Concerning the Jews
by Mark Twain
a.k.a. Samuel Clemens
(1835-1910)
Some
months ago I published a magazine article descriptive of a remarkable scene in
the Imperial Parliament in
"I have read
'Stirring Times in Austria.' One point in particular is of vital import to not
a few thousand people, including myself, being a point about which I have often
wanted to address a question to some disinterested person. The show of military
force in the Austrian Parliament, which precipitated the riots, was not
introduced by any Jew. No Jew was a member of that body. No Jewish question was
involved in the Ausgleich or in the language
proposition. No Jew was insulting anybody. In short, no Jew was doing any
mischief toward anybody whatsoever. In fact, the Jews were the only ones of the
nineteen different races in
"Tell me, therefore,
from your vantage-point of cold view, what in your mind is the cause. Can
American Jews do anything to correct it either in
I will begin by saying that if I thought myself prejudiced against the Jew, I should hold it fairest to leave this subject to a person not crippled in that way. But I think I have no such prejudice. A few years ago a Jew observed to me that there was no uncourteous reference to his people in my books, and asked how it happened. It happened because the disposition was lacking. I am quite sure that (bar one) I have no race prejudices, and I think I have no color prejudices nor caste prejudices nor creed prejudices. Indeed, I know it. I can stand any society. All that I care to know is that a man is a human being - that is enough for me; he can't be any worse. I have no special regard for Satan; but I can at least claim that I have no prejudice against him. It may even be that I lean a little his way, on account of his not having a fair show. All religions issue bibles against him, and say the most injurious things about him, but we never hear his side. We have none but the evidence for the prosecution, and yet we have rendered the verdict. To my mind, this is irregular. It is un-English; it is un-American; it is French. Without this precedent Dreyfus could not have been condemned. Of course Satan has some kind of a case, it goes without saying. It may be a poor one, but that is nothing; that can be said about any of us. As soon as I can get at the facts I will undertake his rehabilitation myself, if I can find an unpolitic publisher. It is a thing which we ought to be willing to do for any one who is under a cloud. We may not pay him reverence, for that would be indiscreet, but we can at least respect his talents. A person who has for untold centuries maintained the imposing position of spiritual head of four-fifths of the human race, and political head of the whole of it, must be granted the possession of executive abilities of the loftiest order. In his large presence the other popes and politicians shrink to midges for the microscope. I would like to see him. I would rather see him and shake him by the tail than any other member of the European Concert. In the present paper I shall allow myself to use the word Jew as if it stood for both religion and race. It is handy; and, besides, that is what the term means to the general world.
In the above letter one notes these points:
1. The Jew is a well-behaved citizen.
2. Can ignorance and fanaticism alone account for his unjust treatment?
3. Can Jews do anything to improve the situation?
4. The Jews have no party; they are non-participants.
5. Will the persecution ever come to an end?
6. What has become of the Golden Rule?
Point No. 1.
We must grant proposition No. 1 for several sufficient reasons. The Jew is not a disturber of the peace of any country. Even his enemies will concede that. He is not a loafer, he is not a sot, he is not noisy, he is not a brawler nor a rioter, he is not quarrelsome. In the statistics of crime his presence is conspicuously rare - in all countries. With murder and other crimes of violence he has but little to do: he is a stranger to the hangman. In the police court's daily long roll of "assaults" and "drunk and disorderlies" his name seldom appears. That the Jewish home is a home in the truest sense is a fact which no one will dispute. The family is knitted together by the strongest affections; its members show each other every due respect; and reverence for the elders is an inviolate law of the house. The Jew is not a burden on the charities of the state nor of the city; these could cease from their functions without affecting him. When he is well enough, he works; when he is incapacitated, his own people take care of him. And not in a poor and stingy way, but with a fine and large benevolence. His race is entitled to be called the most benevolent of all the races of men. A Jewish beggar is not impossible, perhaps; such a thing may exist, but there are few men that can say they have seen that spectacle. The Jew has been staged in many uncomplimentary forms, but, so far as I know, no dramatist has done him the injustice to stage him as a beggar. Whenever a Jew has real need to beg, his people save him from the necessity of doing it. The charitable institutions of the Jews are supported by Jewish money, and amply. The Jews make no noise about it; it is done quietly; they do not nag and pester and harass us for contributions; they give us peace, and set us an example - an example which we have not found ourselves able to follow; for by nature we are not free givers, and have to be patiently and persistently hunted down in the interest of the unfortunate.
These facts are all on the credit side of the proposition that the Jew is a good and orderly citizen. Summed up, they certify that he is quiet, peaceable, industrious, unaddicted to high crimes and brutal dispositions; that his family life is commendable; that he is not a burden upon public charities; that he is not a beggar; that in benevolence he is above the reach of competition. These are the very quint-essentials of good citizenship. If you can add that he is as honest as the average of his neighbors - But I think that question is affirmatively answered by the fact that he is a successful business man. The basis of successful business is honesty; a business cannot thrive where the parties to it cannot trust each other. In the matter of numbers of the Jew counts for little in the overwhelming population of New York; but that his honesty counts for much is guaranteed by the fact that the immense wholesale business houses of Broadway, from the Battery to Union Square, is substantially in his hands.
I suppose that the most
picturesque example in history of a trader's trust in his fellow-trader was one
where it was not Christian trusting Christian, but Christian trusting Jew. That Hessian Duke who used to sell his subjects to George III.
to fight George Washington with got rich at it; and
by-and-by, when the wars engendered by the French Revolution made his throne
too warm for him, he was obliged to fly the country. He was in a hurry, and had
to leave his earnings behind - $9,000,000. He had to risk the money with some
one without security. He did not select a Christian, but a Jew - a Jew of only
modest means, but of high character; a character so high that it left him
lonesome - Rothschild of Frankfort. Thirty years later, when
[Footnote *: Here is another piece of picturesque history; and it reminds us that shabbiness and dishonesty are not the monopoly of any race or creed, but are merely human:
"Congress has passed
a bill to pay $379.56 to Moses Pendergrass, of
The Sun, which tells the above story, says that bills were introduced in three or four Congresses for Moses' relief, and that committees repeatedly investigated his claim.
It took six Congresses, containing in their persons the compressed virtues of 70,000,000 of people, and cautiously and carefully giving expression to those virtues in the fear of God and the next election, eleven years to find out some way to cheat a fellow-Christian out of about $13 on his honestly executed contract, and out of nearly $300 due him on its enlarged terms. And they succeeded. During the same time they paid out $1,000,000,000 in pensions - a third of it unearned and undeserved. This indicates a splendid all-around competency in theft, for it starts with farthings, and works its industries all the way up to ship-loads. It may be possible that the Jews can beat this, but the man that bets on it is taking chances.]
The Jew has his other side. He has some discreditable ways, though he has not a monopoly of them, because he cannot get entirely rid of vexatious Christian competition. We have seen that he seldom transgresses the laws against crimes of violence. Indeed, his dealings with courts are almost restricted to matters connected with commerce. He has a reputation for various small forms of cheating, and for practising oppressive usury, and for burning himself out to get the insurance, and for arranging cunning contracts which leave him an exit but lock the other man in, and for smart evasions which find him safe and comfortable just within the strict letter of the law, when court and jury know very well that he has violated the spirit of it. He is a frequent and faithful and capable officer in the civil service, but he is charged with an unpatriotic disinclination to stand by the flag as a soldier - like the Christian Quaker.
Now if you offset these discreditable features by the creditable ones summarized in a preceding paragraph beginning with the words, "These facts are all on the credit side," and strike a balance, what must the verdict be? This, I think: that, the merits and demerits being fairly weighed and measured on both sides, the Christian can claim no superiority over the Jew in the matter of good citizenship.
Yet in all countries, from the dawn of history, the Jew has been persistently and implacably hated, and with frequency persecuted.
Point No. 2.
"Can fanaticism alone account for this?"
Years ago I used to think that it was responsible for nearly all of it, but latterly I have come to think that this was an error. Indeed, it is now my conviction that it is responsible for hardly any of it.
In this connection I call to mind Genesis, chapter xlvii.
We have all thoughtfully - or unthoughtfully - read the pathetic story of the years of plenty and the years of famine in Egypt, and how Joseph, with that opportunity, made a corner in broken hearts, and the crusts of the poor, and human liberty - a corner whereby he took a nation's money all away, to the last penny; took a nation's livestock all away, to the last hoof; took a nation's land away, to the last acre; then took the nation itself, buying it for bread, man by man, woman by woman, child by child, till all were slaves; a corner which took everything, left nothing; a corner so stupendous that, by comparison with it, the most gigantic corners in subsequent history are but baby things, for it dealt in hundreds of millions of bushels, and its profits were reckonable by hundreds of millions of dollars, and it was a disaster so crushing that its effects have not wholly disappeared from Egypt to-day, more than three thousand years after the event.
Is it presumable that the
eye of
I wish to come down
eighteen hundred years later and refer to a remark made by one of the Latin
historians. I read it in a translation many years ago, and it comes back to me
now with force. It was alluding to a time when people were still living who could
have seen the Savior in the flesh. Christianity was so new that the people of
The meaning seems plain. These pagans had nothing against Christians, but they were quite ready to persecute Jews. For some reason or other they hated a Jew before they even knew what a Christian was. May I not assume, then, that the persecution of Jews is a thing which antedates Christianity and was not born of Christianity? I think so. What was the origin of the feeling?
When I was a boy, in the
back settlements of the
In the cotton States, after the war, the simple and ignorant negroes made the crops for the white planter on shares. The Jew came down in force, set up shop on the plantation, supplied all the negro's wants on credit, and at the end of the season was proprietor of the negro's share of the present crop and of part of his share of the next one. Before long, the whites detested the Jew, and it is doubtful if the negro loved him.
The Jew is being
legislated out of
In the dull and ignorant England of John's time everybody got into debt to the Jew. He gathered all lucrative enterprises into his hands; he was the king of commerce; he was ready to be helpful in all profitable ways; he even financed crusades for the rescue of the Sepulchre. To wipe out his account with the nation and restore business to its natural and incompetent channels he had to be banished the realm.
For the like reasons
In all the ages Christian Europe has been obliged to curtail his activities. If he entered upon a mechanical trade, the Christian had to retire from it. If he set up as a doctor, he was the best one, and he took the business. If he exploited agriculture, the other farmers had to get at something else. Since there was no way to successfully compete with him in any vocation, the law had to step in and save the Christian from the poor-house. Trade after trade was taken away from the Jew by statute till practically none was left. He was forbidden to engage in agriculture; he was forbidden to practise law; he was forbidden to practise medicine, except among Jews; he was forbidden the handicrafts. Even the seats of learning and the schools of science had to be closed against this tremendous antagonist. Still, almost bereft of employments, he found ways to make money, even ways to get rich. Also ways to invest his takings well, for usury was not denied him. In the hard conditions suggested, the Jew without brains could not survive, and the Jew with brains had to keep them in good training and well sharpened up, or starve. Ages of restriction to the one tool which the law was not able to take from him - his brain - have made that tool singularly competent; ages of compulsory disuse of his hands have atrophied them, and he never uses them now. This history has a very, very commercial look, a most sordid and practical commercial look, the business aspect of a Chinese cheap-labor crusade. Religious prejudices may account for one part of it, but not for the other nine.
Protestants have persecuted Catholics, but they did not take their livelihoods away from them. The Catholics have persecuted the Protestants with bloody and awful bitterness, but they never closed agriculture and the handicrafts against them. Why was that? That has the candid look of genuine religious persecution, not a trade-union boycott in a religious disguise.
The Jews are harried and
obstructed in
I feel convinced that the
Crucifixion has not much to do with the world's attitude towards the Jew; that
the reasons for it are older than that event, as suggested by Egypt's
experience and by Rome's regret for having persecuted an unknown quantity
called a Christian, under the mistaken impression that she was merely
persecuting a Jew. Merely a Jew - a skinned eel who was used
to it, presumably. I am persuaded that in
In
The man claimed that in
Berlin the banks, the newspapers, the theatres, the great mercantile, shipping,
mining, and manufacturing interests, the big army and city contracts, the
tramways, and pretty much all other properties of high value, and also the
small businesses, were in the hands of the Jews. He said the Jew was pushing
the Christian to the wall all along the line; that it was all a Christian could
do to scrape together a living; and that the Jew must be banished, and soon -
there was no other way of saving the Christian. Here in
You note the crucial point of the mentioned agitation; the argument is that the Christian cannot compete with the Jew, and that hence his very bread is in peril. To human beings this is a much more hate-inspiring thing than is any detail connected with religion. With most people, of a necessity, bread and meat take first rank, religion second. I am convinced that the persecution of the Jew is not due in any large degree to religious prejudice.
No, the Jew is a
money-getter; and in getting his money he is a very serious obstruction to less
capable neighbors who are on the same quest. I think that that is the trouble.
In estimating worldly values the Jew is not shallow, but deep. With precocious
wisdom he found out in the morning of time that some men worship rank, some
worship heroes, some worship power, some worship God, and that over these
ideals they dispute and cannot unite - but that they all worship money; so he
made it the end and aim of his life to get it. He was at it in
Point No. 4.
"The Jews have no party; they are non-participants."
Perhaps you have let the
secret out and given yourself away. It seems hardly a credit to the race that
it is able to say that; or to you, sir, that you can say it without remorse; more
than you should offer it as a plea against maltreatment, injustice, and
oppression. Who gives the Jew the right, who gives any race the right, to sit
still, in a free country, and let somebody else look after its safety? The
oppressed Jew was entitled to all pity in the former times under brutal
autocracies, for he was weak and friendless, and had no way to help his case.
But he has ways now, and he has had them for a century, but I do not see that
he has tried to make serious use of them. When the Revolution set him free in
[Footnote *: The article was written in the summer of 1898. - Ed.]
You will say the Jew is
everywhere numerically feeble. That is nothing to the point - with the
Irishman's history for an object-lesson. But I am coming to your numerical
feebleness presently. In all parliamentary countries you could no doubt elect
Jews to the legislatures - and even one member in such a body is sometimes a
force which counts. How deeply have you concerned yourselves about this in
As to
your numerical weakness. I mentioned some figures awhile ago - 500,000 - as the Jewish
population of
I have some suspicions; I
got them at second-hand, but they have remained with me these ten or twelve
years. When I read in the C. B. that the Jewish population of the
Now why was the race renamed? I have been told that in Prussia it was given to using fictitious names, and often changing them, so as to beat the tax-gatherer, escape military service, and so on; and that finally the idea was hit upon of furnishing all the inmates of a house with one and the same surname, and then holding the house responsible right along for those inmates, and accountable for any disappearances that might occur; it made the Jews keep track of each other, for self-interest's sake, and saved the government the trouble. ^*
[Footnote *: In Austria the renaming was merely done because the Jews in some newly acquired regions had no surnames, but were mostly named Abraham and Moses, and therefore the tax-gatherer could not tell t'other from which, and was likely to lose his reason over the matter. The renaming was put into the hands of the War Department, and a charming mess the graceless young lieutenants made of it. To them a Jew was of no sort of consequence, and they labelled the race in a way to make the angels weep. As an example, take these two: Abraham Bellyache and Schmul Godbedamned. - Culled from "Namens Studien," by Karl Emil Franzos.]
If that explanation of
how the Jews of Prussia came to be renamed is correct, if it is true that they
fictitiously registered themselves to gain certain advantages, it may possibly
be true that in
Point No. 3.
"Can Jews do anything to improve the situation?"
I think so. If I may make
a suggestion without seeming to be trying to teach my grandmother how to suck eggs,
I will offer it. In our days we have learned the value of combination. We apply
it everywhere - in railway systems, in trusts, in trade unions, in Salvation
Armies, in minor politics, in major politics, in European Concerts. Whatever
our strength may be, big or little, we organize it. We have found out that that
is the only way to get the most out of it that is in it. We know the weakness
of individual sticks, and the strength of the concentrated fagot. Suppose you
try a scheme like this, for instance. In
And then from
You seem to think that
the Jews take no hand in politics here, that they are "absolutely
non-participants." I am assured by men competent to speak that this is a
very large error, that the Jews are exceedingly active in politics all over the
empire, but that they scatter their work and their votes among the numerous
parties, and thus lose the advantages to be had by concentration. I think that
in
Speaking of
concentration, Dr. Herzl has a clear insight into the value of that. Have you
heard of his plan? He wishes to gather the Jews of the world together in
Point No. 5.
"Will the persecution of the Jews ever come to an end?"
On the score of religion,
I think it has already come to an end. On the score of race prejudice and
trade, I have the idea that it will continue. That is, here and there in spots
about the world, where a barbarous ignorance and a sort of mere animal
civilization prevail; but I do not think that elsewhere the Jew need now stand
in any fear of being robbed and raided. Among the high civilizations he seems
to be very comfortably situated indeed, and to have more than his proportionate
share of the prosperities going. It has that look in
But you were the
favorites of Heaven originally, and your manifold and unfair prosperities
convince me that you have crowded back into that snug place again. Here is an
incident that is significant. Last week in
Point No. 6.
"What has become of the Golden Rule?"
It exists, it continues to sparkle, and is well taken care of. It is Exhibit A in the Church's assets, and we pull it out every Sunday and give it an airing. But you are not permitted to try to smuggle it into this discussion, where it is irrelevant and would not feel at home. It is strictly religious furniture, like an acolyte, or a contribution-plate, or any of those things. It has never been intruded into business; and Jewish persecution is not a religious passion, it is a business passion.
To conclude. - If the statistics are right, the Jews constitute but one per cent. of the human race. It suggests a nebulous dim puff of star-dust lost in the blaze of the Milky Way. Properly the Jew ought hardly to be heard of; but he is heard of, has always been heard of. He is as prominent on the planet as any other people, and his commercial importance is extravagantly out of proportion to the smallness of his bulk. His contributions to the world's list of great names in literature, science, art, music, finance, medicine, and abstruse learning are also away out of proportion to the weakness of his numbers. He has made a marvellous fight in this world, in all the ages; and has done it with his hands tied behind him. He could be vain of himself, and be excused for it. The Egyptian, the Babylonian, and the Persian rose, filled the planet with sound and splendor, then faded to dream-stuff and passed away; the Greek and the Roman followed, and made a vast noise, and they are gone; other peoples have sprung up and held their torch high for a time, but it burned out, and they sit in twilight now, or have vanished. The Jew saw them all, beat them all, and is now what he always was, exhibiting no decadence, no infirmities of age, no weakening of his parts, no slowing of his energies, no dulling of his alert and aggressive mind. All things are mortal but the Jew; all other forces pass, but he remains. What is the secret of his immortality?
Postscript - The Jew As Soldier
When I published the above article in Harper's Monthly, I was ignorant - like the rest of the Christian world - of the fact that the Jew had a record as a soldier. I have since seen the official statistics, and I find that he furnished soldiers and high officers to the Revolution, the War of 1812, and the Mexican War. In the Civil War he was represented in the armies and navies of both the North and the South by 10 per cent. of his numerical strength - the same percentage that was furnished by the Christian populations of the two sections. This large fact means more than it seems to mean; for it means that the Jew's patriotism was not merely level with the Christian's, but overpassed it. When the Christian volunteer arrived in camp he got a welcome and applause, but as a rule the Jew got a snub. His company was not desired, and he was made to feel it. That he nevertheless conquered his wounded pride and sacrificed both that and his blood for his flag raises the average and quality of his patriotism above the Christian's. His record for capacity, for fidelity, and for gallant soldiership in the field is as good as any one's. This is true of the Jewish private soldiers and the Jewish generals alike. Major-General O. O. Howard speaks of one of his Jewish staff-officers as being "of the bravest and best"; of another - killed at Chancellorsville - as being "a true friend and a brave officer"; he highly praises two of his Jewish brigadier-generals; finally, he uses these strong words: "Intrinsically there are no more patriotic men to be found in the country than those who claim to be of Hebrew descent, and who served with me in parallel commands or more directly under my instructions."
Fourteen Jewish
Confederate and
In the above article I was not able to endorse the common reproach that the Jew is willing to feed upon a country but not to fight for it, because I did not know whether it was true or false. I supposed it to be true, but it is not allowable to endorse wandering maxims upon supposition - except when one is trying to make out a case. That slur upon the Jew cannot hold up its head in presence of the figures of the War Department. It has done its work, and done it long and faithfully, and with high approval: it ought to be pensioned off now, and retired from active service.
From the September 1898 issue of Harper's New Monthly Magazine. The article Twain refers to in the first sentence (Stirring Times in Austria) was in the March 1898 issue.