DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.27180#0288
PYRAMID AND TEMPLE
telling. Did they think of example? What did they have in
their heads?
They are ready enough to tell you about irrigation or
drought, vegetables or tropical fruits, and whether it is a
question of cooperative or communistic settlements. But if
you come to internal affairs they always glance at their wrist-
watches in just the same way, just as if they had an appoint-
ment.
Thus Fechenbach let himself go with all the more
enthusiasm; he is a socialist and a Zionist, and is recovering
here from his imprisonment. We made part of our journey
together. Fechenbach explained to me what results the
settlers have had. They could have done it cheaper. The
Arabs, who are used to the climate, were ready to help them,
for a slight consideration, in the dangerous business of
draining the swamps. The Jews would have nothing to do
with them; the land was to be their property.
I spent one evening discussing the subject with one of
the administrative people; I believe he was called Max
Levin. Fechenbach sat by. I expressed my admiration for
their social morale as shown by this example. Dr. Levin said
it had nothing to do with morale, merely with money. The
settlers couldn’t have done it cheaper as the nationalist funds
at their disposal were not to be used for employing foreign
labour. In any case, Fechenbach interposed, other considera-
tions may have carried weight and ought to be reckoned
with ethically. No, it was purely practical: Herr Levin took
a piece of paper and did a sum for Fechenbach. It was really
quite simple. The discussion amused me; and I discovered
that nothing supported Fechenbach’s contention better than
the refusal of the parties concerned to recognize it. The
ethical party have only just arrived and can’t yet talk
Hebrew; in order to avoid all phrase-making they prefer to
call themselves materialists.
Part of the modern settlements has been built on a
264
telling. Did they think of example? What did they have in
their heads?
They are ready enough to tell you about irrigation or
drought, vegetables or tropical fruits, and whether it is a
question of cooperative or communistic settlements. But if
you come to internal affairs they always glance at their wrist-
watches in just the same way, just as if they had an appoint-
ment.
Thus Fechenbach let himself go with all the more
enthusiasm; he is a socialist and a Zionist, and is recovering
here from his imprisonment. We made part of our journey
together. Fechenbach explained to me what results the
settlers have had. They could have done it cheaper. The
Arabs, who are used to the climate, were ready to help them,
for a slight consideration, in the dangerous business of
draining the swamps. The Jews would have nothing to do
with them; the land was to be their property.
I spent one evening discussing the subject with one of
the administrative people; I believe he was called Max
Levin. Fechenbach sat by. I expressed my admiration for
their social morale as shown by this example. Dr. Levin said
it had nothing to do with morale, merely with money. The
settlers couldn’t have done it cheaper as the nationalist funds
at their disposal were not to be used for employing foreign
labour. In any case, Fechenbach interposed, other considera-
tions may have carried weight and ought to be reckoned
with ethically. No, it was purely practical: Herr Levin took
a piece of paper and did a sum for Fechenbach. It was really
quite simple. The discussion amused me; and I discovered
that nothing supported Fechenbach’s contention better than
the refusal of the parties concerned to recognize it. The
ethical party have only just arrived and can’t yet talk
Hebrew; in order to avoid all phrase-making they prefer to
call themselves materialists.
Part of the modern settlements has been built on a
264