Jewish Pogroms of Poles and Jewish Disloyalty 1905 Confronted Unszlicht

O Pogromu Ludu Polskiego, by Julian Unszlicht. 1912

Vicarious Jewish Violence Against Poles. Polish Jew Analyzes and Confronts Jewish Disloyalty, Under Tsarist Russian Rule, Towards Polish National Aspirations, That Long Preceded Dmowski’s Pushback

ON THE POGROMS AGAINST THE POLISH PEOPLE (THE ROLE OF THE SOCIALISTS-LITVAKS IN THE RECENT REVOLUTION) is the title of this 1912 Polish-language book. It shows how Jews incited violence against Poles. For instance, just in Lodz in 1905, some 500 people (mostly Poles) were killed and 1,000 wounded. This occurred when the Bund instigated demonstrations, deliberately provoking a crackdown by the tsarist authorities. (p. 72). Notice that Unszlicht expands the term pogrom beyond its standard Judeocentric definition. Thus, Poles can be victims of Jews as well as the reverse. No nationality has a monopoly on virtue or vice.

This gem of a book gives insights into the Zydokomuna (Judeo-Bolshevism) between the Russian Revolutions of 1905 and 1917, as well as the true causes of the emerging Endek enmity against the Jews. However, the author hardly ever mentions Dmowski, and is in no sense pro-Endek. He considers them reactionary (p. 365), and (incorrectly) pro-tsarist. (p. 294).

Author Julian Unszlicht (whose brother, Joseph, was an ardent Communist) identifies himself as a Pole, and only a Pole, of Jewish background. (p. 30). However, his continued tie to Judaism is indicated the fact that he dedicated this book to those Jews who remained loyal to the Polish cause (p. 4), for better or worse. (p. 7). Writing in what turned out to be soon before Dmowski would launch his retaliatory boycott of Jews (1912), the author concluded that, “Jewry has betrayed Poland. That is an indisputable, unlamented, and aggravating fact.” (p. 5).

ANTI-ASSIMILATIONIST AND ASSIMILATIONIST JEWS ALIKE HOSTILE TO POLAND

Litvak (Litwak) publications (for specific citations, see, for example, pp. 127-129) made very derogatory remarks about Poland. Moreover, Unszlicht cited statements from the respected assimilationist Jewish periodical IZRAELITA, which echo Litvak positions, in stating that Polish culture is “a stinking pond”, “a corpse”, “a bankrupt cheater’s playing card”. (p. 5). Unszlicht went further than Dmowski and the Endeks later would: He called the “assimilated Jews become Poles” notion a total farce. (p. 5). The “Polish corpse” innuendo was a common feature of Jewish publications. (e. g, p. 19, 38, 58, 121, 127-128).

Far from being marginal, the Litvaks and their avant-garde, the Socialist-Litvaks (in contradistinction with Polish socialists), were the representatives of Polish Jewry under tsarist Russian rule. (p. 6, 370). Jewish nationalists, whether of the Zionist or Bundist variety (notably the latter: p. 361), actually harmed Jews by keeping them in medieval-style isolation, and in aggressive separatism from, if not enmity against, Polish-ness. The foregoing was the conclusion of not only the Endeks, but also of Polish socialists, as shown in their publication (which, BTW, equally condemned the Litvaks and the Endeks: pp. 183-184).

The most dangerously anti-Polish organizations, controlled the Litvaks or Jewish nationalists, also included the Marxist so-called Social Democrats (SDKPiL; hereafter SD)(p. 8, 13), often acting in unison. (p. 295). What’s more, SD positions often enjoyed the support of larger Jewish parties, such as the Bund. (p. 58, 361, 284, 368).

The cancer ran deeper. Sometimes, apparent advocates of Polish independence, such as the monthly KRYTYKA run by the Jew W. Feldman in Krakow, turned out to be allies of the SD and enemies of Polish independence. (pp. 27-28).

OUTRIGHT JEWISH ENMITY TOWARDS POLAND

The Litvaks were agents of Russification, of turning of the remaining Jews against Poles, and of trying to turn Poles against their national interests by defamation. (pp. 12-13). The latter went beyond Jewish cynicism. Thus, the Polish Eagle was vilified as a symbol of the unchecked power and oppressiveness of the Polish nobility. (p. 127). Polish heroism at the Battle of Grunwald, we are told, was merely an escapade of one set of kings, nobles, and clergy fighting against another set, with the Pope switching sides to be on the side of the victor. (p. 130).

The National Democrats (Endeks) were portrayed as bourgeoisie reactionaries stifling class-consciousness by turning Polish workers against German and Russian workers, and trying to bring back the pre-Partition Poland of privileged and non-privileged. (pp. 130-131). [Exactly the same Communist propaganda came in handy, four decades later, against the Polish government in exile in London.]

Rosa Luksemburg (Luxemburg), according to Unszlicht, exemplified the influential “Polish” Jew who traveled to other nations and defamed Poland, causing great harm to the Polish cause. (p. 316). She opposed Polish statehood (pp. 304-305) and even attacked Polish socialists. (p. 174).

What of the paradoxical fact that Jews had long found haven in Poland, and continued to do so to escape Russian persecution, yet were pro-Russian and anti-Polish? Unszlicht answers: “There is a strange Jewish psychology which gravitates to the strong and powerful, and looks down on the weak and oppressed…” (p. 12). [Perhaps a similar psychology explains German guilt diffusion; why Jews today are less angry over the 6 million Jews murdered by the Germans than they are over the comparatively trivial wrongs done by Poles.] Antigoyism was also a factor in Jewish attitudes. (p. 11, 13, 44, 73, 121, 305, 359, 363, 365).

For all its presumed appeals to the proletariat, the SD actually supported Jewish interests. For instance, calls for workers to go on strike primarily targeted the Polish bakeries, even though they paid much better wages than Turkish or Jewish bakeries. (pp. 192-193). Otherwise, attacks on the Polish proletariat essentially served as a foil for protecting Jewish shopkeepers and the like. (p. 295). SD agitators were responsible for driving German and Polish socialists in Lodz against each other (p. 227), and for numerous violent attacks on Polish workers (e. g, p. 255, 263)–whence the title of this book.

Unszlicht characterizes the 1905 Revolution, in Congress Poland, as an essentially Jewish-dominated one. Moreover, it sought to create a Jewish hegemony over Poland that would be essentially a fulfillment of the Judeopolonia utopian ideal. (pp. 361-362).

The Jews’ election of Jagiello to the Duma [otherwise best known for provoking Dmowski’s retaliatory boycotts] further underlined the anti-Polish and pro-Russian sympathies of the Jewish nationalists. (p. 185). Despite being unsympathetic to the National Democrats, Unszlicht realizes that the Endeks, rather than being purveyors of anti-Semitism in the usual sense of the word, were animated by something much deeper–a reaction against the provocative stance Jews against Polish concerns. (p. 186).

Although the SD accused the Endeks of being pro-tsarist, it was the SD performing a service to the tsarist authorities making common cause with the tsar against the Polish national movement. (p. 189). Furthermore, SD agitators and Okhrana worked together to cause 200 Polish worker demonstrators’ deaths in Warsaw. (pp. 59-60). A part of the SD, notably those who assassinated Poles and engaged in other anti-Polish provocations, turned out to be Jewish Okhrana agents–as exemplified by one named Azef, and his son Phillip, responsible for thousands of deaths. (p. 324-329; see also p. 355-on)!

The Polish reaction? Unszlicht comments: “The Polish cooperatives fight with never-before-seen effort against Jewish usury…” (p. 6). On the other hand, there was a surprising nonchalance to attacks on the Polish cause some Polish leaders. (pp. 24-25)[much like the situation today.]