Anti-Zionist Discourse

With the current surge of support for Palestinian liberation, people are looking for an ideological framework to understand why everything has been happening. As always, it is easier to formulate an oversimplified model of ideologies, than to examine the current and historical events at face value. Accordingly, arguments that seek to delegitimize Zionism have resurged in popularity. 

Ideas such as the Khazar theory of Jewish origin are making the rounds again. The Khazar theory posits that Ashkenazi Jews are primarily descendent from Khazar converts to Judaism. The Khazar Khaganate was an early medieval central Asian state that converted to Judaism in the 8th century CE. There are many problems with this theory. Primarily, the historical evidence for the conversion of the Khazars is extremely limited. The singular primary source for this event, namely a letter that was supposedly sent by a "King Joseph" of the Khazars to Hasdai ibn Shaprut, the Jewish foreign minister of Abd ar-Rahman III, Kalif of Andalusia. Though it is certain that Hasdai believed there to be a Jewish Khazar state, and he most likely tried to send them a letter, the letter that is traditionally considered to be the response is very suspect. Forgeries of this kind abounded during the Middle Ages.

Jews during this era were stateless in a moment when the Christian and Muslim worlds seemed to united against each other. There was a general idea that a secret Jewish kingdom would arise to retake Jerusalem and usher in the Messianic era. A Jewish traveler who went by Eldad ha-Dani famously claimed that there was a hidden kingdom of the 10 lost tribes in East Africa. The letter from King Joseph of the Khazars fits right into this era of global travelers claiming to have found Jewish kingdoms. Some archeological evidence suggests that there were some Jew in the Caucuses during this era. It is possible that some of the Khazar nobility converted to Judaism as a middle-ground monotheistic religion that allowed them to stay neutral in the global dichotomy of Christianity and Islam. There is not nearly enough evidence to suggest that there were enough Khazar converts to be the primary ancestor population of Ashkenazi Jews. 

Anyone who has studied the historical record knows that there were already large Jewish population centers in Europe when the Khazars were supposed to have converted. This theory has to ignore so much of established historical fact that it feels ridiculous to have to refute. Despite this, most people have little idea of how history is studied and just assume that if this idea is written about, it must be true. 

The Khazar theory is helpful for people who seek to delegitimize Zionism. It allows them to form a category of illegitimate nationalisms that have no good reason to exist. Accepting the Khazar theory as a good model of Jewish heritage, the Jews have no reason to live in Palestine, since they are actually from central Asia. This is unlike the indigenous Palestinians, who have lived in Palestine since time immemorial. The Khazar theory itself fails to account for anyone who isn't a descendent of Eastern Ashkenazi Jews. Part of the original impetus for the Khazar theory was that the pre-WWII Eastern European Jewish population had grown so fast during the early modern period that some anthropologists were skeptical that they were really fully descendent of the western European Jewish migrants. Instead, the large population increase was due to the assimilation of many unknown central Asian Jews who they imagined migrated to the Kingdom of Poland en-masse. This theory was, and remains, fully European centric. In its origin context, it allowed western Europeans to respect the emancipation and integration of western European Jews, as they were true "Semites" and civilized, whereas the Eastern European Jews were fit to hate because they were primarily uncivilized barbarians of the central Asian Steppe. This also likely formed an associated with "invading" Eastern European Jewish migrants with the medieval Mongol hordes. Much in the same way that in the US, people like to label the Latin American immigrants as criminals and rapists. 

The Khazar theory does not account for the ancestry of Mediterranean, West, Central, and South Asian Jewish populations that participated in Zionism. 

It is legitimate to differentiate between the Jewish Zionists and the indigenous Palestinians. The vast, vast majority of the Jews who live in Israel are descendants of immigrants who came in the last century through Zionism. Many immigrants choose to change their names. In Israel, where modern-Hebrew was imposed as the national Jewish language, many families from all over the diaspora chose to change their last names to Hebrew equivalents under this cultural pressure. You find Eastern European Jews changing their names from Greun to ben-Gurion, or west Asian Jews changing their name from Abdullah to Ovadiah. You can find people online referring to Bibi by his ancestors' Polish last name, in an effort to highlight his immigrant Jewish heritage.  

The implication is that the immigration reflects an illegitimate nationalism or illegitimate existence in the land. I want to address each of these thoughts independently. 

Nationalism is always fabricated and made up. Political historians generally look to the French revolution for the origins of modern political thought, since that revolution really had it all. The idea of nationalism was expressed for the first time during this revolution. Previously, the leaders of a country imagined that they themselves embodied the government. The French revolutionaries adapted the ideas of social contract theory to mean that the French people, the nation, together held the power of French governance. In many ways the "French nation" was a fiction. The people who lived in France were determined by the borders drawn during the Monarchical period. The borders during the revolution had been drawn at the peace of Westphalia. In order to argue for the reality of the French people, the government began to impose of Parisian French as the true French language in order to create a common language for the people of France. Similarly, a national culture for France had to be developed. This manufactured unity of the French people was a powerful narrative that sought to unite them under a democratic political system. 

Not everyone who lived in the borders of France was immediately considered part of the French nation. The Jews of Alsace had to fight pretty hard to get nominally equal French citizenship, since it was not immediately granted when the revolutionary government formed. On one hand, nationalism can be used to liberate a people from an oppressive government that does not represent them, but it also necessarily excludes people and provides a new medium for discrimination. The Jews of Alsace were seen as foreigners who did not belong in the already complete French nation. Already built nation states tend to be stable enough to critique themselves and tolerate immigrants. This generally manifests in people arguing that immigrants can assimilate in the national culture or the nation can be multi-cultural. Generally, the prevalence of these ideas lead to more tolerance of immigrants, which is a good thing. 

Palestinian nationalism is foundationally as false as any other nationalism. I hope that people understand that when they critique Zionism in the same way. However, Palestinian nationalism is rightly deserving of our favor, since it is in the "fighting oppressive government" stage. Palestinian nationalism also has an "other," a group that is definitely not part of it. Those are the Zionist Jews. Though in theory, many claim they happily embrace non-Zionist Jews, in practice anti-Zionist regimes have ended up just discriminating against Jews in general. To be fair, there is much to hate about what Zionism does to a Jewish community. The transformation of religion into nationalism is not pretty. Unfortunately, most religious community in the world today possess elements of religious nationalism. We still live in the era of Ethno-Nationalism, and its popularity shows no signs of waning. Any discrimination against religious-Nationalism will lead to increased government oversight of the religious community, which if not distributed equally, will manifest as religious discrimination. Also it is almost impossible to destroy ideas directly, they generally need to be superseded by more popular ideas. 

Regarding immigration. Most of the Jews who live in Israel today are descendants of immigrants who came in the last century. Under Zionist direction, many of them have participated in the Zionist settler colonial process. Small amounts of Jewish immigration to the region has existed for centuries. Following the first crusade, when the historic Palestinian Jewish community was mostly wiped out, diaspora Jews began constituting the majority of Palestine's Jewish community. By the early modern period, there were sizable Jewish populations in the Jerusalem, Safed, Tiberias, and Hebron. In 19th century, the majority of the Jews living in these areas were of Spanish Jewish descent, most of them were settled in the region by the Ottoman empire after they were expelled from Spain the 1492. A minority of them were immigrants from eastern Europe, and an even smaller minority were descendants of the indigenous Jewish population. 

With the increasing popularity of Zionism at the turn of the 20th century, more Jews began to immigrate to Palestine with the intention of colonizing it. In Palestine, at the time, the majority of the people living there were peasant farmers who rented from large landowners, in a feudal system of farming. The Zionists bought land from these large landowners and then evicted the native Palestinian peasants. This was effectively the start of tensions between indigenous Palestinians and Jewish immigrants. Indigenous Palestinian violence against the Zionist settlers was stoked by preachers like Izz ad-Din al-Qassam, who framed the Jewish immigrants within an Islamic context, weaponizing Islamic antisemitism against the Jewish colonizers. 

Anti-colonial resistance is a legitimate cause, but the anti-colonial activity of the area, took on an antisemitic character which threatened even the Jews who were not participating the in the colonial activity. Continuously increasing tensions. 

Foreign supporters of Palestinian liberation, who don't consider themselves antisemites, cannot be in favor of expelling the "foreign Jewish population" of Palestine. It is difficult to determine if people who believe in a liberated Palestinian state will be tolerant of a large Jewish population in the territory. The militant Palestinian liberation groups like Hamas and Hezbollah tend to believe that the Jews will emigrate out of fear once they achieve enough regional power. This mass emigration is unlikely to happen. The idea is based on the narrative of the wandering Jew who flees danger. Even though some Jews may leave, I find it unlikely that it will happen on the scale that they imagine. Other Arab states, like Yemen and Iraq have undergone processes like this, but they were only successful because Israel was willing to absorb so many Jewish immigrants. All the countries that attempted this before the state of Israel was created generally failed to induce a mass emigration of their Jewish populations.   

Those who fantasize about a mass emigration of their perceived enemies tend to be supportive of those enemies' extermination if they won't leave. We are seeing this right now with Israel. The most fascistic Zionists within Israel, especially the followers of Meir Kahane, fantasized about a mass emigration of Arabs from Israel. Kahane proposed bribing them all to leave, but they really wanted to them to leave out of fear. This fear tactic was first implemented with some success during the 1948 war, when about 800,000 Palestinian Arabs fled their homes in Israel out of fear and were never allowed to return. 

The fact of the matter is, 7 million Jews live in Israel today. Though the land they live upon was acquired in bloodshed, getting rid of them will required even more bloodshed. The best peace solution is not to return to the fantasy of a pre-Zionist independent Palestine. It's as impossible as the Zionist fantasy to return to a pre-Roman independent mono-cultural Judea. Decades of immigration, expulsion, and blood has irrevocably scarred the region. 

My own fantasy is for a singular secular state that recognizes the religious and national identities that it contains. This state would also offer reparations to victims of the violence. Even though these reparations will be offered to Israelis who lost family and property in the violence, the vast majority of the recipients will be Palestinians who live both domestically and abroad, since they make up the vast majority of victims of the violence over the past century. I fear that such a state will be far too unstable to maintain itself. Maybe it could create a unifying peace narrative, but there will be significant pockets of Zionists who would want to maintain Jewish supremacy and the "right to return" for Jews globally. On the other side, there will be Palestinian Islamic nationalists who would want to start forcing Jews out of the country. The history of violence would encourage people to take up arms once again. 

Another possible solution, which is supported by the international community, is the two state solution. This is an old idea that dates back to the British mandate period. It has always been a messy solution, since the population distributions within historic Palestine do not lend well to simple divisions. In spite of the border drawing difficulties, two states would allow for the national expression of both groups. The very small territory would require them to cooperate very closely with each other, though there remains the great worry of violence re-erupting should extremists come to power on either side. 

I don't know which solution would ultimately work the best. I do know that we must be thinking pragmatically about how to accommodate a peaceful coexistence of both groups in the land without fantasizing about the extermination of one or the other. As long as our discourse tolerates such ideologies, it will be very difficult to reach a lasting peace agreement.     

Jacob Heller and Orthodox Jewish Anti-Zionism

In 1945 Jacob Heller sued Aharon Pechenik for libel on the accounts of Pechenik calling him a meshugane, a chassar deah, and that he belongs in a meshuganem hoiz. Heller claimed these terms amounted to calling him a lunatic and that he belonged in an insane asylum. Pechenik had used the terms in an editorial for the Mizrachi monthly magazine, Der Mizrachi Veg, to critique the politics of the young advocates of Agudas Yisrael and its anti-Zionist ideology, Heller was included as one of the more radical among these. The following articles were included as evidence in the court case, which can be found here. https://www.google.com/books/edition/Supreme_Court/dTDfs1FDu4YC?hl=en&gbpv=1 

Great Britain and the East, Oct. 31, 1942

Letters to the Editor

ORTHODOX JEWRY AND PALESTINE

Millions of religious Jews are unalterably opposed to the machinations in Palestine of the Zionists. The latter, after all, represent but a section of Jewry: They may not speak for all Israel. But all Israel is deeply concerned. Surely the views of the whole Jewish people, not those of a single organization alone, should be taken into account in any plans that are formulated.

One is inclined to ask: Who gave the Zionists authority to be the custodians and guardians and overseers in Palestine—a sort of extra government, an imperium in imperio? How long is their pernicious influence to be suffered? They seek the benefit of Zionism, not of Zion. Perhaps if they stopped trying from without to determine the destiny of Palestine, advantage would accrue to Palestine and to the Jews therein.

It is possible that Palestine will be divided into cantons; eventually it may be incorporated into the British Empire as a dominion (not, of course, as a specifically Jewish dominion) on the Quebec model of provincial autonomy for the two racial elements. In any arrangements that may be set up complete autonomy in internal Jewish affairs is forecast.

Are the Zionists to assume control then over Jewish affairs? This is of supreme significance to true, undiluted, independent Orthodox Jewry the world over, organized under the banner of Agudas Yisroel: it is, indeed, a matter of life or death. Orthodox Jews in Palestine are at this moment being ground under the heel of Zionist tyranny through the instrumentality of the Zionist Chief Rabbinate and the Zionist 'Jewish Community.' (There is in the Zionist Organization a fraction of religious Jews known as "Mizrachi," who are regarded by most Orthodox Jews as appeasers or fifth columnists or quislings in Orthodoxy. They do not merit serious consideration.)

Zionist in Palestine and in Europe and America has wrought untold confusion and damage in Jewry. Isaac Breuer declared that Zionism has become 'the most formidable enemy that ever arose to the Jewish People.' At the World Congress of Orthodoxy at Marienbad in August, 1937, H. A. Goodman cried out: "We must put an end to the criminal monopoly of the Zionists."

The British Government would certainly defer to the advice of the Archbishops of Canterbury and York in religious questions. Palestine is essentially a religious question. Why, then, is it not guided by the wishes of the great rabbis, always the acknowledged leaders of Israel? Why does it turn to secular political Zionist spokesmen?

It made the mistake of not consulting the Arabs with regard to the Balfour declaration and the terms of the Mandate. Let it not make the mistake of not consulting the Agudas Yisroel with regards to the conduct of internal Jewish affairs in Palestine. Orthodox Jewry earnestly hopes that the Government will protect it from the evil devices of the Zionists. It asks independence for itself.

Jacob Heller, Boston, Massachusetts, U. S. A.

The Springfield Daily Republican, Oct. 10, 1944.

ZIONIST AND PALESTINE

Former's Position Adversely Criticized—British Policy Approved

To the Editor of The Republican:—

The Republican and Democratic parties should not have yielded to the pressure of the importunate Zionists and inserted a plank about Palestine in their platforms. Neither should hearings have been held before the House committee on foreign affairs on Palestine resolutions concocted by the Zionist henchmen. America should not be involved in Zionists delusions. Britain, despite the ungrateful, querulous Zionists, has done a magnificent job in Palestine; it is not for us to make her lot harder.

Britain, with admirable understanding, saw that the policy of the 'white paper' announced five years ago was imperative on economic, political and psychological grounds. Who is qualified to reprove her, to favor her with safe advice? The plain truth is that the white paper is a guarantee of the safety and security of the 530,000 Jews (many thousands of whom, by the way, are anti-Zionists) now resident in Palestine. Withdrawal of British bayonets would inevitably mean that the throats of these Jews would be cut over night. 

The vociferous Zionists, with their unpleasant, incessant propaganda, would turn Palestine into a huge concentration camps for Jews. They willfully forget that Palestine is a small, barren country without natural resources, and inhabited by Arabs (who form more than two-thirds of the population) for 1300 years. The Arabs—with reason—fear domination by the Zionists. The terrible plight of Jewry cannot be assuaged at the expense of the Arabs. The moral conscience of the world will not permit treatment of the Arabs that flouts the canons of democracy and fair play. This matter must be settled on the basis of justice, not of Zionism. Let the nations only show good will, and there is plenty of room throughout the world for Jewish refugees.

The Zionists and unfit for self-government. Their attitude toward their Jewish opponents alone proves this statement. The shocking tyranny exercised by the high-handed, lordly Zionists for a quarter of a century over the defenseless, inarticulate Orthodox Jews in Palestine is a tale that needs telling. Such brutal persecution of people because of their adherence to the principles of a great faith—their reduction to helotry—can be matched only in Hitlerdom. 

There will be no Jewish (read "Zionist") state in Palestine. The Jewish population there will never rise to 51 per cent. The Zionists will resign themselves to the status of a permanent minority. The Arabs will be the masters in Palestine. The Jews' rights will be protected by the nations. Possibly the Holy Land, because of its peculiar interest to three religions, will be placed under and international trusteeship.

Let us wake up and face reality. Zionism is not a blessing to Jews or to non-Jews. Hundreds of thousands of solid substantial Jews are vigorously and unalterably opposed to this crass, materialistic, secular nationalism. And there is the grave problem whether it shall be permitted to create unrest and disturbance in the Near East, thereby upsetting the peace of the world. Is it not high time that Zionism be liquidated?

Jacob Heller, Boston, Oct. 8, 1944.

The Springfield Daily Republican, Oct. 17, 1944.

ZIONISTS AND ORTHODOX

Differences of Jewish Opinion Regarding Palestine

To the Editor of The Republican:—

The non-Jewish public, at the mercy of Zionist propaganda, is often, by statements in the press regarding the so-called 'Jewish agency,' led to believe that the body speaks for the Jews of the Holy Land (else why would it 'demand' the right to control Jewish immigration thereto?), if not of the world. This is an entirely erroneous conception. This agency is not Jewish, but Zionist; it is not representative and cannot pretend to be spokesman for Jewry.

In this connection, I should like to quote from a recent article by Jacob Rosenheim, president of Agudas Yisroel, the powerful international organization of Orthodox Jewry: "The one-sided, illegal, party character of this official body, that according to the unambiguous stipulations of the (Palestine) mandate was to secure 'the cooperation of all Jews willing to assist in the establishment of a Jewish national home,' has been revealed to a disastrous degree in the experience of the last few years . . . The agency under its present constitution does not deserve any confidence or support . . . This state of things cannot be allowed to continue. Non-Zionist Jewry and Orthodoxy above all heave a legal and moral claim before the allied nations not to suffer any longer a Zionist party-dictatorship under the deceptive name of a 'Jewish agency for Palestine.' A basic reconstitution of this Jewish agency must be enforced, limiting at the outset its competence and power to purely political economic and social matters (excluding disputed cultural and religious matters) and then securing—on the footing of equality—the cooperation of all Jews willing to assist in the establishment of a Jewish national home. The near future will show whether an internal Jewish understanding of this basis is possible or whether a protracted battle for emancipation among Jews themselves is inevitable."

Further comment is superfluous, Mr. Rosenheim, who for 40 years has enjoyed the confidence of the outstanding rabbinical luminaries, writes with restraint. If Americans were made aware of the unfair and abhorrent tactics to which this agency has repeatedly stooped in its ferocious eagerness to strangle Orthodox Judaism—and all this will the unconscious help of Britain—they would shudder with loathing. 

Jacob Heller, Boston, Oct. 15, 1944.

Der Mizrachi Veg, December 1944.

LIGHT AND SHADOW

From Newspapers and Periodicals

Efforts to Provoke Conflict—Mask of Nonpartisanship—A judgement of Maimonides—'Arguments' of and Ignoramus—In a Temple—Solace from the Poale Agudat Mizrachi—An Agudah Rabbi Preaches Zionism—Repentant Declarations from the Leftist Camp—Were it Not For Mizrachi—

By A. Halevi [Aharon Pechenik]

From all sides we receive inquiries as to our reason for devoting so much interest to the attacks of the Agudat Israel, and for creating so much ado over them at a time when they possess no significance in American Jewish Life, and when comments only create publicity for them. All those bringing this matter to our attention are quite correct; but it is precisely because these people have no significance and no responsibility and have nothing to lose through public expression of opinion, that the few young men occupied with the Agudat Israel in America can permit themselves to write whatever their hearts desire, and, as it were, to provoke quarrel in American Orthodoxy. It is this fact that must be brought to the attention of the Jewish public.

That they themselves are aware of their complete lack of value or significance in America can be seen from their machinations on two fronts. On the one hand, it is sought to besmirch Mizrachists in the press; naive writers are caught by this bait, and the quarrel between Mizrachi and the Agudah is taken up as an indication that not alone among others, but also among pious kosher Jews, is there general bickering . . . On the other hand, however, when it comes to practical work, they know well that they public cannot be fooled, and it is clear to all that the Agudat Israel is unable to point to any actual accomplishments either in America or Palestine; on this account they try to cover themselves under a mask of non-partisanship. Thys, the Beth Jacob schools were known in Poland as Agudah institutions; but here they are averse to making official acknowledgement that they are in any way connected with the Agudah, since the use of that name would be no great praise for them . . . Therefore the Agudats seeks to draw Mizrachi leaders into conflict, while loudly proclaiming their non-partisanship. The same applied to their Torah u-Mesorah, their rescue campaigns, and the others. They include in their roster the names of several Mizrachists, who cannot every day protest the misuse of their names; and they then proclaim in the public places that their lack of partisanship is proven by the Mizrachists who seem to be with them. 

And while we are discussing their aims of provoking warfare and dissension in Orthodoxy, let us present several out of many examples. One of their young men, who has pretensions to being a rabbi and pedagogue, and who holds a position in a yeshivah supported by Mizrachists, blossomed forth in the 'Forward' with an article studded with lies and inanities concerning Mizrachi. This article, under two large captions—'Mizrachi and Agudat Israel—What Is Their Quarrel About?' and 'The Schism in the Orthodox World'—and signed by the pseudonym, A. B. Ruthson, had the following among its pearls: 'Mizrachi maintains the principles taught by the constitution of Zionism; and when the Torah comes into conflict with Zionism, the final law remains in consonance with Zionist dictates. This has created the schism between the Agudat Israel and Mizrachi.' One can readily comprehend the cheap ignorantism fed to the readers of the 'Forward'—that the illustrious scholars, Rabbis H. L. Woloshiner, Samuel Mohilever, I. J. Reines, and A. I. Kook, of blessed memory, and their living compeer, Chief Rabbi Dr. Isaac Herzog—that all these, the great spiritual leaders of Mizrachi, place the constitution of Zionism about the holy Law! Any child acquainted with the ABC of Mizrachi and Zionism knows the elementary fact that the Mizrachi Organization came in existence only in 1902 at the Fifth Zionist Congress, when Orthodoxy severed itself from the main body on the questions of Torah and culture; and that since that time it has gone its own way in all matters of Torah wherein other Zionists have opposing opinions. But Mizrachi always joins other Zionists in general political and economic matters, in accordance with the ordinance of the Law forbidding full severance from the generality of Israel. The sages teach that any prescribed fast-day not also observed by sinner in Israel is not considered a valid fast-day. This is not a fanciful statement lending itself to various interpretation, but a definite legal principle posited by Maimonides, that in Israel's community affairs one must proceed together even with sinners.

To comment on all the absurdities in this article would require ten times its own space. One can only refer to such as: 'Dr. Herzl drew a black line through all of Jewish history when he declared. "Zionism has no relationship with the Jewish religion."' Thus novel expression of ignorance indicates that the young writer had never perused Herzl's writings. For therein he would have discovered scores of positive statements, such as, 'Zionism means, above all, the return to Judaism,' and the end of his book 'Altneuland,' where realization of the dream of Zionism is ascribed to the Master of the universe . . . And had the young man read only what his own leaders wrote, he would have known what the ideological leader of the Agudat Israel, Dr. Isaac Breuer, set down about Herzl—that he was a great Jew and an agent of Divine Providence. And had he read further what Dr. Breuer wrote concerning the ugly discomfiture and bankruptcy of the Agudah ideology, he might never have composed this article. 

Here is but one more pearl from this piece: 'For this reason the Agudat Israel did not attend the Jewish (read Zionist) Conference which took place last year in New York, because the Conference gave prominency only to demonstrations in favor of Palestine, and gave insufficient expression to the agony of European Jewry.' Everyone knows how much truth there is in this statement, but it is curious that the Agudah knew in advance that the Conference would occupy itself only with Palestine—all of which is in full accord with the saying of the sages: 'From the day that the Temple was destroyed, the art of prophesy was granted only to fools.'

And while we are on the subject of Agudah provocation, may we be permitted to refer to another product of the Agudah—one Jacob Heller, who evidently is a resident of Boston, and with whom we have previously dealt in the pages of The Mizrachi Weg. This man has made himself known, with his provocative informations against Zionists and Zionism, to the London Colonial Office; and the organ of the Agudah zealots in Jerusalem, Kol Israel, has published his work quite frequently. Recently this Jacob Heller fastened himself upon the English daily, the Springfield Daily Republican, to which he carried his provocations. He writes therein that England is justified in instituting the White Paper, and that if the Zionists were to attain power over Palestine they would immediately transform the land into a great concentration camp; also that the Arabs are the majority there and to them belongs the land; and that places can be found elsewhere for the Jewish refugees; and so on.

Further does this Jacob Heller declare in his pieces for the English newspaper, that the enslavement of the Orthodox Jews in Palestine through the Zionists can only be likened to Hitlerism; and that the Jewish Agency represents no one, adducing proof therefor from an article by Jacob Rosenheim, 'president of the powerful international orthodox organization, the Agudah Israel' (so writes Jacob Heller), in which Rosenheim 'openly' asserts that non-Zionist dictatorship'—and the like.

We have taken the trouble to present quotations of all the 'arguments' this Jacob Heller had adduced before the non-Jewish world, but entirely with the favoring purpose that we cannot pass adverse judgement upon him insomuch as we are dealing with a person of confused mind . . . But if so, why does the Agudah permit him to speak in its name, and why is he not confined to an asylum, to prevent him sending his accusations and treacherous writings to the non-Jewish newspapers?

Nevertheless, to be honest and objective, we must admit that not all active Agudists have crept into such impasses as have their local representatives. We have already quoted Dr. Isaac Breuer, and other of their workers in Palestine who joined in open combat with the so-called 'Universal Agudat Israel.' Well remembered is the revolt of the 'Poale Agudat Israel,' who could not wait until the Agudat Israel should do something in the Holy Land, hence wen the way of Mizrachi and established their colonies on National Fund land under a budget derived from Zionist funds. And we have had true solace from the Poale Agudat Israel. They recently held a conference in Petach Tikvah and in the village Saba, at which Chief Rabbi Herzog delivered an extended address, and, according to press reports, at which there reigned a feeling of amity toward Mizrachi. A. J. Goldroth, a leader of the Poale Agudat Israel, asserted: 'Instead of the general organization of the Agudat Israel devoting themselves earnestly to assisting the Poale Agudat Israel in its labor and colonization projects, they concern themselves only with their divisiveness among Jews and with creating sundered communities . . .' The Palestine press also reports an address at the National Fund conference held last September on Mount Scopus, by a representative of the Hapoel Agudat Israel colony 'Hafez Hayyim;' 'I have the honor today to take part in this national conference as a representative of the new colony Hafetz Hayyim of the Poale Agudat Israel, just established on National Fund soil. We thank God that we have become partners of all those building up our Holy Land . . . May it be His will that we bring good fortune and serve as exemplars to all the members of the Agudat Israel, so that they too may become partners in the upbuilding of our Holy Land, to assure the continued existence of our people now suffering and bleeding in such fearful agony.'

And to round out the picture, let us quote from an article by one of the few American rabbis who have offered their names as members and actives workers of the Agudat Israel. This is Dr. Leo Jung, who writes as follows in Talpioth: 'The present period is an nationalistic one to an unprecedented degree, but this nationalism displays a valuable attribute for our inner life. Zionism has taught all Jews the central importance of our Holy Land, and has completely electrified Jewish energies. Together with anti-Semitism, Zionism has become a significant factor in turning many Jews back to their people and there is added hope that they will also return to Judaism. On this road one sees perspective of Zionism helping to develop in Jewish hearts that faith which will hold back the stream of assimilation by means of a religious revival and through the revival of Hebrew literature. Through Zionism we shall be enabled to transform the American chaoticism into an American Judaism that will be strong and established and create a milieu that will prove a splendid proliferation of our past . . .'

Where now stands the A. B. Ruthson and the other combative Agudists, who still carry on their foolish attacks and conflicts?

Finally, may we be permitted to quote from the other opposition camp, which also gives evidence of incidental Mizrachi influence, and of the expressions of repentance which seem to have captured the entire camp of Israel. In the Poale Zion publications (Yiddisher Kempfer, Verband Stimme) there was prominently published an impassioned appeal in favor of the Sabbath by M. Moshevitzky, who demands discontinuance of the secular meetings held each Friday night—'A Friday evening gathering should be permeated with the spirit of holiness and with Sabbath sentiment.' Pleads the writer further: 'From the Jewish homes and their windows there must gleam and resound the greeting accorded the Sabbath Queen!' To this we give hearty assent. For long years we have hammered away in our publications and everywhere against the Sabbath desecration of the Poale Zion, and we trust that the emotional appeal in their own paper will have its effect. Incidentally, that appeal was that appeal was reprinted and quoted in many other periodicals. 

Dr. Simon Bernstein, noted Zionist and author, writes in Das Yiddishe Folk, organ of the Zionist Organization of America: 'It is the present task of American Jews not along to succor Jews throughout the world, but also Jewishness among themselves . . . American Jews must themselves become more Jewish, must be the kind of Jews upon whom we could fully rely in previous generations—this is the new responsibility devolving upon American Jewry. It must be clear to everyone, young or old, that from now on upon him alone lies the responsibility for maintaining Judaism, for prolonging the life of Judaism . . .'

Dr. Bernstein, discussing the duties and tasks of Zionism in America, ends: 'No matter how important this may be, it is only part of the general tremendous task before us of returning to Judaism, to Jewishness. The old generation as well as the young must be yoked together in the duty of assuring our continuity as a people, with its own Law, tradition, and Land. Basle and Sinai must be united for all time!'

We can add dozens of such citations from the Palestine press. For lack of space, however, we shall content ourselves with excerpts from an address by A. Lieberstein under the auspices of Mapai, the leftist workers' organization in Palestine: 'We must serve as example for our remnants in Europe, and for the Jewish masses in exilic lands who are threatened by assimilation. We must return to our old tradition, to the Bible and the Jewish Sabbaths and holy day; and thereby we shall avoid the peril of assimilation throughout the world. It is no accident that the colonies of Hachalutz (The Pioneer) in England have resolved to observe the Sabbath and all Jewish traditions, and that their kitchens should be completely kosher. We must prepare along these lines all our representatives that travel to Europe . . .'

Not for naught did the Chief Rabbi of Palestine declare that to evaluate Mizrachi properly one must try to envision Palestine without Mizrachi . . . And the writer of these lines has heard Rabbi J. L. Seltzer, leader and honorary president of the Union of Orthodox Rabbis, utter similar words at a Mizrachi convention—'We cannot envisage the existence of orthodox Judaism in America without Mizrachi . . .'

A Eulogy for Zevulun Hirschensohn

Here is a eulogy for Zevulun Hirschensohn that was printed in the Hebrew newspaper Havatzelet in 1896 in Ottoman Palestine. Zevulun Hirschensohn was my great-great-great-great-grandfather (my mother's father's mother's mother's father's father, if you're following.) He moved from Bialystok to Jerusalem in around 1872¹ to work as teacher in the Grodno Kollel's small yeshiva in Jerusalem, Beis Hillel². Since he only lectured at Beis Hillel in the afternoons, he volunteered in the mornings to lecture at the cheder outside of the Churva Shul (Beis Yaakov)³. The following eulogy was written by one of his students from the Churva Shul Cheder. 

אבל יחיד.

אבל יחיד עשיתי לי במקומי בעירי, בפינת ביתי, קרעתי את בגדי, - וישבתי על הארץ, ובכיתי בכי רב, כשנודעתי מפטירתן של שני רבותי, דיינים מומחים, בבתי דינים בעיה״ק ירושלים תו״ב, אשר מבארם חשקוני מים של תורה, הראשון הוא הרב הגדול ר׳ זבולון מבייאליסטאק זצ״ל, אשר למדתי אצלו חמש שנים, מבן שלשה עשר עד בן שמונה עשר, והשני הוא הרב ר׳ יהודא ליב חפץ זצ״ל, אשר למדתי אצלו אח״כ כמו שנתים. את שני רבותי אלה, הכרתי היטב, את מדותיהם ותכונותיהם ואמר להציב להם מצבה פה על הגליון.

הרב ר׳ זבולון מבייאליסטאק היה למדן גדול, מרביץ תורה הרבה לתלמידים בעודו בחו״ל ואח״כ גם בבואו לירושלים; שקדן גדול, ביום היה לומד עם התלמידים, ובלילה כתב חידושי תורה, כי היה בעל שכל עמוק עמוק עד שנקרא בשם "מהרש״א למדן". הוא היה מתלמידיו של הלל הזקן, ענותן גדול,‬ והיה דן את כל האדם לכף זכות, ואף כשספרו לפניו בגנותן של יחיד או רבים, היה מרגלא בפומיה לאמר, הגלות המר גורם, העניות הגדולה גורמת, היסורים גורמים, אדם זה עני הוא, ואדם זה בעל יסורין ומכאבים. וגם את תלמידיו היה דן לכף זכות, זכרני כי פעם אחת גער רבי זה בתלמיד אחד, ובכה אותו התלמיד הרבה, כשיצא אותו התלמיד, בכה רבי ואמר אבותיו של זה ענים הם ומסתמא לא אכל היום, והרעבון הציק לו עד לבכיה, ושלח רבי וקנה לחם ולפת והאכילהו בצנעה. דרכו היה להשתתף הרבה בצער של יחיד ורבים, וכאשר בעוה״ר צרות רבות לא יחסרו לנו בכל עת ובכל שעה, ע״כ מעולם לא ראיתיו שימלא שחוק פיו, ואפילו אם ראה תלמידיו שוחקים הרבה, היה דרכו לאמר להם "למה תשמחו? העולם חשך בעדינו, . . . ." ואעפ״כ חזק את לבנו תמיד במאמרים מתוקים, כי עץ חיים היא התורה והיהדות למחזיקים בה, אפילו חרב חדה מונחת על צוארו של אדם אל יתיאש עצמו מן הרחמים וכ״ו וכדומה במאמרים ומשלים. הוא סבל הרבה מצער גִדּוּל בנים , וגם מדוחק הפרנסה בירושלם ואעפ״כ היה ותרן בממונו, וטוב לבבו ומזגו המתון מתון עשו אותו כי חי חיי מנוחה והשקט, ובא בימים כמדומה לי כמו חמש ושבעים שנה. תנצב"ה. 

[הספד של רב יהודה ליב חפץ, אינו נעתק כאן]

ואלו זכיתי והיתי בירושלם, הייתי הולך אחרי מטתם, והיתי מרטיב את עצמותיהם בדמעותי הרבים, ועכשיו שלא זכיתי הרי דמעותי נופלות על הגליון, לקרר מעט את חום לבבי השבור, והמנחם ציון ינחם את כל המתאבלים עליהם.

חיים דוד [קנטור] ב״ר שלמה זללה״ה במושבה שפֿפֿייעה [כפר נוער ע״ש מאיר שפיה]⁴

A Private Mourning

I privately mourned in my place in my city, in my house, I tore my clothes, and I sat on the ground, and I cried a lot, when I was informed of the passing of my two masters, expert judges, in the courts of the holy city Jerusalem may it be rebuilt speedily, from their wells I desired the water of Torah. The first is the great master Rabbi Zevulun of Bialystok of blessed memory. I studied with him for five years, from when I was thirteen until eighteen years of age. The second is the master Rabbi Yehuda Leib Hefetz of blessed memory, with whom I studied for about 2 years. I knew these two masters well, their traits and characteristics, so I desire to erect a monument for them here on this page. 

The master Rabbi Zevulun of Bialystok was a great scholar, a disseminator of much Torah to students while he still lived abroad and afterwards when he moved to Jerusalem. He was very diligent, by day he would teach the students, and by night he wrote chiddushim on the Talmud, as he had a deep deep intellect to the point that he was called a "Maharsha Lamdan." He followed the teachings of Hillel the elder, he had great humility, and he would judge everyone favorably. Even when he was informed of the misdeeds of any individual or group, he would say with a pearl in his mouth, "The bitter exile caused it", "The great poverty caused it", "The agony [of living here] caused it", "This man is a pauper", or "This man lives in agony and pain". He would also judge his students favorably. I recall an incident in which Rebbe admonished a student, and the student cried a lot. When that student left, Rebbe cried and said, “His parents are poor, so he probably did not eat today; his hunger brought him to tears.” Rebbe arranged for bread and turnips to be privately delivered to the student. He was always empathizing with the pain of any individual or group. The great difficulties of life in Jerusalem prevented Rabbi Zevulun from ever laughing. Even if he saw his students laughing, he would say to them, "Why are you happy? The world darkens around us,  . . . ." Despite this he constantly strengthened our hearts with sweet sayings. "Torah and Judaism is a tree of life for those who possess [them]", "Even if a sharp sword is placed on the neck of a man, he shall not despair from the mercy [of God]" and other similar sayings and proverbs. He was very burdened with the pain of raising children, and from the stress of making a living in Jerusalem. Despite this he was generous with his money. The goodness of his heart and his moderate temperament made him a moderate person, so he lived a life of peace and calm. His life span seems to me to have been about 75 years. May his soul be wrapped in the bundle of life.  

[Eulogy of Rabbi Yehuda Leib Hefetz, not translated here] 

Had I merited to be in Jerusalem, I would have walked behind their stretchers, and I would have soaked their bones with my many tears. Alas I did not merit [to be there], so my tears fall upon this page, barely cooling the heat of my broken heart. The consoler of Zion shall console all who mourn for them.     

Haim David [Cantor], son of Rabbi Shlomo of blessed memory, in the village of Shfeya. [Youth Village Meir Shfeya]        

---

1. ^ Moses Montifiore 1875 Census of Jews in Palestine. https://www.montefioreendowment.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/scans/11980022.pdf
2. ^ Ibid. https://www.montefioreendowment.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/scans/11980039.pdf
3. ^ Ibid. https://www.montefioreendowment.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/scans/11980037.pdf
4. ^ Haim Cantor, "Eivel Yachid," Habatzeleth, (Jerusalem), Nov. 13, 1896. https://www.nli.org.il/en/newspapers/hzt/1896/11/13/01/article/5

On Revisionist Zionist Ideology

After a brief discussion of the ethics of placing the phrase ה' ינקום דמו (God avenge his blood) at the end of the name of a deceased when זכרונו לברכה (May his memory be a blessing) for victims of terror attacks in Israel, I decided to look up historical uses of the phrase. One example was quite apropos for the discussion since it explicitly and proudly explained the violent undertones of "God avenge his blood," and the potential for such lines of thought to unnecessarily extend the bloodshed in Israel-Palestine conflict. (Which of course is not really a conflict at this point, but violence between a colonizer and the brutalized and colonized people.)

The Revisionist Zionist movement broke away from the World Zionist Organization in 1935 to form its own New Zionist Organization. The goal was to fight against the conciliatory advocacy of mainstream leaders David Ben-Gurion and Chaim Weitzman who gave up claims to the Trans-Jordan territory and did not protest when the British made it an independent state. 

The New Zionist Organization's official Yiddish language newspaper was called Unzer Velt (Our World.) In its first issue, which came out in September 1936, there was a short editorial titled Yizkor. The word Yizkor literally means "May he remember" and refers to a traditional Jewish prayer which begins with the word and serves to memorialize the deceased on the anniversary of their passing. The NZO had its own twist on how to best memorialize the dead. The editorial attempts to argue that the traditional Jewish method of remembering the dead, through prayer, is wrong. Drawing from some biblical language and the traditional method of referring to martyrs, "God avenge his blood," the editorial argues the validity of a Jewish tradition of revenge for the murdered members of its community. The editorial does not restrain itself from the logical conclusion, the only true yizkor that will properly honor the souls of the deceased will be proactive self-defense (i.e. more violence in revenge.) 

יזכור! . . .

די ערשטע שורות אין דער בּאַנייטער "אונזער וועלט" דאַרפן זיין געווידמעט אָט די יידן, וואָס זענען אומגעקומען אין משך פון דעם פּערמאַנענטן פּאָגראָם, וועלכער דויערט אין א"י שוין אַ גאַנץ האַלבּ יאָר נאָכאַנאַנד.

מיר וועלן קיין סך נישט רעדן וועגן אונזערע געפאַלענע. דער טויט זייערע האָט נישט געבּראַכט קיין איבּעריקן כבוד דעם יידישן פאָלק. דער גרעסטער רוב פון זיי איז אומגעקומען נישט מיט קיין העלדן - טויט — ווייט נישט אַזוי ווי די גבורים פון גאַליפּאלי און תל-חי. עס איז אויך דאָ נישט דאָס אָרט צו מאַכן אַ חשבּון מיט די, וואָס זענען געווען געוווינט אָנצורייצן וואָוקאָפּס פּאָליציי אויף אונזער יוגנט.

עס איז איצט די צייט פון יזכור...

ובכן, יזכור — געדענקען זאָל אונזער פאָלק די אַלע, וואָס האָבּן געזעטיקט מיט זייער בּלוט דעם בּאָדן פון אונזער חרוב היימלאַנד. זאָל דאָס פאַרגאָסענע בּלוט אונזערס נישט איינרוען בּיז וואַנען עס וועט נישט אויפשטיין אונזער יוגנט און אַראָפּנעמען פונם יידישן פאָלק די חרפּה, — די חרפּה פון פאַרגאָסענעם בּלוט, פאַר וועלכן עס ווערט נישט גענומען קיין נקמה.

און נקמה איז דאָך אַ געבּאָט פון דער תורה: "מחה תמחה זכר עמלק" — שטייט געשריבּן. אויך די יידישע מסורה גיט-צו צום נאָמען פון יעדן קדוש די ווערטער: הי"ד — ה' ינקום דמו!

בּכן, נישט טרערן וועלן מיר פאַרגיסן אויף די קברים פון אונזערע קדושים און גבּורים. נישט דערצו ווערט איר גערופן, איר יידישע יוגנטעלעכע אייניקלעך פון יהושע בּן-נון, יואב בּן צרויה, יהודה במכבּי און בּאַש צער פון מסדה און בּיתר. ניין, נישט צו לאָזן רינען דיינע טרערן ווערסטו יידישע יונגט גערופן, נאָר צו בּאַשיצן און פאַרטיידיקן דיין פאָלק און דיין לאַנד!

יידישע יוגנט: לאָז זיך נישט איינרעדן, אַז נקמה - געפילן זענען אונז פרעמד. פריש אויף אין זכרון: "עין תחת עין", "שן תחת שן"!

Yizkor!...

The first lines in the renewed “Our World” need to be inscribed on the Jews that are continuously perishing in the permanent pogrom, that has continued in Palestine for half a year one after the other. 

We will not speak at all out our fallen. The dead have not brought any extra honor to the Jewish people. The large majority of them did not perish with any heroism - dead — not too different from the heroes of Gallipoli and Tel-Hai. It is also not the place to make a calculation for these, who were living without stirring up Wauchope’s police for our youth.

It is now the time of yizkor…

So, yizkor — remember, our people should remember all whose blood satiated the soil of our ruined homeland. Should our spilled blood not rest until where it will not raise up our youth and remove from the Jewish people the shame, — the shame of spilled blood, for which it would not take any revenge.

And revenge is after all a command from the Torah: “You shall surely erase [sic] memory of Amalek” — its is written. Also the Jewish tradition adds to them names of every martyr the words: “God avenge his blood!”

So, we will not spill any tears on the graves of our martyrs and heroes. For that you are not called Jewish youthful grandchildren of Yehoshua bin-Nun, Yoav ben Tsruya, Yehuda haMakabi, and Bash Tser [sic] of Masada and Beitar. No, not to let tears flow were you called a Jewish youth, but to protect and defend your people and your land!

Jewish youth: Do not be persuaded, that revenge feels foreign to us. Make it fresh in your memory: “An eye for an eye,” “A tooth for a tooth!”

https://www.nli.org.il/he/newspapers/unzerwlt/1936/09/16/01/article/16

Thoughts on a Speech From a Member of Zak"a

In modern day Israel, in response to the increasing amount terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians, a group of haredi civilian paramedics created a Chesed shel Emet organization to manage the identification and burial of the mutilated bodies from these attacks. As many of the attacks in the 1990s and 2000s were suicide bombings, the bodies of the victims were often in pieces and difficult to identify. 

Traditionally, a Chesed shel Emet organization manages the burial of people who's family's cannot afford their burial. The core value behind the organization is that all Jews deserve to be buried according the Jewish customs whether or not they can afford it. The innovation of Zaka was that they would specialize in collecting the body parts of the victims of gruesome terrorist attacks and also identifying who the body parts belonged to. From this the organization got its name, Zaka, which is an acronym for zihui korbanot ason, or terrorist attack victims identification. 

Zaka fills an important niche in the emergency response to terrorist attacks in the country. Generally civilian EMS are only trained to collect generally in tact corpses, while the army coroners can deal with identifying are collecting the mutilated remains of its soldiers since each soldier has a detailed medical record that can be quickly referenced for identification of the body. Zaka specializes in mangled civilian bodies who are more difficult to identify quickly since detailed medical records are harder to get on short notice. 

Zaka was born out of the haredi community's volunteer EMS service, hatzala, which means that all Zaka personnel are volunteers since the organization operates on much the same model of dispatching. 

Yesterday, on Nov. 21, 2023, the day that all the YU student organizations planned something. (and i mean all, there were like 7 events all planned at about the same time that night, it was kind of wild, but they all wanted to get events done before Thanksgiving.) A senior member of Zaka from Ashdod visited YU on his fundraising tour. Though not mentioned so directly during his talk, the money he was collecting seemed to be intended to fund mental health treatment for all the volunteers who assisted in collecting and identifying the victims of the October 7th massacres. Though I presume Zaka probably needed funding to also generally replenish their supplies that we no doubt exhausted. 

The dynamic of him fundraising felt a little uncomfortable to me, since he had to relive the horrors he witnessed while cleaning up in order to evoke our pity to donate to his organization. Of course he probably agreed out of his own free will and dedication to his noble organization, but nevertheless the dynamic seemed a little improper. The memories of the events should definitely be relayed, but they shouldn't be bought. Though I will stress that I assume the person who spoke volunteered to do this and was more than willing to relay his experiences, the principle of matter is what seems to be slightly bothering me.

I'll put my cynical criticism here in the middle, because I want to end on a more wholesome perspective. Almost all the people who I have heard discuss the current situation in the Jewish community point to a situation of great unity or achdut. However, each faction of Israeli Jewish society is optimistic that the other factions will soften their hardline stance on certain issues. When I heard from the rabbis who visited from Har Eztion, they were optimistic that the charedim would become more willing to serve in the army and support the nationalist vision of a Jewish future. The member of Zaka was himself charedi and his perspective was a little different. The charedim see their main opponents as the secular Jews who are trying to remove the religious aspects of general government policy like allowing public transportation to run on shabbat and the like. After interacting with the some of the relatives of the victims who were secular, he felt hopeful that they would adopt a more open attitude to their charedi neighbors and potentially become more connected to Orthodox Judaism. The Zaka member even requested that we try to donate a Sefer Torah to the secular kibbutsim who were attacked to assist them in the process of returning to religion. 

As part of his address, the Zaka member relayed some of his memories of what happened on October 7 and his team's involvement in the recovery of bodies. I do not remember all the details that relayed, and I don't really want to get too graphic, especially since he was clearly self censoring and not relaying the most disturbing of the details. One of the analogies he used to describe what it was like to enter the houses of the people who were murdered was that the bodies and the walls of the houses talked to you. He repeated this several times. It struck me because this is exactly how Disco Elysium portrays the experience of examining and identifying the mangled corpse of a murdered person. This Zaka member and the writers of Disco Elysium never interacted, so at that moment I knew that the Disco Elysium writers had that seen spot on. They clearly were writing from experience of what its like to examine a corpse like that. Unless I enter a profession that professionally deals with victims of murder, I will never be able to really understand what the person from Zaka or what Disco Elysium meant by the analogy. However, I suspect that when you observe a corpse in situ, exactly at is was when its life was brutally ripped from it, you can immediately spot the clues of how it happened. Whether or not your immediate conclusions of how the murder happened are correct, the bodies and the spilled blood still talk to you, they are trying to explain how it was that they ended up in this mess, but they are mute, for dead man can no longer speak, their lips are frozen. 

The next detail was one that I get very emotional thinking about. Part of Zaka's protocol is to collect all pieces of human remains, included residue of blood to be buried in the ground according to Jewish law. While they clean and collect the blood and other dismembered body parts, they also work to clean the house to restore it to a livable condition. Apparently, in one house while they were cleaning, one the Zaka team members complained, what's the point of cleaning up this house. The team leader who visited YU responded that the point was to collect the blood to bring it to kever yisrael (Jewish burial) and to allow the family to return to the house. He responded, they're all dead, there's no one to return to the house.

And if someone’s kinsman . . . comes to carry the remains out of the house, and he calls to the one at the rear of the house, “Are there any alive besides you?” the answer will be, “No, none.” And he will say, “Hush!”—so that no one may utter GOD’s name. (Amos 6:10)

A Rant on Jewish Nationalism

Nationalism began to emerge in the 19th century as a method for creating cohesive modern states. The feeling among the leadership of post revolutionary France was such that a united French national character had to be engraved upon the hearts of all residents of the newly modernized country. A significant portion of the nationalistic idea is tied the concept of nation states made up of one ethnicity or nation. Ethnic groups within multi-ethnic empires began adapting this notion of the nation state as an argument for why they should have self determination.

The impulse to break up oppressive empires was and remains laudable. Allowing territories within an empire the ability to develop democratic self-rule leads to better governance and is a much more moral method of appointing the people to serve in government. Many of the independence movements of 1848 and later rallied around an idea of nationalism as a liberating concept. All the people in this area of the empire deserve to be their own self-governing state.

Towards the 1870s, we witness the development of nationalism as a method of unifying small countries within a larger ethnic group. Italy and Germany's nationalism developed in this way after the two countries were formed out of unifying many small countries that housed people of the same ethnic group. Around the time of WWI, the Arabs considered the idea of a pan-Arab nationalism, though such a pan-Arab state never materialized. 

All these different streams of nationalism encounter a fundamental problem. There never was and never will be an ethnically homogenous country. How do ethnic minorities integrate in a Nationalism context. Especially ethnic groups that are dispersed internationally. In Europe there were Roma people and Jews living in almost every country. Does the nationalism absorb these minorities into the general nation or are they excluded legally or socially from being members of the nation of the nation state. Though there was initial optimism that these minorities would get integrated into the national identity of their respective countries. 

Democracy is of the people, by the people, and for the people, but the people are stupid. The people are highly antisemitic, and nothing united the European economic classes quite like antisemitism. A useful tool in creating unity in all kinds of contexts, it unified by excluding everyone's primary object of hatred, the Jewish community. The roots of antisemitism stretch back remarkably far, so the mere ideal of national unity was not going to destroy it. Rather the empowering of regular people to get involved in politics somewhat increased outright antisemitism, since monarchs generally discouraged messy antisemitism as a destabilizing force in pre-modern and medieval societies. The modern voters of the 19th century felt the benefit of institutional antisemitism was much better than the risk mob violence posed to the economy or general society. 

Jewish intellectuals, mainly in Eastern Europe where their marginalization from society was felt strongest, proposed a development in the concept of nationalism. What if you could develop a Jewish nation to advocate on behalf of the Jews since clearly the German, the French, and the Russian states were really failing to properly integrate their Jewish communities. (There was also a bit of anxiety over the possibility of proper integration that would lead to the complete vanishing of the Jewish people through assimilation.) A Jewish nationalism would be a modern way of connecting to Jewish identity that non-religious people could still engage with, and if successful, a Jewish national government would be able to reliably advocate for the welfare of Jewish communities abroad. Most Jews supported a territorial nationalism in the sense that the Jewish nation state would be a proper state with its own territory. Functionally speaking the Jewish communities were too scattered to have any real Jewish territory around.

The Jewish nationalist movement needed to create a shared piece of land for all the Jews to have territorial sovereignty over, the less popular ideas of Jewish autonomism that didn't believe in governing a particular territory seemed too unrealistic. To gather support and legitimacy for a Jewish land, the nationalists turned the to the historic homeland of the Jews, Palestine. Perhaps the more assimilated Jews would have read in the antisemitic magazines of the era that were calling upon Jews to return to their middle-eastern homeland, or perhaps they drew their inspiration for the messianic literature of traditional Jewish religion. But the Zionists, whether secular or religious in philosophical orientation, had their eyes set on Palestine.

In order to reclaim the land, they needed to settle it. Many of the western European Zionists treated it as a contemporary colonization project. They would move to the land as Capitalists, establishing a European Jewish bourgeoisie. These early settlers created agricultural industry that often employed native labor who had expertise in farming in the Palestinian climate. Eastern European Zionists, being more influenced by Marxist economic ideas refused to reestablish Jewish life in Palestine as a bourgeoisie owning class. They were going to only use Jewish labor, and that would mean adopting socialist and planned economy practices to ensure the stability of their small independent economic enclave within Arab Palestinian society. 

Overtime the Zionist settlement in Palestine, the yishuv hachadash, would grow in both numbers and in strength and succeed in getting the United Nations to recognize it as a sovereign nation in the 1947 Palestine partition plan. The Jewish communities globally were ecstatic. No more would the Jews be subject to the whims of nationalism regimes that marginalized them. Finally today, in 1947, Jews could be part of the world as a people with a nation state to advocate for them. The Jews living in a nation comprised entirely of their peers would be safe from antisemitism. 

This idea persists in aliyah narratives to this day. One Ra"m, speaking at the 2023 Har Etzion alumni Shabbaton in Teaneck, NJ, commented how moving to Israel was a healing process in which he shed his insecurities and biases that he gained living in galut, in exile (i.e. the diaspora). He compared growing up in Long Beach, NY, in the United States, to growing up in a home with emotionally absent parents. Upon moving to Israel, his exposure to native born Israeli Jews was healing process in which he recovered from the trauma induced by living in such a fundamentally antisemitic society. 

But there's a problem. Israel is not a utopia. Ethnic violence has raged there on and off since the British mandate. I don't need to carefully check the numbers, in Israel in the present day, a Jew is at greatest risk of dying out of antisemitism. In recent decades, Hamas and other Palestinian Islamic Jihad groups have encouraged their followers to conduct suicide bombing, to fire rockets into Israeli civilian areas to stab Jews with intent to kill in public areas. Such a level of popular violence is not seen in even the most antisemitic countries in Europe. 

The harshness of the present day violence in Israel has been overshadowed by the Holocaust. These deaths are seen as martyrs and heroes who are small sacrifices in a larger positive movement in world where the exiled Jew is reborn and brought home where he can honorably defend himself. There feels like some change in the air. The official authorities are calling the attack on October 7th, the most deadly day for Jewish people since the Holocaust. Now, I won't delude myself, the purpose of this statement is to frame Hamas and by extension the residents of Gaza as Nazis, which justifies the harsh counter offensive currently underway. Nevertheless, it opens us to realize that the country in which 1400 Jews died in one day, in what is probably best compared to a pogrom, was not Ukraine or Russia, as was the case since the days of Bohdan Khmelnytsky, until the pogrom of Kielce in 1946. Nor was it in the United States, whose dense Jewish communities rival in size the Jewish population of the state of Israel. No, it was in the haven, the refuge for the persecuted Jew, the modern State of Israel.  

Israel serves quite well as a haven for the Jews persecuted by the specter of nationalisms that marginalize the Jewish residents of their motherland. Perhaps unintentionally, the state of Israel has recklessly allowed another form of antisemitism to brew. To gain traction and legitimacy. This antisemitism is like that of the Orthodox Christian Ukrainian peasants who labored under the boot of their Polish Catholic colonizers. The distant Polish nobility had no interest in directly managing their estates in the conquered provinces. Instead they contracted Jewish notables to manage the land directly. The Arenda system, in which Jews were placed in a marginally high position of power for the first time since the Roman empire. Both the Christians and Muslims had made it illegal for Jews to own slaves in their respective territories, but the Polish crown had found a way to give the Jews slaves once again. Effectively, the Jews were a buffer that allowed the Polish nobility to distance themselves from the mistreatment of the peasants who worked their land. When the peasants revolted in 1648, they targeted the Jews who were settled in their native territories. Some of the Polish generals who were sent to quell the rebellion weren't too fond of Jews either and turned over the Jews they were supposed to be protecting to the rebellious forces of Khmelnytsky. 

The project of the Zionist colonization of Palestine has an ugly secret. It was built on displacing many of Arab residents who once occupied its territory. During the Ottoman Empire and the British Mandate, the Zionist settlers would buy the land that they settled on. They set up large funds to manage the purchase and ownership of this land. In the beginning the settlers were more than happy to higher local agricultural workers who were already familiar with best practices in the Palestinian climate. The later National Socialist settlers who believed in creating a new Jewish proletariat refused to higher Arab workers. The intended effect of this system was that it created an independent Jewish economic enclave within the British mandate. 

Practically, it broke the traditional system of leases and residency in Palestinian society. Land could change hands many times, but generally the new owners would continue to lease the land to the local peasants/farmworkers or higher them to work on the new owner's farm. By insisting on using only Jewish labor, the collectivist agricultural settlements that the Zionists created would marginalize the local peasants from the economy, depriving them of jobs and slowly displacing them as they would move to growing Arab urban areas to find better prospects. 

The next step of expulsion was in the 1948 war. Some historians argue that the violent expulsions in 1948 were part of a master plan to rid the nascent Jewish state of its Arab majority, though in practice the expulsions were carried out somewhat uncoordinated by independently acting militias and military groups. Massacres like the one at Dir Yassin scared Palestinian civilians once they realized the extent of the cruelty that Jewish nationalist para-military groups were capable of. Sometimes the Palestinians would flee of their own volition while others were actively removed by Israeli military groups. The end result of the uncoordinated operation was that by the end of the war almost 800,000 Palestinians were displaced from their homes in that were located in the newly sovereign Jewish state.

Israel's ultimate preference for their absence was made clear when the new country outright refused to allow the refugees to return home, while resettling a similar number of Jewish refugees in their country. The refugee problem persists. As much as Zionists would wish it would go away and some other country to resettle the Palestinians, it won't happen. Unfortunately, the Jewish people are not the United States, we will have to face the consequences of our actions. Though some may mourn our ability to relive the mythic glorious conquests of Joshua and King David, that era is by-gone. Even the Prophets tell us outright, King David's hand were too bloody to build God's temple. In order for us to merit a peaceful existence in the land we must work out a peaceful compromise. Though we like to blame Palestinian leadership for refusing to make peace, it takes two to tango and the Likud party has been a fierce and consistent opponent of any peace negotiations since the concept was proposed.

We should not think of a peaceful compromise as a failure of Jewish strength to retake the homeland. Though our passion for justice and nationalism runs deep, our sages of old remind us, "Who is the hero? He who conquers his desires." We have to consider the peacemaker, the compromiser as the true hero. It takes much strength to be so vulnerable. Though we may think such ideas of peacemaking be altruistic and impossible, they are necessary for our survival. Either we compromise to end hostilities, or the spirit of the beleaguered Palestinians will radicalize until it destabilizes the Jewish state, threatening anyone there. We'd much rather ensure that the moderates who believe in allowing the Jews to remain in the land are in political control and not the radical antisemites who wish to expel them. 

A compromise that is either a two state solution or a one state solution will not be easy, but it is the more moral thing to do in this situation, and with God's help, the merit of righteousness will protect us. 

אם יתמהמה חכה לו כי בא יבוא לא יאחר    

The Jewish Defense League

Pulse

Vol. 1 No. 6 — Nov. 7, 1968

The Jewish Defense League

An interview with Jack Lazaros, head of the recently organized Yeshiva College chapter of the Jewish Defense League. The Interview was conducted by Abby Leizerwski, '71.

Question: What is the Jewish Defense League?

Answer: One of the best ways of defining the J.D.L. is telling you what it is not. First, we are not an extremist organization, we are not a racist organization, we are not affiliated with any political party, we are neither right nor left in our philosophy, and we reject hatred and illegality. What we want to do is combat racism and we are pro-Israel.

Our primary purpose is to alert the New York City population about the growing anti-Semitism here. Many people are unaware that there is a vast and growing anti-Semitic movement at the present time. First, the J.D.L is issuing publications and pamphlets at the college campuses to inform the Jewish and non-Jewish people about the underground anti-Semitism in the city. After everyone has been alerted, the J.D.L. hopes to unite the Jewish people in this issue as well as all decent people of any race or religion. The City administration has been lax on this issue, and the J.D.L. wants to stimulate it to do more.

Question: What are these underground, anti-Semitic movements in the city that you mention?

Answer: They are not so underground. For example, there have been incidents, in which members of the Black Panthers Party went into Ocean-Hill Brownsville and told the Jewish merchants there to leave their stores by a certain date. J.D.L. told the people not to leave and that we would protect them, and we were effective.

Question: Do you expect a physical confrontation with these black militants?

Answer: We hope not. We are primarily interested in working through legal channels in curbing this black anti-Semitism. But if we cannot get the city administration to offer assistance, we are prepared to meet force with force. But the J.D.L. is not just opposed to black militants. J.D.L. is against any type of anti-Semitism. We have enemies who are white, who are part of the far right and new left, some of whom are Jewish.

Question: If legislative means fail, what will the J.D.L. do?

Answer: As in any movement, we have hawks and doves. The hawks favor teaching Karate to our members and also arming them. The doves want to work only in the legislative and publicity areas.

Question: Do you think that the black militants feel that legislative means have failed them and therefore they have resorted to physical force?

Answer: I resent any comparison between J.D.L. and black militant groups. J.D.L. is a defensive organization, we do not go around harassing blacks or whites. However, some black militants have printed anti-Semitic leaflets and are trying to incite other Negroes for their own purposes. J.D.L. is the defensive organization that fights all offensive ones.

Question: Could you tell me specifically what J.D.L. plans to do at Yeshiva?

Answer: Next week we would like one of our founders to come down and address the student body. He will let them know the facts and he will tell them how they can help. I have already spoken to some faculty members, including Drs. Dunner and Bevan, who seem to favor this idea. They said that, depending upon further examination, they would tentatively support our organization. I certainly would like to see many students join.

Question: Do you plan to incorporate karate and rifle shooting in your program at Yeshiva?

Answer: These are not yet set programs but tentative ideas by some of our members. But, in the event that the upper echelons of J.D.L decide to incorporate these courses, we would expect all of our members to take these courses, including these Y.U. students.

Question: Do you think that Jews might better invest their efforts in broader cooperation with the non-militant black majority or would it be better to offer added fuel to the already bitter conflagration inspired by reactionary groups in the U.S.?

Answer: One must differentiate between a reactionary group and a legitimate group dedicated to the prevention of anti-Semitism. We are all for curbing anti-Semitism by helping the Negro achieve civil rights. Jewish organizations such the American Jewish Congress and B'nai B'rith currently work in this area. However, when people equate the struggle for human rights with harassment of the Jews, then a new group, such as J.D.L., must intervene. 

Yeshiva University Archives

This interview from a young recruit to the recently birthed Jewish Defense League provides a fascinating glimpse into the recruitment rhetoric of the JDL in its early days. Though the interviewee stresses that the JDL is not racist and supports civil rights, you cannot help but notice how he is willing to go beyond the boundaries of the law to fight anything the JDL might understand as antisemitism. 

A Rant on Zionism and the Current Conflict

This semester I'm taking a class with Professor Steven Fine on his research with the Arch of Titus. Since the arch itself is a rather small object, the class focuses on how the arch and its elements were understood and used throughout the lifetime of the monument, from when it was erected during the reign of the last Flavian Emperor Domitian until the present day.

We spent some time in class discussing why the arch was initially erected and used other artifacts and literary sources from the era to approximate a picture of the socio-political climate that led to the construction of the monumental arch. 

When Emperor Nero died without a successor, the Roman empire plunged into a state of chaos with three more Roman nobles attempting a failing to secure the imperial seat. The last and only successful contender was Vespasian who returned from his campaign in Judea to seize the imperial seat. Vespasian understood that his position as emperor was precarious. He was not part of the old Julio-Claudian dynasty that had ruled Rome for the past century. In an effort to legitimize his position, he turned to the old republican period for inspiration. During his day, it was considered the good-old-days of Rome. His portrait rejected the stylized youthful and divine faces of the Julio-Claudians. Vespasian had his visage sculpted in a manner reminiscent of the realist portraits of the Republican era, that honored the wisdom and humanity of Rome's nobility. 

Portraits that reminded people a prosperous by-gone age were not enough, Vespasian needed to look like the generals of the old days like Pompey and Julius Caesar who conquered vast swaths of land for the rapidly expanding empire. The problem was that by Vespasian ascent, the empire had reached its governable limits, so he turned to his successful quelling of the Jewish revolt of 66 CE.

Judea had been a Roman province for decades since Pompey annexed it over a century earlier in 63 BCE following the dissolution of the Hasmonean dynasty. The Jewish revolt was an internal revolt, a sign of unrest in an unstable empire. But the story of a costly repression of a small revolt was not one associated with glory and might. Instead Vespasian and his son Titus who lead the Roman response to the revolt portrayed it as a mighty victory against a foreign nation.

They paraded the spoils of war through Rome in a Triumphal parade just like the generals of old did when they conquered new territory. Using the spoils of war looted from the destroyed Judea, Vespasian renovated the Circus Maximus and built the Coliseum with the spoils of war. These new public works were adorned with inscriptions that boasted of the Flavian dynasty's victory over Judea. 

This tactic of portraying a revolt as a war against a foreign adversary is not at all a new rhetorical strategy for ensuring popular support for a cause. Sometimes the difference between a rebellion and a war can be quite vague. Take for instance the United States Civil War. Technically the Confederate States of America was an illegitimate rebel group within the United States that sought to break away from the country. The Confederates posed a formidable threat to the continuity of the United States and occupied close to half of the entire country's organized territory. To call the Civil War a quashing of an internal rebellion would be an understatement. 

As I write this piece, the Israel Defense Force, the Israeli army has invaded the Gaza strip. The relentless bombing of the urban areas of the territory that preceded the land invasion has likely killed 10,000 civilians. This brutal offensive was initiated in response to the bloodiest attack on Israeli territory in the countries history. On October 7th, hundreds of Hamas militants invades the area surrounding the Gaza strip and murders 1400 civilians living in the area, men women and children. They took around 200 hostages as well. 

The response from the Israeli government to this attack has pretty consistent. The Israeli government narrative is that Hamas has effectively declared war on Israel, and now Israel will retaliate with more war. The US media has caught on to this and adopted the term "Israel Hamas War" to define the current conflict. This fundamental problem with this framing is that this conflict is not exactly a war. A war is fought between two states, and a state will generally admit defeat and surrender in following the rules of war as a means of diplomacy. 

Israel is in fact quelling the rebellion of its unhappy vassal state. Though it would not entirely honest to call pre-Oct. 7th Gaza occupied territory, many Palestinian advocates refer to it as such, since Israel is able to exert significant control over what happens in the technically autonomous self-governing Palestinian territory. Hamas is more like a frustrated vassal state, rebelling against its overlord. 

Everyone knows that this is really a rebellion, since Hamas fighters will never be fully eradicated from Gaza. The attacks of Oct. 7 were just an overly successful rendition of an attack that Palestinian refugees and their descendants have been inflicting upon southern Israel since the 1950s. These incursions are not acts of war, but rather attempts of rebellion to try to somehow reclaim some amount the property that the refugees lost in the Nakba. 

The Israeli response to this feels more like the violent quelling of a rebellion, and not a war. Though some elements of expansionist Zionists in Israel may see this reoccupation of Gaza as an opportunity to build new Israeli settlements there, this war will probably not end in informal annexation of land.

The question stands about whether or not Netanyahu will benefit from the stabilizing benefits of being seen as a war hero. By painting this as a war and not a quashed rebellion, a victorious Netanyahu could strengthen his weakening grasp of Israeli politics. Or will his failure to secure his citizens from the attack of October 7th spell his downfall? Only time will tell of these things.

For the moment, I advocate for a ceasefire. The needless slaughter of Palestinian civilians is numbing to witness, just as the slaughter of Israeli civilians was one month ago. I have friends in the Israeli army who are most likely currently in Gaza and in constant danger of local insurgents killing or wounding them. A reality that I try to avoid thinking about because of how painful it is to consider. This quashing of rebellion is not worth the cost. 

The promise of Zionism was a safe haven for the Jews, where they could live without fear of antisemitism. Clearly that promise has failed to come to fruition. Some well respected Jews would advocate the extermination of Palestinians from the land. Morally speaking, their plans are abhorrent and in a perfect world they would be dismissed on such grounds. But we live in a flawed world, so I must offer a Judeo-centric critique of such a plan in hopes that it will prevent them from entertaining the thought of such monstrous violence.

Antisemitism is not a genetic condition, you cannot rid yourself of ideological threats by murdering those who believe in the ideas. Especially such a global idea as antisemitism. The Palestinian antisemites exist in a relatively unique position. Unlike most antisemites, the Jews have actually hurt them. We as a community have not ever experienced such legitimate grievances vocalized in the form of antisemitism. The only thing that remotely compares were the Ukrainian peasants who participated in the Khmelnytsky revolt in 1648. The lives of those peasants were often mismanaged by Jewish Arendars who managed the land they worked on for their Polish noble landlords who lived far away in the Polish heartlands. 

Though I am conscious of how similar my arguments sound to the Jewish assimilators of the late 19th century, who's belief that antisemitism would vanish if Jews assimilated. Perhaps the arrival of the parallel of Nazi Germany will come to disprove my beliefs. In the present I feel morally justified in advocating for the human rights of the Palestinians to be allowed to exist in a democratic country and to not be living in a situation in which they are caught in the cross-fire between two groups of elites who want to demonstrate their own military power. 

Perhaps the solution is a secular one state solution that is neither Zionist nor Palestinian nationalist. History has shown that integration breeds tolerance and is a more effective cure to bigotry that violence. However overcoming the religious-nationalist visions of the Israeli Jews and the Palestinian Muslims will be a miraculous act, more impressive than the splitting of the Red Sea.   

The Last of His Family

About three years ago, the National Library of Israel released its digital newspaper archive. This collection has consolidated Jewish newspapers and periodicals from across the global Jewish diaspora from the 18th century to the late 20th century. As a researcher, the search function has become an invaluable tool for gaining all kinds of useful historical information at a moments notice. 

This collection has alerted me to some fascinating glimpses into how different elements of the global Jewish community created and consumed media. One really cool example is how the press of the highly traditional Yishuv ha-Yashan in Jerusalem published serial novels. Havatzelet was a weekly paper that was published in Jerusalem for the Ashkenazi Jewish community of Jerusalem as its primary audience. The paper ran from around 1870 until 1910. During its first decade the paper used most of its space on publishing articles on topics in Torah study along with a little news. Overtime the news section grew and the Torah articles began to be augmented with more features pieces on all manner of topics. By 1890s, the paper started publishing serial novels. 

The first of these novels to catch my eye was called ha-Acharon be-Mishpachto or "The Last of His Family." It was published in 30 instalments in the year 1896. (I was researching some events from that year and one of the chapters of the novel caught my eye.) I indexed all the instalments about two years ago, and I figured I could publish it here for anyone who would be interested in such a thing. 

Based on the attribution of the story within the newspaper, it appears that this novel originally appeared in a Jewish paper called Der Israelit from Mainz, Germany. The story was anonymously translated from German into Hebrew and reprinted in Havatzelet. I have not read through the entire thing and I do not currently have plans to do so. But I did read some small sections, and it seems very much like a Romance of some kind set in very Victorian environment with large estates and palaces with servants. Anyone who does feel interested in reading it is welcome to reach out to me with the TLDR.

Here is the index of the installments in Havatzelet on the NLI's website.

Chapter 1–2

Chapter 3–4

Chapter 5

Chapter 6–7

Chapter 8

Chapter 9–10

Chapter 11–12

Chapter 13

Chapter 14

Chapter 15

Chapter 16–17

Chapter 18

Chapter 19

Chapter 20

Chapter 21

Chapter 22–23

Chapter 24

Chapter 25

Chapter 26

Chapter 27

Chapter 28

Chapter 29

Chapter 30

Chapter 31

Chapter 32

Chapter 33

Chapter 34

Chapter 35

Chapter 36

Chapter 37