I doubt it. The special Jewish institutions already at work have no such
effect. On the contrary, they already relieve the strain. One of those
institutions, for instance, is the Jewish press: the newspapers
specially devoted to Jewish interests and acting as spokesmen for Jewish
ideas. They are not always as polite as they might be. I have had myself
at times to lodge a complaint against the way in which they have
treated sincere efforts for the settlement of our difficulties and an
honest attempt at finding a way out. They have left a handle to their
enemies sometimes by too insistent or, as those enemies would call it,
too arrogant a claim, and they do write now and then as though we, the
vast majority, had no rights and the only thing worth considering was
the advancement of their own people.
But, after all, it would be absurd to expect anything else. A small
minority vigorously fighting its own hand must exaggerate its claim; an
organism defending itself against very heavy pressure from without
cannot but appear aggressive, and I shall always maintain that the
presence of an openly Jewish institution speaking for Jewish interests,
no matter how insistently, is an excellent thing. It presents a healthy
contrast with the converse attempt to present Jewish arguments under the
cover of neutrality, and to spread Jewish ideas anonymously through what
are very far from being neutral agents.
If I be asked what institutions I have in mind I can only repeat that it
is for the Jews themselves to make the first proposal, but I suggest an
extension of the system, which is already present in embryo, whereby
disputes between Jews shall be arbitrated before a Jewish tribunal. Not
only its extension but its confirmation at the request of the Jews
themselves, might be a good thing. It would also not be a bad thing
if--some time hence when things were ripe for the change--disputes
between Jews and non-Jews could be tried in Courts where the special
character of such disputes, the distinctive difference between them and
disputes between the fellow-citizens of the country in which they live,
should come before tribunals of a mixed character. To attempt this
to-day would, of course, be a very new departure in procedure, indeed a
revolutionary one; and there is no prospect of it for a long while; but
with the growing number among us, and the growing influence, of Jews it
will, I think, when it does come at last, be of advantage to both
parties. It would be fatal if it were imposed upon them. It would not be
accepted. It would not work. But if it were suggested by the Jewish
community spontaneously, and started and developed by them, it would
succeed. And it would add a great deal to the relief already experienced
for the functioning of the other institutions I have mentioned.
There is little more to be said under this head. Apart from the duty of
open dealing and this specific policy of fostering separate institutions
we have no claim to press.
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