Jabotinsky: “What flowed through their veins was not blood but bouillion.”

By Ted Belman

As I continue to read Lone Wolf, the biography of Zeev Jabotinsky, I came upon an excerpt of his writings that I simply had to share with you.

In 1928 Jabotinsky returned to Palestine to settle down so to speak, after his would wide duties occupied his time. Shortly after arriving back, a provocation took place at the Wall that incensed him and his circle. The Brits removed the separation wall which divided male and female worshippers and they did so on Yom Kippur.This outrage aroused fierce spontaneous protests throughout the Jewish Community and throughout the Jewish world.

At the request of Jabotinsky, the Va’ad Leumi convened a special session. Jabotinsky waxed eloquent and made a proposal. They rejected it.

He was more concerned with their attitude than their rejection. He wrote;

    When I arrived here in the fall I found the whole community in a state of great agitation over the events at the Western Wall. Afterwards, I realized that I had believed in a great awakening simply because in those days I was meeting mostly Revisionists. Two weeks later at the meeting of the Va’ad Leumi devoted to the subject, I realized clearly that apart from us the dissidents,

all the others have forgotten how to be offended

    . There were Rabbis there, also regular synagogue goers, as well as “left-wingers”. They made high-flowing speeches – but you cannot easily fool a man of experience. I felt, all the time, and they themselves felt it, that behind the florid words there was no sense of tension.

Here, of course, was a case of unforgivable insincerity. Everybody knew perfectly well that it was our duty to make it absolutely clear that such behaviour by the government was utterly unacceptable. This was no doubt the logical thought that passed through their heads- but that was all. What flowed through their veins was not blood but bouillion. Evidently we have become accustomed, we have accustomized ourselves, to insult, as well as to the fact that nobody will rush to our defense, and that we ourselves can do nothing. Our hearts have stopped reacting.

As true today as it was then. The world is divided between activists and passivists.

June 14, 2012 | 14 Comments »

Leave a Reply

14 Comments / 14 Comments

  1. @ Jerry:
    The British interceding in a Jewish worship ritual is exactly the reason we have the First Amendment. People should be allowed to worship as they choose, without the king,or government, dictating how they should worship or who they should worship. Freedom of speech as well as freedom of religion are sacred rights. Given freedom of speech, coreligionists can argue it out amongst themselves as to how to practice their religion.

    Except that the Orthodox Rabbinate imposes their interpretation of Halacha on those Jews who do NOT accept it. They are the ones who violate the First Amendment, not that it applies to Israel anyway.

    If they want to rope off a section for the Orthodox then fine; but let men and women mix freely elsewhere at the Wall.

    Who are the Orthodox to impose their interpretation of Judaism on those Jews who think otherwise?

    It is NOT I who deny freedom of religion. It is the Orthodox Rabbinate.

    Reform Movement Demands Western Wall Gender Segregation Be Ended

    In this rare case, the British were right.

  2. I have this same argument with some hyperstrict Christians who want to forbid alcohol.

    I tell them, if you want to be as strict as the mullahs, then become Islamic.

    On the other hand, I tell the preachers, if you want to show the superiority and liberality of Christianity, offer the Muslims a beer.

    If you are as nutty as your opponent, what is the point of fighting him.

    The separation of sexes is/was imposed by the Orthodox rabbis. There are many Jews who oppose it. Do rabbis have a right to force these Jews to segregate? What about the values and traditions of non-Orthodox Jews, or are they to be ignored?

    Traditions imposed become tyranny.

    The British were right in this case.

    Jabotinsky had better things to fight over than to support rabbis who did not speak for all Jews then or now.

    Most Jews in Israel today would not segregate. The reason so many are secular is because they see the Orthodox as religious tyrants. Rather than keeping Judaism pure, the rabbis have shut it off for the vast majority of Jews in Israel who vote with their feet and spend weekends at the beach rather than in synagogue.

    Non-practicing Jews are non-practicing for this reason.

    The British were right.

    Jabotinsky had better things to fight over.

    Sorry, Ted. I have to disagree with you on this one. This is not the imperious attitude of a Christian. I am just as tough on preachers and priests. Hyperstrict clerics drive men away from God, not to God. Whether it is Catholic clerical celibacy, Strict Baptist anti-dancing and alcohol rules, Islamic burqas, or Orthodox Rabbinical segregation; it is all the same. It is man-made rules. It is counter-productive and drives men from God, because no one wants to live under such austere regulation.

    The Catholic Church refuses to budge on tradition, insists on clerical celibacy, and no birth control, and is dying out.
    Baptist Churches are full of hypocrites who preach abstemion and drink whiskey at home.
    Islamic strictness is maintained only by terror.
    And most Jews are non-practicing.

    This is what kills a faith in God.

  3. The British interceding in a Jewish worship ritual is exactly the reason we have the First Amendment. People should be allowed to worship as they choose, without the king,or government, dictating how they should worship or who they should worship. Freedom of speech as well as freedom of religion are sacred rights. Given freedom of speech, coreligionists can argue it out amongst themselves as to how to practice their religion.

  4. @ the phoenix:

    Do you mean?

    Who tango (the) foxtrot (f–k) are you to tell us what our values of traditions should be or what is worth fighting for.?

    Do I understand you correctly?

    Super

  5. CuriousAmerican Said:

    This separation of men and women is quasi-Islamic.

    ok american, you REALLY get on my nerves!
    ted was very polite in his reply to you.

    Who are you to tell us what our values of traditions should be or what is worth fighting for.?

    i definitely would have inserted ‘tango foxtrot’ in the sentence

  6. Jason Said:

    In terms of practice and laws, Judaism has more in common with islam

    bear in mind jason, that this entire abomination called pisslam is plagiarized from judaism and christianity. there is NOTHING in this accursed cult that is original nor compassionate nor ANYTHING!.
    it is a ‘religious’ license for pedophiles, robbers, murderers and sadists and basically the scum of the earth, to do their thing ‘in the name of religion’.

  7. When an “outsider” interferes in a battle between brother and brother neither side is happy. While to secularists the separation of sexes at the Wall, indeed anywhere, is a fight for freedom, for traditionalists it is an abomination to have them pray together. This is a problem that we Jews must solve, not be solved for us by the Brits or anyone else.

  8. CuriousAmerican Said:

    Frankly, this was one time the Brits were right.
    This separation of men and women is quasi-Islamic.
    It is wrong.
    He should have told them to concentrate their efforts on things worth fighting for rather than fine points of questionable traditions.

    In terms of practice and laws, Judaism has more in common with islam than with Christianity. Major difference being, Judaism doesn’t seek global conquest.

  9. CuriousAmerican Said:

    Frankly, this was one time the Brits were right.

    This separation of men and women is quasi-Islamic.

    It is wrong.

    He should have told them to concentrate their efforts on things worth fighting for rather than fine points of questionable traditions.

    Wrong on all accounts. Who are you to tell us what our values of traditions should be or what is worth fighting for.?

  10. @ CuriousAmerican:

    Concur. It is a gigantic error to act in behalf of clerical control of zionism. The rabbis do not have a Hebrew Sovereignty as their main, or even secondary, priority. It is not a coincidence that the King was placed above, and controlling, the High Priest.

  11. Frankly, this was one time the Brits were right.

    This separation of men and women is quasi-Islamic.

    It is wrong.

    He should have told them to concentrate their efforts on things worth fighting for rather than fine points of questionable traditions.

  12. This is indeed a very very sad post, Ted.
    It got me thinking. Could it be that with the passage of time, the Jew warrior of biblical times has been totally overtaken by the mutant gene of ‘the meek and passive Jew’ that has a permanent sign on him that can be read from any of the 360 degrees, a sign that says ‘kick me. Please?’
    I am so disgusted with anything and everything that has to do with ‘diplomacy’ (translation: hypocrisy)…
    Bottom line, it is as you wrote below the title of the blog. There is NO diplomatic solution!
    And if you do not fight evil when you Can, and are strong, what will you do when you are weak and beaten?
    Roll over?
    Paint a new sign ” here, I have not been kicked, yet”???