Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

The Southern Israelite Page 7 As Jews Seem Jo Heywood Mroun America s Most Independent Columnist Gives His Views on Anti-Semitism An Interview By JOSEPH BRAININ ■,,,>({ Broun is America's minus columnist. Since his tin'll from Harvard he has tsehall reporter, dramatic literary critic and column- ; was his vigorous defense i eo and Vansctti which his dismissal from the Seta York World. His daily in the Scripps-Howard <papers and his weekly page I lie X at ion have made his e mark: "It seems to Me. By ■xtcood Broun'' nationally fa s' In this exclusive interview a to the Seven Arts Feature Syndicate and The Southern Is raelite. Broun declares that anti- in it ism in America is on the in, rease; says that Mencken "is iII wet" about the Jews; and con fesses that there is no cui-and- ilncd solution to the Jewish prob lem- The Editor. is something unconventional, min and very individualistic about ••id Broun's writings. And the same > to Broun the man. His person- charming indeed. But nothing in Milky, genial six-footer betrays the . the satiric commentator who has tor himself the title of America’s dependent columnist. 1 visited him ipartnient in West 58th Street, in 1 building in which he maintains an cm- <m bureau for the jobless. His would make the hair of any bal- v turn white. It is the small den of "tudent. and gives evidence of strict - to the maid to keep out. Cigarette cover the floor; books and news- submerge desk, bed and chairs. •’ this confusion emerges the type- a lighthouse in the sea of dis ci iantly overlooking all this chaos, himself, well at ease, looking a bit 'its deep in a comfortable chair, • ready for an interview. He not wait for questions, but tackles tlie hull by the horns; 'Upjx>se I should begin by telling hat there is no such thing as anti- tn. Almost any Yankee would be- 'aying: ‘I have no prejudice ’ the Jews — some of my best are Jews,’ and then go on reciting ' 1!-known litany which you know t. I won’t. There is discrimination the Jew; as a matter of fact, anti- feeling is rising around here. Why * 1 don’t know. I’ve tried to >t out, but without success. Some -t '. together with my colleague Britt of the New York Telegram, nt to investigate anti-Jewish dis- Bon in New York. We did not •v any sociological authorities. We ur first-hand information, and we nmination against Jews in hotels tment houses is vanishing. Park 'till has a few apartment houses ru le is ‘no Jews.’ Doubtless the ' think this slogan will increase ue ot their real estate. But if a applicant has enough money and Americanized—that means ‘dumb-’ ,se- he can get even into ’those e * c! ’ : *ve places. "In the business world, however, dis crimination is real. Of this there is no doubt. The results of my previous investi gations were confirmed by recent inci dents during my present ‘Give-a-Job-till- June’ campaign. I received a number of letters offering jobs to stenographers and clerks with the proviso: ‘Christians only.’ No reasons were given. When I tried to make these prospective employers of Christians only talk, and even offered them a premium if they would give me one logical reason for this discrimination, the results I obtained were nil. The usual answer was that the Jewish holidays in terfere with the smooth working of a busi ness organization. But this reason does not carry' conviction. The true reason is pure, undiluted prejudice, and prejudices are not based on logic. If they were they would not be prejudices.” This seemed an appropriate moment for getting Brmm’s comment on H. L. Men cken’s attitude toward Jews. According ly I asked the fearless surveyor of the American scene what he thought of Men cken’s views as expresed in his latest book and in the inteview he gave me the other day. Heywood Broun smiled broadly and said: ‘‘Don’t tell me that the Jews are taking him seriously. The editor of The American Mercury is having some fun, and is rather pleased that he is getting good publicity for his book. He knows well enough that if you want Jews to read you you must attack them. That’s why the Ixxik I’m writing with Britt will not get a tumble from the Jewish readers, f, for one, refuse to think that Mencken, an intellectual and a liberal, means what he says against the Jews. I believe that Ford was the first and last prominent Amer ican who had the courage—or, rather, stupidity—to stamp himself publicly as an anti-Semite, And even he eventually came to know better. But Mencken cannot plead ignorance. As for the reasons he gives—they are trivial. They remind me of what happened to me the other day, when I sent my trousers to my tailor for pressing and the boy' brought them back with the news that the tailor was closed on account of the Jewish holiday. I felt annoyed, but at myself, not at the tailor. 1 felt like kicking myself for not know ing the Jewish calendar. My impressed pants surely would not justify my becom ing an anti-Semite and qualifying the en tire Jewish race as ‘unpleasant.’ No. In his views on the Jews my friend Mencken is all wet. “With the exception of this recent in explicable Mencken eruption I know of no instance of anti-Jewish feeling in in tellectual circles here. You may counter by asking: ‘What of the great American universities?’ I’ll admit that they have a numerus clausus, even if it is unofficial. I’ll agree that the universities are the hotbeds of anti-Semitism in this country. But I’ll deny that our universities are to be counted among the intellectual forces in the United States. I’m prepared to de bate against the proposition that univer sity deans and professors are liberal and rational—thinking human beings. This university anti-Semitism, which hides under the hypocritical cloak of a higher nationalism, is one of the saddest ex amples of American civilization. If only they had the courage of their petty chauvinism—if only they had even the semblance of a theoretical basis for their anti-Jewish discrimination! But they have nothing of the kind. The reaction of these pseudo-intellectual leaders is identical with that of the mob. The attitudes of both spring from legends. “According to all the rules of the game the Jew should be the type most admired by the average American. He, the Jew, is the best illustration of romance in busi ness and of the rather overworked slogan ’a pauper today, a millionaire tomorrow.’ These Jewish successes that bridge the abyss between the errand-boy and the millionaire in one generation should, by rights, become the heroes of our economic system. Men like Benjamin Winter, and there are plenty, are the best propagand ists for our capitalistic system. The Ben jamin Winters renew and strengthen the belief that America is the land of equal opportunity for all and that this economic system is the best. And here is a para dox. Americans, instead of acclaiming these men, |x>int to them as the evil, the source of anti-Semitism. ‘Why?’ you may ask. I don’t know. I can only speculate. Perhaps because the Jew travels in one generation the distance which it takes the American several generations to cover. In other words, the Jew is too fast, too successful. Yet it strikes me that there is a tremendous contradiction in this re action which condcms what it preaches.” "It is not strange, Mr. Broun,” I re marked, "that at the same time we are accused of being the essence of anti-cap italism? The terms ‘Jew’ and ‘Communist’ are getting to be synonymous in the minds of your anti-Semites.” “It is not strange,” the columnist re plied. “Those who look for a scapegoat for capitalism find him in the Jew. Those who look for a scapegoat for Communism find him in the Jew. The range of Jewish types and activities is so large that you do have outstanding representatives in both camps. Logically this versatility should defeat any attempt to see in you. the prototype of either evil. But the mob can see only one facet. Only a thinking, reasoning individual can be aware of several aspects of a question simultane ously. That is why the Jew is the target of lx>th capitalist and Communist anti- Semites. One is tempted to suggest that the capitalist anti-Semite debate the Com munist anti-Semite; then one could pray for a double knockout, which would be the only logical result. But, as I have al ready said, where there is anti-Semitism there is no logic. Consequently such a debate would end in a double victory in stead of a double defeat. “The American is not aware of the presence of the Russian immigrant. He knows only of the Russian Jewish immi grant, so that what is Russian is, to him, Jewish. The fact that the Jews from hardly two per cent of the Russian popu lation has not penetrated to his mind. He sees the Russian revolution as a Jew ish achievement; and therefore Commun ist activities here are Jewish doings as far as our anti-Semite is concerned. When you discuss the Communist demonstra tions here with one of these ‘racial au thorities, he will tell you: ‘Those damn Jews should all be deported.’ And our university deans, who should know geo graphy and statistics, join in the chorus and sing along instead of enlightening the poor, misled anti-Semites. That’s why you have discrimination against Jewish pro fessors and instructors, and that’s why anti-Jewish feeling here is reaching alarming proportions. Recently it has shot up like a high fever—which proves that something is wrong in our organism. And what is wrong is the stupidity of our university men and the hypocrisy of our pseudo-intellectuals. "1 have tried to diagnose this mounting anti-Semitic fever and I have been able to place my finger on one tangible and, of course, unjustified source. You will be surprised if I tell you. Any intelligent man would, for it seems quite incredit- able, the incident was so minor. But I contend that one event, more than any other occurence of recent years, was in strumental in swelling the ranks of anti- Semites. That event was the Leopold and Loeb murder case. These two intellectual and wealthy young Jews, atheists, cynical deniers of all social and human traditions, were exploited to the fullest extent by the Ku Klux Klanners. They were pointed out as types instead of being regarded as abnormal, diseased freaks. On top of that the fact that they were saved from the electric chair through the influence of wealth, instead of being viewed as an ex ample of American travesty of justice, was taken as a typical illustration of the evil power of Jewish money. For a think ing individual this is pure rubbish. Leo pold and Loeb are just as representative of the Jewish race as Mrs. Snyder, the husband-killer, represents American wom anhood. But arguments are useless in a case like that. The anti-Semite got some nourishing food, and, of course, grew big ger. "What we have in America is a mob anti-Semitism that prevades the univer sities and all but a small number of true liberals and genuine intellectuals. That is why the Klan collapsed. A mob cannot be organized. If we had some official anti- Semitic organizations, or at least a few real anti-Semitic leaders like those in Germany, it would be much easier to fight anti-Semitism. One would have a target to shoot at, a concrete object to ridicule. But unfortunately American hy- jx>crisy leaves anti-Jewish feeling un labeled and anonymous. You can’t fight an opponent who dons the invisible cape and is always out of reach.” “The American anti-Semites had a Ford,” I interjected, “but the American liberals never had a Zola. What can be done to put a stop to the ever-growing menace of anti-Semitism, Mr. Broun?” Heywood Broun looked grave, weary and puzzled. “Zola,” he answered, “had the Dreyfus case to enable him to corner his opponents. It was an open fight. Frenchmen are impulsive and passionate; their anti-Semites traveled under their own colors. Here we try to solve a prob lem by ignoring it. The two New York papers for which I have worked—the World ami the Telegram—are both lib eral, but I am quite sure I could never (Continued on Page 15)