How it really was! - An unusual trio – Jabotinsky, Ben-Gurion and Begin

In the office of President Yitzhak Navon, many years ago, I heard a visitor say, “Mr. President, I don't want to flatter you, but….” The president cut him off. With a broad smile, he said, “Why not? Go ahead and flatter me. I like it!” Many a true word, the cliché goes, is said in jest. So, with a minor blush, I publish the following letter from Michael, known as Menachem: “I am one of thousands who have studied with you as professor in a political science course in Bar-Ilan University some 44 years ago, when I was a virtual yeled (boy), age 17, and you must have been in your 40s in 1975. I just want you to know that I treasure to this day how you taught us that Mr. Ben- Gurion was the quintessential pragmatist. Even though I consider myself an admirer of Jabotinsky and Begin, I still know in my heart of hearts that only somebody such as B-G at the helm, along with just a little bit of help from the one above, is what got us to where we are today in a flourishing Eretz Yisrael…. Sir, where would I be able to obtain more of your writings, as the weekly serving of your writings in The Jerusalem Report hasn't been able to quench my thirst?” Truth is, this is possibly the most flattering letter I have ever received. And since I wrote Michael/Menachem that history must be truthful, let me explain that if there were “thousands” of students I taught or influenced, they were in the School for Overseas Students at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem (now called the Rothberg International School). Beyond the flattery, I was very taken by my old student's sentence, “Even though I consider myself an admirer of Jabotinsky and Begin, I still know in my heart of hearts that only somebody such as BG at the helm, along with just a little bit of help from the one above, is what got us to where we are today in a flourishing Eretz Yisrael.” First of all, kudos to Menachem for overcoming his pro-Jabotinsky and pro-Begin sentiments to see that Ben-Gurion's pragmatism led to the possibility of creating a Jewish State. I must admit that I – mirror-image – held negative views of Jabo and Begin until I read more of the former, and got to know the latter personally. If we can look dispassionately at Vladimir Jabotinsky and David Ben-Gurion's principles, we find something which is nothing short of astounding. There is a marked similarity in ideals, albeit due to differences of place and time. As I understand Jabotinsky, he taught that the Jewish people needed a youth movement like Betar that would fulfill three principles: one – “hadar” in Hebrew, is almost untranslatable into all the senses the poet and gifted writer intended, and we'll deal with it later. The next was “one flag” meaning that the Zionist vision of Jewish freedom and statehood was the only “flag” a Revisionist should fly. No adjective such as “labor” or “religious” Zionist should modify the word Zionism. I think he may even have invented the Hebrew word for this: “had nes,” which I have translated as one flag or a single flag. The second value taught in Betar was “tzvaiyut.” The term is based on the word tzava, usually translated as an army, or military. The term was perceived by the anti-Revisionists as “militarism.” The way I would understand Jabotinsky's use of the word, he meant “soldierliness.” The third principle is “hadar.” Early on in the Bible, out of the many translations or interpretations one can find, perhaps the closest meaning is “to act honorably, with dignity and respect.” In the Betar hymn, whose words Jabotinsky wrote, the second verse begins with the word hadar and continues “even the poorest Jew is offspring of a prince. Whether downtrodden or homeless, you were born a King's son, wearing the crown of David.” Indeed, poverty abounded in Jewish communities in that bitter and brief interwar period, adding to the poor self-image of the Jew as a victim. Jabotinsky strove through these words, and by the example of the smartly dressed, impeccably honorable Betar ideal leader or commander to instill in his movement a sense of honor, pride, dignity, bearing, and the strength to rebel against the status quo. His words are powerful (if limping in translation). Many of his poems were set to a marching tempo, creating a military atmosphere. Now let us take a look at post-state Israel and Ben-Gurion. From labor leader of the early days he was now the national leader. Once Israel had won the War of Independence he knew he had to present the people and its youth with new ideals. He had to replace the aim of physical labor with reviving the land through creating kibbutzim and moshavim, transforming the downtrodden Eastern European urban factory workers, or tailors and grocers and unemployed into pioneers with new goals and a new vision. The army had to be organized properly, and young men and women had to learn new military skills. In many speeches, Ben-Gurion redefined the central ideal of Labor – halutziyut – pioneering, which had motivated the idealistic young immigrants who came to Israel, and later the city-bred Sabras as well, to reclaim the land. It was the pragmatic “practical Zionism” that had built the agricultural infrastructure whose settlements defined the borders of the new-born state. Ben-Gurion realized that the finest of young Israelis were now needed to develop the armed forces. He pronounced the IDF “a value.” In Israeli parlance, that means in effect a principle or major national aim. This parallels Jabotinsky's “soldierliness” that was born in the Diaspora out of Jabo's poetic nationalism. It was the pragmatism of “practical Zionism” in the light of changing reality that ultimately saw Jabotinsky's dream of soldierliness realized by Ben-Gurion. B-G laid down another principle. We shall always be a small people. We cannot compete with our opponents in quantity. We must therefore do so by our quality. He made scientific development another value and kept close watch on it via a special unit in the Prime Minister's Office and by the work in various branches of the Ministry of Defense. Just as Jabotinsky was the poet-prophet trying to prepare the Diaspora for statehood, it was Ben-Gurion on the ground, and rooted in his love of Bible, who led the day-to-day struggle to build, bring immigrants, and redefine the aims and vision of Zionism. The “one flag” principle of placing the needs of the nation above the interests of classes or groups in the 1920s and 1930s would effectively – if accepted and applied to mainstream (non-Revisionist) Zionism – have deprived the labor and religious-labor movements of their specific ideals, those that created the facts on the ground. However, after statehood, Ben-Gurion created the word “mamlakhtiyut” – another word whose rich Hebrew resonances make it difficult to translate. Simply, it means placing national interests above sectoral ones. With its Hebrew resonances, it recalls Jewish kingdoms, and thus the dignity practiced in a royal court. Here it should be clear that neither Jabotinsky nor Ben-Gurion would place the state above the individual. Jabotinsky wrote this clearly in his essays and speeches. Ben-Gurion's ideal of state organization was based on British parliamentarism, which similarly enshrines individual rights. For B-G, mamlakhtiyut also meant forgoing socialism for the profit motive. He had the courage to ensure the fledgling state could survive its early years even if it meant an ultimate rapprochement with Germany. The difference between Revisionist Zionism and mainstream Zionism to a great extent reflects the differences in personality between Chaim Weizmann and Ben-Gurion, on the one hand, and Jabotinsky, on the other. The Weizmann-Ben-Gurion approaches (they had their differences) were in step with what they perceived as reality. Jabotinsky was impatient. He projected ideas of a Jewish army conquering Mandatory Palestine and mass evacuation of Europe. All three leaders dreaded, in those grim years preceding World War II, what might very well be the destruction of Jewish life and lives. Jabotinsky did not live to see it; he died in 1939. Menachem Begin, Jabotinsky's heir as commander of the Irgun Zvai Leumi was a man who carried within himself the ideal of “one flag” to the extent of embracing Ben-Gurion in the pre-Six Day War crisis. And the pragmatism of responsibility and office made Prime Minister Begin give Egypt all it wanted to make peace. In combining the three in an article, I do not intend to level the field. As Menachem/Michael wrote, it was idealistic pragmatism that won the day, This writer owes a debt of gratitude to my former student for triggering this article. Our people has been blessed with great idealistic leaders across the centuries. How will our generation be viewed 75 years from now? Avraham Avi-hai held senior positions in the offices of Prime Ministers David Ben-Gurion and Levi Eshkol. He is the author of Ben-Gurion: State Builder

How it really was! - An unusual trio – Jabotinsky, Ben-Gurion and Begin

If we can look dispassionately at Vladimir Jabotinsky and David Ben-Gurion’s principles, we find something there is a marked similarity in ideals, albeit due to differences of place and time.

Brooklyn: Man with Iranian flag shirt charged for attacks three Jews

Israel Police arrest 11 in op. targeting alleged protection racket

How it really was! - An unusual trio – Jabotinsky, Ben-Gurion and Begin

If we can look dispassionately at Vladimir Jabotinsky and David Ben-Gurion’s principles, we find something there is a marked similarity in ideals, albeit due to differences of place and time.

See more on