de
El «boicot» no era más que esto: un acuerdo entre polacos para comerciar con polacos. Los judíos eran numerosos, adinerados y controlaban todos los canales comerciales. Prácticamente son dueños de todos los bienes raíces en Varsovia. Los judíos afirmaban que el llamado boicot (cuyo nombre en polaco es «las cooperativas») era una «persecución».
Sir H. Rumbold—“It must be further remembered that under the influence of economic changes and owing to the fact that since 1832 the Poles have not been allowed to hold posts in the government, they were gradually obliged to take to trade, and competi¬ tion between the Jewish population and the Poles com¬ menced. This competition became stronger when the Russian Government allowed co-operative and agricul¬ tural societies to be started in Poland. The co¬ operative movement is becoming very strong and will undoubtedly form an important factor in the develop¬ ment of economic relations in Poland, so that indirectly it will be bound to affect the position of the small Jewish trader.
“En la medida en que el Gobierno polaco pueda hacerlo mediante legislación o proclamas, el boicot a los judíos debería prohibirse. Pero señalaría que está más allá del poder de cualquier gobierno obligar a sus súbditos a tratar con personas con las que no desean tratar”
Henry Morgenthau, however, takes a more rea¬ sonable view than his British co-religionist, Sir Stuart Samuel. Mr. Morgenthau says:
“Furthermore, the establishment of co-operative stores is claimed by many Jewish traders to be a form of discrimination. It would seem, however, that this movement is a legitimate effort to restrict the activities and therefore the profits of the middleman. Unfor¬ tunately, when these stores were introduced