But a new wave of pogroms that shook many parts of Russia in October 1905 spurred Zamenhof to wait no longer. In January 1906 there appeared anonymously in Ruslanda Esperantisto, the article Dogmoj de Hilelismo;[86]a revised version followed in March in the form of a brochure entitled Homaranismo.97 If the name 'Hillelism' indicated how much Zamenhof was still inspired by a primary desire to eradicate discrimination against Jews, the newly adopted term 'Homaranismo' was more suitable to char- acterize the proposal that all peoples and religions, retaining their speci- ficities, might come together 'on a basis neutrally human, on principles of reciprocal fraternity, equality, and justice' (2ur fundamento neutrale-homa, surprincipoj de reciproka frateco, egaleco kaj justeco) .[87]
Although Zamenhof removed the conspicuously Jewish elements in his project, making it possible to see Homaranismo as essentially simi- lar to the 'religion of humanity' (religion de thumanite) envisioned by Auguste Comte,[88] for the most part the Esperantists reacted to it with skepticism, not to say disapproval, because they saw it as irreconcilable with their own religious beliefs or because they feared that their language movement would take on a mystical character.1 00 Zamenhof defended himself against his critics, but he soon admitted that his 'neutral religion' was not suitable for linguistically homogeneous countries like France but was 'destined [_] only for countries of diverse ethnicities'.1 01 He also conceded that Homaranismo, though based on Esperanto, could not be required of Esperantists and that the Esperanto movement could there- fore not be officially identified with such a doctrine.
In June 1906, Zamenhof was shaken by news of a savage pogrom in his birthplace Biaiystok. Even so, at the insistent requests of Sebert and Javal, he gave up on even mentioning Homaranismo in his address to the Second World Congress, in Geneva. But, as of that year, he publicly advo- cated for a minimal agreement among the Esperantists on what ought to constitute the ideological basis of Esperanto. In the Geneva address, he alluded, for the first time, to what was henceforth understood, if never clearly defined, as the 'internal idea' of Esperanto, namely that in the cur- rent militant phase of the movement, the Esperantists should be inspired to action 'not by the thought of practical utility, but by the thought of [.] fraternity and justice among all peoples' (frateco kajjusteco inter ciuj popoloj).102
Zamenhof refused to remain silent on the truth merely because speak- ing the truth might be interpreted by outsiders as provocation:
a colorless official speech would be a major sin on my part. I come to you from a country where at present millions of people are struggling for free- dom, for the most basic human freedom, for the rights of man.[89]°
Furthermore, he also insisted that Esperanto should not cater only to self-serving interests, since the ideas behind it were far more important:
If we, the first fighters for Esperanto, are forced to forgo all our ideas, we will indignantly tear up and burn everything we have written on behalf of Esperanto; we will painfully destroy the work and the sacrifice of a lifetime, we will cast aside the green star [the badge of Esperanto] that we wear on our breast, and we will cry in disgust: 'With such an Esperanto, devoted only to the goals of commerce and practical utility, we desire nothing in common!'[90]
Perhaps no other utterance of Zamenhof was later more often cited than this one. In fact, the speech in which it occurred was intended as a coun- terbalance to the Declaration on the Essence of Esperantism, which rec- ognized the legitimacy of the use of Esperanto for any and every purpose. A similar modifying character can be attributed to the Declaration on the Neutrality of Esperanto Congresses,[91] which was voted and approved in Geneva. This new declaration, along with Zamenhof's speech,[92] defined neutrality in a way that did not call for silence on controversial issues, but encouraged the use of the congresses as a forum to discuss everything that would help bring the peoples of the world together.107
Zamenhof's insistence that Esperanto be more than an aid to com- mercial relations, and his overt condemnation of opportunism, served to stimulate many Esperantists—not to become adepts of Homaranism, but certainly to interpret their work for Esperanto as also a struggle for an idea. The forms of this idealism varied. Some people might anticipate that the internal idea would be disseminated all the more easily 'the less we talk about it' and recommend that Esperanto be disseminated only as a language—yet at the same time be aware that its success 'would be more than the victory of a language'.[93] Such may have been the feeling of the leaders of the Kovno Esperantist Society in Lithuania in 1910, among whom were 'high-ranking officers of the Tsarist army, Jewish business- people, a German factory-owner, a Catholic priest' all of whom 'despite the atmosphere of religious and national intolerance then prevailing, were linked by Esperanto'.[94]
Alternatively, people could emphasize a link to the internal idea, drawing strength from their role as disciples of Zamenhof and 'better Esperantists'. Still others saw themselves called on to put Esperanto at the service of some 'outside' ideology, particularly socialism. In Geneva in 1906 the first meeting of Esperantist 'Reds' was held, and in 1907 the revolution-minded Internacia Socia Revuo was launched, an interna- tional anarchist congress passed a resolution favoring Esperanto,[95] and in June young Chinese progressives in Paris began the weekly journal Xin shiji (New Century) with the Esperanto subtitle La Novaj Tempoj (New Times). This journal, along with anarchism, brought Esperanto to an underdeveloped China as yet another of the admirable acquisitions of western thought.[96] In another part of the world, in Chicago, in 1908, the first Esperanto translation of the Communist Manifesto appeared.[97]We could argue that the political expectations of many Esperantists were firmly and effectively reproduced in an article that appeared, some- what clandestinely, in the context of a linguistic discussion. These expec- tations were expressed by the Polish linguist Jan Baudouin de Courtenay:
The existence of such a world language linking all humanity will tear from the megalomania of nations and states its sharp and poisonous fang. The struggle for world dominance and the destruction of other nationalities will be neutralized and paralyzed by the world language. An international auxiliary language will contribute to the pacification of humanity far more than all the conferences organized by assorted exterminators and oppres- sors who hypocritically discuss questions of peace while at home they hunt people down with all the more fervor and persecute subject peoples and their languages.[98]
At around the same time, in the years 1907-08, Esperanto went through its biggest crisis to date. To gain international, authoritative support for Esperanto, Zamenhof allowed his language to be assessed by a com- mittee. The committee consisted of 12 eminent linguists (among them the aforementioned Baudouin de Courtenay) and was convened by Louis Couturat in the name of the 'Delegation for the Adoption of an International Auxiliary Language', which Couturat initiated in 1900 during the Paris Exhibition. Louis de Beaufront attended the commit- tee's meetings as Zamenhof's representative. But, instead of defending Esperanto, de Beaufront quite unexpectedly called for changes in the structure of the language, recommending a project of reformed Esperanto known as 'Ido'. Later he claimed that he himself was the author of Ido. A wave of indignation at this 'treachery' swept across the Esperanto movement, causing Zamenhof to break off all relations with the com- mittee. A group of leading Esperantists switched to Ido, but most of the 'Esperantist people' remained faithful to Esperanto, so that within a few years Ido no longer presented a threat to Zamenhof's language. Consciousness of Esperanto's practical utility, along with the need for dis- cipline as a prerequisite for the progress of the movement, proved stron- ger than any inclination to accept the advice of theoreticians concerning linguistic reforms. The crisis proved that Esperanto was already so firmly rooted in society that 'from artificial language it had been transformed into a living language'.[99]