Richard Crossman (1907–1974)

Richard Crossman's essay in this book published in 1952 is that the retreat from optimism and belief in progress should not weaken the determination of moderate socialists to make the world a better place. He gets into trouble because he has fallen into the disastrous fashion started by Toynbee of confusing religion and history. He begins by invoking the Buddha as a figure who withdraws from struggle and Prometheus as a figure who continues to fight for his fellow men, suggesting that Prometheus is the appropriate role model. The comparison is false and forces Crossman to try to squeeze Buddha and Prometheus as well as other figures into his analytical framework. First of all, while remote from us, Buddha was a real historical figure, while Prometheus is a symbol or myth who never existed. Prometheus was not a humanist (indeed he was a Titan, not a man), who rebelled against Zeus and whose poetic descendent is Milton's Lucifer. Crossman's Prometheus has, as it were, read the Stoics and acquired a conscience, and a notion of duty, which strikes us as modern, not to say existential. The archetypical rebel does not fit very well into the Fabian Pantheon. Fabians are skeptical humanists and moderates. Prometheus chained to his peak, with the eagle devouring his entrails, is a tremendous and terrifying figure, and the portrayal of Prometheus by Aeschylus inspired Marx. But he is not a skeptical humanist and moderate. The whole pretentious effort to convert metaphysical and political imagery into the small change of politics is misconceived. Crossman then states that the “facts” support the Christian doctrine of Original Sin more than Rousseau’s vision of the noble savage or Marx’s classless society. This sounds impressive, until one remembers that the doctrine of original sin says nothing about institutional arrangements. What it does is to affirm a certain view of human nature which remains true (or the reverse) whatever the historical destiny of mankind. The correct Christian deduction is not that the classless society is impossible but that its coming would not alter man's fundamental predicament. [Review from 1952.]

For a review in Commentary addressing other essays in this collection, see https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/george-lichtheim/new-fabian-essays-e...… (more)

Rather exhaustive, in more ways than one, set of diary entries by the prominent English Labour Party politican, journalist and author, which covers the 12 or so years from the fall of the Attlee administration to the period just prior to the rise of the Wilson administration. There's a lot of to-and-fro of internal Labour Party politics here, and it can begin to get numbing after a while, particularly the antics of Aneurin Bevan, the Party's bad boy of the 1950s. This volume appeared after Crossman's death, which may have been just as well, since it shows that Crossman blatantly perjured himself in a libel trial he initiated against the Spectator; a report by them that he had been drunk at a conference in Italy had, indeed, been true. This sort of presentation is very good for history buffs, especially with the explanatory footnotes (though one for Chaucer had me wondering if the editor was pulling my leg), but isn't really for casual reading.… (more)

Palestine Mission: A personal record by Richard Crossman 1946 214pg 12/8/18
This book is both as history and tour or Eretz Israel at the time. In reading this book one can see problems that we have in the present Middle East. He was invited into the Committee in Oct 1945. Recommendations made in April 1946 and the book was published in August 1946.

Richard Crossman 1907 till 1974 Studied in Oxford and became a lecturer in philosophy and was later MP. He had spent a year in Germany and later he realized that all the academics he had been associated with there were Jewish. During the war he worked in propaganda against the Nazis. Was appointed to this commission as he had never said anything about the Palestine issue which he knew nothing about. Jews of Western Europe could go back home and put their lives together but not those of Eastern. Before the War, Zionism attracted a small middle class but group after the war it became a real Jewish expression. On the 12 members of the commission one American was a committed Zionist.
In America Judge Louis Brandeis had been a supporter, Got to know a lot of important people in the Jewish community like Steven Wise as well as Laudermilk and David Horowitz.
With Rommel attacking in Africa the White paper was necessary as Britain did not want to upset the Arabs during the war before America and Russia entered.
The one thing that was perplexing was taking Judaism as a religious minority in the world and giving them a national state. What it the status of Jews not in the national state. He predicted the kind of anti Israel antisemitism that we have become familiar with today.
In Cairo the consular officials were not the types very aware of what was going on in the country and the British army provided protection for them. The took a train from Cairo to Jerusalem where they met with the Governors officials. We find 2 ruling classes the British and Arab and the Jews on the other side.
Jehuda Magnes says that the university being called Hebrew university and not Palestine university is correct, Ben Gurion says he disagrees with his Crossman's views on Aristotle. The editor of the Palestine Post tells him about censorship which he did not know.
He meets Weitzman at Rehovot who tell him his peaceful negotiation with the British. but the Yishuv are more militant over the White Paper. In Naharia he finds Yekke culture that is dissapeared from Germany and they want a peaceful solution or binational state. He finds that all Jewish kids are getting an education but the Arabs are waiting for the government to provide it and the next generation as being left illiterate. Arab upper class did not want the peasants to get an education.
He felt that the Haganah could defeat the Arab easily. The British could not manage to tax the wealthy Arabs while the Jewish Agency which was a state within a state was being well run. The Arabs did not like that the Jews were better off. The British civil servant were not very capable but pro Arab.
He met Golda Meyerson the head of the Histadrut. The Jews had set up a socialist system but many were refugees from Bolshevism and would not allow Russian influence. He met Gershon Agnon the editor or the Palestine Post
During the war the Arabs were not concerned whether Britain of the Germans won while the Yishuv helped the British setting up the Palmach which then became the Hagenah.
The commission suggested 1) revoking the white paper 2) Immediately allowing 100 000 Jewish refugees in. 3)Partition.
At the time Britain never had enough coal and were changing over to oil for their trains and were worried about access to Mideast oil. At the same time she knew she had to get out of Egypt.
As a result of not implementing the commissions finding immediately we see that on 17 June Night of the Bridges.
29 June 1946 King David Hotel attack.… (more)