  has ever belonged; that is what he feels to-day  for his country.   The Jew has the same feeling, of course, for his  Israel, but since that nation is not a collection of  human beings, inhabiting one place and living  by traditions rooted in its soil, since it has not a  strong, visible, external form, his patriotism is  necessarily of a different complexion. It has  different connotations and our patriotism seems  negligible to him.   The implied fallacies current in the modern  industrial revolutionary formulae, in such phrases  as " What does it matter to the working man  whether he is exploited by a German or an English  master ? " or, again, " Why should the individual  Tom Smith be sacrificed for an abstraction called  England ? " or again, " Nationalism is the great  obstacle to the full development of humanity"  all that sort of thing, which we feel by instinct and  can, if it is necessary, prove by reason to be non-  sense in our case, sounds, in Jewish ears, as very     BOLSHEVISM 177   good sense indeed. For in his case these things  involve no fallacies at all; they apply to him  vividly and exactly. Why should the Jew be  sacrificed for England ? In what way is England,  or France, or Ireland, or any other nation necessary  to him ? Again, is it not obvious in his eyes that  these terms, " France, Ireland, England, Russia,"  are but abstractions ? The real thing in his eyes  when he thinks of us, is the individual and his certain  needs, especially his physical and material needs ;  because upon these there can be no doubt; upon  these all are agreed ; these are visible and tangible.  "England," "France," "Poland" are whimsies.   It is true that if you were to put his special case  to the Jew with similar force and say, " No Jew  should run any risk for Israel," " no Jew should  suffer any inconvenience by trying to help a fellow  Jew in distress," " the idea of Israel is a vague  abstraction all that counts is the individual Jew  and especially his physical requirements " ; if you  said that sort of thing you would be offending  the most profound instincts of Jewish patriotism and  you would, in fact, clash with the overt and covert  action of the Jews throughout the world. But  the Jew would answer that, as his was an inter-  national polity, the argument applying to our  national polity did not apply to him; that his  feelings, though analogous to ours, were of a different  kind, and that, at any rate, he cannot sacrifice a  fine idea of his like Communism for our provincial  and local habit, called by us Europeans " the love  of our country."   There is more than this in the business.  Even those truths which we know to be truths  have little effect upon us, unless they enter into     178 THE JEWS   the practice of our lives. There are, no doubt, a  number of Jews who would admit at once the  truth of any nationalist statement made by a  European. When a Frenchman, or an Englishman,  or a Russian says to him, " My first duty is to my  people; I must keep them strong as well as in  being and I must sacrifice my interests to theirs  when it is necessary," there are many Jews who  would answer: " You are quite right. The theory  is sound. Man can only function as a part of a  particular society," and so forth ; but it is one thing  to recognize a truth and another thing to experience  it in one's bones, as it were, and these truths,  even where he is admitting them, are truths  indifferent to the Jew.   Therefore when, as in the particular case of  Russia, a national feeling stood in the way of an  abstract ideal, it seemed the most natural thing  in the world to the Jew that the national obstacle  should go to the wall in order that his ideal of  Communism might triumph.   There lay behind this great change in the Russian  towns, and the capture of what remains of Russian  government by the Jewish Committees, a force  most positive. It was the sense of social justice,  the indignation against indefensible evils.   That sense of social justice, that indignation  against indefensible modern evils, we all feel.  There may be men among the wealthier classes  of Western Europe who are so ignorant of the past,  or so stupid, that they do honestly believe Industrial  Capitalism to be an inevitable and even perhaps  a good thing. But such men must be very rare.  Not only must they be rare, but they cannot have  any wide social experience. A man has only got     BOLSHEVISM 179   to live the life of the poor in the great industrial  cities for a day to see the enormity of the wrong  that has to be righted. There are, of course, not  a few but many thousands of individuals who try  to find arguments for Industrial Capitalism, either  because they benefit themselves through the system  and are the richer by it, or because they are the  hired servants of those who so benefit? and of  this kind are the writers in the capitalist press.  But all these, who are hired advocates, or advocates  with a direct proprietary interest in the continuance  of the modern disease, may be neglected ; for they  are not in good faith. They are not really arguing  that the thing is good in itself, they are only trying  to find arguments as lawyers do for something  which they have to defend and which in their  hearts they admit is evil ; or to the evil of which  they are indifferent so long as it gives them a  disproportionate share of material enjoyment.   We must add to these the sincere man who will  admit the domination of Industrial Capitalism  because he honestly believes that, bad as it is, it  is now become inevitable and that to tamper with  it would bring the whole State into anarchy.  " Such as it is," he would say, " the structure of  our society now depends upon it. We may palliate  its evils, we may try very gradually to transform  its worst features. But in its essence it must remain  as it is, or our last state will be worse than our  first."   Of this kind are those who argue that any social  experiment antagonistic to Industrial Capitalism,  if pushed sufficiently far, would result in famine  and chaos and even physical evils far worse than  the physical evils which the mass of men have to     180 THE JEWS   suffer in the great towns which capitalism has  produced.   Apart from these categories, the masses of men, I  say, to-day are convinced that Industrial Capi-  talism is an evil, an evil of the grossest sort;  an evil of a sort unknown to the greater part of  human history and unknown to-day in the greater  part of the human race ; an evil which those peas-  ant societies, or societies of well- divided property  throughout Europe, are happy to have escaped;  and an evil from which we, who are caught in it,  are trying to escape as best we may.   In that modifying phrase " as best we may " lies  the crux, for the great mass of Europeans feel  that any attack on Industrial Capitalism which  denies the nation its supreme place, or which  impedes the superior task of keeping the nation  strong and wealthy, is barred; they also feel  instinctively that any attack which denies the  general right of private property and the value of  that institution to the healthy conduct of our  affairs is also barred. The great mass of our race,  when faced by the problem of Industrial Capitalism,  feel that it has to be solved in some way that will  neither destroy property nor the nation through  which the individual alone can function.   But this, which is true of the great mass of our  race, is not true of the Jews. Therefore they were  able, in the case of the Kussian Revolution, to go  straight for their object, and that object was (apart  from the obvious object of revenge, of love of power,  and the rest) the destruction of an economic  inequality.   These Jews who have destroyed what we knew  as Russia were undoubtedly possessed of a political     BOLSHEVISM 181   ideal : the ideal of Communism. No doubt many  individuals among them (all ultimately) would  prefer the good of Israel to the good of any Russian.  No doubt the wreaking of vengeance upon former  oppressors was strong, as also the appetite for  destroying a general and a national sentiment  alien to them and even repulsive to them; but  there remains, as a positive motive behind the  whole affair, the ideal of Communism. The Jews  alone of the forces present were capable of heartily  entertaining that ideal, and were free of all obstacles  against the achievement of it the obstacle of  patriotism, the obstacle of religion, the obstacle  of the sense of property.   These considerations, I take it, are what explains  the Jewish character of the upheaval in the East,  with its destruction of the Russian nation, its  enormous experiments in social economy, its inevit-  able impoverishment of the State as a whole, its  enthusiastic support by the minority which accepts  its doctrine.   Those very few men and women who have been  witnesses of the Jewish experiment in Russia  (excluding those engaged in propaganda upon one  side or the other) give us a picture which is much  what we should have expected of the situation.   It seems that the great mass of the nation has  affirmed the instinct of private property with the  greatest vigour, and that some nine- tenths of the  Russians have settled down upon the land to which  they always claimed ownership and in which their  sense of ownership is more fierce than ever. In the  towns the unnatural system unnatural because  it opposes all our instincts as Europeans works  more and more slackly as the original system of     182 THE JEWS   terror weakens. For it is clear that Communism  needs a despot, and the active rule of a despot is  necessarily short: it is a system incapable of  transition and therefore of duration.   The perfectly explicable but deplorable exercise  of vengeance by the Jews has been directed against  what we euphemistically term the governing  directing classes, who have been massacred whole-  sale and whose remnants are subjected to perpetual  persecution.   The productivity of the industrial masses has  naturally sunk to a very low level, because under  Communism it can only work through something  like military discipline, and work done under  those conditions is on a much lower productive  level than free work.   But the real interest in the. Jewish revolution in  Russia, to which is now permanently affixed the  name of Bolshevist (which is nothing more than  the Russian for "whole-hogger"), lies in these  two points: first, the continued propaganda of  Communism throughout the world (which propa-  ganda in organization and direction is in the hands  of Jewish agents) ; secondly, and much more impor-  tant, the effect of the Jewish revolution in producing  hostility to the Jews throughout the world.   I say this second fact is much more important  because it is the more real and the more enduring.  You will never make a Communist of the highly-  civilized, tenacious, intelligent and humorous Occi-  dental European. You will no more make a Com-  munist of him than you will make him walk on all  fours or permanently abjure the use of good liquor.  You may get middle-class faddists to accept Com-  munism as a mere creed, and of course you can easily     BOLSHEVISM 183   get exasperated men, ground down by capitalism,  to accept any theory, any system, which promises  them relief. But you will not get Communism  working in men who boast the old European blood,  in the descendants of those who created our past  and its monuments. They will certainly preserve  their traditions and their character. Though the  peril must be combated, and is being successfully  combated everywhere, it is not a peril of great  magnitude to the West.   The other effect of the Jewish revolution in  Kussia the peril into which it has put the Jews  themselves is permanent and is of the first magni-  tude. I know no way to meet it except to explain   revolution, to emphasize the sincerity of the Jews  who have led it, to exculpate them as far as possible,  and, at any rate, to shield their unfortunate com-  patriots abroad from the consequences of what  was certainly a very bad piece of tactics so far as  the future of this people was concerned.   We ought, I think, not to nourish a new and  special hostility against the Jew on account of  what he has done in Kussia, but, on the contrary,  to excuse him, especially because he is a Jew.  We ought, as it seems to me, to say: " He had  reasons for action and excuse for action which men  of our race would not have had, and though we  must prevent that action from spreading, we must  not allow what seemed quite natural under the  circumstances to the Jew to warp our attempted  solution of the Jewish problem. We ought to  work for its solution as impartially and as soberly as  though the provocation of Bolshevism had never  been given,"     184 THE JEWS   That sounds an extreme thing to say, and I fear  it will be ridiculed by most of those who (as they  tell us) have had their eyes opened by the Bolshevist  explosion and who are now confirmed enemies of  the Jewish people. But though it sound fantastic,  I am convinced that it is a right attitude. To  lose one's judgment on a permanent problem  through panic or heat, to forget the elements of  such a problem merely because it has been presented  to us suddenly in an acute form, is the negation  of reason. As well might a man who is dealing  with the problem of fermented liquor, and trying  to get people to use it rationally, let his judgment  be overcome by a case of delirium tremens and rush  thereupon into some scheme of prohibition. The  very test which distinguishes good statesmanship  from bad is the power to keep one's head under  provocations like these; to maintain a middle  course and to aim at whatever solution our reason  tells us to be just under normal circumstances.  We who saw the gravity of the Jewish problem  long before the recognition of it was general, and  who studied it under calmer conditions for many  years, have a right to be heard now : now that the  tide is making against these people and that the  fear of anarchy threatens to turn men's heads.   We were long blamed for attacking the Jews,  we are already blamed for defending them. It  is a proof that our attitude is well grounded and  unaffected by fashion.   The Bolshevist revolution will not last. Its  Jewish character was inevitable. It had a side to it  of Jewish enthusiasm for a sort of incorporeal  justice, and, in any case, it ought not to be allowed  to deflect us from a conclusion which the much     BOLSHEVISM 185   larger lines of history and all general considerations  of reason impose.   Our conclusion, as I have said, is a recognition  and protection of the Jewish nation as something  quite different from ourselves and yet necessarily  inhabiting our society. Such a full recognition  leaves us fore- armed against the tendency in the  Jew (which we cannot avoid) to forget our national  feelings and to misconceive our sense of ownership.  It would render impossible the conspiracies and  the vengeance which have destroyed Russia, and  I believe that had the former Russian Government  treated the Jews as I say they should be treated,  it would be in power to-day.     THE POSITION IN THE WORLD  AS A WHOLE     CHAPTEE IX   THE POSITION IN THE WORLD AS A  WHOLE   THE danger of the Jewish nation in the world  to-day may be summed up in this phrase:   " The Jews are obtaining control and we will  not be controlled by them."   That is the simplest formula, and the one which  would be immediately subscribed to by the whole  mass of those outside the Jewish community who  are alive to the question at all. Being the simplest  form of the truth, it needs, when applied to a highly  complex situation, detailed modification.   This modification proceeds from three sources :   First, the extent of the Jewish control and the  extent of the resentment against that control vary  very largely from one community to another.   Secondly, the civic tradition of each community  in its treatment of the Jewish question also differs  from that of every other, though these various  traditions fall into certain fairly well-defined groups.   Thirdly, the position is modified according to  the presence, in varying degrees of strength in  different communities, of certain international  forces even more powerful than the Jews themselves.  The four principal of the international forces are :     190 THE JEWS   (1) The Catholic Church;   (2) Islam;   (3) The forces of international Capitalism ; and   (4) The international reaction against it of the  industrial proletariat.   We must in the first line of this inquiry make an  important premise. The fact from which we  proceed, namely, the uneasy feeling that the Jews  are getting control and the determination not to  tolerate that control, will be denied by the Jews  themselves. It is denied sincerely I have entered  upon too many discussions with them and heard  too many of their protestations to doubt that;  and if the denial were valid, not only the particular  survey I propose in this chapter, but the whole  of the argument of this book, would fail. For if  there is a Jewish question to-day, and if it is present  in the acute form in which we all know it to be  present, it is not due merely to the contrast and  friction between the Jews and their hosts, but  especially to this feeling of domination.   But the Jewish belief in this matter is not valid,  sincerely as it is held. To the great majority of  Jews it will, of course, seem common-sense. What  has the unfortunate poor Jew in the slums of our  great cities to do with controlling the modern  world ? How in his eyes can the phrase have any  meaning at all? If you pass from him to the  comparatively small Jewish middle class, you would  hear a denial almost equally vigorous. The Jewish  scientist will tell you that he is concerned with his  researches and laughs at the idea of interfering  with his neighbours; the Jewish historian that  he is concerned with his documents, that nothing  is further from his thoughts than interfering with     POSITION IN WORLD AS A WHOLE 191   people outside his trade; the little Jewish shop-  keeper will tell you that he is in active competition  with his non- Jewish neighbours and by no means  always successful in that competition ; the Jewish  lawyer will tell you that he is concerned with the  system of law in which he happens to be immersed  the Napoleonic Code, the English Common Law  or what not and that any idea of his personally  wanting to control the vast non- Jewish majority  among whom he lives is moonshine : and so it is.   The great Jewish banker, though he is fully  aware of his power, would tell you that in his  daily business he comes up against forces to which  he is subject, and has competitors who are at the  best neutral, and more commonly hostile, to Israel ;  and even the man who is to-day more powerful  if that be possible than the Jewish banker, I  mean the Jewish monopolist, and especially the  Jewish monopolist in metal, though he would be  extremely annoyed to have the extent of his control  exposed, will feel that it is due to his superior  abilities and in no way designed for mastery.   All these individual replies are true ; but if you  make of them a composite and general reply, if you  put it as a reply of all Israel to all the world outside,  crying, " I have no desire for supremacy; I never  act in such a fashion that my domination can be  felt or shall increase; the motive is not present,  even subconsciously, among my people " then that  general reply would be false.   In point of fact the Jew has collectively a power  to-day, in the white world, altogether excessive.  It is not only an excessive power, it is inevitably  a corporate power and, therefore, a semi- organized  power. It is not only excessive and in the main     192 THE JEWS   organized, it was, until the recent reaction began,  a rapidly increasing power and most people  believe it to be still increasing. To that the whole  world outside the Jewish community will testify.   The criterion by which we may judge whether  any form of power is irritant to those whom it  affects is not the testimony of those who exercise  the power, but the testimony of those over whom  it is exercised. There never was a tyranny in the  world, not even one of those personal tyrannies  (which have been so much more highly organized  and so much more direct than this power of the  Jews), there never has been a despotism in history,  which would not tell you that it was accidental, or  necessary, or, in any case, innocent of any motive of  oppression. And history universally replies : "To  judge that, you must ask those who felt the pressure ;  not those who exercised it."   Now those who feel the pressure in the matter  we are now examining are unanimous. They differ  in the degree of their resentment from those to  whom the thing is so intolerable that they are  already in active revolt against it, to those who  feel it merely as a distant though an approaching  discomfort. But everybody feels it in some degree.  It is a universal sensation running throughout the  nerves of the modern world and it is growing too  fast in degree and extent to be ignored.   I have already quoted the effect upon those  hundreds of educated men taken into the temporary  Civil service during the late war, when they found,  holding the locked gate of one monopoly after  another, the international Jew. His control of  finance needs no discussion. If the individual  banker or financier is not aware of it, the most of     POSITION IN WORLD AS A WHOLE 193   those who are affected are acutely aware of it.  Men exaggerate in giving it a sort of conscious  personality, but they certainly do not exaggerate  when they point to its effects. The Jew must  remember, what it may be difficult for him to accept  and what is certainly true, that not only is his domi-  nation very bitterly resented but that his presence  in any position of control whatsoever is odious to  the race among which he moves. Everybody feels  that about any form of alien control, much more  do they feel it about that form which they instinc-  tively know to be most alien of all. Every one  has noticed this control exercised in the form of  keeping silence upon what it was to the disadvan-  tage of Israel to have known ; in the form of the  advertising of what it was to the advantage of Israel  to have advertised ; in the form of the giving and  withholding of credit; in the form of attack in  the Press against nations with whom Israel had a  quarrel and the defence in the Press of those (they  have now almost disappeared) upon whom Israel,  in the immediate past, relied for defence. And  everybody has discovered what is not unjust,  indeed, what is inevitable, but what is none the  less a source of exasperation the solidarity of the  Jewish race where the interests of any member of  it were concerned. 1   But if the thing were felt everywhere as acutely  and as consciously as it is felt in special groups  to-day as it is felt, for instance, in one particular  section of English opinion already represented in the   1 Except, of course, an outlawed member. The case of  Dr. Levy turned out of this country by his compatriots in  the Government for having written unfavourably of the Moscow  Jews will be fresh in every one's memory.   O     194 THE JEWS   Press, is felt in a wider section of French opinion,  and in a still wider section of Polish opinion then  the matter would be simple. We could then say  that an issue of the clearest kind had arisen, and  forbid a small alien minority to decide the destinies  of those among whom it lives and of whom it is  not. The answer would be obvious, and the only  difficulty would be how the Jewish control might  be lessened without grievous injustice to innocent  individuals.   But the thing is not so felt. It is modified, as  I have said, by the varying degrees of intensity  in which it is recognized and by the other inter-  national forces which come into play.   If we consider the varying political traditions  and the varying international forces, if we examine  the world's national groups, we shall find something  like this: In the vast body of Russia a position  most paradoxical. For years the Jew was every-  where openly attacked and hated in those parts  of the Russian Empire where he was allowed to  live in large numbers. These were nowhere within  Russia proper but upon the western outskirts of  that empire, within what was once the old Polish  kingdom and largely within what is now the restored  Republic of Poland. But the Russian traditional  antagonism to the Jew changed in a few weeks of  chaos to something not opposite but novel and  different. The Russian allowed a prodigious revolu-  tion to be made by the Jews, he accepted the loot  of that revolution which the Jew secured to him;  he has submitted wholly in the towns, partly in  the country, to a tyranny exercised by Jews ever  since that complete reversal of his national history,  now four years old.     POSITION IN WORLD AS A WHOLE 195   The external political power of what was once  the Russian Empire has disappeared. The Jews  have killed it. But the great mass of Russian  humanity remains strongly affected by this curious  change. Where popular instinct works untram-  melled the old and violent passionate antagonism  between the Russian and the Jew survives. You  see it in the hotch potch of the Ukraine, the  inhabitants of which, in spite of all theories, are of  Russian race and tradition, and the central town  of which is the sacred region of Russia as a member  of Christendom. There, for all the Jewish Com-  mittees with large towns under their complete  control, there have been repeated revolts. But  in the greater part of European Russia at least,  and in much of what was once the Asiatic Empire,  the Jews hold what is left of the Executive  government.   So far as we can judge from the very imperfect  accounts which reach us (for nowhere is the weapon  of secrecy more ruthlessly used), the mass of the  Russians, that is, the peasantry, are in two minds.  To the action of the Jewish despotism in the town  they are indifferent, but to his early attempts  against themselves they were bitterly opposed.  They have suffered at his hands and they thought  him a tyrant. But the Jew seems to have dropped  this interference and the Russian soil to have settled  down as a peasant proprietary. On the other  hand, it was a revolution guided by those same  Jewish Committees which secured the peasant in  the possession of his land. The Russian peasant  has always regarded the land as his own. He  had, I understand, regarded that odd, pedantic  measure, " The Liberation of the Serfs," as only     196 THE JEWS   another name for the robbing him of his land;  and when the organization of Russian society dis-  solved in the strain of war, he poured over the great  estates and took back what he thought was his  own.   For the strange Jewish conception of Commun-  ism, a million miles removed from our European  racial instincts and our high civilized traditions, the  Russian peasant could have nothing but a bewil-  dered contempt. None the less he was conscious  that the Jewish revolution had permitted him, if  not to take the land (he did that himself), at least  to hold it ; and the revolution is indistinguishable  from the Jewish control of the towns.   Within the towns, again (our information is  most imperfect and I can only piece together what  eye-witnesses have told me), although the Jew is,  of course, individually hated, yet his control does  stand for certain things which the mass of the  people still support. He organized the resentment  of the poor against the rich. He erected before  their eyes the pleasing spectacle of a social revenge.  He carried out, fairly consistently, his Communist  programme, one aspect at least of which is practical  enough; for the man that works with his hands  finds that he is as well, or better, fed out of the  meagre common stock, than those who were once  his masters.   In general I think it true to say that the Jewish  control over Christians, if, in a way, stronger in  what was once the Russian Empire than anywhere  else, is also there least resented. I do not say  it would not be resented if it were to excite action  again against the peasants > but we cannot forget  that the peasants were eager to fight for the new     POSITION IN WORLD AS A WHOLE 197   Russian regime because they identified it with  their new property in land. The situation is absurd  enough. Men in hundreds of thousands willing to  fight for Communist masters because by so doing  they believe they can secure themselves in an  absolute form of property ! But that is what the  " red" army was.   In that belt of nations, vague in boundary,  which used to constitute the Marches of the East  and which now stand between what was once the  Russian Empire and the Germanies, the position  would seem to be this.   There are in these countries everywhere a very  large proportion of Jews. The largest by far are in  Lithuania and Galicia, where, of whole towns, from  a third to a half and sometimes up to two-thirds,  of the population are Jewish. Very large also  is the proportion within the admitted frontiers of  modern Poland; very large in Roumania, and  considerable in Hungary.   In all these countries the Jewish problem is  something quite different from what it is farther  West. The Jews are in these countries admittedly  a separate nation. Even as I write I hear the  complaint, sounding strange in our Western ears,  proffered by the Polish Jews who have been appeal-  ing to the West against what they claim to be the  oppressive practice of writing them down as Poles !  In Roumania for two generations it has been the  fixed principle of the State, now latent, now overt,  but always acted upon in social practice, that the  Jew is not a Roumanian at all and cannot be one.  Of course he cannot be one really, any more than  he can be an Englishman, or a Frenchman, or an  Irishman. (Fancy a Jew an Irishman !) But I     198 THE JEWS   mean, not even one by fiction or by convention.  In Poland the greater part of these people have a  different language and all of them have a different  social custom and a different life from the world  around them. In Hungary, where the numerical  pressure of the Jew is less, there is, of course, a  most lively memory of the attempted revolution  under Cohen in 1918, the massacres of Hungarians,  the setting up of an ephemeral Bolshevism and the  necessity of its suppression. In Bohemia the  pressure is far less and in the Balkan States south of  the Danube and the Drave. It is only present as  a pressure of numbers in the group of States which  lie between the Baltic and the Black Sea South  and North and between the Russian people and the  German people East and West.   When we come to Occidental Europe, in which  must be included, though it is hardly a true part  of it, Germany beyond the Elbe; when we come  to the Scandinavian countries, to France, Britain,  Italy, Spain, Switzerland and the Low Countries,  the problem changes. The numerical proportion  of Jews sinks enormously. Fairly large in one or  two Dutch towns, it is almost insignificant in  Scandinavia, and though we have had into the  great English towns and to some extent into the  northern French towns (particularly Paris) a  considerable recent influx of Jews, yet the total  number of these people in the West remains far,  far smaller than the great masses of the East of  Europe. The same is still more true of Italy, and,  in spite of the absorption of a great deal of Jewish  blood in the past, of Spain.   But while the numerical proportion of Jews in  these western countries is much smaller, and while     POSITION IN WORLD AS A WHOLE 199   therefore the peril of Jewish domination is very  different in form from what it is farther East, it is  clearly marked. It is exercised primarily through  finance; next through the sceptical Universities,  the anonymous Press and the corrupt Parliaments,  and, lastly, in a more general form, by the presence  of institutions which greatly favour the rise of the  Jew in competition with his hosts ; each favours  international knowledge ; each favours anonymity ;  each still favours the old Liberal nonsense which  called itself " toleration " and was really an indiffer-  ence to that most fundamental of all social motives  religion save, of course, where an exception  is made to permit attack upon the Catholic  Church.   Under influence of this sort, both sincere and  hypocritical, both generous and mean, the Jew  acquired in all the larger communities, and especially  in France, Italy, Germany and England, a power  out of all proportion to his numbers, and I may add,  without, I hope, offending any Jewish reader, out  of proportion to his abilities; certainly out of  proportion to any right of his to interfere in  our affairs. It was a Jew who produced the  divorce laws in France, the Jew who nourished  anti- clericalism everywhere in that country and  also in Italy ; the Jew who called in the forces of  Occidental nations to protect his compatriots in  the East, and the Jew whose spirit has so largely  permeated the Universities and the Press.   Ireland is an exception. In Ireland the Jew  (outside the little industrial corner in the north-east)  is nobody. And here it must be remarked that  the migrations of the Jew which give him numbers  here for a time and afterwards numbers elsewhere,     200 THE JEWS   in places where previously he had not been known ;  which give him influence here for a time, and sees  it followed by the decline of that influence, do not  seem to obey any law which we can trace, and  are certainly not the product of any conscious  action. It is one of the strangest phenomena in  history, this odd, spasmodic flood movement of  the Jewish race. Is it concerned with commerce ?  That is one element undoubtedly; that is what  explains the exploitation of England by Jews after  the Conquest, of Spain in the later Middle Ages,  of the Valley of the Rhine ; but then, why not other  commercial centres as an attraction ? Venice was  not one, though the Jew was well tolerated there ;  nor was Paris after the early Middle Ages, and while  some of the Dutch towns formed such centres of  attraction the Belgian towns did not.   Was it asylum ? That would account, of course,  for the great influx of Jews into mediaeval Poland,  but then why not into eighteenth century England ?  Why not until very late in the nineteenth century ?  England, which gave the Jews a more complete  civic position than he could find anywhere else  in the world, was not invaded by them. Why these  very recent influxes into the United States, which  has for now a century and a half been perfectly  open by its Constitution, and was by all its civic  tradition an ideal asylum for the Jews ? Until  quite recent times the Jew was hardly known  there, and to this day he is not known outside a  few great cities.   No. There would seem to be no law, or at least  no discoverable law, for this mysterious movement,  the ebb and flow of Israel but that is a digres-  sion. To return to the national situations.     POSITION IN WORLD AS A WHOLE 201   If we leave the Old World and turn to the United  States, we find a novel condition of affairs still in  process of development and very puzzling to the  foreign observer. I do not pretend to analyse it  completely in a few lines, nor even accurately,  for I am dependent upon the observation of others,  and the United States are so utterly different from  us that we have difficulty in following their con-  temporary history; but something of this sort  would seem to be passing there.     In the United States the Jews were present, till  the last few years, in numbers even smaller in  proportion to the population than their numbers  in France, England and Italy, far smaller than their  numbers in what was formerly the German Empire.  In the agricultural part of America, which is still,  I believe, one half of the population, the Jew was  almost unknown. You find him here and there,  as a lawyer or a storekeeper, but that world was  not familiar with him any more than our English  country-sides are familiar with him to-day. With  the growth of the great industrial towns, of course,  the Jew came, but he was still no " feature in the  landscape." There was a certain social prejudice  against him among the wealthier classes in the  East, and this is very important the truth was  always told about him. There was in America no  convention the Jew was always recognized as a  Jew and there was never any of the nonsense we  had over here of pretending that he was something  else.   Of that phenomenon of which the history of  Europe is full, which is so marked in the eastern     202 THE JEWS   counties to-day and which is beginning to rise in  the West, there is nothing traceable in the early  and middle nineteenth century, nor even till the  close of it, in the United States.   Then came the change. It is a change which  has taken place in the lifetime of men much younger  than myself. It is a change, I am told, most marked  since I last visited the United States more than  twenty years ago. A regular and organized Jewish  emigration began to pour in, especially from the  Baltic. It flooded New York, where it now forms  probably a third of the population; it created  Ghettoes in most of the large Northern industrial  towns, and all the phenomena we associate in  Europe with these movements began to show them-  selves. There was the growth of the financial  monopoly and of monopolies in particular trades.  There was the clamour for toleration in the form  of "neutralizing" religious teaching in schools;  there was the appearance of the Jewish revolution-  ary and of the Jewish critic in every tradition of  Christian life. The Jews went also as they usually  do to the heart of things, and the Executive was  attacked. The last and apparently the most  unpopular of the presidents, Mr. Wilson, seems to  have been wholly in their hands. Anonymity in the  Press came, of course. A very marked example of  it is a journal called The New Republic, which,  though it has but a small proportion of Jewish  writers upon it, and though its capital is (I believe)  not Jewish, is yet to all intents and purposes the  organ of the Jewish intellectuals, always joins in  the boycott of any news unfavourable to European  Jews, always joins in the clamour for anything  favourable to them, and in general adheres to the     POSITION IN WORLD AS A WHOLE 203   Jewish side, like the Humanite in Paris, or, let us  say, The New Statesman in England.   But the novel presence in the United States of  this phenomenon with which in the west of Europe  we have now been familiar for a long time, provides  a more direct and a very different kind of reaction  from what it has among us. This reaction against  Jewish powers was not (to use a Stock Exchange  metaphor) "sticky." There was no hesitation;  there were no uneasy patches of silence. The  Jewish question was discussed from the moment  it was first felt and to-day it is discussed beyond  all others. Of political topics I have found it the  first in the conversation of the Americans who  have visited Europe since the War and with whom  I have discussed the affairs of their country. It  ranges, as that reaction always does, from the wildest  Anti-Semitism to strong and open defence of  the Jewish position, not only by Jews but by the  very small minority of their admirers outside the  Jewish community, especially among the wealthy.  The characteristic of the whole thing in the United  States is that it is only j ust beginning. It is capable  of becoming one of those sudden growths of which  the past history of the Republic has made us  familiar, and indeed it is too early yet to judge, even  on the largest lines, what forms it may not take.  It is enough to say that there is behind the reaction  against the Jew in that country a growing intensity  of feeling with which we, as yet, in Western Europe,  for all the advance we have made in the matter,  are unfamiliar. If a test be required, contrast  the silence about the Jews in '96, during Bryan's  great attack upon the gold standard, with the work  of Mr. Ford and all that he stands for to-day!     204 THE JEWS   The rest of the world is either of Islam or heathen.  In the heathen world, so far, the Jew has little  place. He has a strong grip on India, of course,  but only through the British Raj, not through the  native population; and in China, except as a  quasi- European merchant, he has no power at all;  neither has he over the strong and organized  nationality of Japan.   Such are the degrees, very roughly, of the  problem ; such the differences of its quality in the  various national groups to-day. Of these the two  most interesting states of the problem by far, be-  cause they are changing with the greatest rapidity,  are found in France, in England and in the United  States.   I have said that the second modifying condition  was the difference of civic traditions of the various  nations. Here again you have a differentiation  from East to West. But within it a differentiation,  ultimately due to religion, from North to South.  In Russia there was never any tradition of keeping  silence upon the Jew, or of respecting the Jew  at all. He was, until the recent revolution,  the national enemy, and there was the end of it.  Similarly in Poland, Roumania and the vaguer  populations of their borders, and even in the old  Hungary, the Jew was talked of openly as belonging  to a separate nationality and, on the whole, a  hostile one.   But as one got west another spirit emerged,  another tradition. It was " the thing" to treat  the Jew as a citizen. This fashion was weaker in  the Germanies than in the Low Countries, France,  or England ; it was everywhere present west of the  Elbe.        POSITION IN WORLD AS A WHOLE 205   It was a tradition flowing from two sources:  the commercial and protestant England of the  seventeenth century, the sceptical France of the  eighteenth. The Jew (according to this spirit)  merited special protection and special respect. He  must be protected and respected even in his passion  for secrecy; so that at last the mere mention of  his existence in the cultivated and directing classes  of the west became something of an oddity.   From this spirit proceeded the Liberal fiction or  convention which I dealt with in the second chapter  of this book. It was clinched, it was given per-  manent form, by the enthusiasm and severe doc-  trine of the French Republicans, which arose at a  moment when Israel was regarded as a religion  and its national quality was forgotten. Since all  religion was thought to be dying, since, further, an  enthusiasm had arisen against almost any religion  which exercised civic power (notably the Catholic  Church), this Jewish religion, formerly regarded as  inimical to the State, or at any rate separate from  it, was naturally accorded a special privilege. That  strange system arose, the death of which we are  now watching after its brief life of somewhat more  than a century, whereby the Jew was permitted  to wear the mask of nationalities other than his  own, and to function everywhere as though he were  a citizen, not of Israel, but of the nation in which  he chanced to find himself.   Against this attitude arose at last the powerful  plea of nationalism. In England, as we shall see  in the next chapter, this plea was less strong than  elsewhere, because the interests of international  Jewish finance and of British commerce were for  so long nearly identical. In Italy, where the Jew     206 THE JEWS   was naturally closely connected with the nationalist  movement on account of its antagonism to the  Papacy, national feeling clashed little with the  anomaly of the Jew. But in France, especially  after the'def eat of 1 870, the contrast became stronger  and stronger, just as it is strengthening to-day in  Germany after the defeat of 1918.   It was that clash between the " city" of Israel  and the other "cities" in which we Europeans  function, to which allusion has been made on a  former page. It would be very convenient, no  doubt, to the " City " of Israel if all other " cities "  disappeared and left an open field for Jewish  operations. But they do not propose to disappear ;  and though our devotion to them may seem inexplic-  able to the Jew, he must accept it as a permanent  force ; for the patriotism of the European will not  weaken.   In the United States this Liberal tradition or  convention, this conception that the Jew must be  treated as a full citizen, was far stronger even than  it was in the West of Europe. It was in the very  soul of the Constitution, and, what is more impor-  tant, in the very soul of the people. For such a  spirit was nourished not only in doctrine but in  practice by the appearance, in vast quantities, of  immigrants from many different countries, all of  whom were absorbed in and merged by the Ameri-  can spirit. If ever there was a field in which the  false conception that a Jew could be a Jew and  at the same time the full citizen of another nation,  that field was the United States of America. Yet  it is there that the problem is now reaching its  most acute form; and the reason is that side by  side with this strong civic tradition there goes a     POSITION IN WORLD AS A WHOLE 207   complete freedom of speech and a very active  public opinion. The reality became too much for  theory and the Jew was recognized as something  apart. He will never fall into the background  again.   There remain to be considered the international  forces which modify this general truth that the  quarrel with the Jew is a quarrel with his increasing  control over our affairs.   Those international forces are Religion Islam  and the Catholic Church the force of Modern  Capitalism, and the Reaction against that force of  the Industrial Proletariat, the Reaction summed up  in the term Socialism. All four are international.   The position of the Jew in Islam can be simply  defined. In Islam he is treated with less method  and therefore with less continued oppression than  in Christendom, but always and permanently as  something base and inferior, save in a few rare  moments when he has the favour of particular  rulers or is necessary to some special society, or  is admired in a moment of intellectual brilliance.   Normally the Jew in Islam is an outcast. I  know very well that the game is played of pretend-  ing that Islam is in some way kinder to him than  we are. It is but a game : the playing of one party  against another of Islam against Christendom  by Israel, which is of neither. In Islam his superior  position in Christendom is equally famed. History  is too strong for such pretences. All the history of  Islam, all the social spirit of Islam, to which there  are countless witnesses to-day, give the same verdict  about the general treatment of the Jew in that  society.   So it was in independent Islam. But Islam,     208 THE JEWS   politically controlled to-day by the Western Chris-  tian powers, is another matter. Under that un-  stable state of affairs (no one can say how long it  will last ; the conflict between Islam and Christen-  dom seems eternal and the rise and fall of that tide  is indefinitely successive) the problem takes on  quite another shape. France and England appear  in Islam as the artificial supporters of the Jew.   Until quite lately it was the French who bore  the worst odium of this in the eyes of the Moham-  medans. Under the French the Jews in North  Africa were often given a special, a superior position,  which was an insult to every Mohammedan and  which is still an insult to him. It is the weakest  point of the French regime. In Algeria the Ghetto  Jew may vote. The Arab may not. Even in  Morocco, where things have been done more wisely  than in Algiers, the difficulty is felt. How are  you to treat a Jew differently in Morocco from the  way in which he is treated in France? He is  common to the two countries. If you treat him as  if he were French, and therefore a member of the  governing power, what of the pride of those lords  of the Atlas and of Fez ? .   In the vastly larger field of Mohammedan control  exercised by Britain, which, directly and indirectly,  is ten times that of France, there was until lately less  of this friction ; but the tables have been turned,  and to-day it is Britain which stands to the Moham-  medan as the thruster-in of the Jew. It began  with the support of Jewish finance in Egypt; it  went on with the extended control over Indian  commerce by Jews; it continued in the control  of Indian currency by Jews. It has ended in the  grotesque appointment to the Indian Viceroyalty     POSITION IN WORLD AS A WHOLE 209   and the extraordinary experiment of Palestine.  To-day, at the moment in which I write, there  is no doubt on the matter whatsoever : From Rabat  on the Atlantic to the Bay of Bengal, the Western  Powers are regarded as the agents of a Jewish  intrusion which is intolerable to Islam. And  whereas the chief blame lay, until quite a few  years ago, upon the French, to-day it lies upon   the British Government.   *****   The role of the Catholic Church in the debate  between the Jews and Christendom is the most  discussed, the worst understood, of any point  connected with the general problem. But it is  capable of simple definition. Wherever the Catho-  lic Church is powerful, and in proportion as it is  powerful, the traditional principles of the civiliza-  tion of which it is the soul and guardian will always  be upheld. One of these principles is the sharp  distinction between the Jew and ourselves. The  Rationalist would say that this distinction was  racial, and that it only found religious expression  on account of its racial reality. His opponent  would say that the origin of the quarrel was mainly  religious ; that it was a difference in religious tradi-  tion which formed the contrast between the Jew  and Christendom. The former can cite as evidence  the violent original contrast between the Roman  Empire and the Jew, the latter the truth that  religion, philosophy, is the formative force in  every human society.   But whichever theory you adopt, the fact is there.  The Catholic Church is the conservator of an age-  long European tradition, and that tradition will  never compromise with the fiction that a Jew can     210 THE JEWS   be other than a Jew. Wherever the Catholic  Church has power, and in proportion to its power,  the Jewish problem will be recognized to the full.   On the other hand, there never has been and  never will be, or can be, admission by Catholic  morals of warfare against the Jew. Those morals  are plain. That doctrine has been defined over and  over again and acted upon throughout history. If  indirect hostilities are opened against the majority  by a minority in its midst, they may be repressed  and punished. Still more important, insincere and  pretended conversion, used as a cloak, may be  repressed and punished. But though a com-  munity has the right to determine its own life,  and (if it think it possible) even to eliminate (with  justice, not with cruelty, violence or injustice in  any form) an alien, a hostile minority; yet that  minority has its own right to live, if not there,  then elsewhere. It has its right once it is rooted  and traditional to its own convictions, to its  own tradition. If you allow it to live among you,  you must allow it to live its own life save where  that life threatens yours. The Catholic Church will  always maintain reality, including the reality of that  sharp distinction between the Jew and his hosts.   The opponent of the Catholic Church will tend,  other things being equal, to support the Jew,  because, under that distinction, the Jew may find  himself ill at ease. The whole Protestant tradition  of the North was for more than 300 years favour-  able to the Jew, partly indeed on account of its  reliance upon the Jewish Scriptures, its absorption  in the inspired Jewish folk-lore, but more because  the alliance with the Jew was an alliance against the  Catholic Church. Strong traces of that spirit still     POSITION IN WORLD AS A WHOLE 211   remain. What has warred against it has been the  sheer necessity in every country, Catholic or  Protestant, Liberal or anti- Liberal, to preserve  society against what each began to feel as a disrup-  tive and an alien domination.   There remain the two novel forces Modern  Capitalism, and, protesting against it, its victim,  the Modern Industrial Proletariat.   A few years ago anyone would have said that  the opposition to the Jew was an opposition to  capitalism alone ; the Jew was the representative  of capitalism, and Jewish finance was the particular  aspect of Jewish power in which that power was  universally hated. But we have seen all that  change. To-day the strongest force against the  Jew is on the other side. It is mainly aroused, not  by the fear of capitalist forces, but by the fear of  revolutionary forces.   I make bold to say that when the feeling against  the Jew comes to the point of action, the Jew will  necessarily, and in self-defence, fall back upon the  leadership of the proletariat against industrial  capitalism. He will he must, from mere instinct,  quite apart from calculation use the line of cleav-  age which divides a society hostile to him. He will  rely on the line of cleavage driven by the vast  modern quarrel between the few possessors in the  modern industrial world and their victims, the  exploited millions.   So put, the opportunity of the Jew, if he be driven  to extremities to raise an army in his defence,  seems a great opportunity enough. It would  seem easy for him to deflect all animosity against  himself into animosity against the rich safe-  guarding, of course (as he has done in Eussia),     212 THE JEWS   the Jewish rich. But we must remember three  formidable conditions which weaken that oppor-  tunity.   The first condition is this : The industrial millions  are still quite a small minority and will probably  in the future be an even smaller minority of the  civilized white world. The war dealt them a heavy  blow. The fact that the industrial proletariat is  a town population, and therefore less and less  productive, is another cause of weakness; their  decline in health another. The fact that indus-  trial capitalism depends upon the machine being  kept going, and that its serfs are less and less will-  ing to keep the machine going, is another.   Secondly, the area (and that is important)  occupied by industrial capitalism is but a very  small area of the surface of the civilized world.   Thirdly, the revolt of the Industrial Proletariat,  if the Jews provoke it, will be short-lived. Either  it will be defeated, or after destroying its masters  it will, under Jewish leadership, destroy its own  powers of production, as in Russia.   When the fury is exhausted, in a very short  time the Jewish problem will reappear.   The proletarian battle may rage intensely, but it  will be far from universal, and will not be sufficient,  I think, to distract mankind from that other cross-  problem of Jew and non- Jew, to which his attention  is being more and more steadily directed.     THE POSITION OF THE JEWS IN  ENGLAND     CHAPTER X   THE PRESENT RELATION BETWEEN THE  ENGLISH STATE AND THE JEWS   THE various nations of Europe have every one  of them, in the course of their long histories, passed  through successive phases towards the Jew which  I have called the tragic cycle. Each has in turn  welcomed, tolerated, persecuted, attempted to  exile often actually exiled welcomed again, and  so forth. The two chief examples of extremes  in action, are, as I have also pointed out in an  earlier part of this book, Spain and England.  Spaniards, and in particular the Spaniards of the  Kingdom of Castile, went through every phase of  this cycle in its fullest form. England passed  through even greater extremes, for England  was the only country which absolutely got rid of  the Jews for hundreds of years, and England is  the only country which has, even for a brief period,  entered into something like an alliance with  them.   Though it is the present position of the British  State that is, the position of official British  politics towards the Jew with which we are con-  cerned, it may be of service to introduce the matter  by a word upon past relations.   215     216 THE JEWS   The Jewish element in this island, whatever it  may have been during the Roman occupation, was  of small account during the Dark Ages. Things  changed at their close in the eleventh century.  The Jew is the camp follower of each new economic  movement among us and that is why one finds him  in the wake of the Norman Conquest. Throughout  the economic development which it began appears  the secondary role of the Jew. Every one knows  the mediaeval rule of Jewish Status. It was  established here as everywhere else in Christendom.  The Jew was the King's; that is, under the special  protection of the State. If he were the subject  of popular attack, that attack was an attack on  the King's peculiar, and liable to speedy repression.  The individual attacker was punished with special  severity because the danger of mass- movement is  always great where the populace is free to act in  masses as it was throughout the middle ages, and  the necessity for preventing individual attacks  from spreading was correspondingly great. Now  and then the popular feeling got out of hand and  the monarch had to deal with numbers which he  could not control; but as a rule the Jew, especi-  ally the rich Jew, enjoyed a privileged position,  both in Northern France and throughout England.  The Jew of the early Middle Ages in England  was normally a well-to-do man and often an  exceedingly rich man. Then, as now, a small  number of Jews were much the richest men of  their time.   He had most of the finances in his hands, and  this immense privilege (which he has lost), that he  alone was allowed to practise usury. Here we  must pause a moment to define usury.     POSITION OP JEWS IN ENGLAND 217   Usury then (as now) signified the receiving of  interest upon unproductive loans. It is a practice  which all moralists and all philosophers have  condemned and which the Church in particular  condemns. If you lend money to a man for a  productive purpose : if, for instance, he is to buy  a ship and trade with the money you advance,  or to buy a farm and grow produce, then,, of course,  you are perfectly free to stipulate for a portion of  the profit. But if you lend the money for a purpose  not directly productive, as, for instance, to a  man in grave necessity, or in lieu of charity, or  to build such a building as a church, which will  not produce a rent, or if in any other fashion you  lend money to one who (to your knowledge) will  not spend it in some reproductive agency, then it  is immoral to demand interest.   Now an exception was made in mediaeval Christ-  endom in favour of the Jew. He was allowed to  lend money at interest, even in the most grievous  cases of necessity, and for services as unproductive  as religion or war. The only stipulation was that  the moneys saved from this lucrative practice  returned to the Crown (in theory) upon the death  of the licensee. In practice no doubt a very  large part remained with the accumulator, who  during his lifetime was enjoying the income he had  acquired by usury, who could give it to his heirs  while still living, and could use opportunities for  secret investment, or pass it to the custody of  others throughout international Jewry. But liquid  sums left by him, the product of his usury, returned  to the Crown upon his death. This was a great  advantage to the Crown, not only in protecting  the Jew from the native hostility of his alien hosts     218 THE JEWS   (and particularly of the populace), but in giving  him that great privilege a monopoly.   The rate of interest was enormous. It varied  from nearly 50 per cent to over 80 per cent. When  Jews lent money on security the King was party  to the safe custody of the security, and their privi-  lege extended so far that they were exempt from  the common law, and a case between an English-  man and his Jewish creditor could only be tried  by a mixed jury in which the Jew's own com-  patriots were present in equal numbers with the  English.   All during the Angevin period Jewish financial  domination continued, up to the end of the twelfth  century and even into the beginning of the thir-  teenth. But with the first half of the thirteenth  century, for some reason of which I have never  " : seen a sufficient historical analysis and of which,  perhaps, the full causes have been lost, the Jewish  power began to decline very rapidly, so far as  England was concerned.   And here it may be noted that the misfortunes  of the Jews in any country never begin until their  financial position is shaken. As long as they are  the financial masters of the Government they are   Protected ; but woe to them when they begin to  >se their financial power ! Then there is no longer  any reason for supporting them either on the part of  the governing classes in general or of the Executive  in particular. Popular passion is let loose and  disaster follows.   At any rate, the thirteenth century saw in  England a rapid decline of Jewish financial power  and at the same time a rapid rise of official ani-  mosity towards them. They got poorer and poorer   is- > -**',* -' ^ '"" * * f . ' I ',. & ? y~ -**.}  1 *   u      ^  te*     POSITION OF JEWS IN ENGLAND 219   as the century proceeded. Their activities were  at the same time more and more restricted. They  had lent money largely upon land and yet, in the  public interest, were at last forbidden to foreclose  upon it. The final step came when their special  licence to practise usury was withdrawn by Edward  I in the earlier part of his reign; and at last, in  1290, after increasing severities, they were all  expelled the country under penalty of death.   The unhappy people, already reduced by two  generations of falling fortune, were hurried out of  the country, carrying, by permission, their money  and movables. They were protected, indeed, at  the ports by the royal officers, who even paid the  passage of the indigent among them; but they  were plundered at sea and some even murdered.  The murderers were punished, but the memory  of the persecution remained in the Jews' mind and  England became a natural object of their hate.  The Jewish community expelled by the English  was surprisingly small, not 17,000, and suggests the  historical truth that in the Middle Ages, and indeed  until quite modern times, the Jewish community  in Northern France and England was a community  of people in the main well-to-do. It so remained  until quite modern times.   There followed three and a half centuries and  more during which England was the one example  in Europe of a State that would not tolerate the  Jews upon any terms whatsoever. There cer-  tainly remained throughout this time, or at any  rate visited the island, not a few of what the Jews  themselves called " Crypto- Jews," that is, Jews  who outwardly deny their nationality and practise  our religion for the purpose of private gain. These,     220 THE JEWS   when they could defeat the law successfully, re-  mained within the British seas. But their effect was  slight; and the English people during the whole  of their great military advance in France, during  the whole period when their language and culture  was forming, during the whole great national  episode of the Tudors and of the Keformation,  formed the one great exception out of all Europe  in that the Jew remained unknown to them and  was rigorously excluded from their Common-  wealth.   They returned, as everybody knows, under  Cromwell. Their numbers, and still more their  wealth, increased at the end of the seventeenth  century and concomitantly with this, partly as  an effect of it (but here we must not exaggerate),  a number of novel financial features appeared in  the English State each of which shows the increased  power of the Jews. The institution of the Bank,  of the National Debt, of speculation in Exchange  and in the fluctuation of stock.   But the real causes of that alliance between  the English and the Jews which is seen in the  late seventeenth century, which quickened through-  out the eighteenth and became so very marked  in the nineteenth century, was the cosmopolitan  position of England as the leading commercial  State. This it was which led to something like  identity between the interests of Israel and the  interests of Britain, an identity which has lasted  so long that now, when divergence is beginning  to appear, it still seems odd and novel to the older  generation that there should be any Jewish action  which is not favourable to England. They cannot  understand what the new indifference to Jewish     POSITION OF JEWS IN ENGLAND 221   interests, let alone the new hostility to them, can  mean.   There were, of course, many other causes con-  tributory to the peculiar position which the Jew  came to enjoy in modern England, a position  which he has not yet lost in external circumstance,  though it is so badly shaken morally. There was  the fact that England was the Protestant power  of the West.   This religious motive played a great part.  Between the Catholic Church and the Synagogue  there had been hostility from the first century.  In so far as it was possible to take sides in that  quarrel it was natural for the Protestant power  to take sides against the Catholic tradition and  therefore in favour of the Jews. Again, the  English were not only Protestant, their middle  classes were steeped in the reading of the Old  Testament. The Jews seemed to them the heroes  of an epic and the shrines of a religion. You will  find strong relics of this attitude in Provincial  England to this day. One should add a certain  national distaste for violence, which feeling was  exasperated by hearing of the Jewish persecution  abroad. One should also further add the pride  which modern Englishmen take in the feeling  that their country is an asylum for the oppressed.   Meanwhile there was not, until quite lately, any  considerable body of poor Jews in the country to  excite the animosity of the populace. That was  an important negative factor in bringing the Jew  within the boundaries of the English State. But  with all these factors fully considered, it remains  true that the main cause of the accidental Jewish  position in England was the cosmopolitan char-     222 THE JEWS   acter of English commerce and the essentially  commercial character of the English State. As  English export and English shipping began to  cover the globe, the English financial system covered  it as well. London became after Waterloo the  money market and the clearing house of the  world. The interests of the Jew as a financial  dealer and the interests of this great commercial  polity approximated more and more. One may  say that by the last third of the nineteenth cen-  tury they had become virtually identical.   Every new economic enterprise of the British  State appealed to the Jewish genius for commerce  and especially for negotiation in its most abstract  form finance. Conversely, every Jewish enter-  prise, every new conception of the Jew in his  cosmopolitan activities (until these became revolu-  tionary) appealed to the English merchant and  banker.   The two things dovetailed one into the other  and fitted exactly, and all subsidiary activities  fitted in as well. The Jewish news agencies of  the nineteenth century favoured England in all  her policy, political as well as commercial ; they  opposed those of her rivals and especially those of  her enemies. The Jewish knowledge of the East  was at the service of England. His international  penetration of the European governments was  also at her service so was his secret information.  With the consolidation of the Indian Empire  after the Mutiny the Jews were again an ally from  their traditional hatred of the Kussian people,  which hatred has led them in our time to wreak  so awful a vengeance upon their former oppressors.  The Jew might almost be called a British agent     POSITION OF JEWS IN ENGLAND 223   upon the Continent of Europe, and still more in the  Near and Far East, where the economic power  of England extended even more rapidly than her  political power.   And the Jew pointed to the English State as  that one in which all that his nation required of the  goyim was to be found. He here enjoyed a situa-  tion the like of which he could not hope to enjoy  in any other country of the world. All antagonism  to him had died down. He was admitted to every  institution in the State, a prominent member  of his nation became chief officer of the English  Executive, and, an influence more subtle and pene-  trating, marriages began to take place, wholesale,  between what had once been the aristocratic  territorial families of this country and the Jewish  commercial fortunes.   After two generations of this, with the opening of  the twentieth century those of the great territorial  English families in which there was no Jewish  blood were the exception. In nearly all of them  was the strain more or less marked, in some of them  so strong that though the name was still an English  name and the traditions those of a purely English  lineage of the long past, the physique and charac-  ter had become wholly Jewish and the members  of the family were taken for Jews whenever they  travelled in countries where the gentry had not  yet suffered or enjoyed this admixture.   Specially Jewish institutions, such as Freemasonry  (which the Jews had inaugurated as a sort of  bridge between themselves and their hosts in the  seventeenth century), were particularly strong in  Britain, and there arose a political tradition, active,  and ultimately to prove of great importance,     224 THE JEWS   whereby the British State was tacitly accepted  by foreign governments as the official protector  of the Jews in other countries. It was Britain  which was expected to interfere, within the measure  of her power, whenever a persecution of the Jews  took place in the East of Christendom : to support  the Jewish financial energies throughout the world,  and to receive in return the benefit of that con-  nection.   We shall have a most imperfect picture of the  causes which gradually made the Jews regard  this country as their centre of action if we omit one  essential point.   England was secure.   During the whole period which saw the rise of  the Jews to eminence in this island and their  ultimate alliance with its political and commercial  system, English society enjoyed a profound peace.  Save for the petty incidents of the '15 and '45  (the first of no effect south of the border, the second  ephemeral and confined to the North), no hostilities  took place upon English soil between the rebellion  of Monmouth under James II and the bombarding  of London by the Germans from the air during the  late war. There has been (save for some quite  insignificant local riots) complete security for  property and especially for large property. There  have been since the middle of the eighteenth  century no confiscations, and of commercial for-  tunes none since the middle of the seventeenth :  no invasion, no civil war, and therefore no loot:  no personal danger from violence.   Such conditions formed an environment ideal for  the permanent establishment and rooting of Jewish  power, and for the organization of a Jewish base.     POSITION OF JEWS IN ENGLAND 225   The political situation reflected itself, as it  always does, in literature. The Jew began to  appear in English fiction as an exalted character,  quite specially removed to his advantage from  the mass of mankind. He is already a hero in  Sir Walter Scott, but the full development was  much later. You could still have a Jewish villain as  late as Oliver Twist, but with writers as different  as Charles Reade and George Eliot we reach a  time where the Jew is impeccable. The worst  any writer dares do at the end of the process is  to be silent. The best is to flatter the Jewish  type out of all knowledge. This singular inter-  lude was in part due to the divorce between litera-  ture and popular feeling in the middle and latter  part of the nineteenth century; at least, it was  permitted by that divorce. But the active cause  of it was the reflection of the Jew's political posi-  tion upon the mind of the educated class as ex-  pressed in its literary art.   At the same time a parallel movement appeared  on the historical side of literature. A convention  arose that in the clash between the Jews and the  English of the Middle Ages the Jews were invari-  ably right and the English invariably wrong.  Where the struggle was between the Jew and the  non- Jew abroad, the historian exceeded all bounds.  The European hostile to the Jew was a senseless  monster, and the Jew hostile to the European was  a holy victim.   The whole story of Europe and of this country,  in so far as it was affected by this very considerable  factor, was distorted through suppression, and  false emphasis and quite exceptional lying.   The general reader of history neither knew     226 THE JEWS   what part the Jewish question had played nor the  claims that could be advanced for his own race in  the conflict. And as historians live by copying  one another, the legend was established in every  school and college.   At the end of the process the Jews, in proportion  to their numbers, held a power in this country  beyond anything that has been seen in any other  of the world. Poland at the end of the Middle Ages,  when that country was most nearly comparable  to Britain for the harbouring and support of the  Jewish people, is the only parallel, and that a  remote one.   Every English Government had (and has) its  quota of Jews. They had entered the diplomatic  service and the House of Lords ; they swarmed in  the House of Commons, in the Universities, in  all the Government offices save the Foreign Office  (and even there representatives of the Jewish  nation have recently entered) ; they were exceed-  ingly powerful in the Press : they were all-power-  ful in the City. No custom unsympathetic to their  race, from the duel to popular clamour, survived.  They could boast that England was not only the  country where no distinction whatever was made in  practice, let alone in law, between the Jew and  the native, but that England was the only country  where the Jew was always well received, where  his natural defects counted least and where his  natural abilities had most scope.   Such a state of affairs could not last. It was not  natural. It was not consonant with hidden but  deep popular tradition or with popular appetites;  it corresponded only to the mood of one European  community in its wealthier classes. A divergence     POSITION OF JEWS IN ENGLAND 227   between the cosmopolitan financial interests of the  Jew and the particular national interests of Britain  was bound to come. War on a large scale, though  it did not imperil the country itself, was a warning  of change. It appeared with the South African  campaign before the end of the century. The  position of the Jew was altered. Some dissatisfac-  tion with his power began to stir. It was already  muttering and beginning to show itself with the  rise of commercial and maritime competition in  the new German Empire which, in its turn, had  become led, upon all its commercial side, by Jews.  There was bound, I say, to be a reaction and a  permanent one. While it was yet taking place,  in the heat of the Great War, before it had reached  the official world, that one of the English politicians  who was best fitted to speak for the Jews, who was  most intimate with them through manifold ties of  friendship and hospitality, Mr. Arthur Balfour, was  chosen to make the famous pronouncement in  favour of Zionism. It came within a month of  the great crisis of the war. Its object was to divide  the general influence' of the Jews throughout the  world, which had hitherto been upon the whole  opposed to the cause of the Allies, because,  like every other neutral, the Jews were more  and more convinced, as the campaigns dragged  on, that the Central Empires were certain of  victory.   Though this was the motive, the effect was to tie  the British state yet closer to the fortunes of Israel,  for here was England pledged to support, to defend,  to act as a special protector over, the peculiar  interests of the Jews, just where those interests  would most challenge the whole of Christendom     228 THE JEWS   and of Islam, just where it would be most acutely  difficult to confirm Jewish claims.   The declaration in favour of Zionism, the solemn  pledge of the forces of the British State to an  exceptional support of the Jew in a matter wholly  to his benefit and not in any way to that of England,  coming though it did after the climax of Jewish  power had been reached and passed, was the last  stage of that long process of alliance between the  British commercial policy and its ruling classes on  the one hand and the Jews upon the other.   Already, as I have said, that alliance was morally  shaken. The great influx of poor Jews had shaken  it. The mere effect of time, the inevitable revolt  of the human conscience against an unnatural pre-  tence and an obvious fiction, was bound to come,  and was overdue. But although the alliance  was already shaken, the English State remained  officially closely interlocked with Jewry, and its  last action, the demand for the establishment of  a Jewish State in Palestine, was, as has so often  happened in the story of human development, at  once the term and the turning-point of a process  which had reached its conclusion; for it will be  remarked throughout history that any force is  most expressive, its manifestation of power most  crude and most emphatic, in the perilous interval  after its real strength has begun to decline and before  its first open defeat.   But the problems presented by this experiment  in Palestine merit a separate examination. To  this I will now turn.     ZIONISM     CHAPTEE XI  ZIONISM   THE question of Zionism has been discussed from  every possible aspect save one, and that one is the  only factor which relates to the thesis of this book.   It has been argued, as a purely Jewish matter ;  there has been debate upon its justice or injustice  among the Jews themselves, as to its advantage or  disadvantage to their race; debate among the  various non- Jewish forces concerned as to the  advantage or disadvantage it would be to them;  debate upon the rights and wrongs of the native  population among which the Jews might find a  home ; debate as to whether that home should be  in Palestine or elsewhere and so on.   All these discussions avoid the ultimate issue.  Some of them, of course, are of evident importance  within the Jewish community, but so far as the  essential problem we are discussing in this book is  concerned, they do not apply. The one question  which is at issue from the point of view of our  thesis is this:   Whether the Zionist experiment will tend to increase  or to relax the strain created by the presence of the  Jew in the midst of a non-Jewish world.   That, and that only, is our concern, and from  that point of view we may examine the theory of   231     232 THE JEWS   Zionism which has now emerged into an attempted  practice.   First let us consider its necessary general implica-  tions: the implications which Zionism involves,  no matter where or how the experiment were tried.   The Zionist theory is that Israel would benefit if  of its many millions (some twelve millions, counting  those of the partly Jewish fringe, who are sufficiently  Jewish to make one with the race) a core say a  tenth were to have a fixed territorial " city," a  country of their own, a habitation. This country,  wherever it might be chosen, should be, as far as  possible, a purely Jewish State : "as Jewish," one  of its exponents has said, " as England is English."   Now, suppose the place chosen were (to-day we  may say " had been ") an empty or almost unde-  veloped country, and supposing the Jews had found  that their own people could bear the expense of  reaching that place with sufficient capital, and of  colonizing it in large numbers. Supposing a small  State of a million to a million and a half inhabitants  to be thus formed, to be wholly Jewish in character,  and independent in the fullest sense. The question  immediately arises : Would the Jews throughout the  world be :   (a) permitted to regard themselves as citizens of   that State?   (b) regarded in any case as citizens of that   State, whether they willed or no, and regis-  tered as such, with or without the consent of  the registered person ?   If not, what would be the status of the Jew outside  this territorial unit, which he had chosen to be  much more than a symbol of his national unity-  its actual seat and establishment ?     ZIONISM 233   That is the question which, so far as I have  watched the discussion, everybody hesitates to  face ; yet that is the question which will have to  be faced sooner or later as the main political crux  of the whole affair.   Observe that there is no question of establishing  a State wherein the whole or even the great mass  of the Jewish people shall reside. No one would  repudiate such an idea more vigorously than the  chief pioneers of Zionism. The great mass of Jews  would, of course, ridicule it as impracticable and  refuse it as extremely undesirable. They live and  they desire to live following their present interests  in the nations among whom they are dispersed.  They live and they desire to live the semi- nomadic  life, the international life, which has become theirs  by every tradition, and which one might now almost  call instinctive in them. Also the greater part of  them desire to pursue those careers which go with  such a life, especially tne careers of negotiation  and of intermediary work. -They not only feel the  advantage of such a position, they also feel a need  and appetite for such a condition.   Whatever form Zionism might have taken before  it appeared in its present experimental form, what-  ever was said of the theory in the past, this point  was always capital:   The Jews as a nation would remain as they were,  moving among all the peoples. The new Zion was  to be no more than a fixed rallying point, an estab-  lished but small territorial nationhood, which should  do no more than proclaim their unity. It follows,  therefore, necessarily, that the great mass of Jews,  outside the territorial settlement, would have, after  such a settlement had been formed, to obtain a     234 THE JEWS   definition of their political character. What is  that definition to be ?   I think myself the Jews would answer: " It is  to be precisely what it is to-day, or, rather, what  it has been in the Occidental nations during the  past generation." That is, the Jew is to be regarded  as the full national in the nation in which he hap-  pens to be for the time. Nothing shall debar him  from any position whatever in that nation. He  shall be regarded in exactly the same light as all  the other citizens, and, conversely, he shall obtain  no privilege. In countries where there is conscrip-  tion, for instance, he shall be a conscript like any-  body else ; where a nation in which he happens to  find himself goes to war, he shall be compelled to  risk his life for it like any other citizen. If he  happens a year or two before the war to have  settled in the enemy's country, then he shall be  equally compelled to fight for the enemy against  his former country. He shall in every respect be  regarded, by a legal fiction, as identical with the  community in which he happens to be settled for  the moment, but at the same time he is to have  some special relation with the Jewish State.   He and he alone is to be (certainly in practice  and, of right, in legal decisions) eligible for admis-  sion to that city, for office in it. His opinion is to  count in the conduct of that State, wherever he  may personally be placed in the world. He is to  regard himself indeed that is inevitable from the  definition of the new State as personally allied  to it, if not a member of it. He cannot dissociate  himself from its fortunes nor be indifferent to its  success or failure. He must in effect be loyal to it.  He owes it allegiance of a moral kind. He will     ZIONISM 235   necessarily be in much the same position as are  men of Irish descent in the Colonies, in England,  and in the United States, to the surviving and now  increasing remnant of their race which has clung  to its native land. But in the particular case of  the Jew this allegiance will not diminish with time.  It will remain ever vivacious. The race, as its  individual components pass from one country to  another, will make one body, generation after  generation, with the fixed polity settled in the  New Zion. That certainly is the ideal, as I hear  it expressed on every side in conversation and in  writing by the Jews who support it.   Well, if the ideal is left in that condition (and  it is admitted to be in practice in that condition),  it will result in a grievous prejudice to the Jewish  people, and will be a source of more permanent  evil to them than any other policy they could have  undertaken. It will emphasize that very point  of dual allegiance which it must be their object to  soften if the Jewish problem is to be solved.   The existence of a Zionist State will bring into  relief the separate character of the Jew. The  Jewish nation will no longer be able to depend for  one of its defences upon the indifference or the  ignorance still widely present among its hosts.  Whereas before the experiment was attempted,  many of those hosts could forget the difference  between him and them, many had no experience  of it and many remarked it without its affecting  their attitude towards the Jew ; after the experi-  ment has been put in practice there must necessarily  be a change.   To give a concrete instance, no one could in  his anger say to a Jew, " You disturb our repose ;     236 THE JEWS   you are an alien element in our community ; you  must leave it." For if lie meant that, he was at the  same time condemning his victim to universal exile.  But once an established national State exists, once  you have in the world a considerable number say  a million and a half Jews who are not the nationals  of any other nation, but are the citizens of a Jewish  nation with a known locality, an organized State,  then the suggestion of exile changes its meaning.  The opponent of the Jew is now able to say : "Go  back to your own country," and you may be very  certain that he will say that unless some other  solution than the legal fiction of full citizenship in  one country and of moral allegiance to another is  dropped.   The presence of the new Zion will do for the  Jewish people what a frame does for a picture. It  will not be universal to them; it will not cover  the whole field of Jewish activity. It will be but  a fraction of the whole. But it will inevitably  emphasize the separation, the individual and alien  character of the whole. It will concentrate atten-  tion upon all those things which the nineteenth  century in what I have called " the Liberal solu-  tion carefully put in the background and tried to  forget. It will militate against an honest solution  which would recognize the completely distinct  character of the Jew and yet refuse to subject  them to any indignity or suffering on that account .   There is more than this. The various nations,  taken as a whole the Roumanians as a whole,  the Poles as a whole, the French, the Italians, the  English as a whole take up very different attitudes  at any one time toward Israel, and in each the  attitude varies from generation to generation;     ZIONISM 237   there is always, at any one time of history, includ-  ing our own time, a certain number of national  units which are openly hostile to the Jew, regret-  ting his presence among them, restricting his  activities and determined, above all, to separate  him, by a sharp legal definition if possible, at any  rate by universal social practice, from the rest of  the community.   Now these hostile peoples cannot possibly be  prevented from using the weapon put into their  hands by the existence of a new Zion, with the  implications I have just defined. It is difficult  enough even now for the countries where Jewish  finance controls the politicians (and these are still  the most powerful countries) to restrain the anti-  Jewish feelings in the lesser nations. It is only  done by elaborate rules which are imperfectly  obeyed and which are felt in these smaller nations  to be imposed by alien interference with their  domestic rights. The protection by the French,  English and American Governments of what are  called by a euphemism "national minorities"  which means, of course,everywhere the Jews is a  perilous affair, and one which can only be carried  out most imperfectly even as it is. But the one  foundation for that task, the one argument which  its promoters appeal to, is the fact that the  "national minority" that is, the Jews present  in a hostile community can plead universal exile.   If you turn them out in order to suppress them,  they can only leave for another country. They  have none of their own to go to. Or again, if your  treatment of the Jews is harsher than that of your  neighbour, you are virtually directing a Jewish  emigration over your neighbour's borders, and to     238 THE JEWS   that your neighbour has a right to object. But  once an independent Jewish seat is established,  this argument falls to the ground. It is no reply  then to tell these nations that the new Jewish State  cannot contain the whole Jewish race. It will  answer that it is not concerned with the whole  Jewish race but only with its own section of that  race.   Further, it will of course always be to the interest  of those who desire to be rid of the Jewish element  in their midst to argue that the Jewish State could  be more peopled and that there is plenty of room  for more citizens. Again, those hostile to the Jews  in their midst can say : " Very well. Since there  is no room for the whole mass of our Jews in your  new State, we will not deal with the whole mass ;  allow us to suggest that such and such individuals  shall leave our State, where they are not wanted,  and shall go to their own." And they would pick  out the Jews whose exile would most weaken the  Jewish community in their midst.   In the present state of affairs, with the Cabinets  of Eome, Washington, London and Paris still  heavily influenced by Jewish finance, they have,  for the moment, a military force behind them  sufficient to impose their orders in some measure  upon the reluctant nations of Eastern Europe and  in some measure to create an artificial protection  for the Jews there. Even if this protection were  to last another generation (which is unlikely), the  presence of Zionism, interpreted in the sense I have  just quoted, would be enough to undermine its  work. On any change in the situation, in case of  any conflict between these Western powers, or of  any change by one or more of them in its attitude     ZIONISM 239   towards the Jews, Zionism, thus interpreted, would  be the ruin of the Jews in the Centre and East of  Europe. The danger is of such great practical  importance that it ought to be the very first matter  for discussion. It is only our acquired habit of  falsehood and secrecy upon the Jewish problem  which has thrust it in the background. In the  nature of things it must come to the front, and it  would be far better to have the lines of some solution  laid down before it becomes insistent.   What are those lines to be ?   Their general character is clear enough.   Whether it be of advantage or no to have a purely  Jewish State (I mean whether it be of advantage  to Israel or no) may be safely left to the Jews them-  selves to discuss. But one thing is certain : if they  decide in favour of its continuance, then they must  decide also in favour of some form of recognition  for the purely Jewish nationality of the Jews outside  that State.   Thus only will the situation become open and  therefore innocuous. If they try under the new  conditions to maintain the old fiction that a Jew  is at the same time a Jew and yet not a Jew, that  he can be at the same time a Jew and an English-  man, or a Jew and a Eussian, or a Jew and an Italian,  they will be trying to maintain it under conditions  quite other than those of the past, and under con-  ditions where the falsehood will break down in  practice.   Suppose you were to make such recognition  partly voluntary, and leave it to the Jew wherever  he might be to claim or not to claim his nationality  as a Jew; to be regarded, if he so willed, as a  national of the Jewish nation in Zion, or as a national     240 THE JEWS   of the people among whom he happened to be living  for the moment. You may say that under this  purely voluntary system (which would, I suppose,  be more just) very few would choose for Zion.  The great majority would like to go on under the  old fiction. That is certainly true of the West;  but would it be true of the East ? Would it be  true of either East or West in a moment of persecu-  tion ? I think it would not. Even if it be true  of the East to-day, it certainly would not be  true of any body of Jews suffering there, in the  future, any degree of molestation.   But apart from that: Supposing but a small  minority availed themselves of this voluntary form  of recognition, supposing only a small minority to  claim Jewish nationality as defined in the terms of  the Zionist State, there would still be the contrast  between those who had thus publicly proclaimed  themselves nationals of Zion and those who hung  back. In other words, short of a general admitted  maintenance of the old fiction (of which Zionism  more than any other force must accelerate the  breakdown), you must have, through Zionism, an  accelerated tendency to treating Jews throughout  the world as being, whether without the New Zion-  ist State or within it, a separate people. And  they are a separate people, they cannot be other.  My whole plea is that this truth should be recog-  nized and acted upon; for if it is shirked or  denied it will take its revenge. Reality always  takes its revenge upon unreal pretence.   There remains in connection with Zionism another  consideration which is also of importance, though  of a very different kind. Is the new Jewish State  to rely upon its own military strength and its own     ZIONISM 241   police though perhaps guaranteed (for what that  may be worth) by international agreement or is it  to be a protected State occupied, defended and  policed by the strength and fighting qualities of  some other kind of men, not Jews Englishmen,  Frenchmen or what not ?   As we know, the particular solution attempted,  the particular Zionism of which the experiment is  now being made in Palestine, plumps for the second  solution. The protection of Jews from natives is  to be undertaken by a garrison of Englishmen. It  plumps for this solution under conditions as adverse  as they well can be. The present experiment is,  as we noted at the end of the last chapter, not an  independent Jewish State, national, guaranteed,  standing in its own strength; but a protected State ;  and that State protected by one nation: Great  Britain. The new Zion does not depend for its  internal peace, for its establishment against highly  hostile forces, for the ex-propriation of the local  landowners, for the keeping of the peace between  local elements highly hostile to itself, upon  Jewish soldiers and Jewish courage. It depends  upon British soldiers, British organization and  British sacrifice. Those who have promoted the  Zionist experiment have deliberately chosen the  very worst moment for such a folly.   Granted that whoever was to be the Protector  he must be a friendly Protector, no worse solution  could have been devised. A little nation is always  morally guaranteed in its independence, if only by  the balance of the greater nations. The violation  of the neutrality of Belgium offers nothing of a  rule ; on the contrary, it was an odious exception.  And an exception it would have been just as much     242 THE JEWS   if the neutrality had not been officially guaranteed  under Prussia's own hand. The smaller nations,  of which the modern world is full, will have, we  may be very certain, a long lease of life. The larger  nations envy but applaud their security and happi-  ness. They will not be allowed to disappear. The  same, I think, would be true of the Jewish national  seat, could it be established, inhabited wholly or  mainly by men of the Jewish race, religion and  culture; presenting to the world the same aspect  as does, for instance, Denmark to-day. But to  depend for its establishment upon the superior  power, upon the military and financial sacrifice, of  another and totally different people, is a challenge  and a provocation. It is the building of the pyramid  upwards from its apex. It is an experiment in the  most unstable of unstable equilibriums.   The matter is, of course, being discussed every-  where from the point of view of Great Britain, and  nowhere more eagerly than among those who have  to do the policing and the armed protection. But  we are not here concerned with the ill effects such a  situation must have on Great Britain effects so  ill that the experiment as a merely British Protec-  torate is bound to break down we are rather con-  cerned with the effect it may have upon the Jews  themselves. No great nation will sacrifice its  foreign policy, will admit a point of acute weakness,  simply to please the Jews. Sooner or later such a  nation is bound to say: " We cannot sacrifice our  interests to yours. Look after yourselves." And  that is where the peril to the Jews of this system,  a protectorate, comes in.   If there were any reason to suppose a natural  alliance between the British Army and the Jews;     ZIONISM 243   if we could imagine British officers and men taking  a natural pleasure in ousting the Arab and making  way for the Jew, it would be another matter. If  there were something in the nature of things which  made that alliance permanent and stable, if the  Jews were a fully accepted part of the British  Commonwealth as are, for instance, the Scots or  the Welsh, some permanent arrangement might be  possible. But they are nothing of the sort. The  position is wholly unnatural. It cannot last. And  if it cannot last with the British connection, how  should it last with any other? How shall the  transition be made from a British Protectorate  to another protectorate ? Or how, seeing what  violent hatreds have already been roused by the  mere beginnings of the experiment, shall the con-  flict which makes the protectorate necessary be  avoided ?   So far the dislike of the position, which is very  far-reaching, and already very deep in England,  is a passive dislike. No English soldier has yet  been killed ; there has been but little necessity, as  yet, to repress the Arab and create hostility, though  even what little necessity there has been was odious  to the troops concerned. But things cannot remain  in that state. The conflict is inevitable. When  the conflict comes the feeling which has hitherto  been passive will become active. People will not  tolerate the loss of sons and brothers in a quarrel  which is none of theirs, which cannot possibly  strengthen the British State ; which, if anything,  must weaken it ; which is felt to be precarious and  ephemeral, and which will be undertaken against  those with whom British sympathy naturally lies,  and in favour of those with whom the average     244 THE JEWS   soldier and citizen unlike the professional politi-  cian has no ties and no sympathy.   The matter can be very plainly put thus:   If a Zionist experiment is necessary, or advisable,  then let it be made in such a fashion that it can be  dependent upon Jewish police and a Jewish army  alone. Let it not rely upon a foreign protectorate,  which will not last long, which is a weakness to  the directing power, and which creates a false  position.   If it be answered that the Jews are not capable  of producing such an army or such a police, that  they would inevitably be defeated and oppressed  by the hostile and more warlike majority among  whom they would find themselves, then let them  make the experiment elsewhere. But it is certain  that the present form of the new Protectorate is  the most perilous form which could have been  chosen for it, so far as the Jews themselves are  concerned. I appeal confidently to the near future  to confirm this judgment.   From one most poignant aspect of the matter  which we all have in mind I deliberately abstain  I mean the effect of the experiment upon Christian  and Mohammedan feelings throughout the world  of an attempt to establish Jewish control over the  Holy Places. I abstain because of the emotions  aroused by it, which are violent and universal, and  are of the sort I have deliberately determined, as  my Preface has informed the reader, to keep out of  this essay. Things indeed are not yet at the point  of open quarrel in this most perilous of all the  results of Zionism. We must trust for a solution  before it is too late, but that solution will not be  reached if we select for discussion matters upon        ZIONISM 245   which there can be no agreement, and on which  there is now aroused the most passionate feeling.   Still, though I abstain from discussing that point, I  would beg the Jewish readers of this my book to bear  it in mind. If they believe the religious emotions  to be dead in the modern world, or even to be lessen-  ing, they may find themselves terribly disillusioned.   I also refrain from making comment here I have  made it strongly enough elsewhere upon the  strange selection made by the Jews for their first  ruler of the Arabs and Christians in Palestine. I  will do no more than to say that a desire to shield  the less worthy specimens of one's race is natural  and even praiseworthy. One may even take a  certain glory in that one is able to protect them  from outsiders. But to give them too great a  prominence is a mistake, and it is indeed deplorable  that of the whole world of Jews from crowds of  Jews eminent in administration, and political science,  known for their upright dealing and blameless  careers Mr. Balfour's Jewish advisers (whoever  they were) should have pitched on the author of  the Marconi contract and the spokesman of the  famous declaration in the House of Commons that  no politician had touched Marconi shares.     OUR DUTY     CHAPTER XII  OUR DUTY   THE solution which I propose, which I believe  could be made stable, and which I further believe  is the only stable one, demands a greater, a more  necessary effort upon our side than upon that of  our guests.   It is the average man who must do his duty in  the matter, and it is upon him that the responsibility  will fall, if we take up once again that wretched  sequence of ill- ease, persecution, reaction, which has  marked so many centuries.   We are the vast majority, we are the organism  within which this small minority moves. We are,  or could be if we chose, the makers of our own  laws, and we are certainly the makers of our own  political moods.   I know it is the custom to throw all the respon-  sibility upon the other side, to be perpetually  devising instruments for their guidance which soon  become instruments for their oppression, and in  general to imagine a problem wherein the part  of the European is purely negative and all the work  has to be done by the Jewish stranger.   That attitude is not only false but grossly undig-  nified. When men accuse some one weaker than  themselves of interference with, and even of   249     250 THE JEWS   acquiring power over, them they condemn them-  selves. It is in the main our fault if an equilibrium  has so rarely been reached in all these sixty genera-  tions of debate. For however alien, however  irritant the foreign body be, it is we who have in  our hands the solvent of that irritant and of relieving  the strain which it causes.   Here let me recall at the risk of repetition (for  repetition is necessary to lucidity in such argu-  ments) the logical process with which I opened this  essay. I say that the vast majority, the fixed race  through which in fluid and nomadic form Israel  goes moving from century to century, is not free to  discharge its responsibility by any one of those  attempted solutions which I have condemned.  No man, I trust, will have the cynicism to say that  mere persecution, let alone its horrible extreme, is  or should be a solution. No man can predict the  same of exile either. No man can discharge our  responsibility by pretending that any solution  arrived at must be for our good alone and may  disregard that of those who live among us.   It is a statement one hears frequently enough  that the masters of house have alone to decide what  shall be done under their roof : that the interloper,  the alien element, has no standing and no right to  complain of whatever measures may be taken for  the protection of the household. The thing so  put sounds plausible. It is essentially false. It is  comparable to the argument applied to private  property that because private property is a right,  and that because a man " may do what he likes  with his own," therefore he may use it to the mani-  fest hurt of others. Moreover, the analogy is false ;  for when a man is talking of " the master of the     OUE DUTY 251   house " having the right in his household to decide  its own way of living and of treating its guests, he  is considering a very small unit in a great com-  munity; his household in the whole nation: a  little body which, if it discharge or in any other way  deal with something alien to itself, will inflict no  great injury upon that foreign body, since there is  all the world for it to turn to outside. But in the  relations between the Jew and Christendom, or the  Jew and Islam, the parallel fails. It is precisely  because there is no " outside " to which the exile  can turn that a duty is imposed on us.   It is true indeed that when a small and alien  minority assumes to dictate the policy of the rest,  to regard its own advantages alone and subordinate  to those advantages the life of all, the claim is  grotesque and must be disallowed. But we should  remember upon the other side that it is only by  exaggerating its claim that a minority can live at  all. It is only by fierce insistence upon its light  to survive that its survival is guaranteed. We can  arrive at justice in this matter by the process of  putting ourselves in the shoes of those in relation  to whom we propose to act.   Put yourself in the shoes of the Jew and ask how  this doctrine of " doing what one likes with one's  own" and being " the master of one's own house-  hold" would look to you.   A public example which very rightly made a  stir a few months before this book was published,  may serve as text. A learned and distinguished  Jew, Dr. Oscar Levy, a man who was an asset to  any community, was turned out of the country  under circumstances which many of my readers  will recall He pleaded with perfect justice that as     252 THE JEWS   a Jew such an exile left him homeless ; that the  original country of which he was nominally a  citizen (under the broken-down fiction that Jews  can be Germans, or Austrians, or what not, and  cease to be themselves) would not have him ; that  his interests, his livelihood had attached him to this  country ; he had never hidden his true nationality  nor changed his name, nor used any of those subter-  fuges which, even when excusable, are dangerous  and contemptible in so many of his compatriots.  There was no conceivable reason why such rigour  should be used against this man, save indeed that  he was a Jew.   Put yourself in his shoes and see how the thing  looks. There is no nation to which you could have  returned: there is no society to receive you as a  member of it. You are not permitted to remain  in the atmosphere with which you have grown  familiar, in the surroundings which have become  those of your later life, and your consonance with  which it is too late for you to change. Could there  be a grosser cruelty or a grosser injustice ? It is  the very core of the whole problem that somewhere  the Jew must be harboured, and therefore to some  one of us the question must be put, " Will you  harbour him, and if so upon what terms ? " If each  man answer, " No, I will not," then all collectively  become oppressors. It is no answer to say, " These  men are not of us, and therefore they may conspire  against us," or " Their interests are divergent from  ours and therefore may and do clash with ours."  All that is granted. That is merely stating the  problem, not solving it. What do we say in daily  life of men who merely state their grievances, harp  upon them, and make no effort to put them right ?     OUR DUTY 253   What do we think of men who perpetually complain  of something naturally weaker than themselves,  make no effort to understand its necessities and  attempt only to rid themselves of the nuisance  without considering reciprocal duty and. mutual  relations ? The same should we think of those who  so act towards the Jewish community in our midst  which, for all its domination and exaggerated  modern power, is ultimately at our mercy, far  weaker than we are in numbers and situation.  Without further elaboration of what should be an  obvious political and moral principle, let us consider  our part in the task.   It consists, I conceive, in two very different  determinations : two very different but allied lines  of conduct to which we must pledge ourselves.  The first, until recently the most difficult, is the  determination to speak of the Jewish people as  openly, as continuously, with as much interest,  with as close an examination as we speak of any  other foreign body with which we are brought in  contact.   The second, which will perhaps be the more  difficult duty to practise in the future, will be to  avoid, in the individual public recognition of those  with whom we must live, all futile anger and all  mere reaction. I mean by mere reaction, blind  reaction. The instinctive thrusting back against  a thing which presses on us, the uncalculated and  animal return blow, the consequences of which,  either to ourselves or to others, are not weighed  when it is delivered; the futile complaint, the  futile rage, the futile cruelty.   Unless those two duties are undertaken together,  unless the determination to practise both be of     254 THE JEWS   equal weight, the solution I propose will fail. To  discuss the problem presented by the presence of  the Jewish people, to talk of them as one would of  any other, openly and frankly, to interest oneself  in their history and in their present doings: all  this is only to aggravate the trouble if we use that  open dealing for the purpose of doing them a hurt,  or if, in the course of it, we allow ourselves (merely  from irritation or contrast, from the sense which  all must have of opposition to things alien) to react  against them without consideration of the immedi-  ate and ultimate consequences not only to them-  selves but to us.   Conversely, the determination to regard their  interests and to avoid every possible occasion of  conflict, to hold a just measure with them, is quite  useless if we falsify the whole relation by secrecy  and false convention.   The moment that comes in, there comes in with  it a secret dissatisfaction with oneself and with  the whole situation. The position is falsified, the  seed of animosity greatly stimulated, the danger  of mutual contempt made inevitable.   Now let us look at these two branches of what  we have to do in the matter, and see what difficulties  lie in the way.   In the way of frankly recognizing, examining,  taking an open interest in the Jewish minority in  our midst there lie three very powerful obstacles.  First the inherited convention of polite society;  secondly, and much the most powerful, fear ; and  thirdly, the very reputable desire to avoid  offence.   The first of these, the fear of convention, has  many roots the necessity for harmony in a leisured     OUK DUTY 255   life, that is, the desire to avoid friction even at the  expense of truth, the mere momentum of a quiet  habit, the fear of misunderstanding which may  come from one side casting ridicule upon the other,  which may offend the person whom we have mis-  understood, or make us ridiculous in his eyes and  those of our audience.   There is also, of course, as a cause, more powerful  than any other, the force which lies behind all  convention, the force which makes a man take off  his hat in a church, which forbids his walking with-  out boots in the street on the driest day, that is,  the pressure of general practice. But the thing to  realize is that in this form I mean as distinct from  any feeling of fear or of charity the thing is a  convention and a convention only. Difficult as it  is to break with conventions, unless this convention  is broken once and for all, the Jewish problem  remains with us unsolved and growing in acuteness  and peril.   You can meet an Irishman and discuss with him  the conditions of his nation. You can ask an  Italian when he was last in Italy, or congratulate a  Frenchman upon his acquisition of your tongue or  tell him that it is difficult for him to understand  your own customs : but a convention arose under  the Liberal fiction to which I have devoted so  much space in the earlier part of this book that to  do any of these very natural things in the case of a  Jew is monstrous. Your audience is shocked if you  ask some learned Jew at a public table a question  upon his national literature or history. It is a  solecism to refer to his nationality at all, save  perhaps now and then in terms of foolish praise  in nine times out of ten praise not to the point and     256 THE JEWS   not desired by its recipient. And even praise must  be approached most gingerly. You may not ask  a Jew in London, however keen your desire for  information, whether he had cousins in Lithuania  or Galicia who have told him of the conditions of  those distressed countries. You may not ask him  when his family came to England, nor, if he be a  recent arrival, what he thinks of the country. The  whole thing is taboo.   More than this : you must, you are expected (or  were until quite recently expected) to emphasize  in a most extravagant manner the complete identity  of your Jewish guest with the people among whom  he lives. I do not take offence if some chance  acquaintance, noting my French name, talks to me  about France, and is interested in my experience  as a conscript long ago in that country. Mr.  Kedmond did not feel himself insulted when those  he met in London discussed Irish matters with him,  from the most acute difficulty in politics, to the  most general allusion to the Abbey Theatre. The  editor of an Italian review visiting England is not  shocked if you ask him when he left Florence, nor  are those around you horrified at the ill- breeding of  your question. But in the matter of the Jew there  stands this convention cutting you off from any  such straightforward and simple way of dealing  with a fellow- being. That convention, I say, must  be broken down if we are to get any results at all  and to establish a permanent peace.   The thing was not, of course, entirely irrational  in origin. No custom is. It was to be excused  upon several grounds.   First, there was the fact that many people were  known to cherish so strong an hostility to Jews that     OUR DUTY 257   to emphasize the Jewish character of anyone  present might awaken that hostility.   Then there was the peculiar rapid transition both  of Jewish movements and of Jewish fortunes. In  the case I have suggested, of asking a London Jew  whether he had relatives in Galicia or Lithuania,  you might be stumbling upon relations much  poorer than himself in the East End of London ;  or, again, you might seem to be emphasizing the  nomadic character of the race and thereby also  emphasizing the contrast between it and our  own.   But much the strongest excuse for the convention  was the well-founded idea that its exercise pleased  the Jews themselves. Men avoided direct mention  of Jewish nationality because it was felt that such  direct mention was almost an insult. It was a  thing which the Jew in whose presence you found  yourself desired to have kept in the background;  and though we might not understand why he  desired it, yet we respected his desire as we do that  of anyone with whom we wish to preserve har-  monious relations. Most men, for instance, are  indifferent upon, say, the matter of smoking. Most  men are quite at their ease when they are asked  whether they smoke or not, and if they do, whether  they prefer this or that brand of tobacco. But now  and then one comes across a man who, from some  accident of training (as, for instance, a man  whose mother brought him up to think smoking  a mortal sin), does not like to have it alluded  to.   I myself know the case of a man of the highest  culture and of considerable social position to whom  you may not say anything about pigs either in     258 THE JEWS   connection with farming or in connection with food ;  for his sympathies are Mohammedan. In these  exceptional cases, when we know of our guest's  particular desire, we yield to it for the sake of  harmony and of right living. So is it in this matter  of the former convention against alluding to Jewish  nationality or Jewish interests in any form.  Whether the Jews were wise or not to cherish that  convention, as they undoubtedly did, does not  concern this part of my argument. I am talking  of our duty and not of theirs. But I say that  unless the convention is softened and at last dis-  solved, nothing can be done. Both parties should  know that it only does harm. It renders stilted  and absurd all our relations; it fosters that  suspicion of secrecy which I have insisted upon as  the chief irritant in those relations, and it creates a  feeling of exception, of oddity, which is the very  worst service that could be rendered to the Jews  themselves.   Some little time ago the convention went so far  that even a mention, a neutral nay, a laudatory  mention, of anything Jewish in a general company  led to an immediate awkwardness. Men looked  over their shoulders, women gave downward glances  right and left. A sort of hunt began, to see whether  anyone present could possibly in any remote  connection be offended by the monstrous deed.  If a man said, " What a poet Heine was and how  thoroughly Jewish is his irony ! " and said it in a  room full of people, the adjective " Jewish" acted  like a pistol shot could anything be more absurd !  Yet so it was.   But the point I make is not against the  absurdity of this convention but against its peril.     OUR DUTY 259   It is an obstacle to all right handling of what is  becoming daily a more and more insistent and  acute difficulty.   It is obvious that the getting rid of such a con-  vention is not to be effected by violent methods, nor  immediately. But our duty is to accelerate its  decline and, within reason, to enlarge every oppor-  tunity for treating the Jewish nationality precisely  as one treats any other. I mean precisely as one  treats any other in conversation or in writing. We  all know the insane type which loves to break con-  vention merely because it is a convention, and we  shall certainly have to be on our guard against this  sort of person in the near future, as this particular  convention begins to break down. But without  encouraging such eccentricities there is ample room  for an increasing ease in the recognition of what  after all we know to be reality, a reality which  requires open discussion for the good of us all. The  danger is lest even this merely conventional obstacle  should by too long a resistance dam up forces which  tend to break it down and therefore lest, when it is  pulled down, we should admit the other extreme of  licence, with its opportunity for insult and damage.  That is what has happened in the case of other much  more reasonable Victorian conventions, and we  must not have it happen in the case of the conven-  tion which for so long forbade us to admit that a  Jew was a Jew or to take any open interest, when he  was present, in the things which he himself thinks  the most interesting of all.   And if anyone shall answer that convention is  necessary, lest on its decline open hostility should  follow, I can only say that this is to despair of  any equitable solution at all. But my whole thesis     260 THE JEWS   in this book is that such a solution need not yet  be despaired of.   There is one more thing to be said in this matter  of the old taboo. However long it may linger in the  small educated class, it has gone for ever among  the populace, and it is the popular instinct we shall  have mainly to deal with in the difficult times ahead  of us.   The populace in this country talks upon Jewish  matters with a frankness which would astonish the  drawing-rooms, and has so talked upon them for a  generation past ever since the great novel influx  of poor Jews began to pour into our towns. It not  only talks thus openly to and of Jews upon its own  level, but it is thoroughly alive to the presence and  power of Jews in government. Those who think  that a continuance of the convention can put off  the necessity for a solution would be disillusioned  if they would spend a few days east of Aldgate,  and mix with their fellow- citizens there.   Allied to this obstacle of convention is the very  real obstacle of charity.   Now we are here dealing not with a positive  charity but with a negative one and with a form of  charity uncommonly like slackness.   The man who honestly thinks that any allusion  to Jewish races in contemporary art, history or  letters in the presence of a Jew is offensive and  therefore to be avoided, from goodness of heart, and  who also practises the same virtue where any other  foreigner is concerned is rare indeed. There are  such men, for men of exceptional goodness coupled  with exceptional stupidity are to be found. But the  excuse of charity as it is generally put forward is  not wholly ingenuous. Where it is ingenuous our     OUR DUTY 261   reply to-day must be that even at the risk of  occasional ill- ease, the danger of offence must be  risked; for unless we risk it there is increasing  peril of a much greater offence against justice.  For whatever reason open discussion is burked, even  for the reason of charity, we only put off the evil  day, and charity so used may be compared to the  charity which refuses to take action in any other  critical problem of increasing gravity. The charity  which hesitates to control the supplies of a spend-  thrift, or to wage a defensive war in a just cause,  or to defend an oppressed man at the risk of  quarrelling with his oppressor, is a charity mis-  directed.   But, as I have said, with much the greater part  of men who plead this motive the plea is, if they  would only examine their own consciences, found to  be false. And the test of its falsity will be apparent  when the convention slackens. When it is no  longer conventional to avoid all mention of Jews,  how many will remain silent merely from the love  of their fellow-men ? One might go further and  say that when the convention has gone, any need  for this kind of charity will go with it. There is  an exception, of course, in the case of the man  whose dislike of Jews is so violent that he fears  himself if he gives any rein to his tongue. That  mania is exceptional ; but where it is found certainly  its victim will do well to keep silence. If a man  cannot mention the Hebrew alphabet without a  sneer, or the economics of Ricardo without betray-  ing his ill feeling for Ricardo' s lineage, then  certainly he had better hold his tongue when Jews  are there. So, too, a Frenchman who raves against  the English had far better not discuss the British     262 THE JEWS   Constitution or the genius of Newton in any society  where an Englishman may be present.   There remains the chief obstacle that of fear.   There is no doubt that the strongest force still re-  straining an expression of hostility to the Jew is fear.   In a sense, of course, there is a " fear " of breaking  convention but that is fear only in metaphor.  I mean not this, but the very real dread of con-  sequences: the feeling that an expression of  hostility to Jewish power may bring definite evils  on the individual guilty of it, and a panic lest those  evils should fall upon him. How strong this feeling  is, anyone can testify who has explored, as I have,  this most insistent of modern political ills; and  doubtless the greater part of my non- Jewish readers  will recall examples to the point.   It is a fear of two consequences, social and  economic, and even of both combined. Men dread  lest hostility to the Jew Domination should bring  them into the grip of some unknown but suspected  world- wide power some would call it a conspiracy  which can destroy the individual who shall be  so rash as to challenge it. Some perhaps have  gone to the length the insane length of reading  the word "destroy" in its literal sense and of  fearing for their lives. Such an illusion is laughable.  But very many more are affected by the reasonable  conception that they will have against them, if they  provoke it, an intelligent, combined action which  they cannot meet because there is no organization  upon their side : because it is international ;  because there is behind it a great intensity of  feeling; because through finance it controls the  political machines of all the nations, because it is  all-powerful in the Press and so forth.     OUR DUTY 263   They dread, I say, the social consequences. They  also (and that with more definition and more sense)  dread the economic consequences. They recognize  (they also exaggerate) the grip of the Jew over  finance. They conceive that if they speak they will  be dragged down, their enterprises ruined, their  credit dissolved. And that is the most powerful  instrument which can be brought to bear. When  supernatural motives disappear the strongest  motive remaining after appetite is avarice; and  avarice is more universal than appetite and more  continuous. Nor is it only avarice which is at  work here, but also the respectable desire for  security. There are to-day innumerable men who  would express publicly on Jews what they con-  tinually express in private, but who conceal their  feelings for fear that their salaries may be lost or  their modest enterprises wrecked, their investments  lowered, and their position ruined. Above them  are a lesser number, equally convinced that their  large fortunes would be in peril were they so to act.   The characteristic of all this feeling is two-  fold. In the first place, as would seem to be the  case with convention, though in a much greater  degree, it dams up and enormously increases the  latent force of anger against Jewish power both  real and imaginary. It is like the piling up of a  head of water when a river valley is obstructed, or  like the introducing of resistance into an electric  current. The suppression of resentment, though  that suppression is the act of the men who them-  selves feel the resentment and not directly of their  opponents, is a fierce irritant and accounts for the  high pressure at which attack escapes when once  it is loosened.     264 THE JEWS   I speak only of hostility and of attack, for it is  in these least rational examples that the strength  of the thing is to be found. But it applies also to  mere discussion. There is hardly anyone to-day  who does not desire to discuss as an urgent political  problem the present position, the present power,  the present disabilities, the present claims of Israel.  But for one that will openly discuss these things  there are ten who, in varying degrees, forbid them-  selves so plain a freedom of speech in dread of what  consequences might follow. It has, like all panic,  a ridiculous element. It is informed by the most  absurd illusions ; it suffers from grotesque imagin-  ings and phantasms. In some this dread of the  Jewish power has very plainly passed the line which  divides the stable from the unstable mind and even  the sane from the insane. But it is none the less  a formidable element in our problem. This  obstacle, much more than that of convention, bears  a character of rigidity. It works for a certain  time, then it breaks down and releases a flood.   That is why the first expressions of hostility in  our time were so exaggerated and ill- proportioned.  That is why so many of them were plainly mad.  This very character of exaggeration, this very  wildness in proportion, rendered those against  whom the attack was delivered more contemptuous  of it than they should have been.   The forerunners of the present movement I  mean, of the movement hostile to Israel were not  calculated to excite the respect of their opponent  or even to carry with them the men on their own  side. They lacked that " common" sense which is  the first quality of leadership. For the power of  leadership implies a soul in common with those     OUR DUTY 265   who are led. The enthusiast can lead permanently,  but the extravagant man never for long.   I say that these first attacks were on that account  despised: they were unduly despised by those  whom they menaced.   There lay in reserve behind all the exaggeration  and wildness a great bulk of very different opinion ;  the opinion of men normal in their appreciation  of values and of proportion, not given to " seeing  things," fully in touch with reality ; men who know  that they have hitherto only been silent through  the action of fear, who despise themselves on that  account and who are the more ready to act. For  the sense of fear not only degrades but angers:  at least in our race. The European who admits to  himself that he has restrained an instinct not from  religion, nor from a general sense of right, but from  cowardice, is always angry with himself and awaits  the moment when he can take his own revenge  upon his own past and clear himself of reproach  in his own eyes.   Herein lies the peril to Israel of such a state of  affairs. But with that I am not here concerned.  I am only concerned with its effect upon ourselves.  So long as we degrade ourselves, so long as we  humiliate ourselves by our own cowardice, so long  as we shirk all reasonable discussion, let alone all  expression of hostility because we dread the con-  sequences at the hands of our opponents, so long  there are present in rising intensity two evil things :  first, the postponement of the right solution;  secondly, the turning of a reasoned policy into mere  hatred with all the consequences that flow from  such evil emotion.   The longer we maintain whatever remains of that     266 THE JEWS   barrier to free speech (happily it is already crumb-  ling) the longer do we produce the two fatal results  of postponing justice and of creating enmity. The  destruction of that barrier, the ridding of ourselves  of fear in the matter, is, as is always the case in  the exercising of this unmanly thing, a matter for  individual effort. As the proverb goes, " Someone  must bell the cat," which is another way of saying  that if each man waits upon his neighbour, things  will only grow worse and worse.   It is for each in his place, before it is too late, to  approach the Jewish problem and to discuss it  openly ; to preface that discussion by a frank interest  and a general expression upon all those things  in the minority which directly concern its relations  with the majority; to deal with the Jewish nation  exactly as one would with any other.   It used to be a dictum in those who pleaded a  lifetime ago for the open criticism of Scripture, that  " the Bible should be approached like any other  book." * The result is not of good augury to my  present argument and I rather dread the parallel ;  but since the phrase is well, known I will use it as a  model. It is time, I say, to be rid of treating the  Jewish nation as something closed, mysterious and  secret. Let us treat it ' ' like any other nation. ' ' It  is no wonder if men, moved by nothing but a blind  hatred, feel some hesitation upon the consequence  of that hatred. But I am convinced that if we on  our side get rid of this absurd modern fear, take the   1 I beg leave to introduce an anecdote. An undergraduate  once said to Dr. Jowett, the Master of Balliol, " I take up  the Gospels and treat them as an ordinary book." The  Master answered : " Did you not find them a very extra-  ordinary book ? " So it will prove, I think, with the fascina-  tion of Israel.     OUR DUTY 267   Jew in his right proportions, rid our mind of  exaggeration in his regard especially of the con-  ception of some inhuman ability capable of conduct-  ing a plot of diabolical ingenuity and magnitude  we shall be met from the other side.   The Jews are not the only force which is inter-  national nor the only international force the dread  of which has disturbed men's judgments. They  are not the only international force which has some  degree of organization and cohesion. If you desire  to vent your active dislike of the Scotch or of the  Irish you must be prepared for a certain amount  of Scotch or Irish hostility. You will come across  something of an organization and suffer accord-  ingly ; but if you cherish the conception of a vast  subterranean force, Scotch or Irish, watching you  with a malignant power and capable of your destruc-  tion, you are, I think, out of the real world.   If you desire to vent your active dislike of the  Catholic Church you will find ubiquitous opposi-  tion. But if you conclude from this that you are  at grips with a monster then you are out of touch  with reality.   So it is, surely, with this dread of the Jewish  power, which has sullied so many men's minds,  postponed the right discussion of the problem and  nourished ill-ease everywhere. If we simply  act as though that dread were despicable like any  other dread, and turned to perfectly open discussion  of the whole affair, even to an open expression of  hostility where hostility is deserved, we shall be  the better for it. In any case it is our duty to  ourselves as well as to the State to get rid of fear  in the business, for until we are rid of it no  advance towards a solution can be made.     THEIR DUTY     CHAPTER XIII  THEIR DUTY   WHERE positive causes have been found for an  evil it is obvious that the cure of that evil consists  in the removal of the causes, in so far as they can  be removed.   In the particular case of the friction between the  Jewish community and their hosts the causes of  that friction are the foolish and dangerous habit of  secrecy and the irritating expression of superiority.  The causes the Jew can remove if he will. The  matter is in his own hands: we can do nothing:  he can do everything.   But beyond this negative duty which is incum-  bent upon the Jews if they would achieve a peaceful  issue of the perils which menace their future, there  is a positive action also incumbent upon them.  They must foster, they must even propose, institu-  tions which will the better mark them off from a  society not their own and restore to them the dignity  of a nation. I shall in the last chapter of this  book contend that the policy leading to a solution  must repose not upon direct laws of our own imagin-  ing, not upon reactions which will almost certainly  prove oppressive, and almost certainly be evaded,  but upon a general spirit recognizing the separate  nationality of the Jews. But though this is true of   271     272 THE JEWS   every Christian Western State in which they find  themselves, it is not true of their own nation.  They on their side may well come forward with  propositions which they have the capacity for  making, because they will know how to frame them  (as we cannot) after a fashion consistent with their  own dignity and their own tradition. There is a  beginning of such things already present in the  Jewish schools, the Jewish guardians and the con-  siderable separate organization which the Jews  have openly set up for their community in this  country. These beginnings have but to be extended.   Those who are openly hostile to Jews will say  that any proposals coming from their side will con-  ceal a trap. " This people " (they say) " will always  suggest things which will seem innocent enough and  apparently do no more than define their position  plainly for the future ; but we shall find ourselves  caught in an obligation and the Jews more our  masters than ever. They will,' ' say these ob j ectors,  " remain as they are to-day, and while they claim  every privilege as a separate community, they will  also insist upon the full citizenship which is incom-  patible with this attitude. We shall find that,  whatever institutions we ask them to frame, those  institutions will work not only in their favour but  also heavily against us."   I doubt it. The special Jewish institutions  already at work have no such effect. On the con-  trary, they already relieve the strain. One of those  institutions, for instance, is the Jewish press : the  newspapers specially devoted to Jewish interests  and acting as spokesmen for Jewish ideas. They  are not always as polite as they might be. I have  had myself at times to lodge a complaint against the     THEIE DUTY 273   way in which they have treated sincere efforts for  the settlement of our difficulties and an honest  attempt at finding a way out. They have left a  handle to their enemies sometimes by too insistent  or, as those enemies would call it, too arrogant a  claim, and they do write now and then as though we,  the vast majority, had no rights and the only thing  worth considering was the advancement of their own  people.   But, after all, it would be absurd to expect  anything else. A small minority vigorously fighting  its own hand must exaggerate its claim; an organism  defending itself against very heavy pressure from  without cannot but appear aggressive, and I shall  always maintain that the presence of an openly  Jewish institution speaking for Jewish interests, no  matter how insistently, is an excellent thing. It  presents a healthy contrast with the converse  attempt to present Jewish arguments under the  cover of neutrality, and to spread Jewish ideas  anonymously through what are very far from  being neutral agents.   If I be asked what institutions I have in mind I  can only repeat that it is for the Jews themselves  to make the first proposal, but I suggest an  extension of the system, which is already present in  embryo, whereby disputes between Jews shall be  arbitrated before a Jewish tribunal. Not only its  extension but its confirmation at the request of the  Jews themselves, might be a good thing. It would  also not be a bad thing if some time hence when  things were ripe for the change disputes between  Jews and non- Jews could be tried in Courts where  the special character of such disputes, the distinctive  difference between them and disputes between the     274 THE JEWS   fellow- citizens of the country in which they live,  should come before tribunals of a mixed character.  To attempt this to-day would, of course, be a very  new departure in procedure, indeed a revolutionary  one ; and there is no prospect of it for a long while ;  but with the growing number among us, and the  growing influence, of Jews it will, I think, when it  does come at last, be of advantage to both parties.  It would be fatal if it were imposed upon them. It  would not be accepted. It would not work. But if  it were suggested by the Jewish community spon-  taneously, and started and developed by them, it  would succeed. And it would add a great deal to the  relief already experienced for the functioning of the  other institutions I have mentioned.   There is little more to be said under this head.  Apart from the duty of open dealing and this  specific policy of fostering separate institutions we  have no claim to press.   All the main part of the mutual Duty is on our  side. Therefore have I given it the space it seems to  deserve and confined to no more than these few  lines correlative suggestions for those who, after all,  are not responsible to us for their actions and may  properly resent the airing of our views on the do-  mestic details of their alien organization.     VARIOUS THEORIES     CHAPTEE XIV  VARIOUS THEORIES   BEFOEE approaching my conclusion it may be well  to review certain subsidiary theories which I have  not hitherto touched in my discussion, because they  stand apart from its argument.   There is a whole group of historical and other  theories upon the position of the Jews which either  imply that there is no problem, or if there is one that  it cannot be solved, or even that if there is a problem  it is of a sort that does not need solution, because  that solution would be of no practical value.   There come in the first place those theories upon  the international position of the Jews which are  frankly non- rational, and which vary from those  which may be defended with some show of reason  from the history of the past, to those which are  wholly imaginary. None of these, even though  some one of them should be true, can find much  place here because none lends itself to discussion.   Thus there is the conception of a curse; the  conception that Israel must, until its conversion,  suffer a perpetual pilgrimage and perpetual hos-  tility. It is a statement bound up with that other  popular prophecy that in the last days Israel will be  reconciled with the Universal Church. Those who  have these ideas at the back of their minds (they are   277     278 THE JEWS   more numerous than modern thought would like to  admit), at heart despair of any solution, and would  not attempt to urge it with any hope of success.  They say, " The thing is fated and must continue."  But even they, I think, must admit that just as  philosophy admits a paradox of determination and  free will, so political effort must admit a paradox of  foreseen failures and our duty, in spite of them, to  aim at a political good.   Whether it be indeed true or not, that recon-  ciliation is impossible and that in the long run the  quarrel must drag itself out, it is certainly pro-  foundly immoral to look on at the spectacle with no  attempt to ameliorate its evils.   There is again the theory (which I mention in  passing and leave to its adherents) that the British  and the Jews are in some way mysteriously allied by  Providence, so that any solution which does not give  the fullest satisfaction to Israel (no matter at what  cost to poor Japhet) is treason. These people  mystically regard Britain as the handmaid of Jewry,  and there is a section of them who further regard  their fellow-countrymen as the ten lost tribes. I  have in my library some specimens of their litera-  ture.   There is an opposite and, to me, detestable theory  (but I must mention it because it exists), that the  antagonism hitherto found perpetually, whether  latent or active, between this people and the world  about them is the use of the one as a necessary and  divine oppressor of the other. To those who hold  such a theory I can only reply that two can play  at that game, and it certainly absolves those whom  they would oppress from any obligation whatever of  seeking a solution on their side. If a man thinks he     VAEIOUS THEOKIES 279   can do harm to Israel wantonly, without suffering  the reproaches of his own conscience, he is in error ;  and I confess that were I free (as I am not in a book  of discussion and argument) to indulge in mere  affirmation I should be inclined to say that those  who set out with this remarkable object in view will  catch a Tartar.   There is the opposite theory that a special and  Divine protection is still exercised, not only for the  preservation of the Jews but for judgment upon  their enemies. That theory, I think, lies at the back  of many a Jewish action in history and of much  Jewish policy to-day. Non- rational, religious in  origin, it is, I fancy, to very many of the race which  has suffered so much, a consolation and a support.   Now all these non- rational theories (I use the  word without any bad connotation : the non-  rational what is often inaccurately called the  mystical attitude towards any problem may well  be more practical than the rational approach to it)  I leave on one side as improper to rational discussion.   I have heard it maintained, again, by both parties  to this debate, that the presence of an alien force,  migratory, intense, full of tradition, experience and  cohesion, was essential to the height and the activity  of our own civilization.   These are not content to discover individual  instances of Jewish excellence in the mass around  them, or to extend the renown of individual Jewish  genius. They are rather concerned with the general  proposition that some such flux is necessary to the  full action of a high and diverse culture. They tell  us that but for the Jew the civilization of Europe  would have grown torpid, would have settled into a  fixed groove, incapable of change and of creative     280 THE JEWS   progress. The Jew, by this theory, is regarded as a  sort of activating principle, who, whether as an  irritant at the worst, or an inspiration at the best,  keeps all our European life agog, and is necessary to  its continuous business. These also incline to see  the Jew at the origin of every great movement in  European thought. They see him indirectly pro-  ducing the vast transformation of the Roman Em-  pire from a pagan, not indeed to a Jew but to a  Christian, that is (in their eyes) to an Oriental mood.  They see the Jew at the root of the great revolu-  tionary philosophy which springs from the eleventh  century and reaches its culmination in the great  scholastics of the thirteenth. They insist upon the  name of Averroes (Ibn Roshd), the philosopher of  the twelfth century, the Kadi of Cordova : the  exponent of Aristotle, the expositor whom the  Jews preserved : upon the great Moses ben Maimon,  our Maimonides. These also put Nicolas de Lyra  at the root of the Reformation : "Si Lyra non  lyr asset Luther non saltasset." But I may remind  them that the Jewish character of this man is at  least doubtful, that he was of the religious Orders of  Christendom.   These also will certainly and with some reason  ascribe to Jewish influence the great economic  revolution of the seventeenth century, which has  been followed by so vast an extension of wealth and  of population, though hardly of human happiness.   Now for all this there is certainly something to  be said as an aspect of historical truth. How far  it may be extended to cover, as its exponents would  make it cover, the whole historical field, may be  debated, but I would ask my readers to consider  what change we should have seen in the develop-     VARIOUS THEORIES 281   ment of Europe if by some magical instrument  Jewish influence had been upon some one date  removed. It is a theory fascinating, in a way  applicable, and arresting. It is, at any rate, not  nonsense.   It is particularly true that something in  the continuous exercise of analysis by the Jewish  intelligence perpetually moves European intelli-  gence to action The great disputations of the  Early Middle Ages were, largely, either directly  disputations with Jews or disputations provoked by  the intellectual attitude of the Jew; and the Jew,  in the famous name of Spinoza, stands at the origin  of that merely natural, that Lucretian interpreta-  tion of the world which continued through Des-  cartes to its great expansion in the present day.  You find that element in economics as you do in  philosophy, in political science as you do in econo-  mics; and, talking of economics, it must not be  forgotten that the greatest name at the foundation  of modern economic science is the name of a Jew,  Ricardo, while the most prominent name in the  development of its most prominent direct applica-  tion is also a Jewish name the name of Karl Marx.   It is not without significance that any one of these  names recalls, side by side with its Jewish origin,  an aloofness from the general community of the  Jews. That community, I think it is fair to say,  abandoned Spinoza; Ricardo and, I believe, Karl  Marx were alien to the national religion, and the  latter married out of his people and exercised his  enormous influence extraneously to the blood from  which his family sprang. For though it is true that  the direction, the staff of Communism is Jewish, yet  ite convinced adherents are in the mass of our blood.     282 THE JEWS   And in that connection I am reminded of another  theory or fact attaching to the history of Israel,  which is that the intellectual independence of the  Jew has been as marked throughout the ages as his  solidarity. There are many, I know, of that nation  who regard such exceptions as vagaries and almost  condemn them as traitors ; yet they are no small  asset to the reputation of their people and their  names, however much they may be repudiated by  their compatriots, shed lustre upon the whole body  from which they sprang. These include (let it be  remembered) not only the" sceptical" philosophers,  not only the materialists, but also those extra-  ordinary exceptions who have lent the vigour, the  tenacity and the lustre of the Jewish intellect to the  service of the Catholic Church. I make bold to say  that in no one of the Faith has there been more  devotion than in those who, like Ratisbonne (and  he was but one among many), have put such  qualities at the service of what they have dis-  covered to be alone divine. A cynic might add  St. Paul, but, for that matter, the whole origin of  the Church was intermixed with the intense indivi-  dual efforts of such men.   In this connection also every wise man will admit  that there is no greater error than to exaggerate the  consciousness of Jewish action whether the error  proceed from those who admire or who detest it.  To hear their modern opponents talk one might  imagine that the Jewish people formed a small  club of which every member knew every other while  each worked in the unison of a disciplined body.  That aberration I have dealt with more than once  upon former pages. The truth is that no nation on  earth presents so many surprising exceptions to     VARIOUS THEORIES 283   its general action as does this nation, and that no  nation on earth, when it moves in one general  direction, as it often does, is actuated by a common  motive less conscious. We who stand outside the  Jewish body may mark its cohesion, and will mark  it, I hope, to its honour; but its own members  complain rather of its lack of cohesion. I have  heard them complain I know not how often of  the way in which the wealthier Jews left their  society for that of an alien body, sneered at the  general body of Israel, and remained indifferent to  the common cry of the race. It is this unconscious-  ness in action, this frequent replacement of motive  by instinct which accounts for what all observers  have noticed, especially in times of persecution. I  mean the bewilderment of the oppressed at the  action of their oppressors.   I remember once listening to a most eloquent  speech delivered in the course of a debate in which,  with that long recollection which is characteristic  of his people, an Israelite passionately declaimed the  gratitude of that people to St. Bernard who saved  their remnant upon the Rhine from the popular  fury. I remember also how another in a debate  (for I have attended many such up and down the  country and have heard from as many aspects as  possible what the Jewish attitude towards us is)  stated simply, in reply to my description of the  Jewish financial position in this country after the  Conquest: "Your cathedral and your abbeys  and even your castles were built with our money."  The phrase was significant of the way in which  what the English community of the tune regarded  as a tolerated abuse, those fortunes which they  never thought of as Jewish at all, but as moneys     284 THE JEWS   temporarily unjustly wrung from the people at  large, were regarded in contemporary Jewry as  private property legitimately acquired, held in full  possession.   I could wish in this connection that some learned  Jew would produce a History of Europe from the  point of view of his people: a short textbook, I  mean, intended for our consumption ; to show us  ourselves from a standpoint very different from our  own. It may be that such a book exists. I am  certain it would be more useful than those indirect  attacks (for they are attacks) upon the Christian  tradition which pretend to a spirit of impartiality  but are none the less hostile to that tradition in  every line. I would much rather read the story  of Europe as it was seen by a practising Jewish  scholar than a so-called impartial and agnostic  account which grotesquely represents the Church  as something external to the body of Europe and  even inimical to it.   In this connection also we should have (what now  we lack), and that is a conspectus of the Jewish  action over Christendom and Islam combined.  We are aware of the tolerance, or rather favour,  displayed to their Jewish subjects by the Moham-  medans of Spain. It was neither universal nor  continuous. What we do not sufficiently hear,  what we have to piece together from chance  allusions, is the connection between the Moorish  Jews, before and during the Eeconquista, and their  fellows to the north.   Before I leave these cursory and sporadic notes  on what I have called the " theories" upon our  problem, I should mention one which would unhap-  pily seem to have acquired widespread support     VARIOUS THEORIES 285   to-day and which is surely the least satisfactory of  all even less satisfactory than the now dying  fiction which pretended that the Jewish nation  was not present in our midst, but consisted only  of a mass of individuals already absorbed by their  alien surroundings. I mean the theory that it is  possible to continue in a sort of simmering atmo-  sphere of partial repression, with the Jew treated  as something alien and hostile, yet his presence  unceasingly tolerated. That would seem to be  the imperfect conclusion implied, if not stated, in  a hundred modern pamphlets and discussions, the  authors of which repudiate the name of Anti-  Semite though they sympathize apparently with  action even less logical than the politics of the  Anti- Semite. There is no such equilibrium possible,  even if its establishment were as moral as it is in  fact immoral. If a frank solution be not found,  nothing firm can be established. All we shall be  establishing will be a violent and successive fluctua-  tion. It is impossible to maintain an attitude  permanently hostile to one's neighbour, yet count  on that hostility remaining permanently repressed.  You fall inevitably along the slope of such a ten-  dency into those excesses which it should be our  whole object to condemn, to foresee and to prevent.   You cannot continue, as so many modern men  seem, from their conversation, to wish, with political  equality on the one side and a living spirit of enmity  upon the other. You cannot get peace by giving  a mere legal definition to the status of a minority,  which is also necessarily your neighbour, and  refusing a social action consonant with the legal  definition. If you try to do that you are trying  to do two things, one of which will destroy the     286 THE JEWS   other. No one can doubt which will be victorious  in a conflict between a living sentient motive and  a mere definition in public law.   One attitude towards the question which I have  heard fairly often in the mouths of Jews and seen  in their writings is something like this: "Our  affairs have nothing to do with people outside our  nation. This discussion of what you call c the  Jewish problem' is an impertinence upon your  part. There is a Jewish problem indeed, but it is a  domestic problem, and we request you (with some  asperity) to mind your own business."   If this attitude were sound, the search for what  I have called a solution, though it might satisfy  the intelligence, would be a breach of civic morals.  In the same way it would be a breach of civic  morals for me to work out a solution for the quarrel  between Mr. Jones and his mother-in-law, neither  of whom I have ever met and with whom I have no  relations, and then to press this solution upon the  contending parties. But the flaw in this attitude  is that the problem is essentially one involving two  parties, the Jews and the non- Jews. The problem  we are attempting to solve is a problem expressed  in terms of both. Some would even say that there  is hardly a domestic question within the Jewish  nation which does not have its reaction upon  society outside it, and which it is not the business of  that society outside to inquire into. That would  be pressing things rather far. But the main  problem is intimately concerned with both parties  and as much with the one as with the other. It is  true, indeed, that the consequences of a false solu-  tion, or of shirking the solution altogether, would  be more acute for the Jew than for us; but we     VARIOUS THEORIES 287   should both suffer, and even on our side the suffering  would be grievous.   Even if there were no question of suffering in  the ordinary sense of the term, there would still be  the question of justice. The Jews who resent a  statement of the problem and an attempt at solving  it are not doing their own people any good and are  at the same time denying us the right of putting  our own affairs in order, which denial is,, of course,  intolerable : for the position of the Jews in our great  States and in Islamic society is something which  those States and that society have to determine.  They cannot leave it in the air. To some conclusion  they must come, and soon, and on the nature of  that conclusion depends their peace.   Two theories, proceeding from very different  states of mind, the opposite each of the other, but  each exclusive of any solution, spring from the root  idea that there is something inexorably malignant  in the relations between the Jew and his surround-  ings. In the one form this takes the shape of  affirming that the unfortunate Jew is invariably  ill-treated by his wicked hosts and always will be  so ill- treated. In the other it takes the form of  saying that the wicked Jew will always be con-  spiring and trying to hurt his good, kind hosts and  always will be so conspiring. In either case it is  no good trying to find a solution, for it is affirmed  that the- quarrel is in the nature of things. People  will say to one, " Why attempt to change something  which cannot be changed ? Why talk of your  material as something other than what it is ?  Cats will always quarrel with dogs, and if you  want to avoid a quarrel the only thing to do is to  keep the dogs and cats of your household apart."     288 THE JEWS   It is precisely because I do not believe either  form of this idea to be true that I have sought for a  solution. I do not believe either form of doctrine  to be true because the evidence is against it. That  evidence is to my hand and can be examined by  my own unaided powers, as it can be examined  by any other person in our modern society. I  cannot recollect one single case in all the hundreds  of Jews I have come across not one in the score  whom I can count as intimates who showed any  sign of this malignant hatred. I have heard many  outbursts of exasperation which, when we think of  the past, are natural enough ; but of some persis-  tent and evil desire to hurt those among whom they  live, some instinctive desire unconnected with past  suffering, and acting as a sort of instinct, I have  seen no trace. If such were to be discovered in  some exceptional Jew out of a large acquaintance I  should conclude that it might be true of a small  minority, but common sense and common experience  are sufficient to show that it does not affect the  mass.   Of the causes of friction, even of acute friction,  which I have enumerated in former pages, there is  the habit of secrecy, there is the mutual contempt,  arising in each from a sense of superiority over the  other ; there is the quarrel between what is national  and what is international, between what is of us  and what is alien. There are, in a word, plenty of  elements suggesting accidental antagonism, but of  intrinsic antagonism there is no evidence there is  no evidence, I mean, that the Jews would still  desire to destroy a society in which they found  themselves at their ease.   And, if we examine ourselves, we shall be equally     VAEIOUS THEORIES 289   convinced that there is no corresponding desire  upon our side to do a wrong to the Jew. We also are  exasperated by the memory of insult in moments  of quarrel, of international action opposing our  national interests and of friction between what is  native and what is alien ; but that is a very different  thing from permanent and necessary antagonism.  I know very well what is called " modern thought "  gives to the unconscious part of man a large place  and reduces, as much as it can, the field of reason.  I cannot agree with it. It seems to me that man  is essentially rational; and his political relations  can be arranged consonantly with his conscious  morals and his conscious logic.   At any rate, if they cannot, there is an end of  all statesmanship and of all useful political action  even in details.   Next, there are the two converse attitudes  towards the question which certainly are affecting,  the one an increasing audience upon our side and  the other perhaps an interested though but secret  audience upon the other; I mean those two con-  verse theories whereby, on the one side, there is the  Messianic idea of the Jew ultimately controlling  the world, on the other an extreme dread oi that  idea and a belief that it is being actively pursued  to the destruction of our institutions and religion.   I can understand that, with the traditions of  his race behind him and with the tone of their  sacred writings in his ears, a Jew should lean in  some degree to such a conception, or at any rate  that some Jews should lean towards it. Certainly  in face of the ridiculously exaggerated power of  the Jews in recent times (it is now declining, for  secrecy was of its essence and it has now been   u     290 THE JEWS   brought into the arena of open discussion) it was  natural that men should fall into the exaggeration  of panic. They saw the Jew, a tiny fraction of most  communities, not more than a twentieth of any  community, exercising a power quite out of pro-  portion to his numbers or, indeed, to his ability;  and they saw that power directed towards ends  which were Jewish ends and therefore hostile or  indifferent to the rest of mankind. But my  reason for rejecting not only exaggerations of this  idea but its fundamental implication is that it  seems to me practically impossible. It connotes  abilities upon the Jewish side, a continuous will  upon the Jewish side, both of which are obviously  absent. And you have only to look at history  to see that long before things come to anything  like a struggle for supremacy it is the Jew who  suffers most from the suspicion of holding such a  design, not we. Indeed, that is one of the important  elements in the dangerous situation which has  been created to-day.   That large and greatly increasing body of men  who so fear Jewish, domination, and are vigorously  reacting against the Jews under the influence  of that fear, are much more likely to end with  injustice to the Jew than with subservience to  him. It is from this atmosphere that the great  misfortunes of the past have arisen. It is of the  essence of any solution that this mood should be  exorcised upon the one side as upon the other.   There is another theory which I have read of in  more than one learned Jewish treatise and which  has been repeated (after Jewish authors themselves  had launched it) by many non- Jewish societies and  historians, to the effect that the very survival of     VARIOUS THEORIES 291   the Jews, their very existence as a separate com-  munity, was due to conditions common in the past,  now disappeared, and that therefore the present  difficulties can safely be left to time.   This is, of course, to make the general assertion  that the Jewish race can be absorbed, and that  absorption is the solution. That conclusion I  summarily rejected in the earlier pages of this book  on the historical ground that it has had the most  favourable circumstances for success and yet has  always failed. But in the particular case stated  it has an argument of its own and one needing  very special examination: it is this:   Those who defend this theory tell us that however  favourable the opportunities for absorption were in  the past they are nothing to the opportunities of  the present and the future, and that therefore the  argument from history fails. In the past (they  tell us) the Jews were exclusive and even made of  their exclusiveness a religion. They on their side  mixed as little as possible with the world around  them and we on our side maintained that exclusion  by an equal insistence upon the difference between  ourselves and them. We had in those days, it is  maintained, a religion based upon the Incarnation  and therefore abhorrent to the Jew ; that religion  is dead or dying, and with it the tendency to exclu-  sion from outside has disappeared ; while on the  Jewish side there is also a great weakening of the  old religious bond, less of the old Messianic dogma,  and on both sides the enormous melting-pot l that  makes for absorption with an intensity and rapidity   1 I borrow the metaphor from Mr. Zangwill, who applied  it to New York particularly. I apply it to the whole modern  industrial world.   u*     292 THE JEWS   quite unknown in the past. It was one thing to  absorb the Jew when it took a month to go as an  ordinary traveller from London to Rome, it is  another thing when it takes three days. It was  one thing to absorb the Jew when in the greater  part of cases there was a bar to the mixing of the  races, based upon the nerves of religion, it is quite  another thing to absorb the Jew when those most  powerful of emotional forces have disappeared  and so forth.   Now the reasons which bring me to reject this  theory are two- fold.   In the first place, I think it exaggerates the  contrast between the past and the present. In the  second place, I know that in the actual world before  me and precisely under those conditions where the  fusion, the action of the " melting-pot," ought to  be most complete, the most violent reaction against  absorption is to be observed.   As to the contrast between the past and the  present, I think it is based upon an imperfect  apprehension of what our past has been. It comes  of that "telescoping up" of history to which I  alluded in another connection in my second chapter.   The long story of our race between the Roman  occupation of Judaea and the modern local and  ephemeral industrial phase of the great modern  towns is not divided into two chapters, the strange  past and the comprehensible present. It is much  of a muchness. The constant developments which  astonish us to-day in physical science, for instance,  are not more remarkable than the vast new develop-  ments in architecture and philosophy which marked  the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The dis-  turbance of thought which may be called " modern     VARIOUS THEOEIES 293   scepticism" is not anything like so important  a spiritual change as that tremendous revolution  which we call the conversion of the Eoman Empire.  The area of scepticism is not larger to-day than it  has been in many special periods of the past. The  feeling of strong religious emotion which forbids  this or that action is still present among us, some-  times attached to its older objects, sometimes (as  in the craze for prohibition) to some novel object.  The indifference which you will find to the parti-  cular religious barrier between Jew and non-Jew  is not peculiar to our times. It has come and gone  in the past ; after a wave of such indifference you  have had a wave of the most acute reaction, and I  think you are observing a wave of such reaction  to-day.   Nor do I see how the rapidity of mere physical  communications affects the matter, nor even how  the volume of emigration affects the matter. You  can get a million Jews from Lithuania to New  York a distance of 5,000 miles in less time than  you could get a million Jews from the Valley of  the Rhine into Poland some centuries ago; but  the million Jews seem to remain Jews just the  same under modern conditions as they did in the  past. Indeed, the toleration of Jews, the friendly  reception of them, and therefore the opportunities  for their absorption were indefinitely greater in  mediaeval Poland than they are in modern America.  It seems to me that the whole of this part of the  argument is based upon that prevalent view of  history which comes from reading our little modern  text-books : and our little modern text- books are  very rubbishy. It is a view which comes from  that absurd emphasis upon whatever is contempo-     294 THE JEWS   rary. The modern advance of physical science is  regarded as having totally changed the world  inwardly as well as outwardly. We have only to  look at the modern world and to compare it with  any two distant, special periods we know, to  discover that the difference between any pair of  these three is equally striking. In many ways  the modern world is much more like the world  of the Antonines than it is like the world of Innocent  the Great. In many ways the world of Innocent  the Great is much more like the Roman Empire  than the modern world. In many ways the world  of Innocent the Great and our world have more  in common than either has with the pagan Roman  Empire. The general lesson is, therefore, that our  time, with all its remarkable specialities, is but one  specimen out of a great number equally individual,  and certainly there is nothing in it either of religious  scepticism breaking down old religious barriers or  of rapidity of communication, or of any other  fundamental factor, which specially suggests the  absorption of the Jew.   For instance, the Jews mixed much more readily,  on a much more equal footing and with far less  friction among the Mohammedans at particular  periods during the Islamic occupation of Spain  than they do even in England to-day. Yet they  were not absorbed there, any more than they were  absorbed in Poland. They were not absorbed  into that older, tolerant, very denationalized pagan  Eoman world where they so often had full civic  rights and where they even manipulated, as they  manipulate to-day, the finances of the community.   As for the decay of exclusiveness on their part, I  see no sign of it. For this exclusiveness proceeds     VARIOUS THEORIES 295   not so much from a particular observance which  may relax at one period and tighten up at another,  as from an invariable national tradition which  fluctuates in intensity but never sinks so low as  to jeopardize the continuance of the people.   If we turn from argument to observation, the  falsity of the theory stares us in the face. We  have but to take one point, where the metaphor  of the " melting-pot" most applies (and to which  it was originally applied), the city of New York.  What has been the effect of this great influx of  Jews into New York, this turning of New York  into a city a third Jewish under our eyes and in  so short a space of time ? As we all know, the  effect has been the uprising, in that once indifferent  atmosphere, of such a feeling against the Jews as  would appal us did we see it in the Old World.  It is red hot. It is an intense reaction expressing  itself with greater and greater violence every day ;  and the spirit of that reaction cannot be better  expressed than in a phrase which we owe, I tfyink,  to Mr. Ford and his famous propaganda against  the Jews, through his paper the " Dearborn Inde-  pendent." ; ' It is all very well to talk of the melting-  pot," says he, "but so far from the Jews melting  in that pot, it looks as though they wanted to melt  the pot itself."   There you have, in New York, if anywhere, an  opportunity for the theory of absorption to prove  itself. You have present in the field a score of  different races, including great masses of a race  so utterly different from ours as the negro. You  have a certain small proportion of Chinamen and  you have of European stocks an indefinite variety  most of them in large numbers. You have not     296 THE JEWS   only in local establishments or even only in civic  theory, but in actual practice in enthusiastic  practice a complete equality and a positive pride  in the reception of no matter what elements of  immigration, in the certitude that all can rapidly  be moulded into the American form. Most of these  elements were absorbed, and absorbed rapidly;  where they were not absorbed there was at least  peace between them. Then arrives the Jew and  a totally new situation at once appears. A situa-  tion of challenge, of provocation, of admitted  exclusion, of violent debate and even of clamour:  but no sign of absorption. In presence of all the  elements that should make for absorption, difference  and hatred between Jew and non-Jew is growing  in New York with the vitality of a tropical plant.   There is yet another theory which, if it were not  widely held and if it had not been advanced by  so many Jews themselves, I should leave aside as  something comic, something unfit for serious dis-  cussion. But it has been advanced and it must be  met. It is no less than the theory that there are  no such people as the Jews, that the whole thing  is illusion.   This monstrous affirmation is based, I need  hardly say, upon what is called a " scientific "  examination of the affair : for that word " scientific "  has come to be associated with every kind of  unreason. Men, especially Jewish men, have been  found to affirm most solemnly that they had  measured skulls, taken sections of hair, catalogued  the colours of eyes, established facial angles, ana-  lysed blood, and applied I know not how many other  tricks, with the result that no Jewish type could  be discovered ! People who can reason thus do     VARIOUS THEORIES 297   not seem to appreciate the fundamental quarrel  between nominalism and realism, or to have heard  of the old philosophic joke on the definition of  "a thing."   We know a horse to be a horse, an apple to be  an apple, a Chinaman to be a Chinaman, or a Jew  to be a Jew by some process on which philosophers  can debate, but upon the virtue of which no sane  man doubts and upon the right action of which  we base all our lives. The chemist may tell me that  the chemical analysis of a lump of coal gives the  same result as the chemical analysis of a diamond,  to which any man capable of using his reason at  all will reply that upon a very large number of  other lines of analysis, colour, touch, combustibility,  hardness and softness, economic value, prevalence  (and so on indefinitely), the two are not the same.  No analysis is complete, and if we had made no  conscious analysis at all, we could still perceive  at once that a lump of coal is not a diamond.   It is just the same with these pseudo- scientific  attempts to disprove obvious truth. They pullu-  late and they are all equally ridiculous because  they deduce from insufficient data. The existence  and differentiation of the Jewish people as a race  ethnically and as a nation politically is as much  a fact as the existence of coal or diamonds. They  are a nation politically because they act as a nation,  because their individual members feel and exercise  a corporate function. We know them to be a  separate race because we can see that they are.  When you meet a Jew, whether you are his enemy  or his friend, you meet a Jew. He has a certain  expression, a certain manner, certain physical  characteristics which you may not be able to analyse     298 THE JEWS   at the moment you see him, but which give you the  impression and the certitude that you are dealing  with a particular thing, to wit, the Jewish race.  It is true, of course, that the type, like all general  types, fades off at the edges, and there will always  be cases where you may be in doubt of whether  you are dealing with a Jew or with a non-Jew,  but there is a marked central type round which  the Jewish racial type is built up. That is as  certain as that there is a Mongolian type, or a  negroid type, and so forth.   I do not take the objection very seriously. I  only note it because it has been made, and may  crop up in the course of any discussion on this  grave political issue.     HABIT OR LAW?     CHAPTER XV  HABIT OR LAW?   IE it be true that the friction between the Jew and  the civilization in which he lives is aggravated by  his habit of secrecy and by our disingenuousness,  by his expression of a sense of superiority which  galls us, and on our side by a lack of charity and  of intelligence in dealing with him, it would follow  that no solution can be more than approximate:  that whatever arrangement be come to the con-  trast will remain, and with it a certain latent  friction, which always accompanies contrast.   But there is between a simmering of that kind  and the active boiling of the question to-day (with  the threat of its boiling over) all the difference in  the world. But even though the solution be imper-  fect, it might be reasonably stable : we might at  least have peace, though not friendship. It further  follows from the elements of the problem that the  solution lies along the lines of either party modify-  ing whatever in its action is an irritant to the other ;  whatever, that is, can be modified by the will, and  is not mixed up with something ineradicable.   The Jew cannot help feeling superior, but he  can help the expression of that superiority at any  rate he can modify such expression. He can cer-  tainly, though it be at a great expense of tradition   301     302 THE JEWS   and habit, get rid of that pestilent pseudo- defence  of secrecy which poisons all the relations between  him and ourselves. We on our side can drop what  is the converse of that secrecy, the disingenuousness,  the lack of candour, into which we are fallen in  our relations with the Jew. That cannot but mean  a great breach with our tradition and with habit  also, but the advantage is worth the sacrifice. We  can (it must be the work of each individual, it  cannot be a corporate work) approach the Jew with  more respect and yet with more frequency. We  can, I think, advance by many degrees from the  lack of charity we now show, even if we despair of  living in real intimacy with a people so different in  their deepest qualities from ourselves.   Personally, I am not sure that such closer  intimacy might not be established ; I have never  found any difficulty in reaching and retaining  intimate acquaintance with the Jews of my own  circle but I may have been fortunate. I know  that with most of my fellows it is not so, and per-  haps the Jew will always remain to the mass of  those about him something strange and unapproach-  able, and I fear, repulsive. But there is no reason,  why we should mix with that hesitation in our  relations an element of indifference, still less of  contempt, still less, again, of cruelty.   I repeat the formula for a solution: it is  recognition and respect.   Kecognition is here no more than the telling of  the truth: there is a Jewish nation. Jews are  citizens of that nation ; and recognition means not  only the telling of this truth on special occasions  but the use of it as a regular habit in our relations  on both sides.     HABIT OR LAW? 303   This statement is, upon any just analysis of the  Jewish question, so obvious and so simple, that it  needs neither insistence upon it nor development.  Its plain statement is sufficient. But there attaches  to a solution so determined a much more active  and complicated question, upon the uncertainty  of which not only this reform but many another  has made shipwreck. The question must be  answered rightly, because, if we answer it wrongly,  the whole scheme fails.   The question is this : Should the social habit,  the general method in writing and speaking and in  all relations, precede in this case the institutional  action, legal changes, constitutional definitions?  Or should the legal changes, the new institutions,  the constitutional definitions come first ?   To decide rightly is of great moment, for this  reason, that a wrong decision may destroy all the  effect of goodwill.   In my judgment the wrong decision would be  that which would give precedence to legal change,  to new definitions, to new institutions, and attempt  out of them to build a new spirit. I take it that  this reversal of the true order would make all  stable peace impossible.   It must be admitted, of course, that changes  suggested by the Jews themselves, the development  of their own institutions, a voluntary segregation of  their community in other fields than those in which  they have already effected that segregation, stand  in another category. These new and definitely  Jewish institutions we should always welcome.  But the attempt at framing public regulations,  which are to defend the community as a whole  against an alien minority, when that minority must     304 THE JEWS   live with one permanently and as a regular feature  of the life of the community, invariably tends to  oppression, if such regulations are made the first  steps in a settlement instead of being left, as they  should be, to the last. Any separatist legislation  should arise naturally out of a long practice and  full recognition of the Jews as a separate people  and of the accompaniment of that recognition with  respect. If the advance is made on our side, the  Jew may refuse any such bargain. He may dig  his heels in and insist, as many another privileged  class has insisted before him, that he will continue  to enjoy all that he has ever enjoyed, that he will  continue his demand for a dual allegiance, that he  will insist on the very fullest recognition as a Jew,  and at the same time on what is fatal to such  recognition, the fullest recognition as a member of  our own community.   If he does that (and there are those who tell us  he will certainly do so, and will refuse all reform),  then the community will be compelled to legislate  in spite of him. It will be perilous for him and  for us ; it may even be the beginning of grievous  trouble for both, but it will be inevitable. It will  appear in a mass of legislation all over Europe,  which will affect this country with the rest.   The present situation cannot last indefinitely.  It is already uncertain even here, in England ; it  has reached further stages on the road to ruin  elsewhere. But if the Jew sees the peril in time,  and appreciates the nature of that change, the  beginnings of which we have all seen and which is  proceeding at so great a pace, then relations can  be established out of which (later) formal rules,  acceptable to both parties, should proceed. And in     HABIT OR LAW? 305   that case it would be, I repeat, the gravest of errors  to initiate new positive laws and a new status  before a foundation had been prepared by the  re- establishment of honest relations; and that can  only be done by a frank admission of reality, by  the open and continual admission everywhere  that Israel is a nation apart, is not, and cannot  be, of us, and shall not be confounded with our-  selves.   There is great temptation to delay, because the  acuteness of the problem is not felt here as yet,  among the well-to-do, and still more because it  differs in different communities. The peril seems  still far distant from us, though it may be at the  very door of our neighbours. Routine, the inherit-  ance of the immediate past, the false security  produced by the conventions of that past, may well  tempt those who dislike the effort of a change to  shirk that change. But I would ask any intelligent  and thoughtful Jew who still thinks he can rely  upon the false position of the nineteenth century  whether the same forces are there to support him  to-day as were present then ?   Take a particular example. In Poland and in  Roumania the old fiction has been temporarily im-  posed by force. The Jew, who in b oth these countries  is felt to be more alien than any other foreign  European could be, is imposed upon the Govern-  ment and society of each country by the Western  Governments as a full citizen. The strain here is  immensely aggravated because it arose not from the  nature of society but from the action of outsiders;  the English, the French, the American Govern-  ments* (but ^particularly the American and the  English) have erected in Eastern Europe this     306 THE JEWS   unstable, unjust and artificial state of affairs.  It cannot last, for it is unreal.   The communities in question may make no laws  which recognize the Jew; alternatively, the door  is open for oppression : and the moment the hated  foreign interference weakens, oppression will come.   Well, when under the pressure of a real  social difficulty and a crucial one, the unreal settle-  ment is torn up, by the passing of new laws  recognizing the Jew (but harshly, and under no  agreement with him) or by actual hostility, does  the Jew in his heart of hearts think that he would  have the same support from the West now as he  would have had thirty years ago ? He knows very  well he would not.   Thirty years ago you would have got from all  the traditional Liberalism of France, from the  great bulk of its governing class and the whole of  its academic organization, from what was then the  solid and still respected body of old Republicans,  an immediate answer to the Jewish appeal. In  England that answer would have been unanimous  and enthusiastic. You would have had torrents  of leading articles, great public meetings, Cabinet  Ministers speechifying all over the place in the  sacred cause of toleration. Every one knows that  to-day the appeal of the Eastern Jews, though it  might still be supported officially, would be received  by the public with indifference. Ten years hence  it may be received with derision.   Or take another example. Let us suppose it  is highly probable that the Zionist experiment  breaks down, that Englishmen refuse to have their  soldiers' lives risked in a quarrel which is not their  own and refuse to support out of their inordinate     HABIT OR LAW? 307   taxation a top-heavy colony which gives them  no advantage and concerns them not at all. On  the breakdown of that experiment, should it come  soon, would there still be the support for its re-  establishment that you would have had even ten  years ago ? There certainly would not. Ten  years hence it is probable enough that you would  get, not indifference to such re- establishment, but  the most active hostility. All over the world the  stream has turned in the same direction.   Unfortunately the effect of that change has been  to excite hatred rather than a desire for a settle-  ment and to move men towards blind action rather  than towards a reasoned examination of the diffi-  culty. That is why the thing seems to me urgent,  although there are still large areas of Western society  in which its urgency is masked and half forgotten.   When I say " urgent " I mean that this my  essay, which is to-day still to the point, and the  solution recommended in which is still feasible,  may very well, within the lifetime of its writer,  become old-fashioned out of all recognition. The  peaceful settlement here proposed with deliberate  vagueness and softness of outline may seem in a few  years as out of date, as unreal through the interven-  ing change, as do to-day the old tags about the  purity of parliamentary life and the seriousness  of party politics.   My solution may appear at the end of this genera-  tion as mildly inapplicable to the acute situation  then arisen between the Jews and ourselves as  appear to-day the old debates on the very tentative  demand for Home Rule in the '80's. Let us act  as soon as possible and settle the thing while there  is yet time. For in the swirl and rapids of the     308 THE JEWS   modern world, which grow not less as towards  a calm, but more intense as towards a cataract,  every great debate takes on with every year  a stronger form, a nearer approach to conflict;  and none more than the immemorial debate, still  unconcluded, between Islam and Christendom and  the Beni- Israel.  But for my part, I say, " Peace be to Israel."     Printed in Great Britain by Butler & Tanner, From* and London,     -     DS 141 .84 1922a *SMC  Belloc, Hilaire,  The Jews

Published on April 2, 2009 at 1:26 pm  Leave a Comment  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://jewise.wordpress.com/the-jews-2/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: