The Jewish Colony
By Lorenzo Machiavelli, Red Spectre Writer
Nowadays, many are of the mind that colonial policies are a thing of the past. A concept that now belongs in the museums of antiquity alongside slavery. However, like with hydras of Greek myth, so long as the wound dealt to colonialism is not cauterized it will rear its ugly head once more. The old colonies may have died, but what emerged was a new form.
In the beginning the riches of the rest of the world proved too tantalizing for the old European powers. What started as an exodus as a result of the condition of being the average European, i.e. a miserable thrall with next to no prospects towards life, quickly turned into an opportunity for capital to grow beyond the bounds of Europe. However, oppressed people did what came natural to the sane human and resisted. These resistances while not successful initially, eventually broke the hold the western powers (European and American) had over them. But as mentioned previously, the riches of the world proved too tantalizing for these powers to simply let go. Other methods were therefore conceived.
One such method was provided by Theodor Herzl, a humble Jewish bourgeoisie, who sought to liberate the Jew. Not actually from the ghettos and segregation, from the antisemitic Germans, Austrians, English, Russians, etc. but to liberate the Jew from the task of liberating itself wherever they may be oppressed. He sought to liberate the Jews from the lands they toiled on and for, their hard-fought achievements and struggle for equality, into a dream of exclusively being oppressed by the Jewish Bourgeoisie AND other Bourgeois oppressors, same concept as before but seemingly new. He had a lofty plan, to segregate the Jews not in the ghettos and settlements in the nations of Europe, but to segregate the Jews from the rest of the world. Der Judenstaat (The Jewish State) as he called it. One can only wonder if he was dimwit or malicious or more likely both, when he wrote his pamphlet.
But how does one undertake such a task to establish a new state solely for the Jews or more accurately, for the Jewish Bourgeoisie? Herzl initially thought that it was merely a concern of finances. He so believed himself to be correct that he repudiated all men of science for never having considered it. He was so confident in his stance, for which he provides no good reasoning that he starts his introduction as such:
In the beginning the riches of the rest of the world proved too tantalizing for the old European powers. What started as an exodus as a result of the condition of being the average European, i.e. a miserable thrall with next to no prospects towards life, quickly turned into an opportunity for capital to grow beyond the bounds of Europe. However, oppressed people did what came natural to the sane human and resisted. These resistances while not successful initially, eventually broke the hold the western powers (European and American) had over them. But as mentioned previously, the riches of the world proved too tantalizing for these powers to simply let go. Other methods were therefore conceived.
One such method was provided by Theodor Herzl, a humble Jewish bourgeoisie, who sought to liberate the Jew. Not actually from the ghettos and segregation, from the antisemitic Germans, Austrians, English, Russians, etc. but to liberate the Jew from the task of liberating itself wherever they may be oppressed. He sought to liberate the Jews from the lands they toiled on and for, their hard-fought achievements and struggle for equality, into a dream of exclusively being oppressed by the Jewish Bourgeoisie AND other Bourgeois oppressors, same concept as before but seemingly new. He had a lofty plan, to segregate the Jews not in the ghettos and settlements in the nations of Europe, but to segregate the Jews from the rest of the world. Der Judenstaat (The Jewish State) as he called it. One can only wonder if he was dimwit or malicious or more likely both, when he wrote his pamphlet.
But how does one undertake such a task to establish a new state solely for the Jews or more accurately, for the Jewish Bourgeoisie? Herzl initially thought that it was merely a concern of finances. He so believed himself to be correct that he repudiated all men of science for never having considered it. He was so confident in his stance, for which he provides no good reasoning that he starts his introduction as such:
“It is astonishing how little insight many of the men who move in the midst of active life possess of the science of economics. Hence it is that even Jews faithfully repeat the cry of the AntiSemites : "We depend for sustenance on the nations whose guests we are, and if we had not hosts to support us we should die of starvation." This is a point that shows how greatly unjust accusations may weaken our self-knowledge. But what are the true grounds for this statement concerning the nations which take us in? Where it is not based on limited physiocratic views it is founded on the childish error that commodities pass from hand to hand in continuous rotation. We need not wake from long slumber, like Rip van Winkle, to realize that the world is considerably altered by the production of new commodities. The technical progress made during this wonderful era enables even a man of most limited intelligence to note with his short-sighted eyes the appearance of innumerable new commodities. The spirit of enterprise has created them.”
-Herzl, Der Judenstaat Third Edition, p.1
Where can one even start, with the twisting of the theories of political economists, with the lack of understanding of historical movement, his stupidity regarding commodity production and that new commodities would still need to be produced the same as any other commodity?
He will of course come to his senses to some degree that it is not merely a financial concern later in his pamphlet but only to introduce new absurdities and contradictions. His pamphlet is certainly worth looking at further but not in this work. It is merely mentioned here as it is considered the starting point of modern-day Zionism and Israel. And more importantly, it is the starting point of a strategy of maintaining control over colonial holdings.
Herzl proposed the mass migration of the Jewish people into new lands. This idea has been attempted before but the difference with Herzl and his predecessors is that the latter proposed the resettlement in the European nations and generally concerned the Jewish sections of a nation’s population. Herzl’s proposal was for not only the Jewish population of the world, but also for the Christians of the world and the European and American governments to fund this exodus of their contemptible Jewish countrymen.
He will of course come to his senses to some degree that it is not merely a financial concern later in his pamphlet but only to introduce new absurdities and contradictions. His pamphlet is certainly worth looking at further but not in this work. It is merely mentioned here as it is considered the starting point of modern-day Zionism and Israel. And more importantly, it is the starting point of a strategy of maintaining control over colonial holdings.
Herzl proposed the mass migration of the Jewish people into new lands. This idea has been attempted before but the difference with Herzl and his predecessors is that the latter proposed the resettlement in the European nations and generally concerned the Jewish sections of a nation’s population. Herzl’s proposal was for not only the Jewish population of the world, but also for the Christians of the world and the European and American governments to fund this exodus of their contemptible Jewish countrymen.
“Not only poor Jews, but also Christians who wanted to get rid of them, would subscribe their small quota to this fund… All this could, of course, not be done without the express and definite assistance of interested Governments.”.
-Herzl, ibid. p.25
The other difference was where the resettlement was to happen. He had two possible destinations in mind, Argentina and Palestine. Argentina due to an experimental plan and Palestine due to it being the holy land. In reality, his reasonings for Argentina could’ve been equally applicable to many other places. It was not like parts of India as an example, were lacking in comparison to Argentina. As for Palestine, contrary to what Jacob De Haas said in the preface, Herzl didn’t just say “over there” but had strongly implied Palestine. Rather than “over there”, he said “over there in Ottoman controlled Palestine more than likely”.
“Palestine is our ever-memorable historic home. The very name of Palestine would attract our people with a force of marvelous potency. Supposing His Majesty the Sultan were to give us Palestine, we could in return pledge ourselves to regulate the whole finances of Turkey. We should there form a portion of the rampart of Europe against Asia, an outpost of civilization as opposed to barbarism.”
-Herzl, ibid. p.12
other words, a colony within a colony in exchange for regulating the whole finances of Turkey. As crude as it may sound, he is not helping oppose the antisemitic stereotype that Jews are labeled with. What did he mean by “we”? The Jewish people as a whole? He cannot mean that as he intricately divides the labor of those with different crafts and experience for the construction of “an outpost of civilization” in his plan. But if he meant a specific group of Jews who are skilled at managing financial affairs, then his pledge becomes mute. Did he think Jews were better than Palestinians at being a colonized people? In fact, his whole plan becomes null. If the plan was for the Jewish people to remain an oppressed group, then how would that be any different than what was already the case in Europe? In fact, why would the Sultan even need specifically the Jews to regulate finances? The sciences of arithmetic, economics, statistics and algebra were not a foreign concept to the Ottomans. Many of the principles made their way to Europe from the Middle East. The results of the proposal to Ahmad Abdul II will be shown later.
Herzl said many outlandish things like the above-mentioned quotes throughout his pamphlet. The same man who claimed to have solved the mysteries that men of science could not. The same man who claimed to have solved the Jewish Question which generations were struggling with. The same man who is considered by the Israeli state and the Zionist “intellectuals” to be the father of modern-day Zionism. It was not an exaggeration when previously it was said that he was likely a malicious dimwit. He was a conman with an idiotic con.
But that dimwit had uses for certain groups. For example, the Zionists who use his high-flown terminologies and phrases, his “promises” and “goodwill” for Jews and Christians, with none of the contents of his pamphlet realized how he envisioned. One of these visions was a “Jewish Company” which was supposed to answer all the material, financial and commercial needs and concerns of the Jewish people within and without the Jewish state. Not only that, but to make the plan profitable for the Jewish state and the European states and the Christian people. A plan of such magnitude that it would’ve shaken the world economy. But he promised that it wouldn’t do that, the company wouldn’t cause any potential economic crises because of another part of his vision, the “Society of Jews”.
Herzl said many outlandish things like the above-mentioned quotes throughout his pamphlet. The same man who claimed to have solved the mysteries that men of science could not. The same man who claimed to have solved the Jewish Question which generations were struggling with. The same man who is considered by the Israeli state and the Zionist “intellectuals” to be the father of modern-day Zionism. It was not an exaggeration when previously it was said that he was likely a malicious dimwit. He was a conman with an idiotic con.
But that dimwit had uses for certain groups. For example, the Zionists who use his high-flown terminologies and phrases, his “promises” and “goodwill” for Jews and Christians, with none of the contents of his pamphlet realized how he envisioned. One of these visions was a “Jewish Company” which was supposed to answer all the material, financial and commercial needs and concerns of the Jewish people within and without the Jewish state. Not only that, but to make the plan profitable for the Jewish state and the European states and the Christian people. A plan of such magnitude that it would’ve shaken the world economy. But he promised that it wouldn’t do that, the company wouldn’t cause any potential economic crises because of another part of his vision, the “Society of Jews”.
“The plan, simple in design, but complicated in execution, will be carried out by two mediums : the Society of Jews and the Jewish Company. The Society of Jews will do the preparatory work in the domains of science and politics, which the Jewish Company will afterwards practically apply. The Jewish Company will see to the realization of the business interests of departing Jews, and will organize commerce and trade in the new country.”
-Herzl, ibid. p.11
how would the Society of Jews accomplish such tasks? On the matter of how the company wouldn’t do anything untoward because of the Society, Herzl said the following:
“The duties of the Jewish Company and the Society of Jews cannot be kept strictly apart in this outline. These two great bodies will indeed work in unison, the Company depending on the moral direction and support of the Society, the Society again acting only with the material assistance of the Company.”
-Herzl, ibid. p.22
Therefore, the European governments have nothing to fear in regard to any inconveniences that could be caused by the Company because a separate entity from it would tell it not to. Here is another contradiction that would confuse the readers. Is the Society of Jews supposed to be one of the two mediums that creates the Jewish state or is it the Jewish state itself? If it is one of the mediums doing the preparatory work for establishing a Jewish state, that implies there is no Jewish state. Then for what reason would the Company, a profit-driven organization, adhere to the instructions of the Society if those instructions hamper the process of profiteering? Because of “the moral direction and support of the Society?”. In that case, wouldn’t it have made more sense to just merge these two mediums into one entity? Wouldn’t the Company still have moral guidance in that case? Evidently Herzl’s mind works in two diametrically opposed directions for the same concept. On one hand Jews are intrinsically capable of ethically conducting business hence the existence of the Society and on the other hand, Jews require moral guidance to ethically conduct business hence the existence of the Society. The former implies an axiom whilst the latter implies a prerequisite.
If it is still not convincing that Herzl was a fraud, then there is even more evidence to present to establish this case. For example, how his Company would get the funding for the plan. He proposed three methods but the focus will be on the method he actually vied for. Astute readers will notice that the full quote was not provided previously; the one in which he called for the support of the Jews, Christians and Governments. For those worrying that the quote might’ve been taken out of context, here is the full quote:
If it is still not convincing that Herzl was a fraud, then there is even more evidence to present to establish this case. For example, how his Company would get the funding for the plan. He proposed three methods but the focus will be on the method he actually vied for. Astute readers will notice that the full quote was not provided previously; the one in which he called for the support of the Jews, Christians and Governments. For those worrying that the quote might’ve been taken out of context, here is the full quote:
“The Company's capital might be raised without the assistance of a syndicate, by the direct imposition of a subscription on the public. Not only poor Jews, but also Christians who wanted to get rid of them, would subscribe their small quota to this fund. A new and peculiar form of the plebiscite would thus be established, whereby each man who voted for this solution of the Jewish Question would express his favorable opinion by subscribing a stipulated amount. This stipulation would produce security. The funds subscribed would only be paid in if their sum total reached the required amount; if the tenders were not sufficiently numerous, they would be returned.
But should the sum total raised all over the world by a public tax reach the required amount, then each little subscription would be secured by the great numbers of other small subscriptions.
All this could, of course, not be done without the express and definite assistance of interested Governments.”
-Herzl, ibid. p.25
The second paragraph is of particular interest for the implications alone. Keeping in mind that this company did not exist at the time “Der Judenstaat” was written and therefore had no assets, it was supposed to be a multi-national, for-profit organization from the outset. For that goal and to acquire assets, a great amount of investment was required. As problematic such a plan was for any investor, it was not infeasible.
But then comes how he treats the investors or” subscribers” as he calls them. They would not be secured by any assets that the company acquires. They would not even have shares in the company as he designed it. They would be secured by “the great numbers of other small subscriptions”. A profit generation method solely for the company. He claimed that the company would provide many of the material and subjective needs of the subscribers in his pamphlet which could be argued is compensation. However, should that not be an option and not a replacement for security provided by the company? If they wished to opt out, then how could they when do not own any assets in the company? And if they were to be secured via other subscriptions, is it an exaggeration that Herzl suggested a Pyramid scheme?
It could be argued that this was all in case the company achieves its target in gathering investments. But if it doesn’t then the funds will be returned. But with no assets or shares in the company, what guarantee was there for the individual subscriber? The only guarantee was Herzl own words.
The “inspired” organization, is nothing like how Herzl described. The Jewish Agency for Israel, formerly The Jewish Agency for Palestine or formerly many other names, is a non-profit organization established by the World Zionist Organization for the purpose of providing the financial backing for the establishment of a Jewish colony in Palestine. It practically looks nothing like Herzl’s vision.
But then why did the Russian empire and the British empire show interest and outright support for this plan? And what was the actual offer made to the Ottoman empire? The short answer to the former is imperialistic ambitions and for the latter, a potential solution to the inevitable economic crisis of the Ottoman empire. To provide the long answers, some historical background is necessary. The situation in Jerusalem or Bayt al-Maqdis must be discussed first. For simplicity’s sake, the city will be referred to as Jerusalem in this work.
Unlike how Herzl painted the picture, the Palestinian colony’s capital was not an undeveloped settlement but the destination of many investments in the settlement from the Ottoman empire and the European powers such as Britain, France, Russia, etc. Not only that, but it was also a city in which many different ethnic and religious peoples had lived in for generations. Muslims, Christians and Jewish people of the major sects have coexisted in that city. While on occasion religious tensions would arise, most of them were results of outside influence which will be discussed later. The Ottoman empire’s policies towards the different faiths of the Abrahamic religions were quite liberal compared to the Europeans. When the Spanish inquisition happened, the Ottomans accepted Islamic and Jewish refugees from Spain to settle in Jerusalem. The Ottomans in general also allowed the Orthodox and Catholic Christians to congregate and live in Jerusalem.
Organizations of all the different faiths have been formed which received funding and support from abroad to help develop the land. Whilst still a colony, the inhabitants enjoyed more equality than what was the case in Europe.
So why did Herzl approach the Sultan with an offer to establish a Jewish colony within the city? Why did he offer to buy the lands which were already inhabited? Because the Ottoman empire owed a great sum of debt to the Western Europeans. A national debt amounting to around $12 billion by today’s rates. Whilst seemingly inconsequential in comparison to modern standards, the Ottomans did not have the same degree of developed national assets as modern states do. And the assets they did have, they held tightly to for they meant the Europeans would have more control and influence over Ottoman affairs. A level of control which they correctly thought would be abused to cause the downfall of the empire. The national debt was one of the main reasons the Ottomans would eventually join the first world war against the Entente.
Herzl and the Zionists offered to alleviate some of that pressure through purchasing parts of Jerusalem for resettlement. An offer equal to around $2 billion by modern rates. The Sultan refused for two major and obvious reasons.
The first reason was that this exchange would’ve been no different than selling the assets of the Ottoman empire directly to the Europeans. While Herzl claimed that the funds for the plan would be provided through subscriptions, he also multiple times directly said that the plan would only be feasible through the support and cooperation of the European governments. Why else would the governments that previously were either amicable or hostile towards the Jewish Question suddenly show interest towards the Zionists? It would’ve been a medium by which their imperialistic interests towards the Middle East would’ve been realized.
If the first reason would be considered by some dogmatists as pure speculation, despite history proving it to be true, then the second reason by itself would’ve been enough on its own. The Sultan and the Ottoman officials believed that granting this special privilege to Herzl and his people would drive a wedge between the Jewish people and the rest of the population. A Jewish colony required the displacement of the native inhabitants of Palestine. In a letter addressed to Herzl the mayor of Jerusalem, Yousef al-Khalidi, had this to say in response to Herzl’s proposal:
“…Unfortunately, the destinies of nations are not governed solely by these abstract conceptions, however pure, however noble they may be. We must reckon with reality, with established facts, with force, yes with the brutal force of circumstances. But the reality is that Palestine is now an integral part of the Ottoman Empire and, what is more serious, it is inhabited by people other than only Israelites. This reality, these acquired facts, this brutal force of circumstances leave Zionism, geographically, no hope of realization.” [Excerpt from the letter from Yusuf Diya al-Khalidi to Zadoc Kahn, March 1, 1899.]
Despite the sympathetic attitude of Yousef al-Khalidi towards the misery of the western Jews earlier in his letter, he did not think the Zionist ambitions feasible. The letter was delivered to Herzl through Zadok Kahn, the chief Rabi of France. Once again Herzl implied that if not Palestine, then they will find somewhere else. It would’ve been more convincing that Herzl did not strongly want a Jewish state in Palestine if the resolution of the first congress of the Zionist Organization wasn’t what it was:
“Zionism seeks to establish a home for the Jewish people in Eretz Israel [L.M.: “Land of Israel”, a biblical term referring to an area encompassing the majority of Palestine] secured under public law.”
[Excerpt from the first Zionist Congress resolution, Basle, Switzerland, August 29, 1897.]
Herzl, who was elected as president of the Zionist Organization by the first congress in Basel, Switzerland, never disagreed with this resolution. What was the Ottoman government supposed to believe?
Herzi, politely rejected by both the Sultan and Al-Khalidi, puffed out his chest and proudly proclaimed in a letter to Al-Khalidi:
Herzi, politely rejected by both the Sultan and Al-Khalidi, puffed out his chest and proudly proclaimed in a letter to Al-Khalidi:
“The Zionist idea, of which I am the humble servant, has no hostile tendency toward the Ottoman Government, but quite to the contrary this movement is concerned with opening up new resources for the Ottoman Empire. In allowing immigration to a number of Jews bringing their intelligence, their financial acumen and their means of enterprise to the country, no one can doubt that the well-being of the entire country would be the happy result. It is necessary to understand this, and make it known to everybody.
As Your Excellency said very well in your letter to the Grand Rabbi, the Jews have no belligerent Power behind them, neither are they themselves of a warlike nature. They are a completely peaceful element, and very content if they are -left in peace. Therefore, there is absolutely nothing to fear from their immigration.
The question of the Holy Places?
But no one thinks of ever touching those. As I have said and written many times: These places have lost forever the faculty of belonging exclusively to one faith, to one race or to one people. The Holy Places are and will remain holy for all the world, for the Moslems as for the Christians as for the Jews. The universal peace which all men of good will ardently hope for will have its symbol in a brotherly union in the Holy Places.
You see another difficulty, Excellency, in the existence of the non-Jewish population in Palestine. But who would think of sending them away? It is their well-being, their individual wealth which we will increase by bringing in our own. Do you think that an Arab who owns land or a house in Palestine worth three or four thousand francs will be very angry to see the price of his land rise in a short time, to see it rise five and ten times in value perhaps in a few months? Moreover, that will necessarily happen with the arrival of the Jews. That is what the indigenous population must realize, that they will gain excellent brothers as the Sultan will gain faithful and good subjects who will make this province flourish-this province which is their historic homeland.”
-Herzl, Excerpts from the letter from Theodore Herzl to Yusuf Diya al-Khalidi, March 19, 1899.
Herzl disproves his own claims in this letter through his pamphlet and through the Zionist Organization (nowadays called World Zionist Organization). He claims Jews are not warlike in nature, that they are completely peaceful and would be content if left in peace. However, in the Argentina or Palestine section of his pamphlet he said the following:
“…The sanctuaries of Christendom would be safeguarded by assigning to them an extra-territorial status, such as is well known to the law of nations. We should form a guard of honor about these sanctuaries, answering for the fulfilment of this duty with our existence. This guard of honor would be the great symbol of the solution of the Jewish Question after eighteen centuries of Jewish suffering.”
-Herzl, Der Judenstaat Third Edition, p.12
And then in the Army section:
“The Jewish State is conceived as a neutral one. It will therefore require only an army of volunteers, equipped, of course, with every requisite of modem warfare, to preserve order internally and externally.”
-Herzl, ibid. p.39
The supporters of Zionism might throw accusations of misrepresentation but, this is a weighing of Herzl’s position in his letter to Al-Khalidi and in his pamphlet. If the Jewish state within the Ottoman empire territories was completely peaceful, why would it need an independent standing army? If his positions may seem misrepresented, it’s because he did not address what would’ve been a concern to the Ottoman officials. If the two positions might appear contradictory, that is because it was presented so vaguely by Herzl that it could only be presented as such.
it was presented so vaguely by Herzl that it could only be presented as such.
Next is his attempt at dissuading concerns of “touching the holy places”. He might’ve been telling the truth, but this concern also suffered from the same problem of being too vague when he said two different things. The Argentina or Palestine section was already quoted earlier so there’s no need for it to be quoted again. But it’s worth pointing out that on one hand he said that the “sanctuaries of Christendom” would be granted extra-territorial status while on the other hand he tells Al-Khalidi that they would never touch the holy places. If the Zionist Organization was to grant extra-territorial status to those holy places, it implies that it had acquired the holy places. Once again, vague enough that he could’ve answered either way.
But the most damning proof of Herzl’s two-faced personality, is the final paragraph of his letter. He promised that the Zionist Organization never planned to displace
the native Palestinian population. However, once the contents of his diary became public, it turned out that he lied.
it was presented so vaguely by Herzl that it could only be presented as such.
Next is his attempt at dissuading concerns of “touching the holy places”. He might’ve been telling the truth, but this concern also suffered from the same problem of being too vague when he said two different things. The Argentina or Palestine section was already quoted earlier so there’s no need for it to be quoted again. But it’s worth pointing out that on one hand he said that the “sanctuaries of Christendom” would be granted extra-territorial status while on the other hand he tells Al-Khalidi that they would never touch the holy places. If the Zionist Organization was to grant extra-territorial status to those holy places, it implies that it had acquired the holy places. Once again, vague enough that he could’ve answered either way.
But the most damning proof of Herzl’s two-faced personality, is the final paragraph of his letter. He promised that the Zionist Organization never planned to displace
the native Palestinian population. However, once the contents of his diary became public, it turned out that he lied.
“We must expropriate gently the private property on the estates assigned to us. We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it employment in our own country. The property owners will come over to our side. Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly.”
-Herzl, The Complete Diaries of Theodor Herzl Volume 1, p.88
He tells the mayor that they have no plans to send away the non-Jewish population. In fact, the wealthy migrants will drive up the value of the land and make the Arabs wealthier as well. But secretly he had had plans to drive away the poorer population. History has proven that the Zionist Organization and the new Jewish colony did exactly that and more.
The Ottoman’s reaction to Herzl’s suggestion has been made clear. Now comes the turn of the European and Western powers. While multiple of these governments were supportive, it is best to focus on the British and Russian empires. The reason for which is that they had much greater roles to play in the events that would play out after the first congress and after the first World War. The rest followed after for their imperialistic ambitions.
Even before Herzl wrote “Der Judenstaat”, the Russian Empire had plans of establishing its own colonial settlements in the lands of Palestine. Partly due to the mystic character and history behind the land, partly because of the rivalry between the Russian Orthodoxy with other Abrahamic faiths and partly for their plans to weaken the Ottoman empire the same way they have in the Balkans.
The Byzantine Empire greatly influenced Russian culture and state religion. This influence was so great that the Russian Empire considered itself the third Roman Empire. It long desired the seizure and restoration of the original capital of Orthodoxy Constantinople. Though this desire seemingly religious, had much greater militaristic and economic value for the Russians. Istanbul was the city that connected Europe with Asia, putting it at a unique position for trade. Furthermore, the strait connects the Black Sea with the Mediterranean, which would’ve made many boons available, for the Navy and for the traders. However, it is much easier to foster national and religious feelings of fraternity inside and outside of a nation than to convince people to engage in hostile activities at the behest of the elite of society with little to no benefit for them. A familiar strategy throughout history.
The pan-Slavic movements in the Balkans showed how well that strategy worked. So, they tried the same thing in Jerusalem. The pilgrims visiting the holy land from the Russian Empire were usually many times greater than those of other nations. The organizations for the Russian Orthodoxy would receive great amounts of support from the Czarist regime. The regime would then use these organizations to incite and support Arab nationalists against their Ottoman rulers. They even gained the sympathies of many Muslim and Jewish natives of Palestine, even against the Greek Orthodoxy which was a rival faith to them.
It becomes apparent then why the Russian Czar and government, which continued its pogroms against all non-Russians and non-Orthodox Christians including the Jews, would be sympathetic towards Herzl and the Zionist Organization. A Jewish state within Jerusalem could only help their own plans for the Ottoman Empire. A further weakened Ottoman Empire was their goal; not helping the Jews. It was a great shame for them then that they could not escape the results of their oppression of the disenfranchised and suppression of the people, the exploitation of the Proletariat and peasants.
The British Empire also reached the same conclusion but with a slightly different goal. They were looking into new colonial prospects. The Near East which was at the firm grasp of the Ottomans looked ripe. The debts that the Ottoman Empire had towards the British were not good enough when the Ottomans would not sell them the lands they sought. But by sponsoring and supporting the Zionists and with the decline of the Ottoman Empire, they might be able to find entry before their Imperialist rivals.
The results of the policies of the British and Russians can be seen by anyone with a moderate amount of knowledge of 20th century history; The Arab uprising, The Belfour agreement of 1917, The British Mandate of Palestine, The Belfour Declaration of 1926 and the displacement of Palestinian Arabs from 1917 to 1948.
With all that said, with all that misery and the reasons for them unraveled, can it at least be said that the Jews were at least liberated by Herzl? Did he defeat anti-Semitism as he promised? Did he make the Jews of the world lead better lives? Predictably, the answer is no. As it has been pointed out, he never planned for the liberation of the Jews. His plans were always for the Bourgeoisie. He wanted the Jewish Bourgeoisie to stand equal with the other Bourgeoisie. Throughout “Der Judenstaat”, he showed great empathy and understanding towards anti-Semites whilst hating the revolutionary Jewish Proletariat more than any anti-Semite. He wanted a Bourgeois state no different from other Bourgeois states. He wanted the Jewish Bourgeoisie to be seen the same as Bourgeoisie before being seen as Jewish whilst proclaiming the Jewish Proletariat to be Jewish before they are Proletariat.
Any defeat that anti-Semitism experienced and all the rights and material improvements in life that Jews all over the world attained was due solely to the united Proletariat. It was the united Proletariat that liberated the people from religious, racial and ethnic suppression of the Bourgeois states. It was the united Proletariat that caused the Bourgeoisie to give concessions to save their own necks. It is only the united Proletariat that can liberate humanity and not Bourgeois conceptions such as Zionism.
The Zionists succeeded in their goals. They created a colony for the Bourgeoisie. A colony that became a proxy state for US imperialist interests in the Middle East after their so-called independence from the British. An apartheid state and autocratic regime that is disgustingly inhumane. A regime that is entirely dependent on the west both economically and politically. It too will feel the wrath of the Proletariat in time.
If all that was said was not enough to make it clear why Marxists would never support Zionism, then let the response to a final quote from “Der Judenstaat” make it clear once and for all.
The Ottoman’s reaction to Herzl’s suggestion has been made clear. Now comes the turn of the European and Western powers. While multiple of these governments were supportive, it is best to focus on the British and Russian empires. The reason for which is that they had much greater roles to play in the events that would play out after the first congress and after the first World War. The rest followed after for their imperialistic ambitions.
Even before Herzl wrote “Der Judenstaat”, the Russian Empire had plans of establishing its own colonial settlements in the lands of Palestine. Partly due to the mystic character and history behind the land, partly because of the rivalry between the Russian Orthodoxy with other Abrahamic faiths and partly for their plans to weaken the Ottoman empire the same way they have in the Balkans.
The Byzantine Empire greatly influenced Russian culture and state religion. This influence was so great that the Russian Empire considered itself the third Roman Empire. It long desired the seizure and restoration of the original capital of Orthodoxy Constantinople. Though this desire seemingly religious, had much greater militaristic and economic value for the Russians. Istanbul was the city that connected Europe with Asia, putting it at a unique position for trade. Furthermore, the strait connects the Black Sea with the Mediterranean, which would’ve made many boons available, for the Navy and for the traders. However, it is much easier to foster national and religious feelings of fraternity inside and outside of a nation than to convince people to engage in hostile activities at the behest of the elite of society with little to no benefit for them. A familiar strategy throughout history.
The pan-Slavic movements in the Balkans showed how well that strategy worked. So, they tried the same thing in Jerusalem. The pilgrims visiting the holy land from the Russian Empire were usually many times greater than those of other nations. The organizations for the Russian Orthodoxy would receive great amounts of support from the Czarist regime. The regime would then use these organizations to incite and support Arab nationalists against their Ottoman rulers. They even gained the sympathies of many Muslim and Jewish natives of Palestine, even against the Greek Orthodoxy which was a rival faith to them.
It becomes apparent then why the Russian Czar and government, which continued its pogroms against all non-Russians and non-Orthodox Christians including the Jews, would be sympathetic towards Herzl and the Zionist Organization. A Jewish state within Jerusalem could only help their own plans for the Ottoman Empire. A further weakened Ottoman Empire was their goal; not helping the Jews. It was a great shame for them then that they could not escape the results of their oppression of the disenfranchised and suppression of the people, the exploitation of the Proletariat and peasants.
The British Empire also reached the same conclusion but with a slightly different goal. They were looking into new colonial prospects. The Near East which was at the firm grasp of the Ottomans looked ripe. The debts that the Ottoman Empire had towards the British were not good enough when the Ottomans would not sell them the lands they sought. But by sponsoring and supporting the Zionists and with the decline of the Ottoman Empire, they might be able to find entry before their Imperialist rivals.
The results of the policies of the British and Russians can be seen by anyone with a moderate amount of knowledge of 20th century history; The Arab uprising, The Belfour agreement of 1917, The British Mandate of Palestine, The Belfour Declaration of 1926 and the displacement of Palestinian Arabs from 1917 to 1948.
With all that said, with all that misery and the reasons for them unraveled, can it at least be said that the Jews were at least liberated by Herzl? Did he defeat anti-Semitism as he promised? Did he make the Jews of the world lead better lives? Predictably, the answer is no. As it has been pointed out, he never planned for the liberation of the Jews. His plans were always for the Bourgeoisie. He wanted the Jewish Bourgeoisie to stand equal with the other Bourgeoisie. Throughout “Der Judenstaat”, he showed great empathy and understanding towards anti-Semites whilst hating the revolutionary Jewish Proletariat more than any anti-Semite. He wanted a Bourgeois state no different from other Bourgeois states. He wanted the Jewish Bourgeoisie to be seen the same as Bourgeoisie before being seen as Jewish whilst proclaiming the Jewish Proletariat to be Jewish before they are Proletariat.
Any defeat that anti-Semitism experienced and all the rights and material improvements in life that Jews all over the world attained was due solely to the united Proletariat. It was the united Proletariat that liberated the people from religious, racial and ethnic suppression of the Bourgeois states. It was the united Proletariat that caused the Bourgeoisie to give concessions to save their own necks. It is only the united Proletariat that can liberate humanity and not Bourgeois conceptions such as Zionism.
The Zionists succeeded in their goals. They created a colony for the Bourgeoisie. A colony that became a proxy state for US imperialist interests in the Middle East after their so-called independence from the British. An apartheid state and autocratic regime that is disgustingly inhumane. A regime that is entirely dependent on the west both economically and politically. It too will feel the wrath of the Proletariat in time.
If all that was said was not enough to make it clear why Marxists would never support Zionism, then let the response to a final quote from “Der Judenstaat” make it clear once and for all.
“…I do not believe that capitalists are heartless, and I do not take up the attitude of believing it.”
-Herzl, Der Judenstaat Third Edition, p.31
It does not matter whether the capitalists are heartless or not even though many events have proven that statement to be false for most if not all capitalists. It is CAPITALISM itself that is heartless. It is the source of most of the miseries being experienced by the majority of humanity. The Bourgeoisie, Jewish or otherwise, only have one faith. That faith is Capitalism. They only have one God that dictates their actions, that God is Capital. They have subjects and slaves in the form of the Proletariat, and they have sacrificial lambs for Capital in humanity itself.
Marxism will strip Capitalism of all fraudulent platitudes like Zionism and show their reality to the world. Marxism will always be the answer for the thralls seeking liberation from their misery. Marxism will always be the beacon that shows the way to the people from the murky waters. The Jewish Bourgeoisie like all Bourgeoisie will witness these facts inevitably.
Marxism will strip Capitalism of all fraudulent platitudes like Zionism and show their reality to the world. Marxism will always be the answer for the thralls seeking liberation from their misery. Marxism will always be the beacon that shows the way to the people from the murky waters. The Jewish Bourgeoisie like all Bourgeoisie will witness these facts inevitably.
