Friday, 10 May 2019

Labour Party Witchhunt – the Zionists are unhappy that Moshe Machover was the one that got away

The Zionist Movement is happy to use the Holocaust to justify its crimes but doesn't want people to understand what its relationship with the Nazis was



On 19th March the Jewish Chronicle led with what it termed an ‘Exclusive’. Jeremy Corbyn had intervened over the expulsion of Israeli dissident Professor Moshe Machover whom it described as a “'Nazis supported Zionism’ activist.’ 

The Jewish Chronicle and the Zionist Jewish Labour Movement objected to the fact that the ‘Tel Aviv-born academic quoted architect of Final Solution in article distributed at Labour conference.’ You will note that they did not assert that Machover was wrong. What they objected to was that he was telling the truth! According to Zionism’s junk academic David Hirsh, Moshe was guilty of “monstering of Jews and of Israel” although Israel wasn’t even in existence when Heydrich, the engineer of the Final Solution, was speaking favourably of Zionism.

The Gestapo were more than willing to concentrate Jews in just one place

All this was in the context of the fake anti-Semitism smear campaign. It is difficult to imagine  a better way to legitimise anti-Semitism than to equate telling the truth with anti-Semitism. However since Zionists aren’t interested in combating anti-Semitism then that is an irrelevant consideration for them.

Moshe Machover

Almost alone amongst the suspensions and expulsions in the past three years there is one that rankles with the JLM and the Israel lobby more than any other and that is the case of Moshe Machover, Emeritus Professor at King’s College, London University.

Moshe was auto expelled, i.e. without a hearing, by Sam Matthews at the beginning of October 2017 and by the end of the month he had been reinstated. Up and down the country CLPs, trade union branches and other groups passed resolutions opposing the expulsion.


Ostensibly Moshe was expelled because it was alleged he was a member of the Communist  Party of Great Britain. This was an assertion made without a shred of evidence. The real reason was because Moshe had penned an article Anti-Zionism does not equal Anti-Semitism.

A novel on a romance between an Israeli Jew and Arab was banned from the English high school syllabus because inter-racial marriages are considered a social taboo in Israel

To most people it was incomprehensible that the one of the founders of Matzpen, the Socialist Organisation in Israel and a distinguished academic in Britain, had been expelled at all. The idea that expelling Jewish people helps Labour combat anti-Semitism is one of the more bizarre features of the fake anti-Semitism witchhunt and should be perverse even to the dimmest Zionist mind.

Herzl's Jewish State pamphlet - he welcomes the fact that the antisemites will be 'keenly interested in helping us'

Moshe’s real offence was having written the above article but instead of prosecuting him over this they tried a bureaucratic approach.  A false allegation that he was a member of the CPGB.  Since then there has been no further attempts to expel Moshe.

From Herzl's pamphlet The Jewish State

That was why the Jewish Chronicle has decided to test the waters afresh after the adoption of the IHRA misdefinition of anti-Semitism. The IHRA is designed to smear as anti-Semitic anyone who makes any fundamental criticism of Israel and Zionism. In particular the Zionists believe that Moshe has infringed one of the IHRA’s illustrations of ‘anti-Semitism’ namely ‘Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis’.

Presumably their article Jeremy Corbyn intervened over expulsion of 'Nazis supported Zionism' activist Moshé Machover was meant as some kind of shock-horror. As if Blair and Kinnock had never interfered in the disciplinary process!

Zionist historian David Cesarani saying the same thing in his book as Ken Livingstone - that the Nazis supported Zionism pre 1939

Moshe’s ‘crime’ was drawing attention to the Zionist record during the period of the Nazis. That is quite understandable. The JLM do not want people to know that during the Nazi period the Zionists took a conscious decision NOT to fight fascism but to collaborate with it and use it to their advantage. That was why Ken Livingstone was hounded out of the party. 

So in the interests of telling the truth, I thought it might be helpful to illuminate a few facts that the JLM would prefer were kept hidden.

Zionist Exploitation of the Holocaust

As we know, from their repetitious accusations of ‘anti-Semitism’ Zionism never fails to use the Holocaust as a propaganda weapon. The examples are legion. For example when Matan Vilnai, Israel’s Deputy Defence Minister threatened the Palestinians of Gaza with a Holocaust or when Israeli Foreign Minister, Abba Eban described the Green Line separating the West Bank from Israel as Auschwitz borders.’
From the Jewish State - the phrase 'the terrible power of our purse'  is clearly antisemitic - this page demonstrates how Herzl rejoiced in the support of antisemites
Israel has only just commemorated Yom Ha Shoah, Holocaust Remembrance Day. However Zionism doesn’t remember the Holocaust in order to learn and impart the lessons that most people would draw from such a terrible event, namely that we should renew our opposition to racism. That genocide must never be repeated.
On the contrary the lesson that Zionism draws from the Holocaust is that the ‘Jewish People’ itself a racial mystification, in the form of a ‘Jewish’ State should be militarily strong. Which means the continued subjugation of the Palestinians.
Rohinga children - the Burmese army uses Israeli weaponry
So we have the obscenity of Israel arming and equipping the Burmese regime whilst it slaughters the Rohinga people. A carbon copy of what happened in the 1970’s when Israeli support played a crucial part in the genocide of up to 200,000 Mayan Indians in Guatemala.
The other lesson that Zionism imparts is that anti-Semitism is inherent in non-Jewish society and cannot be eradicated and that Jews will only be safe in their racial paradise. For example the article Israel marks Holocaust Remembrance Day amid fears of resurgent anti-Semitism, after going through a list of anti-Semitic incidents in the past year, it quotes researchers at Tel Aviv University as concluding that ‘Many Jews in the Diaspora feel increasingly insecure and are questioning their place in society.’ This is, what they like to call, Zionist wishful thinking.
From Herzl's Diaries - he tried to enlist the support of British imperialist Cecil Rhodes - nowadays the Zionists pretend that they are a movement of national liberation
There is no mention of the fact that the shooting of Jews in the United States just happened to occur as a result of the Presidency of Donald Trump, a White Supremacist who also just happens to be the best friend Israel has ever had in the White House.
The Holocaust is deliberately used to foster Israeli nationalism and the hatred of non-Jews. For Zionism there are no universal or moral lessons from the Holocaust. The slogan ‘never again’ only applies to Jews.
That is why it is necessary to examine what exactly was the role that Zionism played with the accession to power of the Nazis in 1933.
Zionist Relations with the Nazi from 1933 Onwards
This was the Zionist attitude to anti-Semitism throughout its history, including today
Firstly there was nothing unique about the Zionist attitude to the Nazis.  From the very start Zionism had acted according to Theodor Herzl’s maxim at the time of the Dreyfus Affair. In his Diaries Herzl, the founder of Political Zionism had written:
In Paris... I achieved a freer attitude towards anti-Semitism, which I now began to understand historically and to pardon. Above all, I recognise the emptiness and futility of trying to 'combat' anti-Semitism.  [Diaries of Theodore Herzl, Gollancz, London 1958 p.6, May 1895].
Herzl’s attitude, that anti-Semitism must be exploited to Zionism’s advantage and that without anti-Semitism there would be no Zionism held true in the era of the Nazis. As Herzl noted,
the governments of all countries scourged by Anti-Semitism will be keenly interested in assisting us to obtain the sovereignty we want.’ [Theodor Herzl, The Jewish State, p.28 H Pordes, London 1972]
When Hitler came to power in Germany it was clear to most Jews throughout the world that the Nazis were no ordinary anti-Semitic regime. Throughout Eastern Europe, from Poland to Romania and the Baltic states, anti-Semitism was rife. Ghetto benches in Polish universities had been introduced in 1935 and anti-Semitic laws had been introduced in Hungary and other countries.
The Nazis however represented something entirely different from the feudal and religious anti-Semitism of the Eastern Europe. The Nazis were unconcerned with the myth that the Jews killed Christ. They were anti-communists who believed that the Jews were the germ carriers of Bolshevism, engaged in a world-wide conspiracy to undermine every nation bar their own. The Jews were a devil people. The Nazis had contempt for the unsystematised anti-Semitism that ended up in pogroms, a few deaths, but a continuation of the ‘Jewish problem’.  They were scientific racists.
The Nazis began with a concerted legislative attack to drive the Jews out of society beginning on April 7th 1933 with the Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service which resulted in the dismissal of Jews (apart from veterans of the first world war and their offspring) from the civil service. It proceeded via the 1935 Nuremburg Laws, which removed citizenship from the Jews and made them subjects. The Zionists welcomed the Nuremburg laws as clarifying the situation of Jews in Germany.
For the Nazis it didn’t matter whether or not someone who was Jewish converted to Christianity. Once a Jew always a Jew. Being Jewish was a racial not a religious category, unlike the situation in the anti-Semitic countries of Eastern Europe. Thus there appeared the Christian Jew, Jews who had converted to Christianity. In Nazi eyes they remained Jewish. The Protestant Reich Church in particular went along with this and barred them from their precincts.
Jews the world over knew that the advent of Hitler in a country that was the citadel of European civilisation, Goethe, Schiller and Beethoven, was entirely different from the plethora of anti-Semitic regimes in Eastern Europe. The result was that when Hitler took power there was an instant reaction from world Jewry. The Daily Express described it as Judea Declares War on Germany’ but of course it was the other way around (though fascists have subsequently used this headline to justify Hitler’s war on the Jews).
World Jewry were united in seeing the advent of Hitler as a menace and threat to the existence of German Jewry. An international Jewish boycott of Nazi Germany grew up almost instantaneously supported by the labour movement and many non-Jews. The history of the Boycott is best described in Edwin Black’s book, The Transfer Agreement.
There was no section of Jewry who welcomed or saw any good in the advent of the Nazis bar one. Most Jews feared for the German Jewish community. The Zionist leaders however only saw good coming from the rise of Hitler to power. Their only concern was whether or not the Nazis would benefit the Jewish state-in-the-making. They were determined to exploit the rise of Hitler to their own advantage.
Francis Nicosia, Professor of Holocaust Studies at Vermont University, cites Berl Katznelson, second only to David Ben Gurion, as describing the rise of the Nazis as ‘an opportunity to build and flourish like none we have ever had or ever will have.’ [Zionism and Anti-Semitism in Nazi Germany, p.91, CUP 2008] Tom Segev, the Israeli journalist and historian, ascribes the same comments to a report from Moshe Beilinson, a Mapai activist, to Katznelson..
Ben Gurion, the leader of Palestinian Zionism and the first Israeli Prime Minister expressed the hope that the Nazi victory would become a ‘fertile force for Zionism.’ [Tom Segev, The Seventh Million, p.18, 1993 Hill and Wang]
Of course it can be argued that very few people in 1933 could foresee the Holocaust but most Jews feared the worst in respect of the Nazis’ intentions.  Both Ben Gurion and Jabotinsky foresaw the extermination of the Jews. [Segev, p.18]
In New York 55,000 packed inside Madison Square Gardens with another 35,000 outside.  To prevent this rally on March 27th Goering had summoned the leaders of the German Jewish community to get them to try and get it called off - only the Zionists agreed to do so
Every section of Jewish society bar the Jewish bourgeoisie and the Zionist movement supported the campaign to boycott Nazi Germany.
In August 1933 the Zionist movement reached agreement with the Nazis for a trading agreement, Ha'avara. It involved the use of the assets of German Jews who emigrated to purchase German goods which were exported to Palestine. The same Jews were allowed to take £1,000 in foreign currency with them in order to enter Palestine as capitalists, without the need for an immigration certificate. When these goods were sold in Palestine, the migrants whose money it was received a fraction of the value of their money.
This benefited the Zionists enormously since it enabled whole industries like brewery and printing to develop. Ha’avara accounted for 60% of total capital investment in Jewish Palestine. [David Rosenthall, Chaim Arlosoroff 65 Years After his Assassination, Jewish Frontier, May-June 1998, p. 28]. Literally Hitler built the Zionist economy in Palestine.
What was the reason for Nazi Germany agreeing to this deal which on the face of it involved a unilateral transfer of German wealth to the Zionist economy in Palestine? Initially at least they gained no foreign currency though it did keep German factories working.
 ‘One of the German authorities’ principal goals in negotiating with the Zionist movement was to fragment the Jewish boycott of German goods...  Correspondence between Heinrich Wolff, the German consul in Palestine, and the German Foreign Ministry shows that shattering the boycott was a key motive for the German authorities in concluding the Transfer Agreement.’  
Whilst most Jews were boycotting the Nazi economy the Zionists were doing their best to expand their trade with them. Ha'avara acted as the spearhead of a concerted attempt to increase the market for German goods throughout the Middle East.
It was condemned vociferously by Jews the world over. Baruch Vladeck, the editor of the Yiddish daily Forward and Chairman of the Jewish Labor Committee in the United States described how
‘The whole organized labor movement and the progressive world are waging a fight against Hitler through the boycott. The Transfer Agreement scabs on that fight.’
Vladeck contended that
The main purpose of the Transfer is not to rescue the Jews from Germany but to strengthen various institutions in Palestine.’
Vladeck termed Palestine ‘the official scab agent against the boycott in the Near-East’ because ‘without the worldwide effort to topple the Third Reich, Hitler would have never agreed to the Transfer Agreement.’ [Lenni Brenner, pp. 92-93, 51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration with the Nazis’, Barricade Books, 1972].
There is no doubt, as Edwin Black argued, that the aim of Ha'avara was not to rescue German Jews but to rescue their wealth.  Some 20,000 Jews were able to emigrate from Germany under Ha'avara but these were among the richest Jews who would have had least difficulty in emigrating anyway. What Ha'avara did was to take the pressure off the Nazis. Zionism prioritised its own needs above the needs of Jews.
Whereas most Jews did all they could to try and help destroy the Nazi government in its infancy, the Zionist movement took a different position altogether.  So keen was it to collaborate and work with the Nazis that it couldn’t even condemn the Nazi government and its anti-Semitism at its 1933 Congress in Prague.
Even Elie Wiesel, the arch Zionist, who was a survivor of Auschwitz, admitted that the
Jewish leaders of Palestine never made the rescue of European Jews into an overwhelming national priority. We know that Zionist leader Itzhak Gruenbaum... considered creating new settlements more urgent than saving Jews from being sent to Treblinka and Birkenau.’ 
Wiesel cited approvingly Tom Segev’s conclusion that ‘Only a few survivors owed their lives to the efforts of the Zionist movement’ [The Land That Broke Its Promise : THE SEVENTH MILLION: The Israelis and the Holocaust].
Prior to 1939 the Zionist leaders lobbied the Gestapo not to allow emigration to any other destination bar Palestine, so much for the nonsense that Ha'avara was about saving Jews. As Saul Friedland wrote, ‘the Palestine leadership refused to extend any help to emigrants whose destination was not Eretz Israel.[Nazi Germany and the Jews, 1933-1945, p.57, Orion Books, 2009]
Ben Gurion’s official biographer, Shabtai Teveth quotes Ben Gurion as saying that where there was ‘a conflict of interest between saving individual Jews and the good of the Zionist enterprise, we shall say that the enterprise comes first.’ For Ben Gurion ‘there were no “personal” cases, no individual Jews for him’ there was only ‘the Jewish people.’ [Teveth, The Burning Ground 1886-1948, pp. 855, 857, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, 1987].
This was demonstrated in what was termed ‘cruel Zionism’. When the Western powers held a conference in Evian in France to discuss the Jewish refugee question in Europe, the Zionists hoped that it would fail.  They repeatedly expressed their fears that discussion of the refugees would take the spotlight off the building up of the ‘Jewish’ state in Palestine. The Western leaders were also opposed to letting the Jews of Germany into their countries. The only positive outcome from Evian was the offer from Gen. Trujillo of San Domingo to accept 100,000 Jewish refugees. Brazil’s representative, Helio Lobo, indicated that Brazil could accept 40,000 emigrants a year, though nothing like this number were admitted. [S Beit Zvi, Post-Ugandan Zionism on Trial, A Study of the Factors That Caused the Mistakes Made by the Zionist Movement During the Holocaust, 1991, p. 170, Zahala, Tel Aviv].
The Jewish Agency headed by Berl Locker, was unremitting in its hostility to the offer of the Dominican Republic and did their best to destroy it.
Ben Gurion wrote a memo to the Jewish Agency Executive in 1938 explaining that
‘if the Jews are faced with a choice between the refugee problem and rescuing Jews from concentration camps on the one hand, and aid for the national museum in Palestine on the other, the Jewish sense of pity will prevail and our people's entire strength will be directed at aid for the refugees in the various countries. Zionism will vanish from the agenda and indeed not only world public opinion in England and America but also from Jewish public opinion. We are risking Zionism's very existence if we allow the refugee problem to be separated from the Palestine problem.’ [Memo of 17.12.38 to Zionist Executive, Arie Bober, The Other Israel, p.171
After the Nazi pogrom of Kristalnacht, when nearly all German synagogues were set on fire, hundreds of Jews murdered and property destroyed, the British agreed to admit 10,000 Jewish children (though not their parents). The Zionists were furious that they were not going to Palestine and Ben Gurion expressed his anger in a speech to Mapai’s Central Committee on 9th December 1938, he said:
‘If I knew that it would be possible to save all the children in Germany by bringing them over to England, and only half of them by transporting them to Eretz Yisrael, then I would opt for the second alternative. For we must weigh not only the life of these children, but also the history of the People of Israel.’ [Yoav Gelber, ‘Zionist policy and the fate of European Jewry 1939-42, Yad Vashem Studies,, Vol. 12.;, p.199, Segev, p.28].   
The Jewish Agency in Jerusalem set up a Rescue Committee that rescued no one. Its leader Yitzhak Gruenbaum of the ‘left’ Zionist Mapam made his views clear at a meeting of the Zionist Actions Committee in mid-January 1943, when he argued that money from the Foundation Fund should not be used for rescue:
‘No, and I say it again – no! This tendency to consider Zionisactivities secondary must be resisted….’
The struggle for redemption of the land did not
‘readily fit with activities for the benefit of the Diaspora, and this is our tragedy.’ But if a choice had to be made between the two, then ‘Zionism comes first.’ The Blue & Yellow Stars of David The Zionist Leadership and the Holocaust, 1939-1945, Harvard University Press, 1990, Cambridge Massachussets, p.76.
Even Shabtai Teveth, Ben Gurion’s official biographer, had to conclude that
‘If there was a line in Ben-Gurion’s mind between the beneficial disaster and an all-destroying catastrophe, it must have been a very fine one.’ [Teveth, p. 851]
Rudolf Kasztner
Most people will not even have heard of the Kasztner Trial in Israel between 1954 and 1958. It led to the fall of the Moshe Sharrett government in 1955. It stemmed from the accusation that the former leader of Hungarian Zionism Rudolf Kasztner had collaborated in the deportation to Auschwitz of nearly half a million Jews in return for a train out of Hungary for the Jewish and Zionist elite.
A libel action was brought on Kasztner’s behalf by the Israeli state and Attorney General Chaim Cohen appeared on his behalf. At the trial a number of survivors of the Hungarian Holocaust took the stand to testify against Kasztner. He and his acolytes in the Zionist movement had gone to the brickyards where the Jews were assembled prior to deportation to reassure them that they were being ‘resettled’ in the fictional Kenyermeze or Waldsee. Those that survived came back with vengeance in their hearts. A trial was held in Cluj, the capital of Transylvania, then in  Hungary, where a death sentence was passed by the Jewish Holocaust survivors against Kasztner.
Benjamin Halevi, President of the Jerusalem District Court, found that
‘Eichmann did not want a second Warsaw. For this reason, the Nazis exerted themselves to mislead and bribe the Jewish leaders….
The Nazi patronage of Kasztner, and their agreement to let him save six hundred prominent Jews, were part of the plan to exterminate the Jews. Kasztner was given a chance to add a few more to that number. The bait attracted him. The opportunity of rescuing prominent people appealed to him greatly. He considered the rescue of the most important Jews as a great personal success and a success for Zionism.’
Halevy found that Kasztner had lied when he denied giving testimony at Nuremburg after the war in favour of a leading Nazi, Himmler’s personal emissary in Hungary, Col. Kurt Becher. What the court didn’t know was that Kasztner had given testimony in favour of 7 Nazis including Wisliceny, the butcher of Greek and Slovakian Jewry and Herman Krumey, the man who implemented on a day to day basis the extermination of Hungarian Jewry. Kasztner did all these things as an official emissary of the Jewish Agency, not as an individual.
Halevi concluded with an ancient proverb: ‘timeo Danaos et dona ferentes’ (I fear the Greeks even when they bring presents).
‘By accepting this present Kasztner had sold his soul to the devil.’ Kasztner, as the leader of the JA Rescue Committee, ‘didn’t want to destroy by his left hand what he built with his right…’ [Perfidy, pp. 179-80, Julian Messner, New York 1962.
For those interested in this episode Perfidy written by Ben Hecht, a supporter of Revisionist Zionism, is still the best book. The Zionists have claimed for years that Kasztner was the great rescuer of 1,648 Jews on his train despite his having covered up the Auschwitz Protocols of the Jewish escapees from Auschwitz Rudolph Vrba and Alfred Wetzler but last year even Paul Bogdanor, a far-Right Zionist, who had set out to exonerate Kasztner concluded that he was a Nazi agent in his book Kasztner’s Crimes.
Ken Livingstone was forced out of the Labour Party for saying that Hitler i.e. the Nazis supported Zionism. However this is an incontrovertible fact. The Nazis consciously supported the Zionists against their anti-Zionist opponents in German Jewry.
From the beginning of the Nazi regime, Zionism
‘became a central component of Nazi Jewish policy as the Nazi state sought to reverse Jewish emancipation and assimilation in Germany and to end Jewish life in the Reich…’[Nicosia, p. 105].
A ‘generally ‘pro-Zionist’ stance had emerged as a result of the Ha’avara strategy in Nazi Jewish policy.’ [Nicosia ZANG, p. 89]

On 28th January 1935 Reinhardt Heydrich, issued a directive stating:
‘the activity of the Zionist-oriented youth organizations that are engaged in the occupational restructuring of the Jews for agriculture and manual trades prior to their emigration to Palestine lies in the interest of the National Socialist state’s leadership.’ These organisations therefore ‘are not to be treated with that strictness that it is necessary to apply to the members of the so-called German-Jewish organizations (assimilationists)’. Lucy Dawidowicz,; The War Against the Jews 1933-45, Penguin, London 1987.
In May 1935 Schwarze Korps, paper of the SS, wrote in a similar vein that
‘the Zionists adhere to a strict racial position and by emigrating to Palestine they are helping to build their own Jewish state.... The assimilation-minded Jews deny their race and insist on their loyalty to Germany or claim to be Christians because they have been baptised in order to subvert National Socialist principles.’ Randolph Braham, The Politics of Genocide – The Holocaust in Hungary, Vol. 1. Columbia University Press, 1981 p. 484, fn. 94., 5 May 1935, L. Dawidowicz, p.118,
In 1936, the Palestine Post reported the demand that:
‘… the German Zionist Federation be given recognition by the Government as the only instrument for the exclusive control of German Jewish life was made by the Executive of that body in a proclamation today. All German Jewish organizations, it was declared, should be dominated by the Zionist spirit.’
Zionism sought to build a Jewish state in order to perpetuate what it called the ‘Jewish people’. It was a movement based on a racial fantasy. At critical times, not only during the Nazi era, the Zionist movement has prioritised either building its own movement or the Israeli state above the interests of Jews.  It did this during the Hitler era, it did it during the period of the neo-Nazi Junta in Argentina between 1976 and 1983. It did this in the civil war in Russia when the leader of the Revisionist Zionism Vladimir Jabotinsky allied with the leader of the White Russians Petlyura, despite his forces having massacred thousands of Jews.
Despite its accusation of ‘anti-Semitism’, the Zionist movement has never opposed anti-Semitism.  Of course many individual Zionists fought anti-Semitism including in the Warsaw Ghetto. Just as many Zionists supported the Boycott of Nazi Germany but Zionism is an elitist movement.  During the Nazi era the Zionist movement set their face against any campaign against the Nazis.
Below are extracts from the letter sent by the Zionist Federation of Germany to Hitler.

Extracts - Memo from the German Zionist Federation to Adolf Hitler (21st June 1933)

The full text can be found in Lucy Dawidowicz’s Holocaust Reader, pp. 150-155

May we therefore be permitted to present our views, which, in our opinion, make possible a solution in keeping with the principles of the new German State of National Awakening and which at the same time might signify for Jews a new ordering of the conditions of their existence ... Zionism has no illusions about the difficulty of the Jewish condition, which consists above all in an abnormal occupational pattern and in the fault of an intellectual and moral posture not rooted in one’s own tradition ...
... an answer to the Jewish question truly satisfying to the national state can be brought about only with the collaboration of the Jewish movement that aims at a social, cultural, and moral renewal of Jewry ...
Zionism believes a rebirth of national life, such as is occurring in German life through adhesion to Christian and national values, must also take place in the Jewish national group. For the Jew, too, origin, religion, community of fate and group consciousness must be of decisive significance in the shaping of his life ...
On the foundation of the new state, which has established the principle of race, we wish so to fit our community into the total structure so that for us too, in the sphere assigned to us, fruitful activity for the Fatherland is possible ... Our acknowledgement of Jewish nationality provides for a clear and sincere relationship to the German people and its national and racial realities. Precisely because we do not wish to falsify these fundamentals, because we, too, are against mixed marriage and are for maintaining the purity of the Jewish group ...
... fidelity to their own kind and their own culture gives Jews the inner strength that prevents insult to the respect for the national sentiments and the imponderables of German nationality; and rootedness in one’s own spirituality protects the Jew from becoming the rootless critic of the national foundations of German essence. The national distancing which the state desires would thus be brought about easily as the result of an organic development.
Thus, a self-conscious Jewry here described, in whose name we speak, can find a place in the structure of the German state, because it is inwardly unembarrassed, free from the resentment which assimilated Jews must feel at the determination that they belong to Jewry, to the Jewish race and past. We believe in the possibility of an honest relationship of loyalty between a group-conscious Jewry and the German state ...
For its practical aims, Zionism hopes to be able to win the collaboration even of a government fundamentally hostile to Jews, because in dealing with the Jewish question no sentimentalities are involved but a real problem whose solution interests all peoples, and at the present moment especially the German people.
The realisation of Zionism could only be hurt by resentment of Jews abroad against the German development. Boycott propaganda – such as is currently being carried on against Germany in many ways – is in essence un-Zionist, because Zionism wants not to do battle but to convince and to build ... Our observations, presented herewith, rest on the conviction that, in solving the Jewish problem according to its own lights, the German Government will have full understanding for a candid and clear Jewish posture that harmonizes with the interests of the state


No comments:

Post a comment

Please submit your comments below