Henry Ford: The Jews’ “Defenders” Make a Poor Showing
One of the lost articles from Henry Ford’s International Jew series.
by Henry Ford
THE Jews are most unfortunate in their “defenders.” Perhaps the initial misfortune is that the Jewish mind has reverted with automatic directness to the idea of “defense,” and not to frank self-criticism and correction. The bankruptcy of Jewish leadership has never been so apparent as in this situation which only calls for an examination and a repudiation of that which brings shame upon the Jewish name. But had such examination and repudiation been made by the leaders, it would have involved confession of the inadequacy and incompetency of their leadership, and in the present state of affairs, when their power is already swaying perilously, they dare not make this confession.
It is now nearly a year since THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT, desirous of bringing into wholesome and sanitary public discussion a question which was festering in silence and suspicion, began a series of studies of the Jewish Question. The question of the motive which inspired these studies has received various treatment. It is a striking note in all the Jewish attempts at explanation, that these studies are in retaliation for some wrong or injury committed by a Jew. It must be rather humiliating to be compelled to postulate wrong doing on the part of one’s race to account for a study of that race. However, THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT is able to defend the Jewish name in this particular and to say most plainly that the present series of studies are not in retaliation for the misdeed of any Jew, and to add, if need be, that they have not in view the injury of any Jew, great or small, but solely the prevention of further injury to the world through the vast misuse by Jewish leaders of the power that rests in their hands.
In all that year of discussion, Jewish leaders have been making a “defense” which even the Jewish people have felt was far beside the point. Rabbis, publicists, political and racial leaders have all arisen and shouted and called names, but have carefully avoided the questions at issue. There have been “challenges,” all of which have been strategic attempts to stop the discussion and bury it in the smoke of “investigations” which could easily be controlled. Personal abusiveness has been resorted to, not to mention lurid and ludicrous falsehoods but never a focus on a fact, never the choice of a concrete situation, and a candid examination of that.
Jews Disgusted With Sham Defense
ALL these activities have had two purposes in mind, as those who understand Jewish modes of procedure have long since seen; first, to befog the issue with irrelevant matter; second, to divert the studies from the main line to some side line which runs off into a morass. There will be plenty of time to explore the side lines, but the wiser element of the Jews will meet the question on the main line. The refusal of the astronomer to debate the proposition that the moon is made of green cheese, would hardly be received as proof of his fear to meet the facts of his science.
The first real Jewish “defense” was a counsel to violence, for boycott is of the essence of violence — a commercial “pogrom,” to use a word the safe and comfortable Jews of America like to employ. This counsel of violence came from the leaders, of course, and was stimulated by secret meetings where every effort was made to rouse the passions of the Jews to unlawful activity. We stress the word unlawful, because the Jewish leaders counseled a course which they claim in the courts to be unlawful when used against themselves. How, when and where this was done does not matter in this connection. The point is that in following this desperate line the Jewish leaders confessed their utter incompetency and un-Americanism. Had they been plain men of common sense they would not only have seen the lawlessness of their course but its impossibility as well. But why expect blind leaders to be wise? Who can say that this frenzy of incompetence may not be one of the influences that shall open the eyes of the Jewish masses to the folly of their leadership?
The extent to which this idea of violence “caught on” among the Jewish people can be gathered from a study of several thousands of communities throughout the United States. There is no doubt that the Jewish attitude of “Beware!” toward the non-Jews is still strong in a few quarters, but there is also no doubt that it is rapidly disappearing. The Jewish individual is not a fool, and he is not misled by the folly of his so-called leaders nor by the antics of those “Gentile fronts’ who find the Jewish “defense” rather profitable in one way or another. Indeed, some of the most refreshing expressions that have come to THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT are from Jews who shrewdly estimate the qualities of the Jewish “defense.” These sound-headed Jews clearly see that the best defense is to take the situation as it actually is, analyze it, act frankly upon their findings, and seek to remove those mistaken policies and qualities which are always turning up to plague the Jewish people.
In their non-Jewish “defenders” the Jews have had a precious handful. As friends of the Jews they may be just as desirable as any other friends, but as “defenders” their main service is to divert attention for a moment. Then the general situation of the Question closes over them and they are forgotten. Jewish humor must have had numerous occasions to observe how well justified is the Protocols’ estimate of non-Jewish ability in the light of the intellectual character of non-Jews’ “defense” of the Jews.
Billy Sunday and His “Jew Sermon”
BILLY SUNDAY, for example, is one of these Jewish “defenders.” He is not at all clear what he is defending them from, but he is defending them just the same. In the sermon list which Mr. Sunday dispenses during each evangelistic engagement there is what is known as “the Jew Sermon.” Men who have been connected with the promotion of his campaigns say that this “Jew Sermon” is depended on to enlist a portion of the financial support which might not otherwise be obtainable in defraying the necessarily heavy expenses of a Billy Sunday campaign. Jewish contributors are more easily approached through the introduction of “the Jew Sermon.” It is a familiar compilation of complimentary statements, all of which have been made in this series, such as the fact that Jews sailed with Christopher Columbus to discover America, Jews are never seen in the poorhouses, and so on.
It recites the statement of which Jewish writers delight to remind Christians, namely, that Christ was a Jew. The tense is emphasized because Mr. Sunday’s utterance is capable of interpretation in the present tense. “If ever you walk the streets of glory, and are kept out of hell, it will be because of your repentance and faith in the shed blood of a Jew.” This is questionable theology, to say the least, for it is the faith of the Christian church that Christ was and is the Son of God. Nevertheless, the statement as made by Sunday is quite in harmony with the Jewish view of the case. Few things are more nauseous and reprehensible than this senile acceptance of the statement that “your god is a Jew,” “We gave you your god, now we’ll give you your government.” It is very much as if the American people after execrating the assassin of McKinley should journey to Africa and find that Czołgosz had become the god of the Africans. It would give the American a sense of superiority to think that an outcast of his people had become the god of another race.
Well, that does not matter either. Mr. Sunday speaks about “my friend. Nathan Straus.” He says, “You pay tribute to the Jew for the suit you have on and the dress you wear: for they control the tailoring and the custom-made business of the United States. There is not a cabinet in Europe that hasn’t had Jews in its membership. Some of the shrewdest financiers in the world are Jews. It was really the banking house of Kuhn, Loeb & Company, of New York, that refused to loan Japan the money to prosecute the war, that really hastened peace. Isabella had to hock her jewels to pay for Columbus’ voyage, and she hocked them to a Jew. And the Jew is just as distinctively a Jew today as he was 6,000 years ago. All hail the Jews!”
Mr. Sunday Didn’t Know – But
THIS is great “defense.” Everyone knows what it is, a rehash of Madison C. Peter’s little book. But it doesn’t touch the case. Each statement Sunday makes contains the vital essence of criticism, but he doesn’t know it.
Mr. Sunday has not read “The International Jew.” More than that, he has not even read his textbook, the Bible. Dollars to doughnuts he cannot tell offhand the difference between Judah and Israel, or he would stop confusing them. And it is doubtful if he can tell where the Jewish Christ found his first disciples, among the Jews of Judea, or the non-Jewish Israelites of the north country. Mr. Sunday, excellent and useful as he is in certain fields, is simply not master of his subject, and what is worse, he has not tried to be.
That he speaks without knowledge when he attempts to characterize the studies which have appeared in THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT is shown by the following telegrams:
“William A. Sunday, Jan. 11, 1921
“Fairmount, West Virginia.
“We have read your comment as carried by the International News Service, of January 7, on Jewish series now appearing in THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT.
“Will you be so good as to inform us whether you have read any one of the forty or more articles which have appeared, and if so, which one, and if more than one, how many? Thanking you for telegraphic reply at our expense.
“The Dearborn Publishing Company.”
Here is Mr. Sunday’s reply:
“Dearborn Publishing Co., Jan. 11. 1921
“Have read frequent excerpts from Jewish series printed in other papers and comments by Metropolitan Press. I had no reason to question the correctness of these reports. The part with which I especially disagreed was the statement that the Jews were aiming at control of the important activities of the country. I have not found the slightest evidence of the existence of such a condition.
“W. A. Sunday.”
Mr. Sunday did not read any “excerpts” from these articles in any “other papers” up to January 11. None was printed. Up to that time the newspapers printed Jewish propaganda only, and Jewish propaganda is the only knowledge Mr. Sunday has of the Jewish Question. The part with which Mr. Sunday especially disagreed was, he says, the statement that the Jews are aiming at control of the important activities of the country. It would be difficult if not impossible to arrive at an understanding of how Mr. Sunday could especially disagree with what was not said. If he had known, he would have seen that it was not “aiming at control” which was stated, but actual control which was shown. And as for Mr. Sunday’s failure to find evidence of such a condition, there is plenty of evidence in his own sermon on the Jews. He possibly does not consider it as evidence because he read it in a newspaper and did not gather it by direct observation, but he considers it good enough for his sermon.
Mr. Bernstein Plus Hearst Type
AS A “defender,” Mr. Sunday occupies the position of one who has not studied his case. Whether he would study it or not, we have not asked him. From his own standpoint, his sermon to the Jews is an unfaithful and halting piece of evangelism. Obviously he feared to go sled-length in his effort to convert the Jews — that would be to “insult” them; he therefore remains in the region of half-truths and stereotyped praise and veers from his stated purpose as soon as he has disposed of his bouquets.
Mr. Sunday, by the way, is not the only minister who confessed by telegraph that he spoke without knowing whereof he spoke. However, the great majority of them proceeded at once to look into the Question for themselves, and the result has been confirmatory of most of the statements made in this series As a matter of fact, the Bible is the best textbook from which to begin the study of the Jewish Question.
The “defense” of the Jews has been exceedingly stupid not only because a part of it has been made in utter ignorance of what the charge was (as if one should defend a man for murder who is only charged with speeding), but also because of the assumption on the part of some of the defenders that the question could be settled by personalities. Thus far this resort to personalities has been taken exclusively by the Jewish side, though not for lack of material on the other. On that line too there would be no hesitancy to try conclusions, but there are a few Jews at least who appreciate the forbearance in that respect which has been shown.
The chief weakness of the “defense” which resorts to personalities is that it settles nothing. If all were mere say-so, dependent for acceptance upon the credibility of certain witnesses, an attack on personalities might serve to break down the basis of belief. But if the case consists merely in bringing to light certain facts which anybody can see for himself by the mere act of looking, then the matter of personality has nothing whatever to do with the weight of the case. If the articles in THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT have been successful in securing the adherence of great hosts of Americans, it has not been because of any blind dependence on the statements of this paper, but because this great host could look about in their own communities and in their own spheres and see that what the articles have said is true. It is a matter of sight, not faith.
That is the reason why Mr. Herman Bernstein’s articles were totally unworthy as a defense of his people and valueless as a contribution to the Question. Mr. Bernstein, with the aid of the pro-Jewish Hearst syndicate, and the lurid-lettered Hearst newspapers from coast to coast, may laugh every person connected with the matter out of court, but when he has done, the Facts are still there, and the indictment is unchanged Doesn’t Mr. Bernstein see that? Of course he does. He is not a member of the American Jewish Committee for nothing. The American Jewish Committee exists for the management of just such policies and propaganda as have forced the Question to the front in these United States. The Bernstein wad is shot, just as the Brisbane wad and the William Hard wad and numerous lesser wads have been shot, but they never reached as far as the Question.
Crediting men like Bernstein with an interest in the matter as well as a certain amount of intelligence, the only explanation that can be made of their performances is that they are sparring for time. Not daring to meet the Question, for that would involve too much confession, they are hopeful that the Question itself will wear out; but that they might not seem to be inactive they break in from time to time with such performances as those of Bernstein, which are as formidable as if they were pot-boilers wrung out of the necessities of an impecunious writer.
It the Question dies out; if these studies can be brought to an end because of the barrage of abuse which the Jewish press is hurling, then the Jewish leaders can proclaim a victory, and they will have Mr. Bernstein’s large red headlines in the Hearst papers to prove that they were in the thick of the fray. Again, how unfortunate are the Jews in their leaders and defenders!
There is room for suspecting that the weakness of the Jewish defense is due not only to a reluctance to indulge in that confession which would result in the further breach between the mass of the Jewish people and their incompetent leaders, but also to a hope that in the meantime some “back fire” may be started which will be effective in drawing public attention away from the main Question to something else. That has been the mark of Jewish strategy from the beginning of this series — to start a diversion.
Starting a Negro “Back Fire
TO ILLUSTRATE this will involve mention of a phase of the Question which has not yet come up for detailed discussion. It is one of the disadvantages which these studies labor under that it is impossible to present the material on as wide a scale as might be desirable. Thus many phases of the Question are still waiting publication. One of these relates to the bond which exists between certain Jewish influences and the Negro population of the country. There have been strange unrests and convulsions among the Negro people in the United States, prophets have arisen, new watchwords have been coined, a spirit wholly unlike the Negro as his normal self has made its appearance, until it is no longer anything but the plainest truth to say that the Negro Question is more acute as a national problem than it ever was before.
Nor is this the fault of the Negro. Fortunately the American knows the Negro better than anyone else and is not a victim of “race prejudice.” All the obtainable facts seem to point in the direction of the conclusion that the Negro is being tampered with by influences cleverer than anything that he could devise and more malicious than anything the Negro himself would naturally create. That is, the Negro is being used as a tool by some influence whose interest is in national disorder. It is a big question and there is plenty of material to present regarding it. But this much is said merely for introduction. The well-known assertion of the Jews that “the Negroes and the Jews are the only two oppressed races in the United States” has long been harped into Negro ears.
Now for one of the reactions. It is solemnly declared in a Negro publication that:
“The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is the ritual of the Ku-Klux-Klan.”
“The ‘International Jew,’ now running in THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT is a series of lectures from The Imperial Wizard to the members of the Ku-Klux-Klan, instructing them how to perfect the Invisible Empire.”
This paper seriously instructs its readers to read THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT‘s articles with this secret key in mind. For “Jew,” read “Klan.” For “American Jewish Committee” read “American Klan.”
Thus, in the minds of the Negro readers of the newspaper here quoted the seed of the suspicion is planted that the Jews and the Negroes must stand together in the fellowship of persecution, which really means, in the present state of the Negro mind, something more.
Still Building on the Sand
IT IS not easy to believe that this amazing attempt to start a back fire among the Negroes was conceived by a Negro. It is out of harmony with his point of view and his temperament. The idea was very probably of quite other origin.
We would call the attention of the United States Government to the present situation among the Negroes and urge that a strict investigation be made into those influences which are arousing the Negro to courses of which he will become the victim while his hidden instigators go free.
It is a fact explaining this flight of the Jews to the Negroes for help, that the help which the Jewish leaders seek is usually a help based upon a false idea. That “we are the only two oppressed races in the United States” is both untrue and seditious, since there are no oppressed races here, and such an amalgamation of two races under the plea of oppression constitutes a threat against the rest of the people.
In time the Negroes too will find that out, after they have served the Jewish leaders’ purpose and possibly suffered for it; for all other people up to this time have found that out and have withdrawn.
Just now the “Chosen People” theory as a hindrance to plain speaking about Jewish influence upon American life is less flourishing and impressive than perhaps at any other time in the country’s history — why? — because the Jew, by inserting his influence into the very councils of the Christian church, has stressed that “chosen people” theory until it burst all bounds of truth and justice.
The Jewish people, as people and as Jews, have always been able to appeal to the Christian church and the Christian conscience in the United States, in the complete assurance that what was right and generous in their behalf would be assisted in every possible way. This has been the attitude of the church since its implantation in the United States, and before. The Jews prospered under this attitude, indeed could not have prospered without it, and were anxious at all times to strengthen as far as possible the doctrinal basis on which this spirit rested. That doctrinal basis was, of course, “the Chosen People” theory. It was not obnoxious until it became overworked.
No text of scripture has been in wider use the last six months in the United States than that which is quoted as saying that anyone who blesses “thee” shall be blessed and anyone who curses “thee” shall be cursed — the common interpretative reference being made, of course, to the Jews whom we see today. Morris Gest, and “the Wolf of Wall Street,” as well as the others. It represents a “fear of the Jews” strongly fostered by misemphasis on certain words supposed to favor the Jew in all that he does and set him apart from and above the rest of society with relation to his social doings.
World Rule Not by Materialism
THAT has largely broken down. First, it has broken down because it was spoken of All Israel, eleven-twelfths of which is now without identity, and not of the Jews only; second, because even if the Jews are “the chosen people” their own scriptures distinctly declare that the methods they now adopt are not the chosen methods. Some people — even ministers who ought to know better — are so weighed upon by superstitious fear and a desire to accommodate present-day Jewish facts to anything but common sense, that they even excuse modern Jewish methods with the assertion that “the Jews are prophesied to rule the world”‘ and “these methods are the way by which the prophecy is being fulfilled” — these methods being the cornering of gold, the control of commerce and all the other things this series has talked about.
The absurdity of this cannot fail one day to strike the minds that harbor it. If tomorrow the fiction that gold is wealth should be done away — and some day it will be done away — all this control of the world through gold will be done away too, and the international Jews will be left alone sitting upon their little hillocks of metal. They will be the first junk-dealers of the new era, and their junk will be their gold. Again: let the world eliminate war and all the profits that accumulate from it, past profits in the form of interest, present profits, and future profits which will continue as long as the present system of credits and interest continues, and one moment after this elimination all this “prophetic” control of the world goes to smash. If the Jews are to rule, it must be with a scepter other than gold. If they are to wield universal power, it cannot be on the basis of their present materialism.
The basis is wrong. The fear is wrong. The whole doctrine has been used for wrong purposes, for the stoppage of truth-telling and the concealment of situations that ought to be disclosed.
That refuge, however, is passing. No more “anti-Semitic” pursuit and judgment faces the Jew today than that which he may find in his own Scriptures. He now flees to a coalition with the Negro, because the other which he is fast losing is based on a wrong idea which he had no little hand in fostering.
How many more such moves will he have to make before he sees that his refuge is not in the “delusion of persecution” which he has permitted to victimize him, but in a frank face-to-face estimate of the situation as it appeals to him to reconcile himself with the world — not by ceasing to be a Jew, not by pretending not to be a Jew, but by ceasing to be anti-social, and by ceasing to pretend that his Semitic descent elevates him above the general social interest.
Jewish World Notes
- Nahum Sokolow, according to Jewish Correspondence Bureau’s Paris correspondent, in explaining why the “Polish-Jewish Question” was not raised at the Geneva meeting of the League of Nations, said the Jewish Committee went to Geneva with two main objects. One was to try and secure “minority rights” in countries where they had not yet been granted. This was fully obtained. The League adopted the principle of requiring recognition of minority rights, which means “special Jewish rights” exclusively, as a condition of League membership.
- Three Jews have been elected to the new Parliament of the Union of South Africa. They are Morris Alexander, David Harris and Harry Grauman.
- “The rabbi of history has usually been pictured as passive, tolerant, submissive and saintly. Dr. Stephen S. Wise gave a vivid portrayal of the modern rabbi when at Ann Arbor he addressed the student body of the University of Michigan and thrilled his auditors with a dramatic defense of his war record . . . . Now that he has been attacked, Dr. Wise will not only defend himself but show the ‘Anti-Semite’ how the modern Jew reacts to these wholly unwarranted assaults.
- The submissive Jew is of the past. Today we are alert and fighting back” — Rabbi Coffee in Chicago Jewish Sentinel. These be brave words; but it will be news to those who were present on the occasion mentioned that the auditors were “thrilled” by the New York rabbi’s performance. It would be nearer the truth to say that they witnessed an exhibition of questionable taste and an abuse of the hospitality of the university to devote his time to an arrogant and insolent attack on a member of the faculty on a purely personal issue before an audience gathered to hear a lecture on “Americanism.” And it might be added that up to date, Rabbi Wise has failed to keep his threat to hale Professor Hobbes before the courts, although the latter has replied to the rabbi’s “challenge” by repeating in the public prints his characterization of Rabbi Wise’s “war record.”
- Jews will be especially grateful to President Wilson. He favored liberal immigration laws, and worked for the rights of minority races. He appointed no Jew to office as political reward for votes delivered. Those Jews he did select were worthy representatives, as Judge Samuel Alschuler, of Chicago, Justice Louis D. Brandeis, of Boston, Henry Morgenthau and Abram I. Elkus, of New York City. When the President sought advice, he consulted such men as Felix Frankfurter, Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, Edward A. Filene, Bernard Baruch, and Julius Rosenwald. Citizens of this type, serving America with unselfish devotion, have blessed Judaism as well. — Rabbi Rudolph L Coffee, in Chicago Sentinel.
- According to a Jewish News Service dispatch from London, the next Zionist executive will consist of Professor Chayim Weizmann, Nahum Sokolow, Sir Alfred Mond, Major James Rothschild, Judge Julian W. Mack, Julius Simon, Nehemiah De Lima and M. M. Ussishkin. It is suggested that Mr. Justice Brandeis remain as “honorary president of the world Zionist organization,” and there is some agitation to have Zhabotinsky and Neiditch added to the executive as representatives of the Russian Zionists.
* * *