Voters preferred representatives defending private interests over statesmen pursuing principle.

Evidence

Those members of Parliament who had learned to regard politics as the professional representation of vested interests were naturally anxious to preserve that state of affairs upon which their “calling” and their profits depended. The Dreyfus case revealed, moreover, that the people likewise wanted their representatives to look after their own special interests rather than to function as statesmen. It was distinctly unwise to mention the case in election propaganda. Had this been due solely to antisemitism the situation of the Dreyfusards would certainly have been hopeless. In point of fact, during the elections they already enjoyed considerable support among the working class. Nevertheless even those who sided with Dreyfus did not care to see this political question dragged into the elections. It was, indeed, because he insisted on making it the pivot of his campaign that Jaurès lost his seat. — Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 330

Categorization

• SEED: The claim that workers sympathized with Dreyfus yet would not vote on the case complicates the classic picture of the Affair as pure antisemitism — useful corrective for any piece on how moral issues map onto electoral behavior.