Karl Marx and Jerusalem

[KXX4493553 at aol.com]

To whom it may concern... I think this is of common interest... kwp

Karl Marx and Jerusalem   
 
By Shlomo Avineri
  (It may come as a surprise that Marx appears to have    
some empathy for Jews in connection with Jerusalem and               
its Jewish population.  The writer, professor of political    
science at the Hebrew University, is a member of the    
international board of editors of the complete edition of    
the works of Marx and Engels, now published in Amsterdam, 
and a former director-general of the Foreign Ministry.)  
-------------------------------------------------------- 
    Karl Marx was not known for his sympathy to Jews and   
Jewish matters, despite his descent from an illustrious   
line of rabbis. His early essay on "The Jewish Question"   
included some of the more unpleasant things ever said on   
Judaism by a person of Jewish origin, and the fact that he   
says similarly unpleasant things about Christianity does   
not detract from the fact that it is an embarrassing essay   
to read.  
    It may therefore come as a surprise that the only   
place in his opus where Marx appears to have some empathy   
for Jews is in connection with Jerusalem and its Jewish   
population. At a time when all kinds of historical, and   
mythical, legitimacies are invoked in connected with the   
city and its holy sites, it may be of some interest to look   
again at Marx's rather remarkable text.  
    The context is an article Marx wrote in April 1854 in   
connection with the outbreak of the Crimean War, one of   
whose origins was quarreling over the custody of the Church   
of the Holy Sepulchre.   
    At that time, Marx, a penniless emigre in London, eked   
out a meager existence as a contributor to the New York   
Daily Tribune, then the leading radical American newspaper.  
    After describing the complex ethnic and religious   
composition of the Ottoman Empire, Marx starts his   
description of the Jewish population of Jerusalem by   
remarking that  "The sedentary population of Jerusalem   
numbers about 15,500 souls, of whom 4,000 are Mussulmans   
and 8,000 Jews." He clearly states that there was a Jewish   
majority, going on to mention that the "Mussulmans, forming   
about a fourth of the population" are not a uniform group,   
as they are "consisting of Turks, Arabs and Moors."  
    Marx proceeds to describe the Jewish community:   
"Nothing," he says, "equals the misery and the sufferings   
of the Jews at Jerusalem, inhabiting the most filthy   
quarter of the town, called hareth al-yahoud, in the   
quarter of dirt, between Zion and the Moriah, where their   
synagogues are situated."  
    In what is for Marx an unusual expression of sympathy   
for Jews, he goes on: "They are the constant objects of   
Mussulman oppression and intolerance, insulted by the   
Greeks, persecuted by the Latins, and living only upon the   
scanty alms transmitted by their European brethren." He   
points out that the Jews of Jerusalem come from different   
and distant countries, and "are only attracted to Jerusalem   
by the desire of inhabiting the Valley of Jehoshaphat and   
to die on the very place where the redemption is to be   
expected."  
    Before describing in some details the vicissitudes of   
the first Protestant bishop of Jerusalem (Solomon   
Alexander, a convert from Judaism), Marx quotes a French   
author, and again the language is surprising in its empathy   
for the Orthodox Jews of Jerusalem: "Attending their death,   
they suffer and pray. Their regards turned to that mountain   
of Moriah where once rose the temple of Lebanon, and which   
they dare not approach, they shed tears on the misfortunes   
of Zion, and their dispersion over the world."    
    There are myriad descriptions of Jerusalem in the 19th   
century; but this one from a person of such critical   
attitude towards Jerusalem, is another testimony to the way   
Jerusalem was perceived in the 19th century, even by   
radical and socialist thinkers who were well aware that   
there was a Jewish majority in the city at that time.   
    The Soviet Union does not exist any more, and Israel   
now has excellent relations with Communist China. Yet the   
echoes of Marx's description of Jerusalem and its Jewish   
community are, ironically, still with us.  
    LET ME add a personal note. As director-general of the   
Foreign Ministry in 1976, I headed the Israeli delegation   
to Unesco's general assembly in Nairobi. At that time   
Israel was virtually barred from Unesco because of Arab   
accusations - supported by the Soviet bloc - of "Judaizing"   
Jerusalem.   
    In responding to these accusations, I briefly referred   
to Marx's statement that there was a Jewish majority in   
Jerusalem in the mid-19th century, even before the onset of   
Zionism.  
    What followed was like a scene from a Fellini movie.   
The Soviet delegate immediately asked for the right to   
respond. Obviously never having read his Marx carefully, he   
accused me of falsification and claimed that Marx never   
said anything of the sort.   
    In responding, I brought out the Moscow edition of   
Marx's writings, published by the Soviet Foreign Languages   
Publishing House. I added that I was sure the Soviet   
delegate was not suggesting that an official Soviet   
publication was falsifying Marx.  
    The roar of general laughter drowned out the Soviet   
delegate's lame answer. In the evening, at an embassy   
reception, I was approached by the head of the Chinese   
delegation. He introduced himself, through an interpreter,   
did not reach for my hand, but said: "We obviously did not   
agree with your statement. But we always like when someone   
quotes Marx to the Soviet delegation."  
(c) Jerusalem Post 2000 
___________________________