As regards the munitions industry and the export of war material,
     the League of Nations has busied itself for years with efforts to
     get this horrible traffic controlled--with what little success, we all
     know. Last year I asked a well-known American diplomat why
     Japan was not forced by a commercial boycott to desist from
     her policy of force. "Our commercial interests are too strong,"
     was the answer. How can one help people who rest satisfied
     with a statement like that?

     You believe that a word from me would suffice to get something
     done in this sphere? What an illusion! People flatter me as long
     as I do not get in their way. But if I direct my efforts towards
     objects which do not suit them, they immediately turn to abuse
     and calumny in defence of their interests. And the onlookers
     mostly keep out of the light, the cowards! Have you ever tested
     the civil courage of your countrymen? The silently accepted
     motto is "Leave it alone and don't speak of it." You may be sure
     that I shall do everything in my power along the lines you
     indicate, but nothing can be achieved as directly as you think.

     Women and War

     In my opinion, the patriotic women ought to be sent to the front in the
next war instead  of the men. It would at least be a novelty in this  dreary
sphere  of  infinite  confusion,  and  besides--why should  not  such heroic
feelings on the part of the fair sex find a more  picturesque outlet than in
attacks on a defenceless civilian?

     Thoughts on the World Economic Crisis

     If there is one thing that can give a layman in the sphere of economics
the courage  to  express an opinion on  the  nature of the alarming economic
difficulties  of the  present day, it is the hopeless confusion of  opinions
among the experts. What I have to say is nothing new and does not pretend to
be  anything  more than the opinion  of  an independent and honest man  who,
unburdened by class or national  prejudices, desires nothing but the good of
humanity and the  most harmonious possible scheme of human  existence. If in
what follows I write as if I were clear about certain things and sure of the
truth of what  I am  saying, this is  done merely for the  sake of an easier
mode of expression; it does not proceed from  unwarranted self-confidence or
a belief in the infallibility of my somewhat simple intellectual  conception
of problems which are in reality uncommonly complex.

     As I see it,  this crisis differs in character from past crises in that
it is based on an entirely new  set of  conditions, due to rapid progress in
methods of production. Only  a fraction of the available human labour in the
world  is needed for the production of the total amount of consumption-goods
necessary  to life. Under  a completely free economic  system  this fact  is
bound to lead to unemployment. For reasons which I do not propose to analyse
here, the majority of people are  compelled to work  for the minimum wage on
which life can  be supported.  If  two  factories produce  the  same sort of
goods, other things being  equal, that one will be able to produce them more
cheaply  which employs less workmen--i.e.,  makes the individual worker work
as long and as hard as human nature permits. From this it follows inevitably
that, with methods of production what they are to-day, only a portion of the
available labour can  be used. While unreasonable demands are  made  on this
portion,  the  remainder  is  automatically  excluded  from  the  process of
production. This leads to a fall in sales and profits.  Businesses go smash,
which further increases unemployment and diminishes confidence in industrial
concerns and  therewith  public  participation  in  these  mediating  banks;
finally the banks become insolvent through the sudden withdrawal of deposits
and the wheels of industry therewith come to a complete standstill.

     The crisis has also  been  attributed to other causes which we will now
consider.

     (1)  Over-production.   We  have  to  distinguish  between  two  things
here--real   over-production   and   apparent   over-production.   By   real
overproduction I mean a production so great that it exceeds the demand. This
m4y  perhaps  apply  to  motor-cars and  wheat in the  United States  at the
present moment, although even that  is doubtful. By "over-production" people
usually  mean a condition  of things in which more of one particular article
is produced  than  can, in existing  circumstances, be sold,  in spite of  a
shortage of consumption-goods among consumers. This  condition  of  things I
call apparent over-production.  In  this case it is not  the  demand that is
lacking  but the consumers' purchasing-power. Such apparent  over-production
is only  another  word  for  a  crisis,  and therefore cannot  serve  as  an
explanation of the  latter;  hence  people  who try to  make over-production
responsible for the crisis are merely juggling with words.

     (2)  Reparations.  The obligation to pay  reparations lies heavy on the
debtor nations and their industries, compels them to go in for  dumping, and
so harms the creditor nations too This is beyond dispute. But the appearance
of the crisis  in  the  United  States, in  spite of  the  high  tariff-wall
protecting them, proves that this cannot be the principal cause of the world
crisis. The  shortage of gold in the debtor countries due to reparations can
at most serve as an argument for putting an end to these payments; it cannot
be dragged in as an explanation of the world crisis.

     (3) Erection  of near tariff-walls. Increase in the unproductive burden
of armaments. Political in security owing to latent danger of war. All these
things add considerably to the  troubles of  Europe, but  do not  materially
affect America.  The appearance  of the  crisis  in America shows  that they
cannot be its principal causes.

     (4) The dropping-out of the two Powers, China and Russia. This blow  to
world trade also does not touch America very nearly, and therefore cannot be
a principal cause of the crisis.

     (5)  The  economic rise  of the  lower  classes since  the  War.  This,
supposing it to be a reality, could only produce a scarcity of goods, not an
excessive supply.

     I will not weary the reader by enumerating further contentions which do
not seem to me  to  get  to the  heart of the matter.  Of  one thing I  feel
certain:  this  same technical  progress  which,  in  itself, might  relieve
mankind of a great part  of the labour necessary to  its subsistence, is the
main cause of  our present troubles. Hence there are those  who would in all
seriousness  forbid  the  introduction  of technical  improvements. This  is
obviously absurd.  But  how can  we find  a  more  rational  way  out of our
dilemma?

     If we could somehow  manage to  prevent  the  purchasing-power  of  the
masses,  measured  in terms of goods, from sinking below a  certain minimum,
stoppages in  the industrial cycle such as we  are experiencing to-day would
be rendered impossible.

     The logically simplest but also most daring method of achieving this is
a completely  planned economy, in  which consumption-goods are produced  and
distributed  by  the  community.  That,  in  essentials,  is  what is  being
attempted  in Russia to-day. Much will depend on  what  results  this mighty
experiment  produces. To  hazard a prophecy here would  be presumption.  Can
goods  be  produced as economically under such a  system  as under one which
leaves  more freedom  to  individual  enterprise?  Can this  system maintain
itself at all without the terror that has  so far accompanied it, which none
of us "westerners" would care to let himself in for? Does not such a  rigid,
centralized  system  tend towards protection  and hostility  to advantageous
innovations? We must take  care,  however, not  to allow these suspicions to
become prejudices which prevent us from forming an objective judgment.

     My personal opinion is that those methods  are preferable which respect
existing traditions and habits so far as that is in any way  compatible with
the end in view. Nor do I believe that a sudden transference of the  control
of industry to the hands of the public would be beneficial from the point of
view  of production;  private  enterprise  should  be  left  its  sphere  of
activity, in so far as it has not already been eliminated by industry itself
in the form of cartelization.

     There are, however, two respects  in  which this economic freedom ought
to  be limited. In each branch  of industry the number of working  hours per
week ought  so  to be reduced  by  law  that unemployment is  systematically
abolished. At  the same time minimum wages must  be fixed in such a way that
the purchasing power of the workers keeps pace with production.

     Further,  in   those  industries  which  have  become  monopolistic  in
character through organization on  the part of the producers, prices must be
controlled by the State in order to keep the creation of new capital  within
reasonable bounds  and  prevent the artificial strangling  of production and
consumption.

     In  this way it might perhaps be possible to establish a proper balance
between  production and consumption without too  great a limitation  of free
enterprise,  and at  the same  time to stop the  intolerable  tyranny of the
owners of the  means  of production (land, machinery) over the wage-earners,
in the widest sense of the term.

     Culture and Prosperity

     If  one  would  estimate  the  damage  done   by  the  great  political
catastrophe to the development of human civilization, one must remember that
culture  in  its  higher  forms  is a  delicate  plant which  depends  on  a
complicated  set of conditions and is wont to  flourish only in a few places
at any given  time.  For  it to blossom there  is  needed, first  of all,  a
certain degree of prosperity, which enables a fraction of  the population to
work at things not directly necessary to the maintenance  of life; secondly,
a moral tradition of respect for cultural values and achievements, in virtue
of  which this class is  provided with  the  means  of living  by the  other
classes, those who provide the immediate necessities of life.

     During the past century Germany has been one of the countries in  which
both conditions were fulfilled. The prosperity was, taken as a whole, modest
but sufficient; the tradition of respect for culture vigorous. On this basis
the German nation has brought forth fruits of culture which form an integral
part of the  development of  the modern  world. The  tradition, in the main,
still  stands;  the prosperity is gone. The  industries of the  country have
been cut  off almost completely  from the sources of raw materials on  which
the  existence of  the  industrial part of  the  population was  based.  The
surplus necessary to support the intellectual worker has suddenly  ceased to
exist.  With  it the tradition which  depends on it will inevitably collapse
also, and a fruitful nursery of culture turn to wilderness.

     The  human race,  in  so  far  as  it sets a value  on  culture, has an
interest in preventing such impoverishment. It will give what help it can in
the  immediate crisis and reawaken  that higher  community of  feeling,  now
thrust into the background by national egotism, for which human  values have
a validity independent of politics and  frontiers. It will then procure  for
every nation conditions of work  under which it can exist and under which it
can bring forth fruits of culture.


     Production and Purchasing Power

     I do not believe that the remedy for our present difficulties lies in a
knowledge of productive capacity  and consumption, because this knowledge is
likely, in the main, to come too late. Moreover the trouble in Germany seems
to  me to  be not hypertrophy of the  machinery of production but  deficient
purchasing power  in a large section  of the population, which has been cast
out of the productive process through rationalization.

     The gold standard  has, in my opinion, the serious  disadvantage that a
shortage in the  supply of  gold  automatically leads  to  a contraction  of
credit  and  also  of  the  amount  of  currency  in  circulation, to  which
contraction prices and wages  cannot adjust themselves sufficiently quickly.
The natural remedies for our troubles are, in my opinion, as follows:--

     (1)  A  statutory  reduction  of  working  hours,  graduated  for  each
department of industry, in  order to get  rid of unemployment, combined with
the  fixing   of  minimum   wages   for  the   purpose   of   adjusting  the
purchasing-power of the masses to the amount of goods available.

     (2) Control of the amount of money in  circulation and of the volume of
credit  in  such  a  way as  to  keep  the  price-level  steady, all special
protection being abolished.

     (3)  Statutory  limitation  of prices  for such articles  as  have been
practically  withdrawn from free competition by  monopolies or the formation
of cartels.

     Production and Work

     An answer to Cederstr¶m

     Dear Herr Cederstr¶m,

     Thank you for sending me your proposals, which interest me
     very much. Having myself given so much thought to this subject I
     feel that it is right that I should give you my perfectly frank
     opinion on them.

     The fundamental trouble seems to me to be the almost unlimited
     freedom of the labour market combined with extraordinary
     progress in the methods of production. To satisfy the needs of
     the world to-day nothing like all the available labour is wanted.
     The result is unemployment and excessive competition among
     the workers, both of which reduce purchasing power and put
     the whole economic system intolerably out of gear.

     I know Liberal economists maintain that every economy in
     labour is counterbalanced by an increase in demand. But, to
     begin with, I don't believe it, and even if it were true, the
     above-mentioned factors would always operate to force the
     standard of living of a large portion of the human race doom to
     an unnaturally low level.

     I also share your conviction that steps absolutely must be taken
     to make it possible and necessary for the younger people to take
     part in the productive process. Further, that the older people
     ought to be excluded from certain sorts of work (which I call
     "unqualified" work), receiving instead a certain income, as having
     by that time done enough work of a kind accepted by society as
     productive.

     I too am in favour of abolishing large cities, but not of settling
     people of a particular type--e.g., old people--in particular
     towns. Frankly, the idea strikes me as horrible. I am also of
     opinion that fluctuations in the value of money must be avoided,
     by substituting for the gold standard a standard based on certain
     classes of goods selected according to the conditions of
     consumption--as Keynes, if I am not mistaken, long ago
     proposed. With the introduction of this system one might
     consent to a certain amount of "inflation," as compared with the
     present monetary situation, if one could believe that the State
     would really make a rational use of the windfall thus accruing to
     it.

     The weaknesses of your plan lie, so it seems to me, in the sphere
     of psychology, or rather, in your neglect of it. It is no accident
     that capitalism has brought with it progress not merely in
     production but also in knowledge. Egoism and competition are,
     alas, stronger forces than public spirit and sense of duty. In
     Russia, they say, it is impossible to get a decent piece of
     bread.…Perhaps I am over-pessimistic concerning State
     and other forms of communal enterprise, but I expect little good
     from them. Bureaucracy is the death of all sound work. I have
     seen and experienced too many dreadful warnings, even in
     comparatively model Switzerland.

     I am inclined to the view that the State can only be of real use to
     industry as a limiting and regulative force. It must see to it that
     competition among the workers is kept within healthy limits, that
     all children are given a chance to develop soundly, and that
     wages are high enough for the goods produced to be consumed.
     But it can exert a decisive influence through its regulative function
     if--and there again you are right--its measures are framed in an
     objective spirit by independent experts.

     I would like to write to you at greater length, but cannot find the
     time.


     Minorities

     It  seems to be a  universal  fact that minorities--especially when the
individuals composing them are distinguished by physical  peculiarities--are
treated  by  the  majorities among whom they  live as an inferior  order  of
beings.  The tragedy of such a fate  lies not merely in the unfair treatment
to which these minorities are automatically subjected in social and economic
matters,  but also in  the  fact that under the  suggestive influence of the
majority most of  the victims themselves succumb to the  same prejudice  and
regard  their brethren  as inferior beings. This  second and greater part of
the  evil can be overcome by  closer combination and by deliberate education
of the minority, whose spiritual liberation can thus be accomplished.

     The efforts of the American negroes in this  direction are deserving of
all commendation and assistance.

     Observations on the Present Situation in Europe

     The distinguishing feature of  the  present political situation of  the
world, and in particular of Europe,  seems to me to be this, that political.
development  has  failed, both  materially and intellectually, to keep  pace
with economic necessity,  which has changed its character in a comparatively
short  time.  The interests  of  each country must  be subordinated  to  the
interests  of the wider community.  The struggle for this new orientation of
political thought and feeling is a severe one, because it has  the tradition
of  centuries  against  it.  But  the  survival  of  Europe  depends on  its
successful  issue.  It is  my  firm  conviction  that once the psychological
impediments are overcome the solution of the real  problems will not be such
a  terribly difficult matter. In  order  to create the right atmosphere, the
most essential thing is personal co-operation between men  of like mind. May
our united efforts succeed in building  a bridge of mutual trust between the
nations!

     The Heirs of the Ages

     Previous generations were  able to look upon intellectual  and cultural
progress as simply the  inherited  fruits of their forebears' labours, which
made  life  easier and more  beautiful for them. But the calamities  of  our
times show us that this was a fatal illusion.

     We see  now  that  the greatest  efforts  are  needed if this legacy of
humanity's is to  prove  a blessing and not a curse. For whereas formerly it
was enough for  a man to have  freed  himself  to some extent from  personal
egotism  to make him a  valuable member of society,  to-day he  must also be
required to overcome national and  class egotism. Only  if he  reaches those
heights can he contribute towards improving the lot of humanity.

     As regards  this  most important  need  of the age the inhabitants of a
small State are  better placed than those of a great Power, since the latter
are exposed, both in politics and economics, to the temptation to gain their
ends by brute force. The agreement between Holland and Belgium, which is the
only  bright spot in  European affairs during the last few years, encourages
one to hope that the small nations will  play a leading part in the  attempt
to liberate the world  from  the  degrading  yoke of militarism  through the
renunciation   of   the   individual   country's    unlimited    right    of
self-determination.

        III

     Germany 1933

     Manifesto

     As long as I have any choice,  I will  only  stay  in  a  country where
political liberty, toleration, and equality of  all citizens before  the law
are the rule. Political liberty implies  liberty to express  one's political
views  orally  and  in  writing,  toleration,  respect  for  any  and  every
individual opinion.

     These conditions  do not  obtain in Germany at the present  time. Those
who have done most for the cause of international understanding, among  them
some of the leading artists, are being persecuted there.

     Any  social  organism  can become  psychically  distempered just as any
individual can, especially in  times of difficulty. Nations  usually survive
these  distempers. I hope  that  healthy conditions  will  soon supervene in
Germany, and that in  future her great  men  like  Kant and Goethe  will not
merely be commemorated from time to time, but that the principles which they
inculcated   will  also  prevail   in   public  life   and  in  the  general
consciousness.

     March, 1933.

     Correspondence with the Prussian Academy of Sciences

     The following correspondence  is here  published for the first  time in
its authentic and complete form. The version published in  German newspapers
was for the most part incorrect, important sentences being omitted.

     The Academy's declaration of April I, 1933, against Einstein.

     The  Prussian  Academy  of  Sciences  heard with  indignation from  the
newspapers  of  Albert  Einstein's  participation  in atrocity-mongering  in
France and America. It immediately demanded an explanation. In  the meantime
Einstein has announced his withdrawal from the Academy, giving as his reason
that  he  cannot  continue to  serve the  Prussian State  under its  present
Government. Being a Swiss citizen, he also, it  seems, intends to resign the
Prussian nationality which he acquired in  1913  simply by  becoming a  full
member of the Academy.

     The  Prussian   Academy  of  Sciences  is  particularly  distressed  by
Einstein's activities  as an  agitator in  foreign countries,  as it and its
members  have  always  felt  themselves  bound  by the closest  ties  to the
Prussian   State  and,   while   abstaining  strictly  from   all  political
partisanship,  have  alwa58 stressed and  remained faithful to  the national
idea. It has, therefore, no reason to regret Einstein's withdrawal.

     Prof.  Dr. Ernst Heymann,  Perpetual Secretary.  Le Coq, near  Ostende,
April 5, 1933

     To the Prussian Academy of Sciences,

     I have received information from a thoroughly reliable source
     that the Academy of Sciences has spoken in an official statement
     of "Einstein's participation in atrocity-mongering in America and
     France."

     I hereby declare that I have never taken any part in
     atrocity-mongering, and I must add that I have seen nothing of
     any such mongering anywhere. In general people have contented
     themselves with reproducing and commenting on the official
     statements and orders of responsible members of the German
     Government, together with the programme for the annihilation of
     the German Jews by economic methods.

     The statements I have issued to the Press were concerned with
     my intention to resign my position in the Academy and renounce
     my Prussian citizenship; I gave as my reason for these steps that
     I did not wish to live in a country where the individual does not
     enjoy equality before the law and freedom to say and teach what
     he likes.

     Further, I described the present state of affairs in Germany as a
     state of psychic distemper in the masses and also made some
     remarks about its causes.

     In a written document which I allowed the International League
     for combating Anti-Semitism to make use of for the purpose of
     enlisting support, and which was not intended for the Press at all,
     I also called upon all sensible people, who are still faithful to the
     ideals of a civilization in peril, to do their utmost to prevent this
     mass-psychosis, which is exhibiting itself in such terrible
     symptoms in Germany to-day, from spreading further.

     It would have been an easy matter for the Academy to get hold
     of a correct version of my words before issuing the sort of
     statement about me that it has. The German Press has
     reproduced a deliberately distorted version of my words, as
     indeed was only to be expected with the Press muzzled as it is
     to-day.

     I am ready to stand by every word I have published. In return, I
     expect the Academy to communicate this statement of mine to
     its members and also to the German public before which I have
     been slandered, especially as it has itself had a hand in slandering
     me before that public.

     The Academy's Answer of April 11, 1933

     The Academy would like to point out that its statement of April
     1, 1933. was based not merely on German but principally on
     foreign, particularly French and Belgian, newspaper reports
     which Herr Einstein has not contradicted; in addition, it had
     before it his much-canvassed statement to the League for
     combating anti-Semitism, in which he deplores Germany's
     relapse into the barbarism of long-passed ages. Moreover, the
     Academy has reason to know that Herr Einstein, who according
     to his own statement has taken no part in atrocitymongering, has
     at least done nothing to counteract unjust suspicions and
     slanders, which, in the opinion of the Academy, it was his duty
     as one of its senior members to do. Instead of that Herr Einstein
     has made statements, and in foreign countries at that, such as,
     coming from a man of world-wide reputation, were bound to be
     exploited and abused by the enemies not merely of the present
     German Government but of the whole German people.

     For the Prussian Academy of Sciences,
     (Signed) H. von Ficker,
     E. Heymann,
     Perpetual Secretaries.

     Berlin, April 7, 1933
     The Prussian Academy of Sciences.
     Professor Albert Einstein, Leyden,
     c/o Prof. Ehrenfest, Witte Rosenstr.

     Dear Sir,

     As the present Principal Secretary of the Prussian Academy I
     beg to acknowledge the receipt of your communication dated
     March 28 announcing your resignation of your membership of
     the Academy. The Academy took cognizance of your
     resignation in its plenary session of March 30, 1933.

     While the Academy profoundly regrets the turn events have
     taken, this regret is inspired by the thought that a man of the
     highest scientific authority, whom many years of work among
     Germans and many years of membership of our society must
     have made familiar with the German character and German
     habits of thought, should have chosen this moment to associate
     himself with a body of people abroad who--partly no doubt
     through ignorance of actual conditions and events--have done
     much damage to our German people by disseminating erroneous
     views and unfounded rumours. We had confidently expected
     that one who had belonged to our Academy for so long would
     have ranged himself, irrespective of his own political sympathies,
     on the side of the defenders of our nation against the flood of lies
     which has been let loose upon it. In these days of mud-slinging,
     some of it vile, some of it ridiculous, a good word for the
     German people from you in particular might have produced a
     great effect, especially abroad. Instead of which your testimony
     has served as a handle to the enemies not merely of the present
     Government but of the German people. This has come as a
     bitter and grievous disappointment to us, which would no doubt
     have led inevitably to a parting of the ways even if we had not
     received your resignation.

     Yours faithfully,
     (signed) von Ficker.

     Le Coq-sur-Mer, Belgium, April 12, 1933

     To the Prussian Academy of Sciences, Berlin.

     I have received your communication of the seventh instant and
     deeply deplore the mental attitude displayed in it.

     As regards the fact, I can only reply as follows: What you say
     about my behaviour is, at bottom, merely another form of the
     statement you have already published, in which you accuse me
     of having taken part in atrocity-mongering against the German
     nation. I have already, in my last letter, characterized this
     accusation as slanderous.

     You have also remarked that a "good word" on my part for "the
     German people" would have produced a great effect abroad. To
     this I must reply that such a testimony as you suggest would have
     been equivalent to a repudiation of all those notions of justice
     and liberty for which I have all my life stood. Such a testimony
     would not be, as you put it, a good word for the German nation;
     on the contrary, it would only have helped the cause of those
     who are seeking to undermine the ideas and principles which
     have won for the German nation a place of honour in the
     civilized world. By giving such a testimony in the present
     circumstances I should have been contributing, even if only
     indirectly, to the barbarization of manners and the destruction of
     all existing cultural values.

     It was for this reason that I felt compelled to resign from the
     Academy, and your letter only shows me how right I was to do
     so.

     Munich, Aril 8, 1933

     >From the Bavarian Academy of Sciences to Professor Albert Einstein.

     Sir,

     In your letter to the Prussian Academy of Sciences you have
     given the present state of affairs in Germany as the reason for
     your resignation. The Bavarian Academy of Sciences, which
     some years ago elected you a corresponding member, is also a
     German Academy, closely allied to the Prussian and other
     German Academies; hence your withdrawal from the Prussian
     Acadeiny of Sciences is bound to affect your relations with our
     Academy.

     We must therefore ask you how you envisage your relations with
     our Academy after what has passed between yourself and the
     Prussian Academy.

     The President of the Bavarian Academy of Sciences.
     Le Coq-sur-Mer, April 21, 1933

     To the Bavarian Academy of Sciences, Munich.

     I have given it as the reason for my resignation from the Prussian
     Academy that in the present circumstances I have no wish either
     to be a German citizen or to remain in a position of
     quasi-dependence on the Prussian Ministry of Education.

     These reasons would not, in themselves, involve the severing of
     my relations with the Bavarian Academy. If I nevertheless desire
     my name to be removed from the list of members, it is for a
     different reason.

     The primary duty of an Academy is to encourage and protect
     the scientific life of a country. The learned societies of Germany
     have, however--to the best of knowledge--stood by and said
     nothing while a not inconsiderable proportion of German savants
     and students, and also of professional men of university
     education, have been deprived of all chance of getting
     employment or earning their livings in Germany. I would rather
     not belong to any society which behaves in such a manner, even
     if it does so under external pressure.


     A Reply

     The following lines are Einstein's answer to an invitation to associate
himself with a French manifesto against Anti-Semitism in Germany.

     I have considered this most  important proposal, which has a bearing on
several things that I have nearly at heart, carefully from every angle. As a
result  I have  come to the conclusion that I cannot take a personal part in
this extremely important affair, for two reasons:--

     In the first place I am, after all, still a German citizen, and  in the
second I am a  Jew. As regards the first point I must add that I have worked
in German institutions and have always been treated with  full confidence in
Germany.  However deeply I  may regret the things that are being done there,
however strongly I am bound to condemn the terrible mistakes that  are being
made with  the approval of the Government; it is  impossible for me  to take
part personally in an enterprise set on  foot  by responsible  members of  a
foreign Government. In order  that  you may  appreciate this  fully, suppose
that a French citizen in a more  or  less  analogous  situation had got up a
protest against the French Government's action in conjunction with prominent
German  statesmen. Even if you fully admitted  that  the  protest  was amply
warranted by the  facts, you  would still, I expect, regard the behaviour of
your fellow-citizen as an act of treachery. If Zola had felt it necessary to
leave France at the time of the Dreyfus case, he  would still certainly  not
have  associated himself  with a  protest  by  German  official  personages,
however much he might have approved of their  action. He would have confined
himself  to--blushing  for his  countrymen. In the second place,  a  protest
against  injustice  and violence  is incomparably more valuable  if it comes
entirely from  people who have  been prompted to it  purely by sentiments of
humanity and a love of Pew This cannot  be said of a man like me,  a few who
regards other Jews as  his brothers. For him,  an injustice done to the Jews
is the same as an injustice done to himself. He must not be the judge in his
own case, but wait for the judgment of impartial outsiders.

     These  are my reasons.  But  I should like  to  add that I  have always
honoured and admired that highly developed sense of justice which is one  of
the noblest features of the French tradition.

        IV

     The Jews

     Jewish Ideals

     The  pursuit of knowledge for its own sake, an almost fanatical love of
justice, and the desire for personal independence--these are the features of
the Jewish tradition which make me thank my stars that I belong to it.

     Those who are raging to-day against the ideals of reason and individual
liberty  and are trying to establish  a  spiritless State-slavery  by  brute
force rightly see in us their irreconcilable  foes. History has  given  us a
difficult row to hoe; but so long  as  we remain devoted servants of  truth,
justice, and liberty,  we shall continue not merely to survive as the oldest
of  living  peoples,  but  by creative work  to  bring  forth  fruits  which
contribute to the ennoblement of the human race, as heretofore.

     Is there a Jewish Point of View?

     In  the philosophical sense there  is, in  my  opinion, no specifically
Jewish outlook. Judaism seems to me  to be concerned almost exclusively with
the moral  attitude in life and to life. I look upon it as the essence of an
attitude to life which is  incarnate  in the Jewish people  rather  than the
essence of the laws laid down in the Thora and interpreted in the Talmud. To
me, the Thora and the Talmud are  merely the most important evidence for the
manner in which the Jewish conception of life held sway in earlier times.

     The essence of  that conception seems to  me to  lie in an  affirmative
attitude to the life of all creation. The life of the individual has meaning
only in so far as it aids  in  making the life of every  living thing nobler
and more beautiful. Life is sacred--that is to say, it is the supreme value,
to  which  all   other   values  are  subordinate.  The   hallowing  of  the
supra-individual  life brings  in  its  train  a  reverence  for  everything
spiritual--a particularly characteristic feature of the Jewish tradition.

     Judaism  is  not  a  creed:  the  Jewish  God is simply  a  negation of
superstition, an imaginary result of its elimination. It is also  an attempt
to base the moral law on fear,  a regrettable and discreditable attempt. Yet
it seems to me that the strong moral tradition of the Jewish nation has to a
large  extent  shaken  itself  free  from this  fear. It  is clear also that
"serving God" was equated with "serving the living." The best of the  Jewish
people, especially the Prophets and Jesus, contended tirelessly for this.

     Judaism is thus no  transcendental  religion; it is concerned with life
as we live it and can up to a point grasp it, and nothing  else. It seems to
me, therefore, doubtful whether it can be called a religion in  the accepted
sense of the word, particularly as no "faith" but the sanctification of life
in a supra-personal sense is demanded of the Jew.

     But  the Jewish tradition also contains something else, something which
finds  splendid  expression  in  many  of  the  Psalms--namely,  a  sort  of
intoxicated joy and amazement at the beauty and grandeur  of this world,  of
which,  man can just form  a faint notion. It is the feeling from which true
scientific research  draws its spiritual sustenance, but which also seems to
find  expression  in the song of birds. To tack this on to the idea  of  God
seems mere childish absurdity.

     Is what I have  described a distinguishing mark of Judaism? Is it to be
found anywhere else under another name? In its pure  form, nowhere, not even
in  Judaism,  where the  pure doctrine  is  obscured by much worship of  the
letter.  Yet  Judaism  seems  to  me  one of its  purest and  most  vigorous
manifestations. This applies  particularly to the  fundamental principle  of
the sanctification of life.

     It is characteristic  that the animals were expressly  included in  the
command  to keep holy the Sabbath day,  so  strong was the  feeling that the
ideal demands  the solidarity of  all living  things. The  insistence on the
solidarity of all human beings finds still stronger expression, apd it is no
mere  chance  that  the demands  of  Socialism were for the most part  first
raised by Jews.

     How strongly developed this sense of  the sanctity  of  life is in  the
Jewish  people  is admirably  illustrated by a little  remark  which  Walter
Rathenau once made to me in conversation: "When  a Jew says that  he's going
hunting to amuse himself, he lies." The Jewish sense of the sanctity of life
could not be more simply expressed.

     Jewish Youth

     An Answer to a Questionnaire

     It is important that the young should be induced to take an interest in
Jewish questions and  difficulties, and  you deserve  gratitude for devoting
yourself to this task in your paper.  This is of moment not  merely  for the
destiny of  the Jews, whose welfare  depends  on their sticking together and
helping each other,  but, over and above that,  for  the cultivation of  the
international  spirit,   which  is  in  danger  everywhere  to-day   from  a
narrow-minded nationalism.  Here, since the days of the Prophets, one of the
fairest fields of activity has lain open to  our  nation, scattered as it is
over the earth and united only by a common tradition.

     Addresses on Reconstruction in Palestine

        I

     Ten years  ago,  when I first had  the  pleasure  of addressing  you on
behalf of  the Zionist cause, almost all our  hopes were  still fixed on the
future. To-day we  can look back on  these  ten years with joy; for  in that
time  the united energies of the Jewish people have  accomplished a splendid
piece of successful constructive work in Palestine, which  certainly exceeds
anything that we dared to hope then.

     We have also successfully stood the severe test to which  the events of
the last few  years have subjected us.  Ceaseless work, supported by a noble
purpose, is leading slowly  but surely to success. The latest pronouncements
of  the  British Government  indicate a return to a  juster  judgment of our
case; this we recognize with gratitude.

     But we must never forget what this  crisis has taught  us--namely, that
the  establishment of  satisfactory relations between the Jews and the Arabs
is not  England's  affair but  ours.  We--that  is  to  say,  the  Arabs and
ourselves--have  got  to  agree  on  the  main  outlines  of an advantageous
partnership which  shall satisfy the needs of both nations. A  just solution
of this problem and one worthy  of both nations is an  end no less important
and  no less  worthy  of  our efforts  than the  promotion  of  the  work of
construction itself. Remember that  Switzerland represents a higher stage of
political  development than  any  national state,  precisely  because of the
greater political problems which had to be solved before a  stable comm