1 1 1 ' . 1 ' V I ! ■ THE PRIMARY CAUSE Ti ' , r^<^ ' ; ;^ '^^ : T^ ' f?" OF ANTISEMITISM VM'-Tq.t^.^-. (?0nteU Mttioctaxtg ffiibratg Jltljara, Nf w ^ork FROM THE BENNO LOEWY LIBRARY COLLECTED BY BENNO LOEWY 1854-1919 BEQUEATHED TO CORNELL UNIVERSITY DS 145.S36"" ""'"""'' """"^ '^''IMrY.. P^use of antisem tism 3 1 924 028 575 268 olin a V. Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924028575268 The Primary Cause OF ANTISEMITISM AN ANSWER TO THE JEWISH QUESTION By ABRAHAM S. SgHOMER Aathor of " How We Can Help Ourselves," etc. New York ISRAEL PUBLISHING COMPANY 1909 U Copyright, 1909, by ISRAEL PUBLISHING COMPANY Dedicated to the Cherished Memory of my father Naum Meir Shaikewitz Schomer PREFACE. In the following pages an attempt is made to explain the origin and primary cause of antisemitism, thereby answer- ing the Jewish Question, which for the past twenty centuries has been the most vexata quaestio of mankind. The theory presented here is a new one. But from the positive data at our command, the author elicited the new theory which, he believes, fully explains the reason for the continuous existence of antisemitism. The reader is requested to excuse some lengthy illustrations and repeti- tions of certain facts which will be met with in the course of the inquiry. The subject being a difficult one, it was neces- sary, in order to make it accessible to the general reading public, to present it in as popular and intelligible a manner as the subject permits. VI PREFACE. At this stage it is also the author's wish to say a few words concerning his misgivings as to how the world may treat his theory and himself; his object being to call the reader's attention to a peculiar phenomenon and rule observed in the history of mankind, to which the author hopes to be an exception. At no time in the history of civiliza- tion have new theories, no matter how true they were, succeeded at first in ob- taining the stamp of approval of man- kind. They required the aid of time to force an ingress into the minds of men and become accepted as fundamental truths. The fates of the authors were there- fore similar to those of their theories and even worse. As the theories had suffered from tyrannous criticism, ridi- cule and every possible biting sarcasm, so were their authors subjected to similar ordeals to which were yet added un- founded accusations and calumny. In- PREFACE. Vn stead of appreciation, the theorist re- ceived scorn and hatred, instead of encouragement and approval, reproach and misjndgment. The application of mathematical for- mulas in the solution of the Jewish problem, which the author has intro- duced in this work, will probably strike the reader as unconventional. However, the author believes this method will present the subject in a clear way and bring it down to a definite point. The author hereby wishes to express his gratitude — To his sister, Miss Eose Schomer, for her careful perusal of the manuscript of this thesis and for some important criticisms which she offered on certain points therein, thereby enabhng the author to correct them before it went to press; VIII PREFACE. To Mr. A. S. Freidus, of the New York Public Library, for his friendly aid in the research of bibliography on the Jewish Question; To Mr. Sampson Lederhendler, for his kind assistance in reading the proofs of this work. This book is submitted to the public in general and the student in particular with the hope that they will, as the author did, find the solution of the Jew- ish problem here presented to be a correct one. The Author. New York, November, 1908. < r TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Pbeface , y Intboductory Essay 1 Of Problems and Riddles Of Problem Specialists and Their Rela- tion to Mankind Of the Methods Employed in Solving Everyday Problems Of the Methods Employed in Solving World Problems. Of Cause and Effect The Jewish Question and Foemer Attempts AT Its Solution 13 The Jewish Question Still a Mystery Contradictions of Attempted Explana- tions Dr, Leo Pinsker's "Auto-Emancipation" Dr. Theodor Herzl's **A Jewish State" —-Bernard Lazare's "Antisemitism, Its — -" History and Causes" Synopsis of Lazare's Views Anatole Leroy-Beaulieu's "Israel Amonj the Nations" ig II Of the Prejudice Against the Jew .... 46 Prejudice Against the Jew Always in Evidence Definition of Antisemitism Charles Waldstein's "The Jewish Ques- tion and the Mission of the Jews" G. F. Abbott's "Israel in Europe" Peculiar Perplexity of Jewish Question What Is Needed to Solve the Puzzle. IX X CONTENTS. Ill PAGE Beginnings of Judeophobia 52 The Periods of Judeophobia First Appearance of Jew-hatred Egyptians Haman Second Epoch Considered IV Or THE Factors in the Problem 60 Two Factors — Gentile and Jew "The Public Estimate of the Jew" Third Factor — Prejudice Of the Relations and Nature of the Factors 62 The Relation of the Factors Formula Gentile and Jew, What They Are Opinion of Ernest Renan Prejudice Defined Prof. Joseph Baldwin's Definitions Why the Forms of Antisemitism Are Different The Views of Pinsker and Herzl Briefly Considered Prejudice No More Than a Mental Emo- tion Prejudice Not Hereditary Amended Formula Observation of the Jew VI Man and Jew 73 An Experiment The Man-Jew and Name-Jew Further Amendment of Formula CONTENTS. XI VII PAGE The Name Jew 78 Nothing Amiss with Individual Jew Prejudice Directed Against Name Jew VIII Jews, Judaism, Jewish Religion and Why They Survived 80 The Organization of the Jewish People at Mount Sinai The By-Laws of Judaism The Rabbis' Discipline Difference Between Judaism and Jew- ish Religion An International Ethical and Spiritual People IX Some or the Supposed Causes 87 >' Judaism and the Jewish Religion Exclusiveness of the Jew Crucifixion of Jesus Lack of Land Economic Conditions X Of Societies and Multitudes 94 Difference Between a Multitude and a Society Assemblage and Representation The Abnormality of the Jews as a Col- lective Body » XI Collective Bodies and the Law of the Mind 99 Some Philosophers on the Subject Prof. Borden P. Bowne's "Theory of Thought and Knowledge" xn CONTENTS. PAGE The Affirmation of Unity and Plurality Illustrations The Mind, When Psychological and Logical Application of Mental Law to Corpora- tions -^ The Primary Cause of Antisemitism Dis- covered XII FUBTHEB PEOOF 115 -Mental Attitude Toward Abnormal Bodies George H. Warner's "The Jewish Spectre" Bernard G. Richards' "Discourses of Keidansky" Mental Confusion as to What Consti- tutes a Jew Egyptians' Prejudice Against the Israel- ites Considered. Civilization Does Not Wipe Out Anti- semi tism The Jews Prejudiced Against Them- selves Mr. Arnold White's "The Modern Jew" The Jews' Secret Bond Jews Complain of Lack of Solidarity Vague Attempts at Union Distinction Between "Israel" and "Jew" Some Fundamental Principles XIII Of Knowledge and Reason vs. Superstition AND PbEJUDICE AND OF ThEOBY AND FACT . . 142 When Prejudice and Superstition Take Flight The Triumph of Knowledge and Reason CONTENTS. xnr PAGE Why Knowledge Is Power The Crude Condition of the Mind Superstition and Prejudice Not a Mental Disease The Mind Is Progressive Duration of Prejudice and Superstition Habit Reason Still Immature The Practical Solution of the Jewish Question The Abstract and the Concrete Marconi's Wireless Telegraph XIV Summing Up 149 The Primary Cause of Antisemitism ' - The Mind Must Be Psychological and Logical The Universality of the Law of the Mind XV Final Answer . Finally, antisemitism is the product of the Jew- ish national exclusiveness. --- ^^he real cause for antisemitism then, according to Lazare, is Jewish national exclusiveness, of which fact the anti- semites are ignorantTl- Why those who profess antisemitism should he ignorant of this real cause of their antagonistic sentiments to the Jews, and why there should there- fore be four other causes for antisemi- tism, Mr. Lazare fails to explain, and the Jewish Question only appears to be still more involved and remains un- answered. No less interesting are the views of the noted French author, Anotole Leroy- 38 THE JEWISH QUESTION. Beaulien, who in his work, '^Israel Among the Nations," expresses views most of which are similar to those of Mr. Lazare. In his introductory remarks Mr. Beanlieu says : '*. . . Antisemitism is consist- ent with neither the principles nor the genius of our nation (France). It came to us from the outside, from countries which have neither our spirit nor our traditions. It came to us from across the Ehine, from old Germany, always ready for religious quarrels, and always imbued with the spirit of caste ; from new Germany, all inflated with race pride and scornful of whatever is not Teutonic. *' Antisemitism may be traced also to Eussia, to that huge and shapeless Eussia, which, with its steppes and forests, has remained isolated from the great currents of modern life; to holy, Orthodox Eussia, half Oriental, THE JEWISH QUESTION. 39 half Asiatic, which endeavors to find its national unity in its religious unity, and which regards the Catholic and Lutheran with little more favor than the Israelite; to that autocratic Russia, which differs from us in all its institutions, as well as in all its conditions, be they economic, political, religious or social. Whatever sym- pathy we may feel with the Slavonic mind or the Russian spirit the Rus- sians, who have so often emulated us, would be greatly astonished to see us copying them; as well might one pro- pose to the Czar to model the govern- ment of his moujiks and cossacks on that of the French Republic. '^ . . It must not be inferred from what has been said that the com- plaints of the antisemites are wholly imaginary. By ne means. Whether they attack our private or our public morals and customs, many of their complaints are but too well founded. 40 THE JEWISH QUESTION. Abroad, as well as at home, and most especially, perhaps, in our republican France, they are right, these noisy an- tisemites, in loudly denouncing certain governmental methods, certain prac- tices which seem about to take root in the life of modern nations. Antisemi- tism may have been, in its time, a pro- test on the part of the public con- science against culpable concessions of men in oflSce, against the venality of politicians and the domination, at once mysterious and contemptuous, of stock-jobbing interlopers. Despite ^ its excesses and outrages, antisemi- tism is within its rightful province^ when it assails the worship of money, the scandalous barter of political in- fluences, and the shameless exploita- tion of the people by the men whom they have elected; or, again, when it unmasks the hypocritical intolerance of inconsistent free-thinkers, who THE JEWISH QUESTION. 41 have erected irreligion and corruption into a method of government. ^^ . . Modern society is ailing indeed, more ailing than the most hon- est antisemite imagines. The error of antisemitism lies in its misappre- hension of the origin and seat of the evil. It sees, or is willing to see, but ^J}3J^ ^^^ sp^pt.n^«i ^^^ it (^r^^^«_^^^T« symptom the cause of the disease. Antisemitism is essentially 'simple- minded' in the literal sense of the word. It fails to grasp the complex- ity of social phenomena. But this failure which should prove its ruin is largely the cause of its success with the masses, who in their simplicity are always carried away by that which they deem simple, * ' Even if the Jews had all the vices and all the power which the hatred of their enemies sees fit to ascribe to them, it were none the less childish to discover in a handful of Semites the 42 THE JEWISH QUESTION. source of the evils that afiBict modern society. ^^It is not true that in order to re- store it to health we need but to elimi- nate the Semite, as the surgeon's knife eradicates a cyst or a malignant ex- crescence. The extent and gravity of the evil are of a different nature. The evil is in ourselves, in our blood, in the very marrow of our bones. To cure us it will not be enough to re- move a foreign body from our flesh. Though every Jew be banished from French soil, though Israel be swept from the face of Europe, France would not be one whit more healthy, nor Europe in any better state. The first condition of a cure is a knowl- edge of the nature of one's malady. Now, antisemitism deceives us; it blinds us to our condition by trying to make us believe that the cause of the 7 THE JEWISH QUESTION. 43 evil is external instead of internal. There is no more dangerous error. We are afflicted with an internal trou- ble, due to our constitution and our entire mode of living; and the anti- semites insist upon telling us over and over again that it is but a super- ficial ailment, brought on by chance, and foreign to our race and our blood. Even when they boast of exposing our secret wounds, they misconstrue their nature; consequently, instead of furnishing a cure for them, they are in great danger of inflaming them still more. ' ^ Such will be, I doubt not, the feel- ing of every reader who is sufficiently thoughtful and independent to base his opinions upon reflections, and not upon the antipathies of the mob. Antisemitism, even when most justi- fied in its complaints, is mistaken as to the source of our evils." 44 THE JEWISH QUESTION. In another part of the work, Mr. Beaulieu asks: ^^ . . Whence comes this steady and involuntary antipathy? Has it no other cause than the instinctive survival of the prejudices of our fore- fathers? Honestly speaking, I would not dare to assert this. In order to account for it we must look more closely at the Jewish ra^g^ whose con- tact is still distasteful to so many men of less noble blood; especially as, in order to understand the race well, it is not enough that we should know of what ethnic or religious elements it is composed. Before deciding what place the modern nations should assign to the Jews, it will be well to study the essential traits of the Jewish mind and character. The investigation will, I think, bring out some interesting problems in psychology." Mr. Beaulieu then goes on with an in- THE JEWISH QUESTION. 45 quiry into the physiology, psychology, genius, spirit and particularism of the Jew. He finds the Jewish characteris- tics favorable to Israel, and speculates on the cause of antisemitism which he cannot discover, although he gives many possible causes. After a diligent search under the literary method, he fails to solve the problem. We could thus give the views of many other noted authors on the Jewish Question, but as we said before, while they all display brilliancy of style and thought and give us bright glimpses of truth, the truth itself is not discovered. On none of their theories can the mind settle in the conviction that it has traced the real primary cause of anti- Semitism. IL Of the Pkejudice Against the Jew. From the foregoing the reader un- doubtedly observed that every phase of antisemitism, no matter in what place and with which class of people it is found, always circles around one point, namely, prejudice. We must therefore bear in mind that at the bottom of Judeophobia there is always that prejudice which must be the real cause of all accusations against the Jews. The term '^Antisemitism," as we have seen, and according to the Jewish Ency- clopedia, has its origin in the ethnologi- cal theory that the Jews, as Semites, are entirely different from the Aryan or Indo-European populations, and can never be amalgamated with them. The word implies that the Jews are not ob- 46 PREJUDICE AGAINST THE JEW. 47 jected to on account of their religion, but on account of their racial character- istics. As such are mentioned: greed, a special aptitude for money-making, aver- sion to hard work, clannishness and ob- trugiveness, lack of social tact, and espe- cially of patriotism. Finally the term is used to justify resentment for every crime or objectionable act committed by an individual Jew. From what we have already learned we know that the foregoing suppositions regarding the Jews are groundless, that the prejudice ngaiust the Jews is nn tJhe effect of any or all of the sairl nccusa- tions brought again^t^^g^,JmiJiiaLllie accusatio ns are ^ ladf^, M(^cau$i,e, of the prejudice. We now begin to realize wherein the difficulty of the Jewish Question lies.£J[f instead of that prejudice there were some definite idea^ if the Gentile could actually point to a definite reason for his dislike of the Jew, there would be no 48 PREJUDICE AGAINST THE JEW. riddle at all, since the cause of the dis- like would be clear/J But because what we have before us is j^rejudice, which does not explain the real cause for that sentiment, it makes of the Jewish Ques- tion a riddle. In that also we find the reason why so many able authors could not arrive at any definite conclusion on this problem. Mr. Charles Waldstein, in his work, '^The Jewish Question and the Mission of the Jews," after considering the numerous antisemitic outbreaks in vari- ous countries, could after all not find some definite point on which he could settle as the cause of the violent Jude- ophobia ; and he asks : ^^Is there a Jewish Question at all?" He then continues: ^'I main- tain that there is not, in the sense in which we speak of a Labor Question, or the Eastern Question, or the Home Eule Question. For the element of PREJUDICE AGAINST THE JEW. 49 unity is hiding the subject upon which it is proposed to establish a question ; and the attributes which it represents are different from, nay, opposed to, one another according to the circum- stances in which it has been placed/' In concluding his preface, the same author says: ^^But at the end I ask myself: whether all I have written in this book will be of any avail to dispel the preju- dice among enemies of the Jews?" In the same doubtful tone Mr. G. F. Abbott in his book, '^Israel in Europe," says: ''The Jewish Question — a question than which none possess a deeper in- terest for the student of the past, or a stronger fascination for the specula- tor of the future; a question com- pared with which the Eastern, the Irish, and all other vexed questions 50 PREJUDICE AGAINST THE JEW. are but things of yesterday; a ques- tion which has taxed the ingenuity of European statesmen ever since the dispersion of this Eastern people over the lands of the West/' lNow, why are all these thinkers so perplexed when confronted with the Jewish Question?^ Why have other vexed questions, for instance, the Labor, Irish and Eastern questions, never been regarded with such amazement and be- wilderment as this one? Why has no other question called forth fear and su- perstition as the Jewish Question does? Why is there an answer to every other question, and not to this one? ("Because in all other vexed questions there is, after all, a clear issue, some- thing definite on which the mind can set- tle and consider, while in the Jewish Question there is no clear issue, nothing definite before the mind.J All that the mind can perceive is a prejudice against PREJUDICE AGAINST THE JEW. 51 a people] the reason for which is not known and cannot be discovered.J The prejudice against the Jew — if the many ^le^^ authors who have investi- gated, searched and have written on the subject, had stopped at this point only and endeavored to look for the mysteri- ous cause of the prejudice instead of wandering away in other directions in search for answers to other questions, the problem would have been solved long ago. What is needed to solve this puzzle is the cause o f the effect , which is desig- nated by the word prejudice, and which causes other effects most terrible to the Jewish people and most degrading to civilization. That cause we will go in search of in the following pages. vfc ni. Beginnings of Judeophobia. After a careful perusal of the history of the Jews, we find Judeophobia in evi- dence at two distinct periods far from each other. These are, when the Israel- ites sojourned with the Egyptians, and when, after being a full-fledged nation for nearly a thousand years, they were dispersed among the peoples of the world. During the period of the Jewish exist- ence as a nation, there is no evidence of that repugnance and prejudice which we find in the time of Israel's Goluth in Egypt and his Goluth among the na- tions after losing Palestine. What is remarkable is that we dis- cover, as we shall presently demon- strate, in the dislike of the Israelite by the Egyptian, and the dislike of the Jew 52 BEGINNINGS OF JUDEOPHOBIA. 53 by the modern Gentile, the same preju- dice as their cause and the same cause for the prejudice. Mr. Bernard Lazare in Chapter II. of his already mentioned treatise, ^^Anti- semitism, Its History and Causes,'' very ably sums up the antagonism against Israel at the two different periods, and although we do not agree with his con- clusion as to the relation between the Egyptians and the Israelites, we shall nevertheless quote him and then discuss the proposition, which is of great impor- tance in our inquiry. Mr. Lazare says : '^Modern antisemites who are in quest of sires for themselves, unhesi- tatingly trace the first demonstrations against the Jews back to the day of ancient Egypt. For that purpose they are particularly pleased to refer to Genesis xliii, 32, where it is said: 'The Egyptians might not eat bread 54 BEGINNINGS OF JUDEOPHOBIA. with the Hebrews; for that it is i*n abomination unto the Egyptians/ They also rely upon a few verses of Exodns, among them the following: ^Behold, the people of the children of Israel are more and mightier than we ; come on, let us deal wisely with them, lest they multiply/ (Exodus i, 9, 10.) ^*It is certain that the sons of Jacob who came to the land of Goshen under the Shepherd Pharaoh Aphobis were treated by the Egyptians with the same contempt as their brothers, the Hyksos, referred to in hiero- glyphic texts as lepers, called also 'plague' and 'pest' in some inscrip- tions. They arrived at that very epoch when a very strong national sentiment manifested itself against the Asiatic invaders, hated for their cruelty; this sentiment soon led to the war of independence, which resulted in the final victory of Ahmos I., and the enslavement of the Hebrews. How- BEGINNINGS OF JUDEOPHOBIA. 55 ever, unless one is a violent anti-Jew, it is impossible to perceive in those remote disturbances anything beyond a mere incident in a struggle between conquerors and conquered. i t There is no antisemitism until the Jews, having abandoned their native land, settle as immigrants in foreign countries and come into contact with natives or older settlers, whose cus- toms, race and religion are different from those of the Hebrews. ^^Accordingly the history of Haman and Mordecai may be taken as the be- ginning of antisemitism, and the anti- semites have not failed so to do. This view is, perhaps, more correct. Though the historical reality of the book of Esther can scarcely be relied upon, still it is worthy of note that its author puts into the mouth of Haman some of the complaints, which, at a later period, are uttered by Tacitus and other Latin writers. ^And Haman 56 BEGINNINGS OF JUDEOPHOBIA. said unto the king, Ahasuerus : there is a certain people scattered abroad and dispersed among the peoples in all the provinces of thy kingdom; and their laws are diverse from all peo- ple; neither keep they the king's laws.' " (Esther iii, 8.) That the cause of the prejudice on the part of the Egyptians against the Israel- ites was the same as that existing since the time of Haman, we will demonstrate in the course of this work. Let us first consider Haman 's hatred of the Jews in the kingdom of Ahasuerus. [^ Haman 's complaint to the king was against all the Jews, but his wrath was kindled by one Jew — Mordecai. J In the words of the book Esther : ''And all the king's servants that were in the king's gate, bent the knee and prostrated themselves to Haman; BEGINNINGS OF JUDEOPHOBIA. 57 for SO had the king commanded con- cerning him; but Mordecai bent not the knee nor prostrated himself. '*Then said the king's servants, who were in the king's gate, unto Mor- decai, ^Why transgressest thou the king's command?' ^'Now it came to pass when they spoke unto him day by day, and he hearkened not unto them, that they told it to Haman, to see whether the words of Mordecai would be able to stand; for he had told them that he was a Jew, (Note this last sentence.) ^^And when Haman saw that Mor- decai bent not the knee, nor prostrated himself for him, Haman became full of fury. *^But it appeared too contemptible in his eyes to lay his hand on Morde- cai alone ; for they had told him of the people of Mordecai ; therefore Haman sought to destro y all the Jews that were throughout all the kingdom of 58 BEGINNINGS OF JUDEOPHOBIA. Achasliverosh, the people of Morde- cai/' (Esther iii, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.) 1 Here is a clear case of prejudice against the whole Jewish people. Be- cause Mordecai offended him, Haman at once charged all the Jews of the king- dom with insubordination and asked the ^ — ^ ki^ng to destroy them all. * C From the narrative it is evident that Haman was prejudiced against the Jews before the affair with Mordecai. The latter 's refusal to bend his knee was only the spur to turn the prejudice into a furious hatred which only the blood of all the Jews could satisfy. If there had been no prejudice against the whole Jewish people, it would have been im- possible for Haman to think of destroy- ing all Jews because one transgressed against him. '^ From the foregoing observations we always arrive at one and the same con- clusion, that prejudice is at the bottom BEGINNINGS OF JUDEOPHOBIA. 59 of all accusations against the Jews; hence, prejudice is the cause of antisemi- tism. ^ c 4 N.^. - --- ^ ^. y^ ^■" y-'/ -y^-^'^ V. ,. Causa latet, vis est notissima. What is the cause of the prejudice ? IV. Of the Factors in the Problem. We will now approacli the old Jewish Question with a view of finding its solu- tion. Our first step is to ascertain what fac- tors of a positive nature we are given in this problem. We perceive that there are two cer- tain factors — Gentile and Jew, There are no other factors and our attention must be directed toward these two only without trying to create others. There is a certain phenomenon always in evidence in the relations between the two. This phenomenon is a prejudice manifested by the Gentile against the Jew. The relation in that respect be- tween the two is ably and briefly summed up in the article, ^^The Public Estimate of the Jew, ' ' which appeared in the New York Independent, November 8, 1906; among other things it read : 60 FACTORS IN THE PROBLEM. 61 *'- . . Whether it is socially, whether as a citizen in many lands, in many forms somewhere, in some form everywhere, there is still a ban, a prejudice, at least an exclamation or an interrogation point. Theoretical expression on paper and practical working of affairs are, as to him (the Jew), at variance." We thus have two certain factors and one uncertain one: (1) Gentile, (2) Jew, (3) Prejudice (manifested by the first against the second). ^ lA Ju. 'c- The question which arises here is whp that prejudice against the Jew? - 7^ '' That why is the indefinite something, the X, the unknown quantity of our problem. If we succeed in discovering the cause for the prejudice, our task will be com- pleted — the Jewish Question solved. V. Of the Eelation and Natuke of the Factoks. In our problem, we have seen, there are three factors, two certain and one uncertain: Gentile, Jew and Prejudice. We know that it is the Gentile who entertains the prejudice. We also know that the Prejudice is directed against the Jew. We consequently understand the relation of the Gentile and Jew, but we do not know to what prejudice is re- lated; in other words, what is the cause of the prejudice. It is clear, however, that the relation of the prejudice to that indefinite something, to the X of our problem, must necessarily be equal to the Prejudice of the Gentile against the Jew, since it is the same Prejudice which is observed as the relation of the two positive factors in the problem. 62 RELATION OF THE FACTORS. 63 We shall therefore (although it will appear unconventional) formulate our problem in the form of a formula as follows : The relation between the Prejudice of the Gentile and the Jew is equal to the relation of the Prejudice to X or, Prejudice of Gentile: Jew:: Preju- dice : X;_^c^,^.,,Kyyu This means that the prejudice of the Gentile against the Jew is equal to and really consists in his prejudice against some cause, X. We have learned that the prejudice against the Jew is Ifhic et ubique. Its manifestations depend upon the cultural status of the people which entertains it, but it has been in existence ever since the Jewish dispersion. The prejudice then against the Jew is universal ; hence, the Jewish Question is a universal one. Having before us three factors, it is 64 RELATION OF THE FACTORS. now necessary to define and understand them. Gentile and Jew, what are they? First of all, we find that they are both members of the white division of the human species; that they belong to the Caucasian group. We then discover that neither of them is purely Aryan or Semi- tic, but both are modern men, and that the Jew as a man is not inferior to the Gentile. Even Ernest Eenan, who claims to have been the first to recognize the in- feriority of the Semite to the Aryan, in his ^^Le Judaisme comme Race et comme Eeligion" (assuming for argument's sake that his theory is correct), makes the positive assertion that the Jews are not a Semitic race, and are in every re- spect as good modern men as the other Aryan peoples. The same view is held by many scholars already mentioned and quoted and others. RELATION OF THE FACTORS. 65 Having thus ascertained the nature of the positive factors, we shall proceed to inquire into the nature of the phenom- enon — Prejudice. /[^Prejudice is defined as a judgment or opinion formed without due examination of the facts or reasons that are essential to a just and impartial determination; a mental decision based on other grounds than reason or justice. In other words, Prejudice is some kind of a feel- ing more than anything elseT? Professor Joseph Baldwin, in his book, ^^ Psychology Applied to the Art of Teaching," very simply sets forth and defines the different kinds of feeling. He says: ^'Feeling, — ^I enjoy and suffer. I experience various feelings differing in kind. Some feelings are occa- sioned by sensor-excitations caused by organic stimuli; these feelings are organic sensations. Some feelings 66 RELATION OF THE FACTORS. are occasioned by sensor-excitations caused by external stimuli acting througlL the special senses ; these feel- ings are special sensations. (Other feelings are occasioned by ideas ; these feelings are emotions. ■ Feeling in- cludes organic sensations, special sen- sations and emotions." In another part of the same work Mr. Baldwin says: '^Law reigns in the Self -World. — Deeper insight satisfies me that self acts spontaneously, but acts in uni- form ways. I find that the uniform ways in which self acts are the laws of the mental economy. Self is sub- ject to mental laws of the mental economy. Self is subject to mental laws just as matter is subject to phys- ical laws. Self must attend, in order to know. Self must ascend through particulars to generals. Self must re- RELATION OF THE FACTORS. 67 call the past through the present. Self must make effort, in order to growth. Law reigns in the mind-world. ' ' L Prejudice, consequently, is an emo- tion. It is created under some certain mental law. J The phenomena of feeling and thought and the laws of the mind are treated and explained by Psychology. Prejudice is ever followed by the feel- ings of dislike and hatred; the latter feelings are followed by action, which may be of different forms, depending upon the cultural status of the man. We thus realize why the forms of antisemi- tism are different among the peoples where Jews are settled. As we have seen in the foregoing pages, the late Dr. Pinsker has said that in the psychology of the peoples the basis of the prejudice against the Jew- ish nation is to be found, and that other factors besides not less important, '*« 68 RELATION OF THE FACTORS. which render impossible the fusion or equalization of the Jews with the other peoples, must also be considered. Jude- ophobia, he said, is a psychic disorder. As a psychic disorder it is hereditary^ and as a disease transmitted for two thousand years it is incurable. His con- clusion was, that ^^the Jews are not a living nation ; they are everywhere aliens, therefore they are despised." Here we discover the error of that able scholar. He labored under the mis- taken impression that the prejudice against the Jew hes in the psychology of the peoples, which at best is an indefinite statement, whereas it cannot lie else- where but in the psychology of the indi- vidual. Here is also his error in mis- taking prejudice for a psychic disease which is hereditary. Prejudice is no more than a mental emotion caused by a phenomenon which the mind cannot understand and of which it can form no definite idea. As RELATION OF THE FACTORS. 69 soon as the mind forms a definite idea and understands the phenomenon, preju- dice ceases of itself, that emotion is gone. It is consequently no disease, but the ignorant state of the mind. Igno- rance is certainly not hereditary. The same error of Dr. Pinsker was entertained by many other writers on the Jewish Question, among them also Dr. Herzl. Dr. Pinsker *s conclusion that the fact of the Jew being an alien causes that prejudice, was also errone- ous,^ as we will further demonstrate. In a similar manner we see the other learned authors deviating from the straight road which the problem pre- sents, thus failing to reach a definite point on the question. To proceed now with our inquiry; we are aware that as far as the Gentile is concerned the cause for the prejudice with him is a psychologic one. We have thus ascertained what road we have to take in our inquiry with the Gentile. 70 RELATION OF THE FACTORS. ^ Knowing that it is within his psychology we cannot make the blunder of looking I tor it somewhere else. \ji^ t^<>'^^^.^' -^^ ^-' We will accordingly amend our form- ula thus: The relation of the Mental attitude of Gentile to the Jew is equal to the rela- tion of Prejudice to cause, X: or, Mental attitude of Gentile: Jew:: Prejudice: X. We have to discover what occurs in the mind of the Gentile when he comes in contact with a Jew, in order to get a clear idea of his emotion of prejudice. J We shall therefore have to use with him intro spection . At this stage we have to consider another phase of the problem. r Emotions are by themselves effects - > which must necessarily be caused by some things. Without anything to cause them there cannot be any emotions. In our problem we see that there is RELATION OF THE FACTORS. 71 the emotion of prejudice within the Gentile against the Jew, and the ques- tion, therefore, is what causes that emo- tion. Since we have no other factors but Gentile and Jew and prejudice, and since the prejudice is manifested by the first against the second, it is obvious that it must be the latter who causes that emotion within the psychology of the former; hence our answer obtained is that the Jew calls forth the emotion of prejudice within the Gentile. This answer shows us what other road we must take in order to arrive at a solution of our problem. Since it is the Jew who causes the emotion of preju- dice within the mind of the Gentile, we have also to observe the Jew. With him we must use our sense-perception. As sense-perception is an easier pro- cedure than introspection, our next step will then be to observe the Jew and en- deavor to find what there is about him 72 RELATION OF THE FACTORS. which causes that prejudice against him. Is it his appearance, his actions, or some other trait in his person? We accordingly continue our inquiry and discover a most remarkable fact. K VI. Man and Jew. There are two kinds_of_Jews. Some Jews are 'recognized as Jews by reason of their physiognomy, manner of dress, or speech; other Jews cannot so be rec- ognized. Lin neither of these classes do we find anything particularly objection- able or something which should call forth prejudice. They are not worse than, and are as good as. Gentiles.^ Failing to discover anything which should justify the prejudice, we resort to some experiment. We introduce a Jew of each class to a Gentile. The one who cannot be recognized as a Jew we permit to go unrecognized as such. We t hen discover th at the Gentile has a prejudice against the man in whom he recognized the Jew, against the other he entertains no such emotion. On the 74 MAN AND JEW. contrary, he enjoys tlie other's company and sometimes even prefers him to others. After the lapse of some time we dis- close to the Gentile the identity of his friend — the Jew. We observe a change coming over the Gentile. Unperceived bj^imself^ the^prejudice appearswiihin him. j As time goes on that emotion be- gins to do its work, he feels already a dislike against the recognized Jew,, and the least dispute which may happen to arise between the two will lead to a strong dislike or hatred on the part of the Gentile. At any rate, there will ever be that ^ * exclamation or interrogation point" deep within the mind of the Gen- tile. [_There already is a something which mars the friendship between the two, and the Jew who was much es- teemed and even loved before becomes suddenly or gradually an object of fear, disrespect and even hate.J This wonderful phenomenon is cer- MAN AND JEW. 75 tainly very puzzling and we try another experiment. A Gentile who by his looks resembles a Jew is introduced to a Gentile, the lat- ter mistaking him for a Jew. " The result is that from the very first minute the prejudice is there.7^hen the Gentile is informed that the person is not a Jew, the prejudice vanishes as if by magicT] Much perplexed by these experiments, we ask the Gentile for a reason, but he is unable to explain those p henome na. No matter whether the Gentile is a con- servative or a radical, ignorant or highly educated, an orthodox or an atheist, the resul t is al ways the same. Even if the Gentile tries to convince himself that there is nothing the matter with him as to his feelings for the Jew, he is mis- taken. fDeep within him there is the emotion of prejudice smouldering and needs only the slightest provocation to be turned into a flame of hatred.^ At first this phenomenon seems very 76 MAN AND JEW. perplexing and baffling to tlie mind, but upon a second consideration it appears simple of explanation. We have observed that the emotion of prejudice against a man arises within the Gentile^ the moment the latter gets the consciousness that the former is a Jewp^otherwise that emotion is absent. It is evident, then, that it is the name Jew which causes that emotion. This discovery is of great moment in our inquiry, for it expressly establishes the fact that while there is nothing wrong about the man — Jew, there is something amiss with the name — Jew. We cannot fail to realize the importance of this distinction, for it gives us the key to the riddle. We thus find that the relation of the mental attitude of Gentile to the Jew is equal to the relation of prejudice to the ^^ame — Jew, or, ^ ^ Mental attitude of Gentile: Jew:: I Prejudice : Name — Jew. MAN AND JEW. 77 Here it is necessary to pause and re- flect. We have reached a spot with many roads leading in different directions; it is necessary therefore to guard against taking the wrong path. Let us critically consider the situation. f We have discovered that it is the name Jew which is that cause of the prejudice/ Our next step should then be to consider what there may be in that name Jew which produces that emotion. VII. The Name Jew. The name Jew is not tlie name of an individual, but of a certain class of men. The class of men going oy that name number in the millions and have a na- tional record. It is consequently the name of a distinct people. Since it has been established that it is not the individual Jew who causes that prejudice, but it is the name Jew, and since that name implies the whole Jewish people, reason points to the whole Jewish people as the cause of that emotion of prejudice. From what we have learned before there is nothing in that class of men, the Jewish people, which should differenti- ate them, as men, from the Aryan. It was also established beyond any doubt that the Jews, as well as any other of 78 THE NAME JEW. 79 the civilized peoples, are modern mjaa> "We have also by personal experience seen that there is nothing in the indi- vidual Jew which could cause that emo- tion of prejudicei^Hence the individual Jew is as good a man as any other, and since there is nothing wrong about the individual Jew there can be nothing wrong about the Jewish people which is composed of individual Jews. But we have it that it is the name of the^ whole Jewishj^eople which produces the prejudice not only within the psychology of one^ass of men, but of all classes; we therefore again reach the conclusion that there must be something the matter with the whole people after all, and we must endeavor to discover what it is. vin. Jews, Judaism, Jewish Religion and Why They Survived. We see before us twelve million human beings identified as Jews. As we have observed, they have an historical record of a distinct people. The fact is that they regard themselves as such and are regarded in that light by the nations of the world. As the Jews have no country of their own and are dispersed among the na- tions without losing their identity, they are therefore a distinct international society. From their history we learn that about four thousand years ago their ancestors sojourned with the Egyptians and were held there in the house of bondage. They were eventually freed by Moses, an Israelite who was brought up in the 80 JEWS, WHY THEY SURVIVED. 81 court of Pharaoh as a prince. Moses led the Israelites from Egypt and organized them at Mount Sinai as a distinct so- ciety, a people, for the sole purpose that they should keep holy and observe cer- tain fundamental ethical laws as ex- pressed in the Ten Commandments, which he engraved on stone as a lasting record. Moses also had given the Israelites by-laws which tended to keep them together as a people and particu- larly to enforce the observance of the said fundamental ethical principles en- graved on stone — the Ten Command- ments. After Moses, at various epochs of the Jewish existence as a people, the by-laws were amended and modified to suit the times, but they always served as a school of discipline that Israel should remem- ber and keep holy the fundamental law which ever remained unchanged and as- sumed greater significance and truth as time passed on. 82 JEWS, WHY THEY SURVIVED. These by-laws were in their character religious. They were enforced by the elders of the people and in the course of time assumed the form of a perma- nent religious institution, always with the end in view to discipline the children of Israel in morality according to the fundamental principles of the Ten Com- mandments, and also to prevent the fusion of the Jews with the other peoples who, at that time, were far from perceiving the truths of Judaism. Organized as a people whose life was a definite law of highest ethical import, and surrounded by the various rules of discipline, the Jews, notwithstanding the environment of those days, continued their corporate existence separate and apart from the other peoples and up- held the spirit of the highest law, which eventually became the conception of every civilized people. When the Jews were dispersed among the peoples of the earth, a particularly JEWS, WHY THEY SURVIVED. 83 strict religious discipline was introduced by the doctors of the Talmud. These learned raen in the law of Judaism, realizing that the Jews were not on their own soil and came in close contact with the other peoples who were far from the doctrines of Judaism, and dreading the influence of the new environment, enact- ed numerous technical religious by-laws which were to be observed by every Jew- ish man, woman and child, under the penalty of disgrace of the violator. UThe rabbis who thus strengthened Judaism by the Jewish religion fol- lowed the Hebrew maxim : * ' Trainup^ a^ child in the way he should gOj and when be is old he w iU not^depaxt^onL it. ' ' (Prov. xxii. 6.) This rule holds good with a people as with an individual.J The discipline of the Talmudists exer- cises its influence to this day not only on the orthodox Jew, but on the re- formed Jews and the Jew-assimilators as well. Among the Jews are found 84 JEWS, WHY THEY SURVIVED. most radical men who are far from re- ligion, yet they remain loyal Jews not only because of the ethical principles of Judaism, but also because they were trained to adhere to their people from which they cannot separate themselves even if they believe that they can. How- ever, the training itself without the fun- damental principles of Judaism would not be able to exert such a lasting influence. Judaism and the Jewish religion were always so confounded as one. thing that j;heir distinction was never made clear. But it is evident that Judaism is one thing and the Jewish religion is another thing. ^ ^ Judaism in itself is no more than a system of moral laws and doctrines as chiefly represented in the Scriptures, the fundamental laws of which are the Ten Commandments. The Jewish religion, on the other hand, is an institution which consists of JEWS, WHY THEY SURVIVED. 85 a system of rites and ceremonies to be practiced as an aid to remembering and observing the fundamental principles of Judaism. The fundamental principles of Juda- ism have gradually made their way among the peoples and have become the accepted truths of universal morality. The principles of Judaism are regarded as being eternal. Now it is clear why Judaism, the Jewish religion and the Jews survived. As long as the principles of a society have life in them and are in themselves a living institution, the society itself can- not die. Whether consciously or uncon- sciously, the membership of the society will be kept alive by the principles for which it was organized as long as the principles themselves have not lost their vitality. It is also clear, therefore, that the Jewish people has no other but an ethi- cal and spiritual purpose for its exist- r 86 JEWS, WHY THEY SURVIVED. ence ; it is consequently an International Ethical and Spiritual People, and not an imperium in imperio. The Jews can call the attention of mankind to this fact and referring to their history and life as a people, say: We are an ethical and spiritual people, international in character for the past two thousand years. We are not and never will be an imperium in imperio as long as we are among the nations. For proof of that consider us as we are. Spectemur agendo, and judge us by our martyrdom as the Jewish nation, pecu- liar only in that we have organized as a people for the purpose of promoting the principles of the highest ethics and exist as people with no other aims.*l IX. Some of the Supposed Causes. Although we have shown in the pre- ceding chapters that neither Judaism nor the Jewish religion is the cause of the prejudice against the Jews, we will nevertheless add a few remarks on this theme. We find that the fundamental ethical and religious principles of the Jews do not clash with the laws of any civilized country ; on the contrary, they are in full harmony with the fundamental laws of morality and conduct of every civilized people. The Ten Commandments, the fundamental laws of Judaism, are ac- cepted by every civilization as the basis of all morality, and are in various forms introduced by legislators in every code. The Bible, which narrates the history of the origin of the Jewish people and 87 88 SOME OF THE SUPPOSED CAUSES. in which the fundamental laws of moral- ity appear, is held sacred by all, and with every enlightened nation it is even ac- cepted as the sanctity on which an oath is administered. ^We thus see that neither Judaism nor the Jewish religion is the cause of the emotion of prejudice against the Jews^J If there is anything which does the Jews honor, it is certainly their moral and ethical code, which is held in reverence by all the world. The supposition then, by some, that it may be the KuUurkampf — Judaism or the Jewish religion which causes the prejudice — must be eliminated . Is that prejudice caused by the exclu- siveness or appearance of the Jews? (According to Bernard Lazare.) This supposition will have to be aban- doned as well, when we consider that the prejudice is equally strong against the Jew assimilator, who is like the Gentile in every respect, except in name. SOME OF THE SUPPOSED CAUSES. 89 Is that prejudice caused by the his- torical fiction that the Jews have cruci- fied Jesus? j^This perhaps may be the case with some ignorant folks who know nothing of mankind and its history. Even with such it is only a secondary cause, the prejudice being there before this fiction reaches their ears. But how about the Gentiles who are familiar with the facts of history; who possess education, and are not superstitious? How about such men who know that it was the Eomans who crucified Jesus, and that Jesus and the Apostles were Jews themselves? Why are they prejudiced against the Jews? ^ I According to Pinsker and Herzl, the cause of the prejudice against the Jews lies in the opposition that they^ar^^ ^Jiens^and have no country of their own. Is this really the cause? Is it in this that we find the cause for the old odium in longum jacens against the Jews? 90 SOME OF THE SUPPOSED CAUSES. An inquiry in that direction reveals the fact that it is not so. Beginning with an individual, we find that because one has no realty of his own and does not live in his own house, there is no prejudice against him. Going over to the consideration of corporations, we find the same conditions. No one is prejudiced against any corporation, whether it be a congregation or some other institution, because it may own no real estate, or not have its own buildings. Passing to international societies, we again fail to discover that the lack of a territory should be a cause for the emotion of prejudice. Is there any pre- judice against the international brother- hood of the Freemasons, even though it is a secret society? It is known that Freemasonry is an ethical institution, numbering thousands of members, and that it has no territory of its own, yet there is no prejudice either against the society itself or against any of its mem- SOME OF THE SUPPOSED CAUSES. 91 bers. On the contrary, because it is an ethical and spiritual institution, it is considered an honor to be a member thereof. At this stage we may also mention the Zionists, who form a distinct inter- national Jewish party. While we find prejudice against the Jews at large, there is no prejudice against the Zionist party, which desires the establishment of a territorial state for the Jews, but has no territory of its own. As regards nations with territories we find that with them the possession of territory sometimes causes jealousy of one nation toward another, which leads to enmity and war. The Jews being the only people which was able to survive as a people though it lost its territory, established a pre- cedent that a nation, or association of men with an ethical and spiritual pur- pose for its existence, can live without a territory. Hence, a territory is not the 92 SOME OF THE SUPPOSED CAUSES. sine qua non for the existence of an ethical people. When a Gentile says to the Jew, ^^Yon are a stranger here, " it is becanse of his prejudice against him, and not becanse the latter lacks a territory as a member of the Jewish people. Jews think of a territory becanse they suffer from the prejudice against them. Otherwise they do not feel the need of a territory for the purposes of Judaism. We cannot discover, try as we may, anything which should convince the mind that lack of a territory is the cause of the prejudice against the Jew. As to economic conditions being the primary cause for the prejudice against the Jews (according to Lazare and Beaulieu), we also fail to find it to be the real cause, in view of the fact that the Jews, as a whole, suffer from economic conditions as much as, and even more than, the Gentiles. They suffer more because not only do they suffer from SOME OF THE SUPPOSED CAUSES. 93 economic conditions, bnt because they are also accused of being the cause of the conditions. Other reasons which were given as possible causes for antisemitism have been proven groundless, and there is nothing in them of importance which should call for a special analysis. We shall therefore proceed with our search for the real cause. X. Or Societies and Multitudes. We shall once more use our sense-per- ception and observe the Jewish people as a whole. There are before us about twelve mil- lion human beings going by the name of Jews. We have learned of their origin and their aims as a people. We know that for the past twenty centuries, since they lost their own territory, they rep- resent an International Ethical and Spiritual Society. We are also aware of the fact that no matter whether we speak of the biggest nation, the smallest people or any asso- ciation of men for some definite purpose, each of these represents a distinct so- ciety or association. Since we speak of the twelve million Jews as a distinct society and as a defi- 94 OF SOCIETIES AND MULTITUDES. 95 nite association, let us look at it and see it. Our sense-perception tells us that we do not see a Jewish society or a Jewish association, but what we do see is a mul- titude of Jews. We look again and try to make sure of what we see ; the picture is the same no matter how we try to observe it ; before us is not a definite society of Jews, we see a l^g multitud^of Jews. Now, there is a great difference be- tween a society , an association, or a^o- ple, or whatever it may be called, and a multitude, even if the multitude goes by onecertam name. A multitude is not a society. v_^ '^ A distinct society or association has been defined as a body of persons asso- ciated for a commorLpbject. It is a defi- nite body and is distinguished by the ele- ments of unity in name, object and its reference to assemblage and representa- tion. 96 OF SOCIETIES AND MULTITUDES. A multitude, on the other hand, is a large number or body of persons inde^ nite, without reference to assemblage or representation. Even if it goes by one certain name and has a common ob- ject, it cannot be regarded as a distinct, definite society, because it has not the element of unity as a body. We have made here a very important discovery: while twelve million human beings go under one name, **Jews,'' they are nevertheless not a ^jiefimte society, but a multit ude, While they ha ve~bhe common ethical object, hence a spiritual unity, they are neverthe- less still a multitude lacking the ele- ment of assemblage or representation. The twelve million Jews, then, do not constitute a collective unity. As they do not have that element of a physical unity which a society, whether small or large, must have, we find them therefore incapable of deliberating, resolving and acting in that personal capacity which OF SOCIETIES AND MULTITUDES. 97 every definite society has. Being only a multitude, a body without reference to assemblage and representation, they are an abnormal association without a will, hence they may be termed a mob as well. Having observed this chaotic state of the twelve millions of human beings who persist in going by one common name, **Jews," we ask: Can it be that the ab- normal state of the Jews as a distinct multitude calls forth the emotion of pre- judice within the Grentile? In one of the foregoing chapters we have demonstrated that prejudice is an emotion, a vague idea based on some- thing indefinite. We have also men- tioned the fact that as far as the Gentile is concerned, we have to search the work- ings of his mind in order to discover the cause of that emotion of prejudice against the name Jew. The question before us now is whether the abnormality of the Jews in being a 98 OF SOCIETIES AND MULTITUDES. mere multitude is the cause of that emo- tion of prejudice. We have therefore to institute an in- quiry into the workings of the mind of man and discover how it thinks and forms ideas when confronted with bodies which have a plurahty of elements. Here we will bring to the attention of mankind a fact, which though well known to the philosopher was never appreciated in its significant relation to human society and particularly to the Jewish Question, and which we yet be- lieve to be the missing link, so to say, in the Jewish problem so long sought after. XL Collective Bodies and the Law of the Mind. Treating on the relation of collective bodies to the law of the mind, which can be rightly termed jus divinum, there are many authorities. Immanuel Kant in his work, ** Critique of Pure Reason," treats on it particularly in the chapter on '* Deduction of the Pure Conception of the Understanding," wherein we find the explanation for the possibility of a conjunction of the manifold repre- sentations given by sense; of the orig- inally synthetical unity of apperception; of the principle of the synthetical unity of apperception as the highest principle of all exercise of understanding, etc. Among the other philosophers who deal with the subject and whose works should be consulted are Spencer, Cousin, Locke and Hume. 99 100 LAW OF THE MIND. For the purposes of this work and in order to avoid lengthy quotations, we will make use of some views of Profes- sor Borden P. Bowne, who, in his book, ^* Theory of Thought and Knowledge, '^ lays down in as simple a manner as the subject permits the following conditions of thought with respect to collective bodies. He says: *^ There are multitudinous condi- tions of concrete thought of an acci- dental sort, both physiological and psychological; and there are certain other conditions given in the very structure of thought itself. Only the latter concern us here. *^And as consciousness is the abso- lute condition of all thought, it seems as if a discussion of consciousness were a necessary preliminary to the theory of thought. This seeming, however, is misleading. Since con- sciousness is an accompaniment of all LAW OF THE MIND. 101 mental states, it is easy to think that it is a distinct element by itself. This is a logical illusion. The spatial fig- ures also in which we speak of con- sciousness lead to the fancy that con- sciousness is something which con- tains other mental states, or which furnishes the stage for their opera- tions. But, in fact, consciousness is no simple, homogeneous mental state antecedent to objects, or apart from objects; it arises only in connection with particular objects, and is nothing by itself. When consciousness is empty of objects there is nothing left, '* Consciousness may, indeed, exist in varying grades of clearness, from a vague sense of subjectivity and objec- tivity up to the distinct consciousness of self and the definite apprehension of an object ; but in every case the vague- ness of the consciousness is the vague- ness of the apprehension; and an at- tempt to make the consciousness more 102 LAW OF THE MIND. distinct could only direct itself to making the conception more distinct. If there be a vague, undifferentiated, unrecognized somehowness of feeling which, we choose to call consciousness, it is plainly nothing for intelligence so long as it remains in this state. In order to attain to rationality this general consciousness, which is a con- sciousness of nothing, must in some way become a consciousness of some- thing. Hence the question, How we come to rational and articulate con- sciousness, is identical with the ques- tion. How we get objects of thought and knowledge. '* Thought, as apprehending truth, exists only in the form of the judg- ment. The presence of ideas in con- sciousness, or their passage through it, is neither truth nor error, but only a mental event. Truth or error emerges only when we reach the judg- ment. The fundamental conditions of LAW OF THE MIND. 103 the judgment, therefore, must be fun- damental conditions of thought itself. These are three: the unity and iden- tity of the thinking self, the law of identity and contradiction, and the fact of connection among the objects of thought. The first is the condition of any rational consciousness what- ever. The second is the condition of our thoughts having any constant and consistent meaning. The third refers to that objective connection which thought aims to reproduce, and with- out which thought loses all reference to truth. As the first relates to the constitution of the subject, it might be called the subjective condition; the second might be called the formal condition; and the third, as relating to the constitution of the object, might be called the objective condition. Or, without too great inaccuracy, they might be called, respectively, the psychological, the logical and the on- 104 LAW OF THE MIND. tological condition of thought. The name, however, is of no moment, pro- vided we understand the thing. *'We consider first the unity of the mental subject as the condition of thought. '*Let us take the judgment A is B, where A and B are any two particular states of consciousness. How is this judgment possible? *^The answer is. It is possible only as there is a conscious subject M, which is neither A nor B, but em- braces both in the unity of its own consciousness. Then, by distinguish- ing, comparing and uniting them in the unity of one conscious act, it reaches the judgment A is B. But so long as we have only the particular states A and B, they remain external to each other, and the judgment is non-existent and impossible. ^^A demurrer is sometimes raised against this conclusion. That the ex- LAW OF THE MIND. 105 ternal juxtaposition of particular thoughts can never become a thought of the particulars in their mutual re- lations is manifest. A. conception of all the parts of a watch in separation is not a conception of the watch. The conception of the watch is not a con- geries of component conceptions, but it is rather a single, unitary concep- tion. In like manner, it is urged, the judgment is also one. It is not built out of particular states, and needs nothing beyond the one judging act itself. ^^This claim is subtle rather than profound. There is a clear conception of the impossibility of building com- plex conceptions out of simple ones by mere juxtaposition, but along with this there is a confusion of logical sim- plicity with psychological simplicity. Psychologically, no doubt, the concep- tion of plurality is as truly a single act as the conception of unity. The 106 LAW OF THE MIND. conception of a watch is as trnly one as the conception of a single wheel. But logically the one conception has a plurality of elements; and there can be no true thought until the unity of the conception is distinguished into the plurality of its implications. Over against the plurality we must affirm a unity; and, equally, over against the unity we must affirm a plurality. Analysis is as necessary as synthesis. The judgment, then, may be psycho- logically one, but logically it involves the distinction of A and B as well as their union. Without this distinction the judgment is impossible. And for this logical distinction and union alike we need something which is neither A nor B, but which comprehends and acts upon both. This something we call the self. By it we mean not any- thing sensuously or imaginatively pre- sentable, but only that unitary and abiding principle revealed in thought, LAW OF THE MIND. 107 and without which thought is im- possible.'' From the foregoing we learn and must now constantly bear in mind in the course of our further inquiry, that there cannot be a true thought until the unity of the conception of a certain object is distinguished into the plurality of its im- plications ; that over against the plural- ity the mind must affirm a unity; and equally over against the unity the mind must affirm plurality ; that the judgment is psychologically one, but logically it involves the distinction of the various parts of the object as well as their rela- tion and union; that without this dis- tinction judgment is impossible. For this logical distinction and union alike the mind needs something which is not one or the other part of the object, but the object itself which comprehends and acts upon all the parts. This something is the self, the object itself. By it is 108 LAW OF THE MIND. meant not anything sensuously or imag- inatively presentable, but only that ordi- nary and abiding principle revealed in thought, without which thought is impos- sible. We shall now illustrate in more detail the mentioned law of the mind: We take the same object, a watch, as an example. The watch itself is a defi- nite unit and the mind perceives it as a unit. Yet the watch is composed of many wheels and parts. The wheels and parts are not the watch itself, but together they make up and form one thing — the watch. We observe then that the watch is psychologically one, but logically it involves the distinction between the wheels and parts and their relation and union. Without this distinction judg- ment would be impossible, and for this logical distinction and union of the wheels and the parts the mind needs something which is neither a wheel nor wheels, part or parts, but something LAW OF THE MIND. 109 which comprehends and acts upon all the wheels and parts. This something we call watch, which is the self of all the wheels and parts. In the watch there is nothing sensuously or imagina- tively presentable, but there is only that unitary and abiding principle revealed in thought, without which a true thought of that self — watch, would be impossible. What is true of the mind in its thought of a watch is true in its thought of everything else. When we say a man, the mind has the conception of a unit, notwithstanding the fact that a man is a body composed of numerous organs and cells. Yet over against the plurality of the organs and cells the mind psychologically aflSrms the unity — man, and over against the unity — ^man, the mind logically affirms the plurality of the organs and cells. The self called man is the unitary and abid- ing principle revealed in thought. Of the same kind is the conception 110 LAW OF THE MIND. the mind has of corporations, whether they are small or big, local or interna- tional. When we take as an example the American People, we find that as a whole it is a unity. This unity is composed of millions of individuals who are also di- vided in many parties. Yet the mind psychologically perceives over against the plurality of individuals and parties, the unity — ^^the one American People; and logically over against the unity it affirms the plurality of individuals and parties. Our thought then with a people is also psychologically one, but logically it in- volves the distinction of the millions of citizens and residents, the parties as well as their relation to one another and their union. For this logical distinction and union of a nation, the mind also needs that something which is neither one citi- zen nor another, neither one party nor the other, but which comprehends and LAW OF THE MIND. HI acts upon all the individuals and all the parties. The mind needs something which is the selfy and this self it calls the people, the nation. Of the American people, however, the mind can have a true thought because it is a normal society with the element of assemblage and representation. Assem- blage and representation is the only element (not territory) which takes a body of men out of the category of a multitude and gives it the form of unity which makes it conformable to the normal state of a corporation, and which complies with that then ordinary and abiding principle revealed in thought, without which thought is impossible. This principle consequently applies to every corporation, be it congregation, association or nation. We will now turn our attention to the Jews and try to discover what concep- tion the mind has concerning them. 112 LAW OF THE MIND. We discover that the mind can form no true conception of what the Jews are. It cannot over against the plurality af- jfirm a unity, nor can it over against the unity affirm a plurality. The judgment here can be neither psychological nor logical. The reason for this is that in order to enable the mind to think rightly of the collective body, the body must be a normal one. The collective object must have the self which is not any of the parts of which it is composed, it must be something which embraces and acts upon all the parts, thus making up the self. The Jews have it not. All the mind knows is that there are Jews, but it does not see the self, the Jewish physical unity, the Jewish people, which should be expressed by assemblage and repre- sentation, which should comprehend and act upon all the Jews. Having before it only Jews, the parts of the self, the mind has no true thought, and is therefore confused as to what the Jews are. LAW OF THE MIND. 113 Having before itself only a multitude of Jews, the mind cannot psychologically or logically differentiate the parts from the whole, and the whole from the parts, and for this reason sees in every Jew and all the Jews something which it does not understand. The mind_sees Jews but does not see the 5eZ/ of^the.Jews, the Jewish people. In this we find the rea- son why when the other peoples talk about Jews they refer to them as Jews, but never as the Jewish people. \ Because the mind can form no true thought of the Jews, it is confused, without, however, realizing this fact, and therefore prejudice naturally arises. It is now clear why prejudice against the Jew has so long remained unexplained and why the prejudiced mind, seeing only a multitude, piled up every act and phenomenon of individual Jews on the whole multitude. We thus also now understand why every crime or objectionable act com- 114 LAW OF THE MIND. mitted by an individual Jew is charged to all the Jews. The prejudiced mind will always pick out what is objectionable in the object it is prejudiced against. "We have thus found the answer to the Jewish question. We have thus discov- ered the primary cause of the prejudice against the Jew. The prejudice is due to the abnormal- ity of the collective unity of the Jewish people, of which the mind cannot form a definite conception. We therefore obtain that the relation of the attitude of the mind of Gentile to Jew is equal to the relation of the prejudice to the abnor- mality of the Jewish collective unity, or Attitude of the mind of Gentile: Jew:: Prejudice: Abnormality of the Jewish collective unity. In the foregoing answer we find the nerviis probandi of the solution of the Jewish riddle. XII. FuETHER Proof. We have observed the law of the mind in its relation to collective bodies. We know that consciousness is no simple, homogeneous mental state, antecedent to objects, or apart from objects, but that it arises only in connection with particular objects, and is nothing by itself. When consciousness is empty of objects there is nothing left. We have also learned that thought, as apprehending truth, exists only in the form of the judgment. The presence of ideas in consciousness, or their passage through it, is neither truth nor error, but only a mental event. We have also made clear to ourselves under what circumstances the judgment can be true and under what circum- 115 116 FURTHER PROOF. stances it is impossible for the mind to form true thought. We shall, therefore, now continue our inquiry as to that law which reigns in the mind-world, and look for further proof as to whether the mind is actually uni- form in its ways when dealing with nor- mal or abnormal bodies of a collective nature. We are fully aware of the fact that every people and every association of men has, by reason of its manifold mem- bership, individuals of divers characters, means and culture. There are rich and poor, ignorant and learned, honest and dishonest. Yet at no time will we charge the whole society or people with pau- perism because it has some poor mem- bers; with wealth, because there are in it some capitalists; with criminal ten- dencies, because some of its members are criminals. It is impossible for the mind to form such conceptions because, as we have seen, it operates psychologically 1 FURTHER PROOF. 117 and logically. It can therefore diflferen- tiate between the unity as snch and its parts as snch and vice versa. This, however, is the case only with a normal society or people. When asked for a definition of what constitutes an American, or Frenchman, we will easily define them and say that they are mem- bers or citizens of this or that people, etc., without regard to their individual characteristics. When the question is put, What con^ stitutes a Jew ? the mind somehow is per- plexed and is unable to define or explain what really the Jew is. The reason for this is now obvious. The Jews as a jjeo- ple, lacking the element of physical unity because not having the element of as- semblage and representation, constitute an abnormal collective body, a fact which makes it impossible for the mind to be psychological and logical. iThere are Jews, but there is not the self of all Jews — the Jewish people. | 118 FURTHER PROOF. <