History of Zionism, 1600-1918, Vol. 2 (of 2)Sokolow, Nahum
History
History of Zionism, 1600-1918, Vol. 2 (of 2)
Sokolow, Nahum
Jews -- Restoration; Zionism -- History
Dr. M. Gaster said he stood before them not as a new Zionist, but as
an old friend. He stood before them, the old Zionist, deeply imbued
with the spirit of faith, believing in the truth of the word of God
and the glorious promise in store for our people, a dreamer of visions,
if they would. People had mocked at their visions and ideals, at
their aspirations and their hopes, and yet they continued their work,
unswerving in their enthusiasm. What appeared to so many as a dream had
now become a reality――and they were gathered there to begin to reap in
joy what they had sown in tears and sorrow. He had originally acclaimed
Herzl as the leader of the movement, and he had had to bear the burden
of the difficulties, but he had been true to the trust and had kept the
flag of Zion flying, and it was now for him, and for all of them, a day
of joy to see the fruits which they had so long wished for. They had
come together to thank the British Government for _le beau geste_, in
the inimitable French, for their declaration of sympathy with their
national aspirations. But Zionism was neither a local question nor did
it affect English Jewry, except in a very small proportion. It was a
movement which affected the whole of the race. Every Jew, therefore,
wherever he might be, was united in that sentiment of gratitude. They
were there, representing the feeling which animated the Jews of all the
world. Therein lay the greatness of the British Government――that it had
lifted the problem from its local geographical character and given to
it that universally valued importance which they attached to it. But
what Zionism stands for must be clearly apprehended, and also what the
Declaration of the British Government was expected to embody. The term
“National Home” was a circumlocution of the original word which formed
part of the Basle programme, the foundation-stone of Zionism, and
that word had been chosen when no definite political meaning could
be assigned to it. Circumstances had changed. It was for them to give
to the word its true original meaning. What they wished to obtain in
Palestine was not merely a right to establish colonies, or educational,
cultural, or industrial institutions. They wanted to establish in
Palestine an autonomous Jewish Commonwealth in the fullest sense of the
word. They wanted Palestine to be Palestine of the Jews and not merely
a Palestine for Jews. They wished the land to be again what it was in
olden times and what it had been for Jews in their prayers and in their
Bible――a land of Israel. The ground must be theirs. They stood, indeed,
as a people for the same programme as British statesmen were standing
to-day in a larger sphere. Jews stood for reparation, restitution,
and guarantees, and it was in the very application of those principles
that the greatness and importance of the Declaration of the British
Government stood out so luminously. England owed to Jews no reparation.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account