Posted on 12/07/2001 10:15:51 PM PST by madrussian
Many of the Jewish immigrants who reached the United States during the great immigration of 1881-1914 were believers in socialism, and ardent supporters of trade unions and other pro-labor organizations. The Russian Revolution in 1917 strengthened their communist fervor: Quite a few were convinced that the "days of the messiah" had come and a just society would soon arise in the Soviet Union where Jews could fulfil their duty as Soviet citizens.
And yet hardly any of them went so far as to return to their land of birth. Most preferred to continue their pursuit of the American dream, according to which every immigrant laborer could get ahead, establish himself financially, and give his American-born children an education that would enable them to be president of the United States one day. For the majority, the dream of financial prosperity vanished within a decade, as the Great Depression left tens of thousands of people dying of hunger and created unemployment on a scale unknown since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.
This was the atmosphere in which Mary Leder's parents decided to return to the Soviet Union and try their luck in the Jewish autonomous republic of Birobidzhan. The Leders were devoted communists, and their daughter, Mary, born in the United States, joined the American communist movement at the age of 15, after the family moved from the East Coast to California in search of employment.
In October 1929, more than a year before the Wall Street stock market crash, the Leders were already feeling the pinch. The father, a builder by profession, was finding it difficult to sell houses. By 1931, it was clear that the move to California was not a success. Mary's parents envisaged a brighter future in the Jewish socialist homeland Josef Stalin was anxious to establish in the eastern republic of Birobidzhan.
Mary's reaction was one of shock: What connection did she have with a faraway country whose language she did not speak? As a girl who had grown up without any formal ties to Judaism, what interest could she possibly have in any kind of Jewish homeland, even a socialist one? Although she was a supporter of the Soviet Union and communism, Mary, who had dreamed of going to college and becoming a journalist, was devastated. Realizing that she could not remain alone in the United States, the teenager informed her parents that she would accompany them, but not for long. When she turned 18, she said, she would go back to America.
This book is a kind of diary kept by Mary Leder from the day she set sail for Japan in the company of her parents, en route to Soviet Russia, until her return to the United States 30 years later. After several weeks with her family, she decided that Birobidzhan was not for her. She asked to stay with relatives in Moscow, hoping to learn a profession there. Not wanting to be a burden to her aunt and uncle, she ended up joining a commune of young people, with whom she lived and worked for several years.
Meanwhile, her parents in Birobidzhan decided to wind up the Soviet chapter of their lives and go back to the United States.
Mary, now 18, chose to stay behind and become a Soviet citizen as a first step toward finding employment. Hoping that Mary would soon rejoin them, her parents and younger siblings departed for America. Towards the end of the 1930s, Mary went to work for a foreign language publishing house, where the Soviet authorities took advantage of her skills and those of other foreign citizens residing in the Soviet Union. Later, she even received spy training, but the project through which she was being sent to America was cancelled at the last minute.
After returning to her former job, Mary married Abraham, a Jew from Rostov, and gave birth to a daughter. When the Germans invaded the Soviet Union, Mary and Abraham fled to a small town in the Volga region together with many other families. During that time, their young daughter became ill and died. When the couple eventually moved back to the capital, they encountered blatant anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism that began to affect their personal and professional lives. These trends intensified in the 1950s, although Stalin died in 1953.
When Abraham succumbed to a serious illness in 1959, Mary applied for an exit visa: The time had come to reunite with her parents in the United States. It took several years before her dream came true. In 1965, at the age of 45, Mary returned to the land of her birth, where she lives until today.
Leder's book is built on contradictions and dissonance. The equation is supposed to balance out in the end, but it doesn't. Right from the beginning, we have the family's high hopes with respect to the communist world, where everyone is equal and has the same opportunities, regardless of religion or class. But the author is soon disappointed with Stalin's "Jewish republic," and before long, her parents are, too.
Next, the author decides that by joining a commune in Moscow, she will be able to move ahead in the Soviet system. Again, she sobers up quickly, her hopes for collectivism soon dashed. At spy school, as Leder dreams of using her fluent English to aid her new homeland, up pops an officer and advises her that when she gets to the United States as a Soviet agent, she should defect. Go live with your parents, he says. You aren't cut out to be a spy, and anyway, life in America is so much easier.
During World War II, Leder is fired by the hope that the Soviet nation is fighting fascism. In reality, she finds that Soviet society has turned its back on her due to anti-Semitism. Finally, she believes that she will be cared for by the communist system, that citizens will be provided with everything they need in the way of food, medical care and education. The truth is that she cannot even obtain the simple drugs that might have saved her husband's life.
Mary Leder's story is both fascinating and sad. It is written in a flowing style, without the abundance of detail that often makes memoirs hard to read. Reading this book, one cannot help reflecting on the courage of this girl, who embarks on the adventure of living apart from her parents in a foreign country and makes no special effort to join them when they pack up and go home. On the one hand, we gasp at the temerity of a 16-year-old who joins a commune in an unfamiliar land where she doesn't speak the language.
On the other, it is hard to accept her passivity with respect to returning to the bosom of her family. She does make several attempts to leave the Soviet Union, but one can certainly think of some channels she hasn't tried, and the same goes for her family. Is she harboring a secret anger at having to accompany her parents to the Soviet Union in the first place? Has she become swept up in an adventure that is more than she bargained for?
In a country where parents equip their kids trekking to the Far East with international cell phones and beg them to drop into an Internet cafe at least once a week to "touch base," the story of a family that moves from the United States to the Soviet Union and sends a 16-year-old daughter alone to the capital, ultimately saying goodbye for close to three decades - that is certainly a story worth reading and thinking about.
Don't forget Marian Zacharski, who could write a book entitled "How to Steal US Military Secrets and Get Off Scot Free."
One could interpret your "Duh" as a suggestions that the same would have happened in Russia.
So between Feburary and October 1917, the Jews moved enmasse to Moscow, raised an army and overthrew the Kerensky government? Do you really believe something so absurd?
It does sound absurd if your scenario is the only one conceivable. The fact that the overwhelming majority of the Bolsheviks in Lenin's government were Jewish is sufficient to realize who were the main Bolsheviks supporters and ideologues.
That is like saying the fact that the membership of the National Black Republican Network are black means that most blacks are Republican.
Most Jews were not communist in 1917. National politics was a foreign concept to most Jews back then.
The Russian Revolution began in Moscow and St, Petersburg, places where there were virtually no Jews, rather than Kiev, Odessa or Minsk, or, for that matter, Poland, where Jews were numerous.
The places where Jews lived were not centers of resistance to the Provisional Government of Kerensky. There were Jews associated with Lenin, but there were also many Jews associated with Kerensky.
My "duh" meant that it would pointless to have a pogrom in a place where there were no Jews. The pogroms took place in Ukraine because that was where the Jews were.
Do you understand now?
What does that have to do with Zacharski's guilt and the fact that he still owes the US Government a lot of years in prison?
For your analogy to work, Bolshevik government would have to be called Jewish faction of Bolshevik government.
Most Jews were not communist in 1917. National politics was a foreign concept to most Jews back then.
You mean members of a party? Of course not. Party members were always a minority. Sympathizing with destruction of Russia and perceiving it as their tribal revenge? Quite possibly. Tribal interests have always been paramount in Jewish community.
The Russian Revolution began in Moscow and St, Petersburg, places where there were virtually no Jews, rather than Kiev, Odessa or Minsk, or, for that matter, Poland, where Jews were numerous.
Jews were numerous in Menshevik and Bolshevik movements. History is often done by militant minorities, with majority being rather apathetic or not knowing better.
The places where Jews lived were not centers of resistance to the Provisional Government of Kerensky. There were Jews associated with Lenin, but there were also many Jews associated with Kerensky.
Provisional government was overthrown by Bolsheviks, and we know who were in charge there.
Do you understand now?
Are you saying that the only reason the pogroms didn't take place in Russia because there were few Jews? And that they took place in Ukraine because that's where the Jews were? LOL!
Probably because of hormonal needs. She was young, no parents supervision and the idea of the New Soviet Man probably appealed to her.
It seems that the reviewer is really confused on the issue of the anti-Semitism. The Soviet nation is fighting fascism and at the same time is anti-Semitic. Hmm, kind of mutually exclusive statement.
You: You mean members of a party?
No, I meant not communist or communist sympathizers. National politics was a foreign concept to Jews in that era. The rabbis advised Jews not to become involved in the politics of a gentile nation.
Tribal interests have always been paramount in Jewish community.
Avoiding pogroms was the only constant motivating factor in the Jewish community of the Russian Empire. Very few Jews were interested in any radical revolution.
Jews were numerous in Menshevik and Bolshevik movements. History is often done by militant minorities, with majority being rather apathetic or not knowing better.
History is often portrayed by the majority population in a way that scapegoats minorities for all problems. You have yet to explain how the Jews, who were not very numerous in Russia, were able to instigate a communist revolution (according to your theory) while they were not able to instigate one in Ukraine, Belarus, or Poland, where they made up a much larger percentage of the population. Have you considered the possibility that most Jews simply were not interested in communism?
Provisional government was overthrown by Bolsheviks, and we know who were in charge there.
You have presented no evidence that most Jews favored the Bolsheviks over the Provisional Government.
I don't know her maiden name, but her first name was Wanda, if that helps.
National politics as full participants, maybe. National politics that can be perceived as self-defence and opposing their "opressors", I wouldn't be so sure. Besides, there is a huge gap between what some rabbis may profess somewhere, let alone that that teaching is open to interpretation what it really means, and real life.
Avoiding pogroms was the only constant motivating factor in the Jewish community of the Russian Empire. Very few Jews were interested in any radical revolution.
There must have been different notions of "radicality". American Jewish neocons are much more radical and agressive than traditional conservatives, for example. But to them, they are just normal and logical. Bolshevik revolution was "avoiding pogroms" and "taking some revenge" for some, I am sure.
History is often portrayed by the majority population in a way that scapegoats minorities for all problems.
It's a two-way street and the same can be said about minorities who often believe they are victims all around. I'd rather take an objective approach, where every side is assigned some blame. Wouldn't you? Or in other approach, either side is blameless and is simply acting in their own interests that may diverge. But that's not what Jewish supremacists have in mind, to them their tribe is beyond reproach, and "anti-semitism" is some universal illness that's guaranteed to exist everywhere just because "Jews are special and misunderstood".
You have yet to explain how the Jews, who were not very numerous in Russia, were able to instigate a communist revolution (according to your theory) while they were not able to instigate one in Ukraine, Belarus, or Poland, where they made up a much larger percentage of the population.
First portion of your question is more technical, whether a minority can affect the course of history in any major way. I already answered that question somewhere. As for the second part, it's a topic of separate discussion. As far as I know, Jewish kommies were active in those countries too, and we had a discussion on how kommies were cheered in Poland in 1939. Also, could local population be more hostile to the movements that were headed by Jews, whose tricks they were up to? Also, Jewish kommies did have some successe in Hungary and Germany.
Have you considered the possibility that most Jews simply were not interested in communism?
It's possible, since most is only more than 50%. And what does "not interested" mean? Does sympathetic with the goals or using it for tribal goals qualify as "interested"?
Unlike Inyokern, who diplomatically answered my question about how Jews regard Jesus, saying that he was a "charismatic preacher". What he doesn't say is what really counts. LOL!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.