they who are doing for us the work of the “home of refuge.” And as for
the future, the number of the Colonies will grow, in so far as it grows,
through men of capital, who will found new Colonies of the same
“wealthy” type. Colonies for poor men can only be founded by
organisations, and their number must be so limited that they can count
for nothing in comparison with the need of creating a rural proletariat
to cover the whole country and win it by manual labour. Even an Agrarian
Credit Bank will not make much difference from this point of view. Such
a bank—despite all the great things prophesied for it—will be much
better able to help in the foundation of “wealthy” Colonies than to
found Colonies for poor men with its own means. Perhaps its inability to
increase the number of such Colonies will really be a blessing in
disguise. For if they existed in large numbers they must all be full of
men quite unfitted for such a difficult task. Only if they are very few
can we hope for their survival and development through a process of
natural selection, by which the man who has not the necessary qualities
will make way for another, and in time these Colonies will gather to
themselves all the small body of born agriculturists which is still left
among us.[78]
However that may be, this is not the way in which our rural proletariat
can be made. It may be said that it will be made in ordinary course in
the “wealthy” Colonies, through the natural increase of the inhabitants
and the consequent division of the land; that the sons or grandsons of
the farmers will themselves become poor labourers, living by the work of
their hands. But experience shows that this, too, is a vain hope. The
children who are born in the Colonies have also the cleverness of the
Jew. When the son sees that his paternal inheritance will not be
sufficient to make him a substantial farmer, and that he is doomed to be
one of those pillars of society, the agricultural labourers, he quickly
leaves the Colony, and goes to seek his fortune overseas, where he is
content to work like a slave, so long as he is free from bondage to the
land, and is able to dream of a prosperous future. But it would be doing
these sons of the Colonies a grievous wrong to imagine them lacking in
love for Palestine. Most of them do love the country, and long for it,
even after they have left it. Some of them return to it in after years,
if they have succeeded abroad in acquiring enough money to enable them
to settle comfortably in Palestine. But the trouble is that love of the
country alone cannot breed agriculturists; for that you must have also
love of the _land_. The genuine agriculturist feels that leaving the
land is like giving up life. The inherited link between himself and the
land is so strong and deep that he cannot sever it. He therefore prefers
to endure poverty and want, to live all his life like a beast of burden,
rather than to leave the land. But this trait of the genuine
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