Concerning the Jews by Mark Twain aka Samuel Clemens

[chump]

I found this jewel on Truthseeker, and linked to the link here. Written in 1898, it is interesting to see Mark Twain's perspective and how the situation has evolved. Some excerpts:

http://classiclit.about.com/library/bl- ... ngjews.htm
Concerning the Jews
by Mark Twain
a.k.a. Samuel Clemens
(1835-1910)
... 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 Europe had become quiet and safe again, the Duke came back from overseas, and the Jew returned the loan, with interest added...

...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 Egypt was upon Joseph the foreign Jew all this time? I think it likely. Was it friendly? We must doubt it. Was Joseph establishing a character for his race which would survive long in Egypt? and in time would his name come to be familiarly used to express that character - like Shylock's? It is hardly to be doubted. Let us remember that this was centuries before the crucifixion...

... The Jew is being legislated out of Russia. The reason is not concealed. The movement was instituted because the Christian peasant and villager stood no chance against his commercial abilities. He was always ready to lend money on a crop, and sell vodka and other necessaries of life on credit while the crop was growing. When settlement day came he owned the crop; and next year or year after he owned the farm, like Joseph.

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 Spain had to banish him four hundred years ago, and Austria about a couple of centuries later...

...In Berlin, a few years ago, I read a speech which frankly urged the expulsion of the Jews from Germany; and the agitator's reason was as frank as his proposition. It was this: that eighty-five per cent. of the successful lawyers of Berlin were Jews, and that about the same percentage of the great and lucrative businesses of all sorts in Germany were in the hands of the Jewish race! Isn't it an amazing confession? It was but another way of saying that in a population of 48,000,000, of whom only 500,000 were registered as Jews, eight-five per cent. of the brains and honesty of the whole was lodged in the Jews. I must insist upon the honesty - it is an essential of successful business, taken by and large. Of course it does not rule out rascals entirely, even among Christians, but it is a good working rule, nevertheless. The speaker's figures may have been inexact, but the motive of persecution stands out as clear as day.

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 Vienna, last autumn, an agitator said that all these disastrous details were true of Austria-Hungary also; and in fierce language he demanded the expulsion of the Jews. When politicians come out without a blush and read the baby act in this frank way, unrebuked, it is a very good indication that they have a market back of them, and know where to fish for votes.

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...

...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 America they scatter too, but you know more about that than I do.

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 Palestine, with a government of their own - under the suzerainty of the Sultan, I suppose. At the Convention of Berne, last year, there were delegates from everywhere, and the proposal was received with decided favor. I am not the Sultan, and I am not objecting; but if that concentration of the cunningest brains in the world were going to be made in a free country (bar Scotland), I think it would be politic to stop it. It will not be well to let the race find out its strength. If the horses knew theirs, we should not ride any more...

[barracuda]

Not exactly Twain's finest hour. I must say I prefer The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County.

[slimmouse]

I guess as long as people consider themselves Jews or christians or muslims or whatever, we will always have the misguided pontifications of the like of Twain to deal with.

Gotta hand it to the reptiles. They sure as hell know how to control us, including the brilliant literary talents of the likes of Twain

[norton ash]

Well, we'll just add Twain to the list of horrible anti-semites who should obviously not be bothered with.

[slimmouse]

Well, we'll just add Twain to the list of horrible anti-semites who should obviously not be bothered with.

Shakespeare was the same Norton. A metaphorical village idiot in a world of such

[Simulist]

Oh yeah. Just the kind of world I want to foster — not.

One where Twain and Shakespeare are discouraged and "intellects" like David Icke have become the new household names.

[semper occultus]

the extract above didn't strike me as unduly anti-semitic in intent. Given subsequent history the glib stereotyping Twain is guilty of is bound to make one uncomfortable.

[Nordic]

Beethoven was anti-semetic, so I'm boycotting his music. That'll teach him.

[barracuda]

Link?

[surfaceskimmer]

Link?

http://www.henrymakow.com/mark_twain_on ... nance.html

original here: http://classiclit.about.com/library/bl- ... ngjews.htm Harpers Magazine March1898

[barracuda]

Okay, first - Henry Makow? Jeebus' donkey.

Secondly, however, I was looking for a reference to Nordic's statement that Beethoven was an anti-semite. Apologies for the nebulosity.

[surfaceskimmer]

Sorry for the confusion... When I saw the Makow stuff, I went looking for an original link to the old Harper's text. And then I discovered this thread, and then your question. The nebulosity may have been mine.

I was once asked for the definition of "nebulous" and I answered "By definition, it has none."

The question of Beethoven's anti-Semitism I'll leave to others. I'm told that listening to Beethoven is good exercise for the corpus callosum, but I haven't tried that yet.

[Jeff]

Twain's execution may have been unconsciously dressed with prejudice, but his intent in writing it was actually anti-anti-semitic:

Some months ago I published a magazine article descriptive of a remarkable scene in the Imperial Parliament in Vienna. Since then I have received from Jews in America several letters of inquiry. They were difficult letters to answer, for they were not very definite. But at last I have received a definite one. It is from a lawyer, and he really asks the questions which the other writers probably believed they were asking. By help of this text I will do the best I can to publicly answer this correspondent, and also the others - at the same time apologizing for having failed to reply privately. The lawyer's letter reads as follows:

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 Austria which did not have a party - they are absolutely non-participants. Yet in your article you say that in the rioting which followed, all classes of people were unanimous only on one thing, viz., in being against the Jews. Now will you kindly tell me why, in your judgment, the Jews have thus ever been, and are even now, in these days of supposed intelligence, the butt of baseless, vicious animosities? I dare say that for centuries there has been no more quiet, undisturbing, and well-behaving citizen, as a class, than that same Jew. It seems to me that ignorance and fanaticism cannot alone account for these horrible and unjust persecutions.

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 America or abroad? Will it ever come to an end? Will a Jew be permitted to live honestly, decently, and peaceably like the rest of mankind? What has become of the Golden Rule?

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....

Knowing something of the "Truthseeker" by its other jewels, I'm certain its intent is something else. And I'm having difficulty imagining an intent for this thread other than mischief.

[Nordic]

Hm, I can't remember where I read that now. I used to read a hell of a lot on Beethoven him being an artistic hero of mine and all of that. I always wanted to make a biopic about the guy. Probably never will. But I was dismayed to learn this about him, then again the guy had moments where he hated just about anybody and everybody. He was quite likely bipolar and found it impossible to keep friends, he usually would blow up here and there at all of them.

My point by my statement was that it's somewhat silly to judge people in the past by present day standards. Not 100% silly, but somewhat.

At the same time, learning about the history of this is extremely interesting.

There seems to have been a steadfast amount of anti-semitism in Germany for quite some time, generations, perhaps. Also in Poland. I believe there were Jewish ghettos in Poland quite some time ago. And I understand Russia was rabidly anti-semitic for a long time and still can be. Not exactly an uncommon cultural trait.

I'll try to find something that supports this but I actually read this in a (gasp!) printed book, and not online, some time ago. If I recall it was expressed in his letters to someone, sometime.

Edit:

It's a tough thing to google! Any search ends up with connections to Wagner, a famous antisemite, and his views on Beethoven, or connections to Mahler, and his being a victim of antisemitism.

I'll try more later.

[Simulist]

Twain's execution may have been unconsciously dressed with prejudice, but his intent in writing it was actually anti-anti-semitic:

[...]

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....

Thank you.

By the way, if anyone is wondering which the "one" race might be that Mark Twain felt some prejudice against, I would suppose that he is referring, tongue in cheek, to the human race.

In 1906, he wrote, "As to the human race. There are many pretty and winning things about the human race. It is perhaps the poorest of all the inventions of all the gods but it has never suspected it once. There is nothing prettier than its naive and complacent appreciation of itself. It comes out frankly and proclaims without bashfulness or any sign of a blush that it is the noblest work of God. It has had a billion opportunities to know better, but all signs fail with this ass. I could say harsh things about it but I cannot bring myself to do it--it is like hitting a child."