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
The Congress found itself confronted with the problem of organization.
Several delegates were of the opinion that the task of leadership
was too difficult for a Small Actions Committee, consisting of three
persons, and that the headquarters should be removed to a larger centre.
This view was not influenced by any personal sympathies or antipathies:
it was dictated by considerations of an important character. Others
were opposed to any change. This was an internal fight which had to be
fought out, as in any other democratic movement, with the weapons of
reason and conviction, and it was fought out. This Congress could not
radically solve the question and it was left to the next one to bring
the solution.
Zionism, however, remained as strong as ever. The disputes, far from
being symptoms of weakness, were symptoms of growing interest, devotion
and enthusiasm for the common cause.
CHAPTER XLIXD.
Turkey, 1910‒14――The New Turkish Cabinet of 1912――The Balkan
War――The Tenth and Eleventh Congresses――Death of Wolffsohn.
WE may as well now cast a glance at the aspect of the general political
situation at the period this narrative has reached. Public opinion in
England was greatly disappointed when the first enthusiasm for Turkish
liberties had passed away. The ship of state in Turkey began to enter
very troubled waters, and no one saw safety ahead. The defeat of the
Committee of Union and Progress, the displacing of the Said Pasha
Cabinet and the downfall of the other leaders of the Young Turkey
party of 1908, followed by the amnesty of a number of officials of
the Hamidian regime, had naturally led many in Europe to believe
that reaction had set in, and that the Young Turks had once more been
overthrown and were in danger of being stamped out by the Old Turks or
reactionaries. On the other hand, some careful observers asserted that
the new Cabinet of 1912 was the best Turkey had had during the past
forty years, and that it was in no true sense reactionary, but really
constructive and progressive. They maintained also that the Committee
of Union and Progress had begun to use old methods and were now
hated by a large proportion of their former supporters. But all these
allegations were contradicted by rapidly developing events. Hardly at
any time within this generation had the political situation in Turkey
presented elements of greater uncertainty and danger than in the period
1910‒14.
The greatest misfortune was the impossibility of any improvement.
Turkey undoubtedly had the desire for progress along those lines which
Europe professedly was so anxious to see her follow; but she needed
advice, guidance, credit and patience. She required men――advisers,
counsellors――to give her practical help in carrying out the necessary
reforms. But, unfortunately, such a development was made impossible by
the disturbing political events.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account