Meeting Minutes on the Brenner Affair

1

The Chairman raised for discussion the question of the future of the support for the weekly Ha-Po‘el ha-tsa‘ir, which is published in Jaffa, in connection with the article that appeared in issue 3 of the newspaper, written by Mr. Brenner, in which the writer used very harsh expressions against religion in general and against the Jewish religion in particular. The Committee decided to support this weekly newspaper three years ago in the hope that while discussing the interests of the Hebrew laborers in Palestine, it would also educate the local laboring youth in the national spirit. Since the Committee did not find a possibility to establish regular annual support for this newspaper, it was decided at the time to grant the editorial board fifty francs for each issue, while reserving the right to discontinue this support at any time. The frequent support provided for the newspaper by the Committee provoked dissatisfaction and harsh criticism from many people close to the activities of our association. Until now, however, we could ignore these denunciations. Brenner’s article has provoked vitriolic displeasure among many people who have usually adopted a positive attitude toward this journal. In this meeting the Committee must determine its position regarding this article, which has caused such a commotion.

Mr. Ravnitzki emphasizes the insolent and stormy tone of the article in question—an article that can embarrass even those with the most liberal and tolerant minds. By supporting this newspaper, the Committee is assuming a considerable measure of responsibility for its orientation. Accordingly, there is a real need to express in the most vigorous terms the Committee’s negative attitude toward this article, which discusses in such frivolous terms a problem of such exceptional importance and gravity. [ . . . ]

Mr. Bialik proposes that the support be suspended until the newspaper’s administrators employ a new and responsible editor who will act in accordance with the Committee’s instructions.

Mr. Trivash calls for a calm and objective discussion of the problem. When granting the financial support to Ha-Po‘el ha-tsa‘ir, the Committee could not have anticipated in advance the appearance in this newspaper of an article that is inconsistent with the worldview of many members of our Association. He assumes that the Committee considered the possible appearance of similar articles, but nevertheless promised its support to the editorial staff, aware of the vital need for such an organ to raise the cultural level of the workers in Palestine. The support should not be withdrawn now due to the great merits of this newspaper, which consistently advocates two principles: nationalism and [workers’] organization. However, since he nevertheless considers Brenner’s article inappropriate for the pages of this organ, which has specific goals and serves a specific set of interests, he suggests that the Committee forward a grave and unequivocal warning to the editorial staff.

Dr. Klausner does not regard Mr. Brenner’s article as a critical perspective on certain moments of Jewish religious awareness—something that cannot be absent from any truly cultural person—but rather as an unequivocal reflection of problems of the utmost importance. Articles of this type, in his opinion, undermine the foundations of the Jewish national cultural treasures and embody a profound insult for the entire Jewish people, for whom religion is associated with centuries-old experiences and with the greatest historical aspirations. Since the Committee supports Ha-Po‘el ha-tsa‘ir, it cannot afford to fail to respond to the appearance of this article. He blames the Committee for supporting a newspaper that does not have an editor who reports to the Committee and the Association. He notes that the only Hebrew organ in the Land must be managed by someone with a literary reputation and a recognizable character. He then suggests that the Committee withhold the fifty francs due to the newspaper for issue no. 3 in protest—and resume the support only after an editor is employed whose name and career constitute a guarantee that an article of this type would never appear again. [ . . . ]

Mr. Ravnitzki is concerned that any particular decision by the Committee is liable to lead to the disappearance of the newspaper. Despite its many demerits, Ha-Po‘el ha-tsa‘ir is nevertheless an effective organ and everyone is interested in its ongoing existence. The editorial staff should not be faced with an immediate demand to present a new editor for approved by the Committee. Instead, the editorial staff should simply be informed that the Committee is conditioning its ongoing support on the employment of an editor who will leave no room for articles of the type discussed here.

The Chairman takes the view that the Committee cannot and must not be guided in its deliberations of various questions in accordance with the median position prevailing among the Association’s members. By electing the members of the Committee, the participants in the general assembly charge them not only with implementing all the meeting’s decisions, but also with undertaking tasks that cannot be anticipated in advance, and in this respect, the personal tendencies of the Committee members play a vital role. Accordingly, he proposes that the Committee cease any discussion of the attitudes of the association’s members and recommends that we guide ourselves solely according to one criterion: to what extent do such articles damage or benefit the [Jewish] society in Palestine, regardless of their particular value. He personally does not doubt that such articles arouse doubts and hesitations in the souls of the emerging generation [i.e., the New Yishuv], which requires a firm foundation composed of national culture. The Committee should respond immediately and bluntly to Brenner’s article. He does not accept Dr. Klausner’s proposal regarding the denial of the fifty francs due to the editorial staff for issue no. 3, if only because such a sum was already forwarded by a representative of the Committee immediately after the issue appeared. Apart from that, such a step would almost surround this issue with the aura of a persecuted martyr, and would win it broad publicity in Palestine. There is absolutely no need to enter into friction with the editorial staff of Ha-Po‘el ha-tsa‘ir. We need only inform it, through the Committee’s representatives in Jaffa, that due to the appearance of Brenner’s article in issue no. 3, the Committee considers itself obliged to halt the support for the newspaper in the future. If, in the future, the newspaper modifies some aspects of its character, and if the editorial staff see fit to approach the Committee again to request support, the Committee will discuss this question again at that point.

Dr. Raymist asks that it be noted in the minutes that he voted against Mr. Chairman’s proposal.

Decided

The editorial staff of Ha-Po‘el ha-tsa‘ir will be notified by the Palestine executive [branch in Jaffa] that due to the appearance of Mr. Brenner’s article in issue no. 3, the Committee has decided to discontinue its support for the newspaper henceforth. If, however, following the nomination of new members of the editorial staff, the newspaper’s character and orientation change, and its administrators see fit to apply anew for support, the Committee will discuss this question again.