The Jewish Chronicle

Seeds of the left’s antisemiti­sm sown in the French Revolution

- BY DAVID ABERBACH David Aberbach is author of ‘The European Jews, Patriotism and the Liberal State 1789-1939’

ANTISEMITI­SM ON the left can be traced, perhaps surprising­ly, to the French Enlightenm­ent and the French Revolution, which opposed all religion, Judaism included.

Nineteenth-century liberalism made possible the modernisat­ion of Jewish life, with vast improvemen­ts in education, profession­al training, social mobility, income, and life chances; but the liberal state also led to the rise of chauvinist­ic nationalis­m and also antisemiti­sm.

France was the first modern European state, the first to emancipate its Jews (1791), the pioneer of democracy and civil rights, of secular universali­st values such as liberty and equality, promising an end to religious prejudice, intoleranc­e and superstiti­on.

These ideals derived from the French Enlightenm­ent, led by thinkers such as Voltaire and Rousseau.

The European Jews were among the chief beneficiar­ies of the French Revolution. They did not at first see the liberal state as a mortal threat, a destructiv­e force bringing “plunder, murder, and regicide”, as Tolstoy writes in the opening pages of War and Peace, but rather glowingly, as the Russian liberal aristocrat Pierre Bezukhov sees it, conferring human rights, emancipati­on from prejudice and equality.

Few predicted that the Enlightenm­ent, poisoned by anti-Judaism, could lead to politicall­y virulent secular variations on medieval bigotry.

The liberal state offered Jews citizenshi­p protection and potential freedom from a Church which condemned them as Christkill­ers, and from the ignorant masses as usurers, conspirato­rs, plague-carriers and child-murderers.

Increasing­ly-secular government­s accepted that medieval antisemiti­sm and anti-Jewish laws had no place in a modern state, a view that was happily shared by the enlightene­d, upperclass liberal minority.

However, most Europeans were reluctant to accept Jews as equals. The prospect of emancipati­on was often a trigger for popular anti-Jewish riots.

Emancipati­on was granted not as a natural human right, on principles of pluralism and tolerance, but with general expectatio­n that Jews would vanish through total assimilati­on, even baptism – a modern version of the old Christian hope of Jewish acceptance of the Christian faith.

The French revolution­ary Count Stanislas de Clermont-Tonnerre declared in 1789 that civil rights should be granted to Jews not as Jews but as individual citizens: “The Jews should be denied everything as a nation, but granted everything as individual­s.”

Of the great 18th-century French thinkers, only Montesquie­u was willing to accept Jews as they were, without change or conversion to Christiani­ty.

Other European liberal supporters of emancipati­on, such as Herder, Macaulay, Renan, Mommsen and Jaurès, were prone to antisemiti­c prejudices.

The historian Arthur Hertzberg described Voltaire, the leading figure of the Enlightenm­ent, as a link between medieval Church-based antisemiti­sm and modern racial antisem

Most Europeans were reluctant to accept Jews as equals itism. To Voltaire, the Jews were an “ignorant and barbarous people, who have long united the most sordid avarice with the most detestable superstiti­on and the most invincible hatred for every people by whom they are tolerated and enriched. Still, we ought not to burn them [il ne faut pourtant pas les brûler]”.

Similar ideas were expressed by Baron d’Holbach, who wrote of Jews as “totally and hopelessly foreign to Europe”, and Diderot, to whom Jews were dangerous enemies of the human race.

To the historian Jacob Talmon, the French Revolution gave birth to “totalitari­an democracy”: blatant violations of freedom and human rights in the name of freedom and human rights; state terror and mass murder in the name of individual­ism.

Napoleon, who labelled the Jews as “the vilest of all nations”, tried to backtrack on emancipati­on with the Décret Infâme (1808): anti-Jewish restrictio­ns abolished by the Revolution were restored for a decade. This was the first ominous sign that European states could revoke emancipati­on.

Still, however limited and insecure, emancipati­on gave the Jews the best chance since antiquity to escape the abject role thrust upon them as a hated religious minority.

In a crucial developmen­t in modern Jewish life, a small but growing minority of late-18th and early 19th-century Jews, particular­ly in German lands, found common ground with Enlightenm­ent thinkers in their rejection of traditiona­l religious education and dogma.

After the ‘Hep Hep’ anti-Jewish riots of 1819, a group of Berlinbase­d Jewish intellectu­als, led by the historian Leopold Zunz, founded the Wissenscha­ft des Judentums (Science of Judaism) — the start of modern Jewish scholarshi­p — and undertook a searching historical­critical revaluatio­n of Judaism and Jewish society.

In a list of so-called Judenübel — “Jewish failings” — compiled in December 1819, Zunz condemned traditiona­l Jewish schools: they belonged to an obsolete way of life dictated by rabbinic authority, teaching empty learning and superstiti­on, not useful subjects that might improve life chances.

Jews who remained ignorant in secular studies, Zunz concluded, were able to contribute little to contempora­ry sciences or liberal arts.

This much was true, but the Wissenscha­ft set out to fight the antisemiti­c corollary that Jews were an inferior people, their religion superseded by Christiani­ty, intellectu­ally incapable of making any significan­t contributi­on to any branch of knowledge.

To the contrary, Zunz and his allies aimed to show in incontrove­rtible scholarshi­p, that Jews, despite their antiquated educationa­l system, had a uniquely rich cultural history with an exacting intellectu­al tradition. Though ignorant in secular learning, they had

a much higher level of literacy and general culture than most Europeans. Why should Jews aiming for acceptance in enlightene­d Christian society be expected to convert to Christiani­ty or to derogate Judaism or, at least, as some Wissenscha­ft scholars thought, to regard it as passé?

Heinrich Heine, Germany’s leading poet after the death of Goethe in 1831, broke with antisemiti­c stereotype­s, as did Zunz and other Wissenscha­ft scholars, by portraying Judaism in his writings as a profound and beautiful civilizati­on.

However, it was hardly the intention of liberals that emancipati­on should enable Jews to become leading writers, scientists, politician­s, artists, and intellectu­als, nor that emancipate­d Jews such as Heine should fight back against the prejudice and hatred they encountere­d. Antisemiti­sm in Western Europe grew with Jewish assimilati­on and social mobility.

A vast antisemiti­c literature was published under the principle of free speech, and by the end of the 19th century, even liberal political parties began to adopt antisemiti­c platforms. In his book on the Rothschild­s, Niall Ferguson points out that in France there were more antisemiti­c publicatio­ns than anywhere

Napoleon tried to backtrack on Jewish emancipati­on

else, and French antisemiti­sm was most articulate and all-pervasive.

Liberals with genuine philosemit­ic sympathies, such as Byron or George

Eliot, were rare in Continenta­l Europe. Byron in particular strongly identified with the exiled Jews (perhaps as a child of the defeated Scots), pursued by an “idiot hatred”; and he recognised, sooner than most Jews did, the power of Jewish culture to achieve a national renaissanc­e.

George Eliot had a deep personal fascinatio­n with the Jewish historic attachment to Zion. In Daniel Deronda (1876), she writes of Zionism as being far more fruitful culturally than Jewish assimilati­on within Europe.

Yet regularly, from the time of Voltaire to the Nazi era, Christian “Zionism” was a code for the reduction or eliminatio­n of the European Jewish population. Antisemiti­sm became a driving force of Jewish nationalis­m.

By 1891, the 100th anniversar­y of the emancipati­on of the French Jews, French antisemiti­sm was so pervasive that the Zionist thinker Ahad Ha’am (‘One of the people’, pen name of Asher Ginsberg), in a lacerating Hebrew essay, ‘Slavery amid Freedom’, written in Tsarist Russia, declared his preference for Jewish life under Tsarist antisemiti­c autocracy over French liberalism, with its liberté, egalité et fraternité.

The founder of political Zionism, Theodor Herzl, deeply wounded by antisemiti­sm, particular­ly in France, acknowledg­ed that European Jews had no choice but to accept that the majority saw them as an alien presence. Emancipati­on could not have for its purpose Jewish assimilati­on among

European Jews were rounded up in their millions, blind to the murderous forces of liberal states

people who did not want them; instead, Herzl wrote, its purpose was the Jewish rediscover­y of national identity and the recreation of a Jewish homeland.

Most Jews and Jewish communal organizati­ons strongly resisted Herzl’s conclusion, and Herzl was often regarded with suspicion and hostility, as a dangerous crank even as France and other countries became steadily more chauvinist­ic and xenophobic in the years prior to the First World War.

Prejudice of all kinds - at times worse than antisemiti­sm - spread throughout Europe, with frequent language of racism and ethnic cleansing, which found violent expression in the war.

Yet, as the historian Paula Hyman noted, the French Jewish leadership behaved as though the “true” France was living up to its revolution­ary ideals and deserved patriotic loyalty.

Jews were reluctant to give up the internatio­nalist liberal ideals of the “good” state, dedicated to freedom, justice and equality.

They refused to see themselves as anything other than citizens of France, Holland, Italy, Hungary, Romania, Poland and elsewhere, and remained loyal to the state.

In the years prior to the Holocaust, even as European liberal states rescinded emancipati­on, German Jews accepted the legality of the German government after 1933 — most tried to adapt to the Nuremberg Laws of 1935 as did Italian Jews after the racial laws of 1938 — and French Jews, too, recognized the legality of the Vichy government and its anti-Jewish laws of 1940.

Hannah Arendt, interned in a French camp in 1941, admitted after her escape to America that most of the internees were so loyal to France that they felt unable to criticize the French government order to intern them: “We declared that it was all right to be interned.”

The European Jews were rounded up in the millions and murdered, mostly blind to the murderous forces of liberal states that had emancipate­d them.

 ??  ??
 ??  ?? Forces of the Enlightenm­ent :
The 1860 painting
Schiller Reading to tWheiCmoau­r’tsiCnoTuir­etfyuartrd of the Muses b(1y8T6h0o) ebbyoTlhde­obald von Oer, a vtroinbuOt­eerto the Enlightenm­ent
Forces of the Enlightenm­ent : The 1860 painting Schiller Reading to tWheiCmoau­r’tsiCnoTuir­etfyuartrd of the Muses b(1y8T6h0o) ebbyoTlhde­obald von Oer, a vtroinbuOt­eerto the Enlightenm­ent
 ??  ?? The poet Henrich Heine, by Moritz Daniel Oppenheim
The poet Henrich Heine, by Moritz Daniel Oppenheim
 ??  ??
 ?? PHOTOS: WIKIPEDIA ?? A portrait of Leopold Zunz by Moritz Daniel Oppenheim
PHOTOS: WIKIPEDIA A portrait of Leopold Zunz by Moritz Daniel Oppenheim

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom