The Origins of Israel, 1882–1948: A Documentary History

24. Betar and the Zionist Revolution (1932)

145 24 Betar and the Zionist Revolution (1932)    Yehoshua Heschel Yevin (1891–1970) was one of the leaders of the maximalist, or radical, wing of the Zionist Revisionist movement and one of the founders, along with Abba Achimeir and the poet Uri Zvi Greenberg, of Brit ha-Biryonim (the league of thugs). Born in Russia, Yevin was trained as a physician and served as a surgeon in the Red Army. Yevin was initially active in socialist Zionist circles, but in 1928, captivated by Jabotinsky’s militaristic and revolutionary zeal, he joined the Revisionist movement. The maximalists (in the years 1932–33 as part of Brit ha-Biryonim and later as a faction within the Revisionist movement) were provocative in their rhetoric and action. While Jabotinsky was engaged in broad Zionist politics and represented his movement internationally, Yevin and his colleagues, unencumbered by the rules of diplomatic decorum, were able to articulate more purely the Revisionist message of blood and glory in the name of the national cause. In this article, Yevin addresses the members of Betar (see document 23n1). The young members of Betar were expected to lead the heroic fight for national liberation; Yevin here calls on them to ignore the universal promises of socialist and liberal Zionists, and instead to cultivate and uphold the ethos of strife and sacrifice. ❖ Source: Homesh Beitar, January 3, 1932. Translated by Marganit Weinberger-Rotman. The bankruptcy of Old Zionism is more than just a bankruptcy of a failed system. Failed systems can be fixed by repairs, by restorations, or by some basic improvements, which make them as good as new. But Old Zionism cannot be fixed by simple “renovations,” because the bankruptcy of Old Zionism goes much deeper: it is a bankruptcy of Weltanschauung. Old Zionism, from its very inception, was inspired by liberalism, which at the time was prevalent all over Europe—including socialist circles. Liberals believed in universal progress; the world is, slowly but surely, advancing towards a reign of justice. Thus, it was possible for Zionism to base its tenets on a simple, childish syllogism: the world is progressing towards justice and the realization of just ideas. Zionism is a just idea. Ergo, the world will inevitably progress toward the realization of Zionism. Thus, the question of realizing the Zionist idea was basically a matter of explaining to the world how just and worthwhile the movement is in order to ensure its success. The First World War has mercilessly wiped out these liberal assumptions. In the trenches, in the communal graves, where ten millions were buried, this cozy, optimistic belief in “the reign of justice” was also laid to rest. It is clear that the world does not progress toward universal justice, and that justice without accompanying armed legions belongs in the garbage heap of history. This was well understood by world leaders. Pilsudski,1 Masaryk,2 and other national liberation leaders were quick to amass legions as they espoused the idea of universal justice. The Zionist leaders did not see this; they allowed themselves the luxury of remaining loyal to their liberal beliefs twenty years after the words “liberalism” and “progress” became a laughingstock around the world. This is why the “spies,” Aharonson and his friends,3 were outsiders in the movement, which had become anachronistic and, similarly, the idea of the Jewish Legion was rejected by those who “championed justice.”4 This is also why they saw the Balfour Declaration not as a call for forging a national Jewish army, but as corroboration of their effete belief that “the just Zionist cause is bound to triumph.” If the rivers of blood caused by the war and the revolution did not open our eyes to the truth, it is time that the events in Hebron and Safed5 and the Passfield White Paper6 opened our eyes. The cheery old Zionist syllogism is as false as its opening phrase; the world is not progressing toward universal justice! To them the bayonets of Hebron murderers are more “just” than mounds of murdered children and old people. Here’s our dilemma; either give up Zionism altogether, 146 :      or seek a Zionism of Power—justice, yes, but justice accompanied by battalions: A Betar kind of Zionism. This is the revolution that Betar7 represents, which is not the same as the ideas of the ZHR.8 The ZHR talks about revision, about repairing and mending; whoever is not pleased with...