Behold Moshiach ben Satan the son of perdition
Behold the mark
Behold his mark
The mark of his name
Behold the Star of Dovid of apostate Solomon, The star of Moloch
But they say, of ben Dovid
of Moshiach ben Dovid, their man king who they will have over them
Whose mark is of his name Dovid
Whose Name came from that Mark
Who is the puppet leader
King David Concord Sweet Red Wine
... The Carmel Winery was founded in 1882 by Baron Edmond de Rothschild. King David Concord
has a dark red/purple color and the "foxy" nose typical of this varietal ...
- browse and compare book price at 40+ Sites!
... 6. From King David to Baron David ISBN: 0961057831 ... 7. House of Rothschild ISBN:
0670887943 - Hardcover - List Price: $34.95 Author: Niall Ferguson. ...
ROTHSCHILD Family Tree
... Also see From King David to Baron David : the genealogical connections between
Baron Guy de ROTHSCHILD and Baroness Alix de ROTHSCHILD by Neil ROSENSTEIN. ...
Six-Point Star of David, the Oldest Flag in the World?
... King David's symbol had always been the Menorah or seven-branched ... In 1822 the "Magen
David" was adopted by the ... and it was used on the Rothschild coat of arms ...
Who is a mere man 6-9
Who will be a Tzaddik 90-60
who will be the tzaddik of the generation
who will be the FINAL TZADDIK 900-600
whose number is in the Talmudic Qabalah Gematria
18: Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.
16: They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;
1. I pass now to the method of confirming the dynastic roots of King David to the last strata of the earth.
2. This confirmation will first and foremost be included in that which to this day has rested the force of conservatism by our learned elders of the conduct of the affairs of the world, in the directing of the education of thought of all humanity.
3. Certain members of the seed of David will prepare the kings and their heirs, selecting not by right of heritage but by eminent capacities, inducting them into the most secret mysteries of the political, into schemes of government, but providing always that none may come to knowledge of the secrets. The object of this mode of action is that all may know that government cannot be entrusted to those who have not been inducted into the secret places of its art ....
4. To these persons only will be taught the practical application of the aforenamed plans by comparison of the experiences of many centuries, all the observations on the politico-economic moves and social sciences - in a word, all the spirit of laws which have been unshakably established by nature herself for the regulation of the relations of humanity.
5. Direct heirs will often be set aside from ascending the throne if in their time of training they exhibit frivolity, softness and other qualities that are the ruin of authority, which render them incapable of governing and in themselves dangerous for kingly office.
6. Only those who are unconditionally capable for firm, even if it be to cruelty, direct rule will receive the reins of rule from our learned elders.
The Rebbe’s Revolution In 5762
Ten years passed. On the one hand, world-wide terror increased. On the other hand, the world continued to progress towards the time of the RebbeMendel Menachem Schneerson's revelation. Somehow, the Rebbe arranged it so that Bush’s son would become president too and complete what his father left unfinished.
By Rabbi Naftali Estulin
Since the time has come for the revelation of the Rebbe MH"M, the U.S. has no choice, and must fulfill its destiny and instill the Sheva Mitzvos within all of humanity.
7. In case of falling sick with weakness of will or other form of incapacity. kings must by law hand over the reins of rule to new and capable hands.
8. The king's plan of action for the current moment, and all the more so for the future, will be unknown, even to those who are called his closest counselors.
9. Only the king and the three who stood sponsor for him will know what is coming.
| America in the grip of Bush's 'Iron Triangle'
America in the grip of Bush's 'Iron Triangle' Ed Vulliamy in Washington
reveals the network of big business interests that is now ...
www.guardian.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4099753,00.html - 17k - Cached
10. In the person of the king who with unbending will is master of himself and of humanity all will discern as it were fate with its mysterious ways. None will know what the king wishes to attain by his dispositions, and therefore none will dare to stand across an unknown path.
11. It is understood that the brain reservoir of the king must correspond in capacity to the plan of government it has to contain. It is for this reason that he will ascend the throne not otherwise than after examination of his mind by the aforesaid learned elders.
12. That the people may know and love their king, it is indispensable for him to converse in the market-places with his people. This ensures the necessary clinching of the two forces which are now divided one from another by us by the terror.
13. This terror was indispensable for us till the time comes for both these forces separately to fall under our influence.
14. The king of the Jews must not be at the mercy of his passions, and especially of sensuality: on no side of his character must he give brute instincts power over his mind. Sensuality worse than all else disorganizes the capacities of the mind and clearness of views, distracting the thoughts to the worst and most brutal side of human activity.
Neither shall he regard the God of
his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify
himself above all.
15. The prop of humanity in the person of the supreme lord of all the world of the holy seed of David must sacrifice to his people all personal inclinations.
16. Our supreme lord must be of an exemplary irreproachable.
And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.
30: And then shall appear the sign of
the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and
they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and
31: And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
14: These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.
PART ONE ZIONISM
I. THE BALFOUR DECLARATION
The world war had entered its fourth year in the latter part of 1917, with no indication of a rapid settlement in sight. The complexity and variety of events, increasing with the years, had emphasized its universal character. Every country engaged-whether America, Germany, Russia, Greece, France, Italy, or England found its entire interests, political, economic, and ethnic, involved in the issue. All these nations seemed gripped in a deadlock, and at the same time felt the pressing need of deliverance.
Before 1917, it had been thought that if the allies continued to hold the western front, the Russian " steam roller " would crash the central powers by sheer force of numbers. But the "steam roller" had itself exploded: there had been a revolution, and, by the end of July, Russian troops had withdrawn from Bessarabia and Moldavia, and between the Dniester and the Pruth, leaving the eastern front undefended. If this loss was somewhat offset by the fact that America, in spite of the President's reluctance, had finally joined the allies, it was still doubtful whether her forces would arrive in time and in sufficient numbers to be of real military value.
The scale on which the war was waged made all usual methods of reaching a settlement out of the question: no outside Power could be invoked as mediator; the Pope had issued a peace proposal on August 1, but the allies regarded it as inspired by Germany and turned a deaf ear.
Allied statesmen had cast about for some principle on which an honourable peace could be proposed, if a crushing defeat could not be inflicted on the enemy. The principle of nationalities, viz., the right of small nations to form their own government, had been advanced, and had met with general acceptance.
Thus America's object in entering the war, according to President Wilson, was to deliver the peoples of the world from autocracy," " to make the world safe for democracy," and the like. But the application of this principle presented difficulties. That Germany and Austria should be broken up into Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Hungary, Jugo-Slavia, etc., in the way that afterward occurred, was one matter; but the example of Russia, and the possibility of the principle being applied to England, then troubled by Irish agitators, and the other allies, led many to dread a completely dismembered Europe.
Nevertheless, the idea had acquired a large measure of popularity in cities where reaction against over-organization had created an intense desire for freedom.
In rough, this was the situation when the British government issued a note favouring a national home for the Jews: it took the form of a letter addressed to Lord Rothschild and signed by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Sir Arthur (later Lord) Balfour, and read:
Foreign Office, November 2, 1917.
" DEAR LORD ROTHSCHILD,
I have much pleasure in conveying to you on behalf of His Majesty's Government the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations, which has been submitted to and approved by the Cabinet:
His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which, may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.
I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.
ARTHUR JAMES BALFOUR."
Thus it was that the Jews, the " Chosen People," after centuries of ispersion, were to be established in a home land. Here was poetic justice; it seemed as though nineteen centuries of wrongs were to be righted.
Six weeks later, the newspapers were full of the triumphal entry of General Allenby into Jerusalem, and the conquest of the Holy Land by the British army which included Jewish units: to the religious-minded, it was as though Providence had set the seal of approval on the Balfour declaration. Sceptics, on the other hand, remarked callously that Allenby's army had been loitering about Palestine inactive for the last four months; that Jerusalem offered no resistance and one week ought to have sufficed for staging his entry. His forces undoubtedly counted some Jews in the commissary department, as there are in all armies; but the credit for the conquest was almost wholly due to the assistance of the Arabs, over a hundred thousand strong, to whom the promise of autonomy had been made by England in 1915. The Balfour declaration was a direct violation of this promise. But for every miracle there are unbelievers!
More than a decade has passed, and, looking back, one is inclined to ask a few questions: Why was it that the British cabinet with a war on its hands resolved to set aside a national home for the Jews ? Had the cabinet proposed a home in the Near East to the Armenians first, and on the latter's refusal turned to the Jews ? Was it to be an asylum for cripples and orphans; or a religious centre; or a sort of Liberia, like African Liberia founded in 1822 for freed negroes? Or were all the Jews in the world supposed to migrate back to Palestine ? This last idea, though excellent in theory, would hardly be feasible.
Reading the declaration carefully, it becomes clear that certain Jews (the Zionist group), and not all the Jews, wanted a " national home ": they may even have intimated their desire to some member of the cabinet. Sir Arthur was dining one evening at Lord Rothschild's country place and admiring his beautiful home, when, at the mention of that word, Lord Rothschild, turning away to hide a tear, said sadly that some of his friends " had no home [that is, no national home] where they could lay their heads." Sir Arthur was touched and said he would mention it to His Majesty and to his colleagues, and knew that they would express their sympathy for Lord Rothschild's friends in distress. Accordingly, the declaration of sympathy followed a few days later.
For those who are satisfied with the above explanation there is no need to read further; those, however, w î desire a fuller account of things may be willing to discard popular fallacies and study things afresh. As a background, a general idea of the history and character of the Jews and their institutions is essential.
The longest path may be the shortest in the end.
II. THE JEWISH COMMUNITY: ITS SPIRIT AND ORGANISATION
In studying the Jewish people, special attention must be given to the Jewish community. This peculiar social order has for twenty centuries impressed its indelible mark on every one of its members in every quarter of the globe; uncrushed by pressure from without, it has administered its affairs according to its own arbitrary laws, often in defiance and to the detriment of the government of the land. The authority of the Jewish leaders, originally derived from the ten commandments delivered to Moses,l had already in the time of Augustus been widely extended2 by a learned but unscrupulous priesthood 3 over an ignorant, superstitious people. In that age, while a struggle was going on between two rival sects, Pharisees4 and Sadducees,5 certain political clubs 6 were formed which concealed under a religious mask the grasping aims of a clique.7
These clubs were not slow to take advantage of their country's misfortunes. A few years later, during the siege of Jerusalem by Vespasian, they won, by the betrayal of the Jewish cause, the favour of the Roman conqueror,8 and were subsequently entrusted by the imperial government with the administration of Palestine.' Moreover, with the sack of Jerusalem, the destruction of the temple, and the death of the patriotic leaders, the common people found themselves utterly dependent, in spiritual as well as civil matters, upon these same self-styled societies of the learned, who alone possessed the secrets of the priesthood and copies of the sacred texts. By interpreting, altering, and augmenting the rules and ritual these texts contained, and by a system of espionage and assassination,10 the new rulers established a strict control over the daily life of their co-religionists. Thus having taken hold of the Jewish people through the medium of the Roman authority, this clique easily placed its laws above the ten commandments, and formed a government whose control over its subjects was absolute.11 This government became henceforth known as the Kahal.12
The dispersion of the Jews which followed in 135 A.D., instead of destroying the Kahal, served on the contrary to set it on a new and firmer basis, on which it has continued ever since. Wherever Jewish emigrants settled,13 they founded communities apart under the direction of the fraternities, and held to the precepts of the Talmud.(tm) Each community had its representative, its rabbi, its synagogue: it was a miniature Kahal. The different aims of these communities always found themselves intimately related with those of the central body upon which their existence depended.
For if the ruling clique or caste had begun by grinding down its own race," it now saw that, by drafting them into its organization, it could exploit the gentiles on a far grander scale." The number of fraternities was increased by the addition of trade unions, every trade in which the Jews engaged being represented. To strengthen its control and to advance the interests of the Jews as a whole, it developed and perfected that system of espionage which it still maintains.
It sent agents17 to watch over Jewish affairs at police stations, and, when opportunity offered, distribute gifts to the employees. Other agents were posted at the doors of shops, hotels, business houses, lawcourts, and even in the private households of government officials. These trained agents had each a special field to cover: police, export, import, exchange, government supplies, lawsuits, etc.
The duty of an agents assigned to lawcourts was to keep constantly in touch with the proceedings, or with the official, meet the petitioners and, when practicable,18 fix the sum they must pay for a favourable judgment. This concluded, the agent took all necessary steps, and often succeeded in obtaining a decision contrary to justice. But in every case, the first duty of the agent was to note all errors and irregularities committed by the court, and all scandals brought out in the course of trial: these, reported and carefully recorded in the files of the Kahal, could be used as weapons against any person involved, who might later wish to act contrary to Jewish interests. Thus the order derived strength from three sources: advance information on trade conditions, bribery, and blackmail.
It is quite easy to understand the reasons of the concentration of trade in the hands of the Jews, wherever they have settled in sufficient numbers. For if on the one hand the individual Jew is the slave of the Kahal, his submission on the other hand is rewarded by its support in his struggle with non-Jewish competitors. He can count on the immediate help of his fraternity, and where necessary of the whole organization, and thus is assured of the victory over any single gentile.
The teaching in the synagogue incited its following to a thorough exploitation of their gentile neighbours, care only being taken not to excite hostility to the extent of endangering the whole community. This doctrine, popular from the start, was eventually embodied in its most concrete form in a book of the Talmud, called the Shulchan Aruk. A few quotations will suffice to show its character:19
"When a Jew has a gentile in his clutches, another Jew may go to the same gentile, lend him money and in his turn deceive him, so that the gentile shall be ruined. For the property of a gentile (according to our law) belongs to no one, and the first Jew that passes has the full right to seize it."20
"When a Jew makes a deal with a gentile, and another Jew comes up and deceives the gentile no matter in what manner, whether he give him false measure or overcharge him, then both Jews must share between them the profits thus sent by Jehovah."21
"Although it is not a direct obligation for a Jew to kill a gentile with whom he lives in peace, yet, in no case, is he allowed to save a gentile's life."22
"It is always a meritorious deed to get hold of a gentile's possessions."23
"Marriages taking place among gentiles have no binding strength, i.e. their cohabitation is just as the coupling of horses, therefore their children do not stand as humanly related to their parents."24
Of the spirit which taught that all non-Jews were animals 25 to be stripped of their property for the benefit of Jewry, and which united the community in a common aim and a common hatred; of the Shulchan Aruk which transmitted this aim and this hatred from generation to generation, Jewish leaders of the last fifty years have written :26
" The Shulchan Aruk is not the book that we have chosen for our guide, but the book that has been made our guide, whether we would or not, by force of historical development: because this book, just as it is in its present form, with all its most uncouth sections, was the book that best suited the spirit of our people, their condition and their needs, in those generations in which they accepted it as binding on themselves and their descendants. If we proclaim that this is not our law, we shall be proclaiming a falsehood; this is our law, couched in the only form which was possible in the middle ages, just as the Talmud is our law in the form which it took in the last days of the ancient world, just as the Bible is our law in the form which it took while the Jews still lived as a nation on their own land. The three books are but three milestones on the road of a single development, that of the spirit of the Jewish nation."
A Jewish community, in the midst of a gentile population on which it preyed, depended for its success on two things: the absolute subordination of its members and the secrecy of its proceedings. The Kahal concealed its activities from the outside world under the guise of religion. " The Jews were loyal subjects like their neighbours, but to them faith was life, and they were constantly preoccupied with the observance of their ritual ", it told the world. But this was not a sufficient screen. As in all secret organizations there are traitors and renegades whatever the penalty. The Kahal was obliged to shroud itself in mystery and mysticism,27 even from its members. The multiplicity of the ritual laws, the voluminous civil code, the secret instructions of the fraternities, the continuance of obsolete forms, all served to create such a confusion that no non-Jew confronted with the documents could distinguish what was fundamental from what was prolix ritual or irrelevant.28 The general scheme of the Kahal, which has been in operation since the second century A. D., remains in force to this day. Its essential characteristics may be outlined as follows:
a) The council of elders or geronsia,"(r) presided over by à patriarch or exilarch. Its functions were purely formal; it represented the Jews in official relations with foreign governments, acted as their spokesman when they wished to arouse public sentiment in their favour, but had no direct
responsibility in the secret government whose existence it served to conceal. Composed of leading members of the fraternities, it could discuss at secret meetings questions of general interest, leaving their practical solution to the
b) The tribunal or beth-din.30
c) The fraternities.
The beth-din decided all lawsuits and differences arising between individual Jews, and between members and the Kahal itself. It existed in all localities where there were Jews, catered to their commercial needs, and had final jurisdiction in both civil and religious matters. It alone was competent to interpret the spiritual laws of the Talmud. To illustrate the character of this court, the following paragraphs from the Talmudic code31 may be given:
" No Jew may appeal for justice to any court or judiciary other than the Jewish tribunal. This holds even when the laws of the country bearing on the question at issue agree with the Jewish laws, and when the two parties are willing to submit their differences to the former. Whoever breaks this injunction shall be outlawed;32 his offence is equivalent to contempt and violation of the law of Moses.
" The beth-din judges cases involving loans, debts, marriages, legacies, gifts, damages, interest, etc.
" Although the beth-din has no right to fine a thief or looter, it may inflict the indoui on him until he makes full restitution. It may inflict fines for the infraction of rules as prescribed in the Talmud.
" When the beth-din notices that the nation is given to disorders,33 it may, without confirmation by the Jewish authorities, impose fines, death-sentences, and other penalties; and in this connection it may waive the production of testimony to prove the guilt of the accused. Where the latter is a person of influence in the country, the beth-din may use the legal machinery of the country to punish him. His property may be declared outside the protection of the law (guefker), and he himself may be done away with as circumstances require."
It would be erroneous to suppose that all suits between Jews are tried by the beth-din. In many circumstances, and especially in thorny cases where the Jewish law is contrary to common sense, because the form and the terms do not agree with justice and conscience, the case is tried not by the judges of the beth-din, called dayans, but by a special court composed of persons chosen for their knowledge of business practice or other special reasons.
The explanation of the mass of lawsuits between Jews before non-Jewish courts is as follows. For the most part, these have to do with drafts presented for payment and drawn on Jews who have incurred penalties at the hands of the beth-din. The laws of the country are thus used to execute the decisions of the Jewish tribunal. The beth-din makes a practice of binding the two parties in a suit submitted for its decision, by having them sign blanks before the trial. If, afterward, the party who has lost the case refuses to abide by the decision, the blank bearing his signature is converted into a draft and put into circulation.
Turning to the fraternities which are the sinews of the organization, one finds their outward form strictly innocuous. The rules are nearly all on the same model, and fix the annual dues, the place and date for the regular meetings, the duties and obligations of members, and the penalties if disregarded; the latter range from small fines to expulsion from the fraternity. A member expelled from a fraternity found himself cut off from the community and generally died an outcast. Each fraternity has a religious or charitable purpose, connected with such worthy objects as the following:
a) Reading from the sacred texts,34
b) Burial of the dead,
c) Ransoming of prisoners,
d) Free loans, help for poor girls, aid for the sick, clothing for the poor, etc.
It should be noted that these objects were not entirely disinterested: the fraternity charged with reading the texts, distorted them; those who buried the dead received fees, not only for that care, but also for plots in the Jewish cemetery, for the purification bath prescribed for Jewish women, for seats in the synagogue.35 The fraternity for ransoming prisoners was composed of the most influential members of the community; as its chief concern was the freeing of delinquent Jews from gentile courts, it had to bring pressure to bear on police and government officials.36
An excellent illustration of a Jewish community in the twentieth century is found in the account of the organizing of the KehillaW in New York City in 1909 and of its subsequent operation, - published in the Jewish Communal Register.38
The purpose of the Kehillah is to " weld Jewish interests and develop community conscientiousness "; the immediate cause of its creation was " the statement of the police commissioner, General Bingham, that the Jews contributed fifty per cent, of the criminals of New York City."39
The first step taken by the constitutive convention was the election of an executive committee and an advisory council of seventy members; the latter is the council of elders or gerousia, and its duty is to " make its voice heard and its opinions felt (sic) in all questions affecting the Jews the world over."
The next thing of importance is the creation of a beth-din or court of arbitration, by the board of authoritative rabbis (vaad harabbonim) already charged with the regulations of marriage, divorce, circumcision, and ritual bath.40 The beth-din will undertake to settle all disputes between labour and capital.41
Further on, the purpose of the Kehillah is made clearer: it is for the " coordination of the existing communal agencies42 to save the synagogue from impending ruin," to which end all the material and moral resources of the entire community are to be drafted.43 In other words, the hierarchy of fraternities for which Judaism serves as a cloak and the synagogues as a lodge-room, is endeavoring to strengthen its hold on its members, among whom there is a tendency towards emancipation.
Finally, mention is made of some of the fraternities, under the title of benevolent societies: the burial clubs and the visitors of the sick. It is particularly interesting to note that these orders assess their beneficiaries: that is, they operate as life insurance companies.44
So well is the question of ritual meat (kosher) regulated by the Kehillah, that " all the meat slaughtered in New York city and vicinity, whether for Jewish consumption or not, is slaughtered by schochetim under the supervision of
authoritative rabbis.'45 Of New York's sixty per cent gentile population, none can buy meat not prepared according to Jewish ritual. But this paternal interest of the Kehillah for its members and for the whole gentile population is not entirely unmotivated; for the Register goes on to explain that meat so killed brings " prices far in excess of those paid for ordinary meat." It pays the slaughter-houses to employ schochetim and contribute to the welfare of the authoritative rabbis.
Thus the Jewish fraternities through the ages have kept their typical character of a secret government, disguised under the form of synagogues and schools.
The life of the people, too, has changed little from generation to generation, and from one country to another: they are always and everywhere the tools of the ruling clique; to it they pay heavy, indirect taxes, and in return receive help in exploiting the land which harbours them. They have a heavy heritage, a Jewish conscientiousness, a hatred of non-Jews, a love of deceiving; all this they
cannot easily shake off, and with it the yoke of the Kahal.
1. Exodus xx.
2. The Gospels themselves bear witness to the distortions of the divine law of Moses by the human additions of the rabbis. Cf. Matthew xv. 2: " Thus you have destroyed the ommandment of God by your traditions."
3. Compare Matt. xxm. 14-36.
4. Lit. the " separated ".
5. From Sadoc, Greek form of Zadok (lit. " the just "), founder of the sect.
6. Known as Imburah from habor, " join together ".
7. Graetz, iv. History of the Jews, p. 85.
8. Vespasian appointed Rabbi John Ben Zakkai, chief of the haburah, ruler of Jamnia: Jost, i. History of the Jem, p. 210.
9. Brafmann, Jewish Brotherhoods, (Vilna, 1868) par. 18.
10. The clubs were secret fraternities, each member binding himself by an oath; the penalty for disobedience was exclusion or death: Jost., op. cit.
11. "Every day, and every hour of the day, and every act of every hour, had its appointed regulations, grounded on distorted texts of scripture, or the sentences of the wise men, and artfully moulded up with their national reminiscences of the past or their distinctive hopes of the future,-the divine origin of the law, the privileges of God's
chosen people, the restoration to the holy city, the corning of the Messiah." Milman, n, History of the Jews (Everyman Library, 1923 edition p. 165).
12. Literally, "community" or "commonwealth".
13. Nearly every province of the Roman empire had at least one colony of Jews at the end of the second century A.D.
14. Talmud Torah, lit. "study of the law", name for the agglomera tion of rabbinical works.
15. Contemptuously termed am-ha-aretz, lit. "people of the soil", and debarred from bearing witness, etc.: Talmud Pessashim 98. They had to^'submit to the haburah or perish". Talmud Tainot 23.
16. "The hatred of the am-ha-aretz towards the learned societies was so great, that, if we patricians had not obtained for them some material advantages, they would have killed us." Talmud Pessashim 49.
17. Called factors: Brafmann, Book of the Kahal, ch I.
18. Depending on the character of the suit, judges, etc.
19. The Shulchan Aruk is a manual of Jewish laws, drawn from the Talmud, and compiled by Rabbi Joseph Caro (1488-1575).
20. Loc. cit., Law 24.
21. Ibid., Law 27.
22. Ibid., Law 50.
23. Ibid., Law 55.
24. Ibid., Law 88.
25. Goyim, lit. "animals".
26. Quoted from Asher Ginzberg's reply to Rabbi Lolli, in 1897.
27. The part played by the Jews in the founding and spreading of gnostic sects is not treated here.
28. " The Mosaic law, intricate enough, is woven into an inextricable network of decrees (in the Mischna).. The Mischna fully admits polygamy... Capital punishment is of four kinds: stoning, burning, slaying by the sword, strangling... The sixth book is on the subject of uncleanness and ablution: it is rigid and particular to the utmost
repulsiveness.. The object of this work was to fix on undoubted authority the whole unwritten law. But the multiplication of written statutes enlarges rather than contracts the province of the lawyer; a new field was opened for ingenuity, and comment was speedily heaped upon the Mischna, till it was buried under the weight, as the Mosaic law had been before by the Mischna... Those ponderous tomes, at once religious and
civil institutes, swayed the Jews with uncontested authority." Milman, op. cit., pp. 174, 175.
29. A revival of the old Sanhedrin which governed Palestine.
30. Lit. " house of religion ": see Brafmann, Bk. of the Kahal, ch. 8.
31. Hocher-Hamichot. " The synagogue with its appendant school or law court, became the great bond of national union." Milman, pp. 160, 161.
32. Viz., the indoui or the herein, corresponding to excommunication and expulsion from the community.
33. The meaning seems to be, " rebelling against the Kahal ".
34. There were four fraternities or learned societies having this as their object: they were composed exclusively from the upper caste. For this and the following, see Brafmann, Jewish Brotherhoods, p. 21.
35. Ibid., p. 38.
36. Ibid., p. 33.
37. Diminutive of kahal.
38. New York, 1919.
39. Jewish Communal Register (New York, 1919) n. If Bingham's statement were without foundation, would it have aroused so much indignation?
40. Ibid., p. 50.
41. Ibid., p. 52.
42. Ibid., p. 55.
43. Ibid., p. 120.
44. Ibid., p. 732.
45. Ibid., p. 312.
III. NEW LINKS BETWEEN COMMUNITIES
The Jews, disseminated in all lands and claiming the same rights as other nationals, jealously guarded the secret of their hierarchy. Prior to the eighteenth century various nations had from time to time granted equality of rights to the Jews within their borders,1 but in every case had retracted them.
About 1770, Moses Mendelssohn2 and others began preaching emancipation for all Jews everywhere, as the ultimate goal of the race. This suited the Kahal: if its members enjoyed the privileges of other nationals, they would eventually occupy important posts in gentile governments and thus extend its own power and influence. The aim was to a large extent realized a few years later. With the French revolution in 1789, the status of the Jews in that country was completely changed.3 Not only did they obtain the franchise, but, profiting by the sale of confiscated property, they soon acquired great wealth. Napoleon remarked in 1806: " By what miracle did whole provinces of France become heavily mortgaged to the Jews, when there are only sixty thousand of them in the country? ".4
Jews in Austria and Germany as in France and England, obtained about the same time political freedom and soon rose to high social and administrative rank in the land of their adoption: the names of Rothschild,5 Cremieux,6 and Disraeli,7 at once suggest themselves.
But, freed from the restricting influence of the ghetto, the Jews tended to become assimilated not only in appearance, but in reality. The yoke of the Kahal seemed more irksome to those who had acquired wealth which they wished to enjoy undisturbed. As it could add nothing to their success in life, they longed to be rid of its ritual, indirect taxes, demands of personal services, and its threats.
Jewish leaders, observing this tendency, felt the need of new links between communities, the more so, as the new facilities of communication of the nineteenth century- telegraph, railways, steamships-rendered intercourse between distant bodies much easier. A group of so-called " universal brotherhoods " was accordingly organized in only five years, 1864-1869; they were:
a) Brotherhood for the awakening of the slumbering
Jews,8 at St. Petersburg;
b) Alliance Israelite Universelle9 at Paris;
c) Jewish Emigration Society,10 at London;
d) Brotherhood for the enlightenment of the Jews,11 at St. Petersburg;
e) Brotherhood for the repopulation of Palestine.12 The first of these societies was founded in 1864: in 1866, it already numbered twelve hundred members among the wealthiest and most influential Jews, at whose head stood:
Sir Moses Montefiore D. L. Loewe France Russia Prussia Prussia
Rabbi Albert Cohn M. Strahun M. S. Magnus L. Silberman
In 1864 was also founded the Brotherhood for the enlightenment of the Jews (fourth in the above list) with its centre at St. Petersburg; within a year it numbered 227 wealthy Jews, including Dr. Bernstein, the bankers Ginzberg, Dr. Kalisher, Dr. Schwabacher,13 and men prominent in science. It is therefore not surprising that their efforts should have met with sympathy among Christians.
On closer examination, the enlightenment these societies sought appears not to be of the kind to raise the people above the racial prejudices fostered in the ghetto. On the contrary, the literature which the society for the awakening of the slumbering Jews published, with the exception of a book of travels, was strictly a course of studies in Talmudic laws,14 and calculated to revive the sentiment of a common aim and common hatred found in the Shulchan Aruk.
The book of travels, Even Saphir, is more stimulating: it points out in subtle language the power of the Kahal and Jewish solidarity. A passage may be quoted as illustration:15
" Here in Cairo, Jewish business is exchange, banking, and usury... The Jews derive great benefit from these three operations, thanks to the different foreign currencies and the fact that there are two rates of exchange, one fixed by the government, the other by merchants.
" These two rates constantly vary, rising and falling, and people who do not deal in money matters are easily misled. These operations are for the most part in the hands of the Jews, wise and clever people who, among capitalists, rank as high as the wealthiest in Europe. They occupy important positions in the pasha's palaces and government offices. In fact the Jews at the present moment enjoy full freedom in every way: their word counts for much, and in trials and lawsuits with non-Jews their side always wins."
The Kahal resorted to another device to keep its flock within the fold. Whenever opportunity offered, it made a cause celebre of some Jew brought to trial in a gentile court, and then, when the case had become the common talk of the day, it had him released. In what better way could it show its power?
The murder of a French missionary by three or four Jews in Damascus in 1840 furnished one such occasion, and the Dreyfus case in 1896 another.
It found, too, little difficulty in organizing pogroms in Poland and in Russia. The peasants in these countries, though of a trusting, friendly nature, could be provoked by fraud and extortion at length to retaliate. A few Jews were killed, and millions of their race rallied around the synagogue. The privileges granted the Jews by the Tsar Alexander II necessitated the pogroms of 1882; and these were followed by a cry of " anti-semitism," which, as Herzl used to say, always gathered the sheep into the fold "-the time at the conference at Kattowitz in 1884.
Here eastern Jews16 met their more assimilated brethren from the West, but little was accomplished. The latter, whose views had been modified by long contact with Frenchmen, Englishmen, and Germans, failed to understand the violent nationalism of the eastern ghettoes, where the aim was a return to Palestine, the creation of a Jewish state, and eventual world domination.
The eastern group was known as "The Friends of Zion"17 and was led by Leo Pinsker and Moses Lilienblum. Pinsker had already set forth his programme in a book, Auto-emancipation (1882), in which he had been inspired by the Rome and Jerusalem (1862) of Moses Hess. Fear of the Russian authorities preventing a full exposition of his aim, he had limited himself to claiming Palestine for the Jews as a refuge against persecution.
One of his colleagues, Asher Ginzberg, was destined to carry his work much further. The latter, a fanatic, fanned Jewish national aspirations in the East, and from the date of the founding of the " Sons of Moses " in Odessa in 1889, the movement spread rapidly. Meantime in Germany and Austria, another active nationalist, Nathan Birnbaum18 of Vienna, organized the Jewish students into a body called the kadimah. Its aim was to establish a Jewish centre in Palestine which should rule the world in the three spheres of politics, economics, and religion, through the medium of Jews at the control of affairs in every nation.
If the western group, on the other hand, did not respond readily to a nationalist appeal, they yet were intrigued by the idea of world domination. International and clannish at heart, in spite of their outward assimilation, they were to prove by the sequel that they could be won to the eastern point of view: if they rejected it at first, it was largely because they thought they could obtain all they wanted without the help of their retrograde brethren. They were, moreover, divided into two camps: the Rothschilds and the German Jews in Germany and America. The second camp had invested a large part of their capital in German industry, which proved very productive in the years 1884 to 1896; they also shared, or pretended to share, in the plans of pan-German ambition.
But when, in 1896, Germany obtained from the Sultan the concession for the Bagdad railway and reached out over Palestine towards India, some leading western Jews were alarmed and felt the need of uniting Jewry. The only basis of union was the eastern programme, for the eastern group, being fanatics, would accept no other.
To win over the western group to the new aim, an assimilated Jewish writer, Theodore Herzl, was called on to paraphrase Leo Pinsker's Auto-emancipation.19 This paraphrase, published in 1896, bore the title, The Jewish State. There was little that was original about the book, but the character and influence of the author carried much weight.
Theodore Herzl was a typical assimilated Jew.20 Born in Hungary in 1860, after finishing school in Budapest and studying law at the university of Vienna, he devoted himself to journalism and literature. As reporter for the Viennese paper, Die neuefreie Presse, he worked in Spain and later in France. While in Paris, he reported the Dreyfus case, under the influence of another Jew, the famous Dr. Blowitz, correspondent of the London Times.
It is said that the Dreyfus case " made a Jew of Herzl." He did not know Hebrew, and had never been taught the fanatical books of the Talmud, such as the Shukhan Aruk and the Abodah Zarah. He was opposed to violent methods, and in one of his novels, Altneuland, has left a picture of a civilized Jewish state, patterned on those of Western Europe.
In any case, after the publication of The Jewish State, the Friends of Zion in Odessa, and the body of students (Kadimah) under Nathan Birnbaum, adopted Herzl. The first Zionist congress was called at Basle the following year (1897). Herzl was elected president, a position which he held till his death (1904).
At the congress, as the eastern group was the more numerous, the name " Zionism", coined by Nathan Birnbaum in 1886, was adopted, and its aim declared essentially democratic. But the western group was not wholly won. Some of them, mostly from England and France, responded coldly to Herzl's appeal, fearing to compromise the rights and positions already acquired in those countries. The desired union could not yet be effected, and the two groups rallied around their respective leaders, Herzl and Ginzberg.
Herzl nevertheless remained faithful to the task he had undertaken.21 He entered into negotiations with the rulers of several nations to obtain some suitable home for the Jews. He failed to get Palestine from the Sultan, and later, the El Arish peninsula from the Khedive of Egypt; but he received, and virtually accepted, the offer of Uganda from Great Britain. In 1903, he laid this proposal before the sixth Zionist congress: it was thrown out by the Zionists who would have no land but Palestine. Herzl died the following year, and with him the leadership of the moderate party was soon to pass into the hands of the violent nationalists.22
* * *
An article in the Judisk Tidskrift (No. 6, Aug.-Sept., 1929), written by Dr. Ehrenpreis, Chief Rabbi of Sweden, contained, according to the Swedish paper Nationen, the following passage:-
" I participated with Herzl in the first Zionist Congress which was held in Basle in 1897. Herzl was the most prominent figure at that first Jewish World Congress. He worked to achieve an object which had been fixed beforehand. Just as Isaiah foresaw, decades before the event occurred, the victorious power of Cyrus before anyone else, so did Herzl foresee twenty years, before we experienced them, the revolutions brought about by the Great War, and he prepared us for that which was going to happen. He foresaw the splitting up of Turkey, and he foresaw that England would obtain control over Palestine. " We may expect important developments in the world." These were the words spoken by Herzl twenty years before the Great War. He added that the events would offer the Jewish people fresh opportunities."
1. For example, in Spain, before the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella; in England, under Cromwell; in Russia, under the Tsar Alexis in th" seventeenth century.
2. Grandfather of the composer (1729-1786).
3. J. Darmstadter, in his essay, Histoire du peuple juif (Paris, 1886) says that, from this date, the Jews looked on France as their own possession.
4. Letter of Nov. 29, 1806, to Champagny, quoted in article " MSS of Napoleon ", Synhedrian Allgemeine Zeitung des Jud. (Leipzig 1811), p. 33.
5. Cf. Corti, House of Rothschild (New York, 1928).
6. Cabinet minister in 1846 and 1871 ; one of the most active men in the coup d'etat of Louis-Napoleon in 1851 (1796-1880).
7. First Jewish M.P. The leading source for the life of Disraeli is W. F. Moneypenny and G. E. Buckle, Life of Disraeli (London, 1923) ; see also the admirable sketch, entitled Vie de Disraeli, by the Jew A. Maurois (Paris, 1927).
8. Haburah mekidze nirdamim. See Brafmann, Jewish Brother hoods, pp. 96-98.
9. Haburah kol Israel haberim.
10. Haburah shiluhe plakiloth.
11. Haburah marbe.
12. Haburah yishub Israel. To the foregoing list might be added the Jewish immigration society of New York, and also the Independent Order of B'nai B'rith (Sons of the Covenant) founded in 1843.
13. Op. cit., p. 100.
14. Including Pachad Ishak, " fear of Isaac ", an index to Talmudic literature; Teschubat ha-gaonim " decisions of the illustrious " viz., of the ancient authorities on religious and legal matters, etc. Op. cit., p. 101.
15. Even Saphir, p. 18.
16. The two principal branches of the Jews are the Sephardim, settled mostly in the Spanish peninsula, and the Ashkenazim of Alsace- Lorraine, Germany, Poland and Russia. The former are the more cultivated.
17. Hoveve Zion.
18. His pen-name was Mathias Asher.
19. Whose direct orders Herzl was obeying is not clear: probably those of David Wolfsohn, acknowledged leader of western Jewry.
20. His enemies in the Zionist camp later hurled the epithet" assimi lated " at him to express their scorn for his moderation.
21. Osiah Tonn mentions several letters of Herzl, expressing the wish to retire from the Zionist movement as soon as possible.
22. David Wolfsohn succeeded Herzl as president for a short time.
IV. GINZBERG THE INTERPRETER OF JEWISH AIMS
If Herzl strove to modify and conciliate Jewish ambition with its gentile surroundings, it was the task of Ginzberg to give it a new form and the strength of mass fanaticism.
Asher Ginzberg1 was born at Skvira, in the province of Kiev, in 1856, of well-to-do parents belonging to the Jewish sect of Hassidim. He received a strictly rabbinical education and, at seventeen, married the grand-daughter of a prominent rabbi, Menachem Mendel. Five years later (1878), he moved to Odessa, where he continued his studies, with special attention to the works of Spinoza, Moses Mendelssohn, and Nietzsche. Not long after,2 he visited Berlin, Breslau, and Vienna where he met Charles Netter, a French Jew and one of the founders of the Alliance Israelite Universelle, who introduced him into that body.
It was thus that, in 1884, on his return to Odessa, Ginzberg joined the Friends of Zion3 under Leo Pinsker and Moses Lilienblum, and attended the conference at Katto-witz. His shrewd, restless mind and command of Hebrew soon raised him to prominence: a letter in Hebrew to the scientist S. Finn on his seventieth birthday, attracted the notice of Alexander Zederbaum. Zederbaum was the editor of the Hebrew paper Ha-melitz, and immediately invited Ginzberg to contribute.
Although he had constantly criticized the methods of the Friends of Zidh privately, he hesitated to do so in print; but finally overcoming his scruples, he sent in a radical article, entitled Not the Way,4 which appeared the same year (1889). In it, Ginzberg attacked Pinsker's plan of sending Russian Jews to Palestine for the material advantages they might derive.5 All attempts to improve the condition of Russian ghettoes were futile, he insisted; the Jews must first become consciously, aggressively national. The article with its direct appeal to fanaticism was read by Jews all over Europe; other articles by the same pen followed.
He now broke with the Friends of Zion, and with him went a group of young men who had come to share his advanced views. These men he formed (1889) into a secret organization called the Sons of Moses.6 It met in his house in Yamskaya Street, Odessa, and numbered among its first members, Ben Avigdor, Zalman Epstein, Louis Epstein, and Jacob Eisenstaat. It was to this small group that Ginzberg read what is to-day known as " the protocols ",7 in which the national aim is set forth in such direct, forceful language, -in strange contrast to the confused, pedantic style of the Talmud.
The opening words give the tone of the whole.
" Let us put aside phraseology and discuss the inner meaning of every thought: by comparison and deduction let us illuminate the situation. In this way I will describe our system, both from our own point of view and that of the goyim.s
" It must be remembered that people with base instincts," he continues, " are more numerous than those with noble ones; therefore, the best results in governing are achieved through violence and intimidation, and not through academic discussion. Every man seeks power; every one would like to become a dictator if he possibly could; and rare indeed are those who would not sacrifice the common good in order to attain personal advantage."
The argument is then developed with conciseness and lucidity: all objections are anticipated and met in a few terse phrases. No rhetorical effect is sought; expression is natural and vivid: e.g. of the mob at the time of a revolution,9 the author says:
" These beasts fall asleep when they have drunk enough blood; it is then easy to shackle them."
The Protocols are sometimes criticized as containing nothing that had not been said previously by philosophers or statesmen; but even if that were true, it would detract little from their interest. For their importance does not lie in the aim, world domination, nor in the theory by which it is attained, exploitation of man's baser instincts, but in the extraordinary astuteness with which the practical application of the plan has been suited to existing conditions.
The very fact that the language is forceful and incisive, that all the allusions are striking, and the thesis so to speak irrefutable, is to some an obstacle to belief: nor is this surprising.
If, at Waterloo, Napoleon had had a battalion of tanks and a few batteries of modern eight-inch guns, the forces of England and Prussia would have been driven from the field: with the improved methods of warfare of the last century at his command, he could have defied the armies of the world in 1814.
For the past century the Jews have been making rapid progress in the theory and practice of politics, while the rest of the world thought them merely emerging from the ghetto; and, as it cannot understand the intricate new machinery of government they have devised and set up, it says, " Such a thing is impossible." Yet, like a great engine of war, the organization of the Kahal advances on the course determined, crashing all resistance.
That course is succinctly stated in the twenty-four protocols of Ginzberg: they are an epitome of Jewish thought from Rabbi Akiba10 and Maimonides11 down to Marx12 and Engels. At the same time the reader is reminded constantly of some familiar event of recent years which bears out the thesis. For example the passage:13 " To show that all the gentile governments of Europe are enslaved by us, we will manifest our power by subjecting one of them to a reign of terror, violence and crime."
Can anyone, recalling the Russian revolution of 1918, read this, knowing it was written before 1897,14 and not be impressed by the correspondence between the prophecy and its fulfilment two decades later?
But Ginzberg was no visionary: he knew of what he wrote, and the course of the revolutionary movement already on foot in Russia had been too carefully calculated to leave any doubt as to its eventual success.
The Second International was formed in 1889, and the theories of Marx and Engels adopted. The labour movement was no longer represented by a small group of workingmen led by theorists, but by powerful national organizations of workers. Therefore the aim of the Second International to secure the transfer of power to the proletariat was to be pursued under conditions more favourable than those which had prevailed at the time of the First International. The dominant industrial and financial interests served to further the objectives of the socialists through a callous disregard for labour.15
In 1900, on Lenin's return from exile, appeared the first number of the revolutionary paper Iskra (" The Spark ") edited in London by Trotski (Braunstein) a Jew, and supported by another Jew, Blumenfeld.16 Organizations directed by Iskra spread throughout Russia: it was the source from which the ideas of local leaders were derived. In March 1903, there emerged at its first meeting in Minsk, a completely formed Russian communist party; it represented six organizations and was headed by nine men, of whom at least five were of Jewish descent.17 It was known as the " Russian social democratic party " (until 1918), and its methods as well as its motto " Proletarians of all countries, unite ", were those of Marx and Engels. A second congress of the party met at Brussels and then at London, in July and August, of the same year. Here the doctrine that " the necessary condition of the social revolution is the dictatorship of the proletariat ", was expressed for the first time.18
Then came the split between bolsheviks and mensheviks, and the movement faced its first real test in 1905. Weakened by defeat in the war with Japan, the Tsarist government could not forestall strikes and disorders. The shooting down of workmen who had assembled before the winter palace encouraged the bolsheviks to attempt an armed uprising. A congress of the party met in London on April 25, 1905, and formulated the programme which was to be put in practice twelve years later.19
The outbreak in Russia was immediately hailed by a Zionist paper as the work of Jews.
" The revolution in Russia is a Jewish revolution, a crisis in Jewish history. It is a Jewish revolution because Russia is the home of about half the Jews of the world, and an overturning of its despotic government must have a very important influence on the destinies of the millions living there and on the many thousands who have recently emigrated to other countries. But the revolution in Russia is a Jewish revolution also because Jews are the most active revolutionists in the Tsar's empire ".20
Unsupported by the peasants and the army, the revolts of 1905 failed. A period of reaction set in, bringing with it the arrest and exile of many of the revolutionary leaders. From that time, in fact, plans for a revolution in Russia had to be entirely directed from abroad. How the old leaders usually managed to escape their prison sentences;21 how they secured funds to travel about and participate in congresses in Stockholm, Paris, Prague, Berne and other cities; and how they managed to keep alive a central organization is not explained in published documents; but the connection between these subversive activities and Zionism will become clearer further on.22
Meantime the protocols, secretly circulated in Hebrew among the Sons of Moses, had helped the expansion of that order throughout Russia and Poland and contributed to its victory at the Basle congress in 1897,23 when Zionism became an official movement.
But when Ginzberg saw that Herzl's conception of Zionism was " an economic one first and foremost ",24 excluding as it seemed the spirit of Jewish nationalism, he gathered his old adherents into a new secret order, the Sons of Zipn (B'nai Zion) to propagate the true faith. While affecting himself to keep outside of the official movement, he edited a Hebrew paper, Hashiloah (" The Way "), thanks to financial aid from a Moscow tea merchant, a Jew, Kalonymous Wissotzkii, and became head of a great Hebrew publishing firm called Ahiasaf. With these powerful organs, he could attack Herzl with impunity. One of the latter's friends complains :25
" Ahad-ha-am (Ginzberg) reproaches Herzl with wanting to imitate Europe. He (Ginzberg) cannot admit that we should borrow from Europe its academies, operas, white gloves. The only thing he would transfer from Europe into Altneuland (i.e. Palestine) would be the principles of the inquisition, the way of acting of the anti-semites, the restrictions of the Rumanian laws... He understands freedom as practised in the ghetto, only in his conception the parts are reversed: persecutions are to continue, but this time, of the gentiles by the Jews... He is one of the worst enemies of Zionism, and it is our duty to protest against its name being used by him. His conception is the exact opposite of Zionism, and he would mislead us by speaking (slightingly) of ' political' Zionism, in contrast to ' this secret Zionism>26 which is his very own."
Fourteen years of labour at last began to show fruit. In 1911, Ginzberg's representatives, Chaim Weizmann and others, scored a victory at the tenth Zionist Congress. Two years later (1913), " when he visited the congress for the second time," writes a disciple,27 " he was happy. He could see how some of his ideas, some of the truths that he had fought so bitterly to advance, were already working within. He was happy, as a practical philosopher should feel when he realizes that his life has not been in vain, that he has been one link in the long chain that pulls Israel to a glorious future, that he has served Israel, and, through Israel, mankind ".
From this point, Zionism, as Ginzberg understood it, became a reality which his disciples28 have since carried from victory to victory under the eye of the master. He himself remained aloof, at least from public view, until his death in 1927 in a Judaized Palestine.
1. His pen-name was Ahad-ha-am, lit. " one of the people "; his father was a tax-collector.
2. Between 1882 and 1884.
3. Hoveve Zion: supra, ch. III.
4. Lo ha-shiloah.
5. Certainly in this he showed great shrewdness.
6. B'nai Moshe.
7. Infra Part í: The Protocols. From internal evidence the date of the protocols may be placed between 1880-1890.
8. The text itself should be studied: to paraphrase or quote a few passages from it is to give a very defective notion of this important work.
9. Protocol II.
10. Compiler of the Mischna (from shanah " to repeat ") or oral tradition of the Jews in the second century A. D. See Preface to Mischna by Maimonides; also, Milman ï. History of the Jews, p. 133.
11. Spanish Jew, author of commentaries on Mischna and other works, in the twelfth century.
12. Karl Marx, author of Das Kapital, founder of first international, (1818-1883); joint author with Engels of communist manifesto. Marx's real name was Mordecai.
13. Protocol VII, last paragraph.
14. A copy of the Protocols has been in the records of the British Museum since 1906: infra Part n, Chapter I.
15. W. R. Batsell, Soviet Rule in Russia (Published under the auspices of the Bureau of International Research of Harvard University New York, 1929), p. 756.
16. Batsell, op. cit., pp. 49, 691, 692.
17. Ibid., pp. 689, 690.
18. Ibid., p. 692. Compare, " It suffices even for an instant to give the masses self-government, and they will become a disorganized mob... Capital which is entirely in our hands, will hold out to this state a straw, to which it will inevitably be forced to cling." Protocol I, par. 6.
19. The central committee in 1905 was composed of the well known revolutionaries: Lenin (Ulianov), Rykov, Krassin (Vinter), Bogdanov, and Postalovskii; Batsell, op. cit., p. 694.
20. The Maccabean (New York, Nov., 1905), p. 250, under the title " A Jewish Revolution ".
21. Thanks to the fraternity for the freeing of delinquent Jews: supra ch. II.
22. Infra, ch. V.
23. The Sons of Moses (B'nai Moshe) having achieved its object, was dissolved after the congress; for the latter, see supra, ch. III.
24. In the words of Richard Gottheil, Chief Rabbi of New York City.
25. Pamphlet entitled Audiatur et Altera Pars by Dr. Max Nordau, 1903, at the time of the publication of Herzl's novel Altneuland, which Ginzberg attacked.
26. That set forth in the protocols.
27. Jesse Sampler, in his Guide to Zionism.
28. Among these should be mentioned Chaim Weizmann, Nahum Sokolov, Leon Simon, Jabotinskii, Ussitchin, Schmaryar Levin.
V. ZIONISTS AND ANTI-ZIONISTS DURING WORLD WAR I
It has frequently been observed that Europe, whether considered as a whole or as so many separate countries, lost rather than benefited by the world war: the victorious allies, with a huge burden of debt, came off hardly better than the vanquished. But to Zionism, the war brought untold wealth and the complete realization of an immediate aim.
" The present war ", wrote Sokolov at the time,1 " has not affected the unity of the Zionist organization. As the latter was established on the federal principle, it was found possible to continue the essential work of the movement by utilizing the separate organizations of the different countries. The work of propaganda and the collection of funds... actually made great progress."
It may therefore be interesting to trace its activities in four capitals, Berlin, Petrograd, London and New York, during this period.
At the outbreak of the war, Zionism had its headquarters in Berlin.2 There also were the headquarters of the moderate party, represented by the society, Hilfsverein der deutschen Juden. This society had built in the Holy Land a number of schools, seminaries, and other institutions, superior to those of the Alliance Israelite Universelle and the Zionists. On this account, Germany had promised the society control over Palestine, as soon as she had completed the Berlin-Bagdad railway. But as such an eventuality would not have suited Zionist plans, they looked to a different solution.3 "The inner actions committee," we learn,1 "which met regularly in Berlin and transacted all international business between congresses, was composed of members dispersed in various countries. Dr. Schmaryar Levin had come to America to attend the Zionist Convention in June (1914). His presence in America during the war was valuable both for American Zionism and the international cause. Warburg and Hantke, two Gentfan members, were in Berlin where they remained practically throughout the war; Jacobson, another German member, was then in Constantinople."
The strength of this Zionist international chain of communication did not escape the notice of the German government, which sought its support in addition to that of the Hilfsverein. In June 1915, an appeal was sent out from Berlin to all Zionists "asking for sympathy with Germany".* The Zionists, however, were too shrewd to commit themselves while the issue of the war was still doubtful; at the same time, they wished to keep Germany's confidence, which they subsequently exploited in connection with Russia. They therefore refused the request with the ironical explanation that "the Zionist movement could not be involved in world politics".
The following year, they secretly transferred their support from the central powers to the allies, and their headquarters from Berlin to London.6 From then on, their influence was felt more and more in political circles in Europe and America. In particular the Zionist Transfer Department, as it was called, was in a position to transmit funds and information to subversive elements in enemy countries. In this connection, Jacobson, seeing that "Constantinople could no longer be the centre of Zionist politics, left for Copenhagen, where, in a neutral country, he could be of practical use to the Zionists by transmitting information and funds. There he established a Zionist bureau. Chlenov, one of the Russian members, went back and forth between Russia and Denmark, and eventually went to England. Another Russian member, Nahum Sokolov, moved about freely in the allied countries ".7 Rudolf Steiner, occult adviser to the Kaiser, passed freely between Germany and England during the whole period of hostilities, in spite of police regulations. " By its dependable financial methods, it established what was practically a Zionist credit throughout the world. This had no small share in bringing about that attitude on the part of the allied governments which later resulted in their recognition of the Zionist organization as the official representative of the Jewish people."8
The chief task which engaged the Zionists at this time (1916) was the revolutionary movement in Russia. The body of professional revolutionaries which had prepared and directed the outbreak of 1905, had continued its subversive work through congresses held in the different capitals of Europe with undiminished zeal.9 Lenin had become the acknowledged leader of the bolsheviks: with him on the central committee (elected in 1912) and later prominent among those who took over the control of Russia were: Zinoviev (Jew), Ordzhonikidze (Georgian), Schwarzmann (Jew), Spandarian (Armenian), and later Stalin (Georgian), and Belostolskii (Jew).io Outside of it, Trotski (Jew) was active both in New York and London.
Since 1914, these and other professional agitators had been carrying on, principally in Switzerland, a campaign against the war, which they hoped to turn into a class struggle.11 Under wartime conditions, however, a well organized revolutionary movement was difficult to effect. In 1905 the party in Russia had counted three million adherents, in 1906 one million, in 1907 three-quarters of a million, in 1908 only 174,000, and in 1910 just 46,000. In April 1917, a congress of the party claimed to represent 76,000 organized workers. It would be idle to fancy that this minute body was in any sense representative of the 'proletariat', or that it could become a welcome ruler, seven months later, over millions of people.12 But the Zionist task was facilitated by a clever exploitation of the German general staff in the beginning of 1917. The latter, in order to render Russia impotent and thus free troops for use on the western front, staked more on the use of subversives and thus played the Zionist game. " Some man in Germany ", writes General von Hoffmann, then chief of the German staff on the Russian front, 13 " who had connections with the Russian revolutionaries exiled in Switzerland, came upon the idea of employing some of them in order to hasten the undermining and poisoning of the morale of the Russian army. He applied to the deputy Erzberger and the deputy of the foreign office. And thus it came about that Lenin was conveyed through Germany to Petersburg in the manner that afterward transpired ". On May 10, 1917, shortly after his arrival in Russia from the sealed German railway car, Lenin spoke at the Petrograd conference of his party against the provisional government.14 He wanted to destroy at the roots every reminder of Russia's Slavic past. He feared that a " bourgeois government would make the Soviets unnecessary ",15
How, in the course of the ten months following, the bolsheviks replaced the provisional government, and, by preventing the constituent assembly from meeting, remained the absolute masters of Russia; how, faithful to their Zionist patrons, they manifested the strength of Zionism by subjecting the Tsar's empire to a " reign of terror, violence, and crime ",16 is common knowledge and cannot be treated here. Suffice it to say that they justified the judgment of the Austrian foreign minister, Count Czernin, who wrote (Nov. 17, 1917):"
" This Russian bolshevism is a peril to Europe, and if we had the power, beside securing a tolerable peace for ourselves, to force other countries into a state of law and order, then it would be better to have nothing to do with such people as these, but to march on Petersburg and arrange matters there. Their leaders are almost all of them Jews, with altogether fantastic ideas, and I do not envy the country that is governed by them. The way they begin is this: everything in the least reminiscent of work, wealth, and culture, must be destroyed, and the bourgeoisie exterminated. Freedom and equality seem no longer to have any place on their programme: only a bestial suppression of all but the proletariat itself."1"
Zionism gained immeasurably by this success in both money and influence. Crown jewels and possessions, millions of paper rubles put into circulation, art treasures in museums, churches, and private houses, all have been turned to its account. Besides, the dramatic triumph of the ruthless methods advocated by Ginzberg did much to overawe the opposition to Zionism among the Jews. As a leading Zionist said:19
" The downfall of the tsardom of Russia was undoubtedly one of the greatest events in the world's history. Russia entered into a period of revolution which seemed to bring with it all the blessings of right and liberty. The restrictions affecting nationalities and creeds were removed. But far from destroying Zionism, the new liberty gave it an immense stimulus." (The blessings mentioned, it appears, are reserved exclusively for Zionists.)
While these events were taking place in Petrograd, Zionists in London were not idle. " London from the beginning was the financial centre of the Zionist organization ";20 for, while the rival banking firm of Bleichroeder Mendelssohn in Berlin continued their support of the moderates, Rothschild had been won to the new movement. Nahum Sokolov had, during his frequent visits as member of the inner actions committee, been impressed with the opportunities offered for establishing a centre there:21 since 1914, he and Chaim Weizmann had been actively working to bring its political problems to the fore in England. To this end, Weizmann had entered into intimate " relations with the house of Rothschild and done much to make this family more closely acquainted with Zionism."22
Among the non-Jews, an invaluable friend was found in Sir Mark Sykes. How he was won to the cause is not clear:23 before the war he disliked it as " bad cosmopolitanism and finance," but, in the middle of the war, came to the decision which he announced in Hull, that " It would mean that every Jew throughout the world would be made more valuable to the state which he had chosen for himself."24 However that may be, from the beginning of 1917, Sykes devoted himself heart and soul to the movement, and his house at No. 9 Buckingham Gate, " equipped with all such materials as correspondence files and telegraphic communications, became a Zionist centre."25 Collaborating with Sykes was another gentile, Georges Picot.
The first official meeting of what was known as the " Political Committee " took place on February 7, 1917, at the house of Dr. Moses Gaster. There were present (besides Gaster) Lord Rothschild, James de Rothschild, Sir Mark Sykes, Sir Herbert Samuel, Herbert Bentwich, Harry Sacker, Joseph Cowen, Chaim Weizmann, and Nahum Sokolov.26
The Zionist programme to serve as a basis for official negotiations, covering the future mandates of Palestine, Armenia, Mesopotamia, and a kingdom of the Hedjaz, was discussed in detail.27 On the following day (Feb. 8) there was a second, smaller conference, with Georges Picot, at Sykes' house: the result was a plan known as the Sykes-Picot agreement, which was then put into execution.
Sokolov left for Paris to negotiate with the French government. On March 22, 1917, he was received at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, where he " outlined the principles of the Zionist programme. He received the assurance that the French government regarded the programme very favorably and was authorized to inform the Zionist organizations of Russia and America of this result by telegraph."28 Sykes left for Rome, and thence for Port Said and Cairo; then to Jeddah to negotiate with King Hussein, returning on June 14 to London, where he was occupied until November 1917, arranging the preliminaries for the Balfour declaration.29
One must not suppose that this was all done on the sole initiative of the London group; on the contrary," every idea born in London was tested by the Zionist organization in America, and every suggestion from America received the most careful attention in London."çî
The details of the diplomatic conversations in London which led to the declaration have not yet been made public; but, of the British cabinet besides Sir Herbert Samuel, Lloyd George, if not already a Zionist, was easily won to the cause;31 while Sir Arthur Balfour and other members who had the good of the nation at heart, were yet inclined to view it favourably from the following considerations:
a) The financial support of the Rothschilds, at a time when the country had to float loan after loan, would be lost, if the Zionist request were refused.
b) If granted, it would ensure Jewish co-operation throughout the empire and in other countries, both during the war and in the future.
c) The Palestine mandate, coupled with that of Mesopo tamia, was the gateway to India: by calling it " a national home for the Jews", England would lull French and Italian jealousy.
As against these, the mandate constituted a breach of England's promise made to the Arabs in 1915 in return for their support in fighting Turkey. To offset this objection, the Zionists generously proposed to give the Arabs what they already owned, but with the new title of " Kingdom of the Hedjaz ".
Moreover the cabinet could count on a number of Zionist votes in the House, notably Sir Alfred Mond (the late Lord Melchett)32 and Sir Philip Sassoon among the Conservatives, and more among Lloyd George's following. The shrewder members of the cabinet realized that they would eventually have to reckon with the British taxpayer, and the commercial advantages33 of Palestine lost nothing in Zionist exposition. But the great plea was that the English and the Jews, the two great trading races of the world, should unite forces and take over the trade routes between Europe and Asia.34
Although the Zionists had made all preliminary arrangements with the allied governments and the cabinet as a whole was desirous of complying with every point, yet some over-scrupulous member,35 with (the Zionists thought) undue regard for the actual inhabitants of Palestine, altered the text Weizmann's committee had prepared.36 Instead of the words, " The reconstitution of Palestine as the national home of the Jewish people ", at the last minute were substituted the words, " The establishment of a national home in Palestine ".
" It can scarcely be necessary to explain at length," wrote Asher Ginzberg indignantly three years later,37 " the difference between the two versions. Had the British government accepted the version suggested to it, its promise might have been interpreted as meaning that Palestine, inhabited as it now is, was restored to the Jewish people on the ground of its historic right; that the Jewish people was to rebuild its waste places and was destined to rule over it and manage all its affairs in its own way, without regard to the consent or non-consent of its present inhabitants. For this rebuilding (it might have been understood) is only a renewal of the ancient right of the Jews, which overrides the right of the present inhabitants who have wrongly established their national home on a land not their own."
It does not seem, however, that Ginzberg advocated the Jews withdrawing from the rich lands of Europe and America, on the ground that they have there " wrongly established their national home on a land not their own."
The Balfour declaration was issued on November 2, 1917, and transmitted to Lord Rothschild on behalf of the Zionist federation.38 Its endorsement by the other allies was a small matter between Nahum Sokolov and the two representatives, Pichon for France, Imperial! for Italy. From the debates in the French senate, April 5, 6, 1921, following the interpellation of Senator Dominique Delahaye, it subsequently appeared that neither the Chamber of Deputies nor the Senate had ever had the question of ratification put to them.
To those active in Zionist circles, the declaration was no surprise: among the leaders it had been expected for many months. It was, however, made the occasion for public rejoicing in the Jewish and Jew-controlled gentile press,39 and mass meetings were held in London and addressed by Sir Mark Sykes,40 Sir Herbert Samuel,41 and others prominent in politics. But the Jewish moderates, headed by Claude G. Montefiore and David L. Alexander, raised a dissentient voice: they feared, as at the Basle congress,42 that the new nationalism would injure their social rights as Englishmen. Even more they disliked being eclipsed by Ginzberg's satellites from the ghetto. They made, therefore, common cause with the anti-Zionists in America; and when anti-Zionism died out there, it disappeared in England.
Meantime, in New York, changes were taking place of much importance to Jewry. When the Kehillah was organized in 1909,43 the control rested with a group of German Jews, including Jacob Schiff, president of Kuhn, Loeb & Co, a branch of the Bleichroeder Mendelssohn bank,44 Isidor Strauss, Julius Sachs, David Philipson, who, through their affiliations in Germany, were anti-Zionists and favoured the international Jewish policy. They maintained a ministry for foreign affairs, at first composed of appointees of the union of American-Hebrew congregations. The latter, through its delegates, established an ambassadorship at Washington to act for the Jewish people on immigration and other political matters. Subsequently the union was given the support of the B'nai B'rith,45 whose leading member had been appointed ambassador. " For thirty years ", wrote an American Zionist,46 " our ambassador at Washington was the Hon. Simon Wolf. He informed the United States government what the Jews of this country wanted and what they were opposed to. In Simon Wolf's opinion, the Jews were not a nationality but a religious sect; they insisted upon being regarded solely as Americans. Mr. Wolf spoke in the name of assimilation on behalf of the Jews in America."
Later another more powerful group of Jews organized under the name of the American Jewish committee and took over the ministry of foreign affairs.47 During the Wilson administration certain Jews appointed to the highest posts exerted so much influence on the chief executive and members of congress as almost to control the national policy: in particular the Zionist Louis Brandeis of the supreme court, Bernard Baruch, chairman of the war industries board,48 Felix and Paul Warburg of the federal reserve, Julius Klein of the department of commerce, and Eugene F. Meyer.49
Under Zionist influence, the Yiddish newspapers, edited by radicals, started a campaign against the American Jewish committee on the grounds that it was autocratic, and demanded an American Jewish congress, elected by and responsible to the people. " As Zionism moved forward," continues the article quoted above, " the opposition had to recede. When the congress is not in session, the affairs of the Jewish nation are regulated  by the inner actions committee50 and the greater actions committee, two executive bodies the members of which are elected by the Zionist congress."
Thus Zionism, by clever propaganda, gained the masses. But it did not neglect to win over certain leaders of American Jewry, by what means may be guessed. Jacob Schiff had long been interested in the revolutionary movement in Russia and had transferred large sums to support it through his bank, as far back as 1905. The success therefore of the revolution in 1917, engineered by the Zionists, could not fail to change his views. " I believe, " he wrote Rabbi Philipson in 1918,51 " I have heretofore explained to you the reasons which, soon after the outbreak of the Russian revolution, have induced me to change my former attitude towards the Zionist movement, and I have since become more and more convinced that it was in the best interests of our people that I did this."
Schiff had evidently shared the " blessings "52 of the Russian revolution and quite properly gave credit where it was due. The letter continues. " There can be no doubt that the success of these [Zionist] endeavours will have the
most healthy and refreshing effect upon entire Israel, wherever in the world its members may be located, and the proposition you bring forward, to oppose these efforts, is, in my opinion, nothing less than preposterous."
When the opposition to Zionism came to a head in America, it found all the leading Jews on whose support it had counted either only nominally anti-Zionist, or frankly favourable. Rabbi David Philipson and Max Senior, who with others were attempting to call a conference to combat it in the autumn of 1918, met with little encouragement in New York. Oscar S. Strauss wrote:53 " I regard the holding of a conference to counteract the activities of Zionists as distinctly unwise and harmful. I do hope that your committee will recall its proposed action. I make this suggestion, yea request, not as a Zionist, as I am not affiliated with that organization, but as an American and as a lover of our people."
An exchange of letters between Max Senior and Louis Marshall54 is more instructive. " The reasons," wrote the latter, " which I then urged [in declining Rabbi Philip-son's invitation] have been emphasized by the rapid march of events. The allied armies have now swept the Turks and the Germans out of Palestine. It is significant that Jewish units constitute a part of the victorious army.
" President Wilson expressed his personal views in support of the principles laid down in the Balfour declaration. France, Italy, and Greece have formally adopted it: there is therefore an unanimity of sentiment on the part of the allied powers.
" The American Jewish committee, although its members are in the main non-Zionists, recognised the political importance of the declaration as a factor in the effort to defeat the central powers. Major Lionel de Rothschild, president of the league for British Jews, informs me that that organization is in agreement with the American Jewish committee."55
But, if Marshall pretended that the Jews should accept Zionism in order to comply with the " unanimous sentiment of the allied powers " who had determined to build a home for the Jews in Palestine, he was not blind to the real reason for Zionism. His letter continues:
" The Balfour declaration with its acceptance by the powers, is an act of the highest diplomacy. It means both more and less than appears on the surface. Zionism is but an incident of a far-reaching plan: it is merely a convenient peg on which to hang a powerful weapon."56 The letter ends with a threat to non-Zionists: " All the protests they may make would be futile. It would subject them individually to hateful and concrete examples of a most impressive nature. Even if I were disposed to combat Zionism, I would shrink from the possibilities which might result ".
Senior's reply is direct and fearless:57
" I repudiate any connection on national, religious, racial, or cultural grounds, with a ' national home-land for the Jews in Palestine'. We have seen how demoralizing a divided allegiance was to the Germans in this country. I do not pretend to know the inside political history and intricacies of policy of which you hint... I am not to be intimidated into silence by either of the threats you mention... I regard the real danger to the Jew to lie in silent acquiescence to the Zionist claims. You recognize that the non-Zionists did not precipitate the rupture. The break was bound to come, but the recent Tammany-like circular to congressmen was certainly the breaking point... I refuse to accept the Zionist coup d'etat as an accomplished and sacred fact... Finally, you and I and the Zionists know that Palestine offers no solution for the Jewish question in Russia, Galicia, and Rumania. Six million Jews in these lands cannot be removed to Palestine. I certainly have no objection to Jews moving to Palestine, or Persia, or Patagonia, if they can secure freedom in those lands. But emigration is only a palliative. The Jewish question must ultimately be worked out in Russia, Galicia, and Rumania."
Senior's fear that the " real danger to the Jews (in America) lay in silent acquiescence to Zionist claims" has proved justified. The tasks since set by the Zionists for American Jewry have been heavier by far than those set by the Egyptians.58 But the Zionists cleverly lulled any lurking suspicions in the minds of all but a very few (including Senior) by a fanatical appeal to nationalism and a romantic picture of the " land overflowing with milk and honey ". Anti-Zionism disappeared.
Then came the peace conference; the formation of the League of Nations at Geneva;59 and the British mandate for the holy land, over which the Jews exercised complete control in practice, leaving to the English taxpayer the expense of civil administration.60
Thus Zionism gained its ends: in Berlin and Petrograd by subversive activities, in London and New York mainly by diplomacy. Without the influence of Zionism in America during the Wilson administration, and American money, the Balfour declaration, obtained by the efforts of Weizmann and Sokolov, would have remained a dead letter.
1. Sokolov, History of Zionism, p. 21.
2. Jesse Sampler, Guide to Zionsm, p. 63.
3. Oscar S. Straus, in a letter to Rabbi Philipson, dated New York, Sept. 2,1918, alluding to this deal and writing in favour of Zionism asks, "Doyouwish Palestine to be under the tyranny of Germans, or of their brutalized tools, the Turks? ".
4. Sampter, op, cit., p. 63.
5. Ibid., p. 239.
6. Ibid., p. 63.
7. Ibid., p. 63.
8. Ibid., p. 63.
9. Supra, eh. IV.
10. Batsell, op. cit., p. 655.
11. In 1915 a conference of socialists opposed to war was held at Zimmerwald. Exponents of the programme of international revolution and class warfare were present in force. Ibid., p. 757. It was this year that Rosika Schwimmer (Jewess) induced Henry Ford to sail to Europe in the famous peace ship.
12. Ibid., p. 695. The population of Russia in 1917 was one hundred and thirty million.
13. The War of Lost Opportunities (New York, 1925), pp. 180-181.
14. Batsell, op. cit., p. 27.
15. 8 Speeches of Lenin (New York, 1928), pp. 19-26.
16. Protocol VII last par.
17. In the World War (London, 1919), pp. 216-217.
18. Cf. supra, ch. IV. Nordau's criticism: " He understands freedom as practised in the ghetto."
19. Sokolov, History of Zionism, p. 38.
20. Ibid., p. 43.
21. Ibid., p. 44.
22. Ibid., p. 8.
23. His biographer, Shane Leslie, says " it was his Catholicism that assisted Mark to understand the Jewish tragedy." Mark Sykes (London, 1923), p. 269.
24. Loc. cit.
25. Sokolov II, History of Zionism, p. 29.
26. Ibid., p. 52.
27. This programme had been drafted by Gaster, Weizmann, Bentwich, Cowen and Sokolov at the end of 1916: he. cit.
28. Ibid., p. 52.
29. Shane Leslie, p. 270.
30. Sokolov, p. 82.
31. Lloyd George's connection with the Jew Sir Basil Zaharoff (real name Zaccharia), large shareholder in Vickers, Maxim Ltd., munition works, should be kept in mind. For a statement on Zaharoff at this time see Boucard, Les dessous de I'espionnage anglais (Paris, 1929), pp. 228-234.
32. Vice-president (subsequently president) of one of the largest chemical firms, Brunner Mond & Co, in which Chaim Weizmann was also associated. Sassoon, another Jew, was closely connected with Mond in British politics.
33. The mineral deposits of the Jordan valley, for which Alfred Mond (the late Lord Melchett) obtained the monopoly in 1929.
34. " The geographical position of Palestine, as the connecting link between three continents, if held by the English and the Jews, both shopkeepers, offers the opportunity of making the land of Israel the great emporium of "East and West": Bernard Rosenblatt, Social Zionism, pp. 145, 146.
35. Presumably Sir Arthur J. Balfour himself.
36. The text was drafted under Ginzberg's directions by the Jewish political committee composed of: Sokolov (chairman), Weizmann, Leopold Kessler, Cowen, Bentwich, Albert M. Hyamson, Simon Marks (secretary), Sacher, Israel Sieff, Leon Simon, Ettinger and Folkpvskii.
37. Ahad-ha-am, Essays on Judaism and Zionism, tr. by Leon Simon, p. 15.
38. Supra, ch. I.
39. " But we all know how the declaration was interpreted at the time of its publication, and how much exaggeration many of our workers and writers have tried to introduce into it." Ahad-ha-am, loc. cit.
40. Shane Leslie, p. 270.
41. In his speech at the demonstration of Dec. 2,1917, at the London opera-house, Samuel said that he " had stood for Zionism not only in the cabinet, but outside it". Sokolov, p. 47.
42. Supra, ch. III. "
43. Supra, ch. II.
44. Affiliated with the big " D " banks in Germany: Deutsche Bank, Disconto Gesellschaft, Dresdener Bank, Darmstadter Bank.
45. Supra, ch. III.
46. Louis Lipsky: The Maccabean (New York, June, July, 1917), p. 276.
47. Loc. cit., Presumably at the beginning of the Wilson administra tion.
48. Baruch stated publicly that during the war in his official capacity he " probably exercised more power than any other man in the country ".
49. Present head of the Federal Reserve Board.
50. Supra, ch. V.
51. Letter of the late Jacob H. Schiff to Rabbi David Philipson, dated: Bar Harbor, Sept. 5,1918.
52. Supra, ch. V.
53. Letter of Oscar S. Strauss to Rabbi David Philipson, Beechwood, Avenue Avondale, Cincinnati, Ohio, dated New York, Sept. 2, 1918.
54. Born in Syracuse, N. Y., 1856; graduated from Columbia law school; became partner in law firm of Guggenheimer, Untermeyer & Marshall; appointed, in 1908, chairman of N. Y. state immigration commission; acted as counsel for Gov. Sulzer in his impeachment. For twenty years, chairman of the commission on amendment, N. Y. Bar Association. Brought influence to bear on President Taft and Senate to abrogate treaty with Russia, on account of treatment of Jews in Russia. President of Jewish delegation at the peace conference. Served on the board of arbitration (or beth-din) which settled the cloth
ing strike of 1919, in New York. Took a prominent part in Zionist movement; headed many Jewish charities, including the American Jewish relief commission which raised seventy-five million dollars " for Jewish war sufferers ". Trustee of Syracuse university; president of N. Y. state college of forestry. Died in Zurich, Sept. 11, 1929. (Extract from press obituary notices on day following his death).
55. Letter of Louis Marshall to Max Senior, dated New York, Sept. 26, 1918.
56. Italics are ours.
57. Letter of Max Senior to Louis Marshall, dated Washington, Sept. 30, 1918.
58. The taxes and "-contributions " for " rebuilding Palestine " have amounted to $100,000,000. Infra, ch. VI.
59. " The League of Nations is an old Jewish idea." Sampler, Guide to Zionism, p. 21. Leon Simon, in a draft for the Palestine mandate written in March 1918, said: " It is fitting that one of the powers should act for the League as sovereign of Palestine during the period that must elapse before the Jewish nation can grow to full maturity."
60. The construction of roads and the maintainance of an adequate police have been the two largest items.
VI. TEN YEARS OF ZIONISM
Sionism is a convenient peg on which to hang a powerful weapon," wrote Louis Marshall,1 meaning that the project of a national home in Palestine would serve as an excuse for building up a powerful, international organization to supplant eventually the present national governments.
From whatever angle one considers it, the project is an experiment on a vast scale. Decades have passed since the experiment was begun, and it is time to ask:
a) Is the experiment a success or a failure ?
b) Have the promoters of the experiment proved that they have throughout always acted in good faith, or not?
To answer these questions properly would require a careful study of onditions, not only in Palestine, but in the world at large: such a study is beyond the present scope. It is, however, possible to examine certain points which bear directly on the above, namely:
1. Did the promoters of the national home for the Jews use undue political influence on the European powers, England in particular, in obtaining control of Palestine?
2. Did the promoters (the Zionist organization) benefit by the realization of the project?
3. Was their administration of funds scrupulous and competent ?
4. Have the inhabitants of Palestine benefited by the mandate; has Great Britain benefited by it; and have the Jews as a whole benefited by it ?
In connection with the first point, the origin of the Sykes-Picot agreement and of the Balfour declaration has already been traced.2 Both of these were in direct violation of the agreement made by the British government in 1915 through Sir Henry MacMahon with the Sherif of Mecca, Hussein. Then the Sherif had agreed to aid the British cause against the Turks, in return for a promise that Great Britain would recognize and support the independence of the Arabs, south of the prospective Turkish boundary. The British government has withheld from publication part of the official correspondence containing this agreement, in spite of requests made in the House of Lords and the House of Commons.3 It is affirmed by a writer to whom Hussein showed Sir Henry's letters that, when the Arab leader flatly refused to accept territorial reservations proposed by the British authorities, the latter finally conceded the point and in January 1917 definitely undertook to support Arab claims in the whole territory south of the Turkish boundary, except in the protectorate of Aden and in the region of Basra in southern Iraq. In March 1916, Sir Henry wrote again to the Sherif confirming the agreement.4
But, as Chaim Weizmann once said,5 in this connection: " Negotiating with a government is easy: one must demand things from a government; a government does not do things by itself; you must know what to demand, how to demand, and when to demand. If you know that, you know all the secret: that is essential for Zionists to understand."
The Balfour declaration was endorsed in February, 1918, by the French government; in May, by the Italian government through its ambassador in London; in August, 1918, by a published letter from President Wilson; and, later, by a joint resolution of the United States Congress in its 1922 session.6
To allay Arab fears, just before the armistice (Nov. 7, 1918), the British and French governments issued a joint declaration which was posted throughout Syria and Palestine and ran :7 " The end aimed at by France and England in the East is the complete and final enfranchisement of the peoples so long oppressed by the Turks, and the establishment of national governments and administrations, drawing their authority from the initiative and free choice of the native populations.
"To fulfil these purposes, France and Great Britain have agreed to encourage and help the establishment of native governments and administrations in Syria and Mesopotamia, which have been freed by the allies, and in the territories whose liberation they are now pursuing, and to recognize these as soon as they are effectively established. Far from wishing to impose upon the populations of these regions any particular institutions, the allies have no other desire than to assure, by their support and by an effective assistance, the normal functioning of the governments and administrations which the populations have freely given themselves. To assure an impartial and equal justice for all, to facilitate the economic development of the country by helping and encouraging local initiative, to favour the spread of education, to bring to an end Turkish political divisions, too long exploited, such is the role which the two allied governments assume in the liberated territories."
Early in 1919 there also gained currency in Palestine the twelfth of Wilson's fourteen points, to the effect that nationalities under Turkish rule " should be assured an undoubted security of life and an unmolested opportunity of autonomous development".8 In May of the same year a purely American commission went to the Near East to ascertain the wishes of the communities as to a mandatory; the commission reported that Great Britain received second choice in 57.49 per cent, of the petitions; that there was a general agreement in favour of retaining the unity of Syria and Palestine, as well as a strong sentiment against France as a mandatory for Syria; less than one per cent, of the petitions supported the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine, while 72.3 per cent, expressed opposition to it.9
Yet, without reference to these findings, the allied supreme council, at its meeting in San Remo on April 24, 1920, awarded the mandate for Syria and the Lebanon to France, and the mandates for Palestine and Iraq to Great Britain. This in itself was an act of bad faith on the part of the council; but the terms of the Palestine mandate were still less in keeping " with the wishes of the native populations ". The mandate provided for carrying out the Jewish national home policy on the one hand, and for guaranteeing the rights of the existing population on the other. Throughout the confusion of the two aims, and the duplicity of both the British government and the Zionists behind it, are striking. In article 2 the mandatory made itself responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative, and economic conditions as would secure the establishment of the Jewish national home; for the development of self-governing institutions, and for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion. In article 4 the Palestine administration was to receive special advice from a so-called Jewish agency; under article 6 the British government undertook to facilitate Jewish immigration and encourage close settlement by Jews on the land, including state lands and waste lands: other sections provided that local autonomy should be encouraged, that there should be free access to the holy places, etc.
At the time when the mandate was awarded,10 Palestine bad a population of 757,182, of whom 590,890 were Moslems, 73,024 Christians, and 83,794 Jews; the remaining 9,474 were principally Druzes.11 The Jewish fraction, eleven per cent, of the population, was roughly divided into four groups:
Descendants of Jews who had never left Palestine
(negligible in number);
1. Descendants of Jews who had returned to Palestine in the middle ages (few in number);
2. Those who had come in during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, under non-Zionist auspices;
3. Those who had come in under Zionist auspices.
The mandate, however, recognized the Zionist organization as the Jewish agency with special public functions in Palestine, because Zionists were thoroughly organized both there and abroad and were the promoters of the whole experiment; and the Zionist, Sir Herbert Samuel, was appointed first British High Commissioner, taking office on July 1, 1920, superseding the military administration.12
The next point, whether the Zionist organization has gained by the venture, is easily elucidated by noting the enormous expansion of that body in the last decade and the millions of dollars that have passed through its hands.
The world Zionist organization today includes forty-seven territorial Zionist federations, a few smaller Zionist societies, and certain special unions.13 all represented at the world Zionist congresses. There are seven members of the Zionist executive committee in Palestine (four general Zionists, two labourites and one Mizrachi Zionist). Their duty is to watch over the work of the Zionist organization in Palestine, and to keep in touch with their colleagues abroad. Of the latter, there are three in England, one in Germany, and one in the United States.14
To make its activities more effective, the world Zionist organization has delegated a considerable part of its practical work to certain corporations and companies, of which the more important are:15
1. The Jewish Colonial Trust, Ltd., with a balance sheet for the year 1928 of more than ?10,000,000.
2. The Anglo-Palestine Co. Ltd., subsidiary of the above, also showing a balance sheet of more than ?10,000,000.
3. The Jewish National Fund, which by 1929 had acquired about 71,500 acres of rural, and 450 acres of urban land. The annual receipts between 1924 and 1928
averaged $1,384,000, making over $5,500,000 for the four years.
4. The Palestine Land Development Co, Ltd., which acquired about 38,400 acres, of which it sold to Jewish settlers about 14,300 acres. Its trial balance sheet in Dec. 1928 showed a balance of over $2,100,000.
5. The Palestine Foundation Fund, Ltd. (Keren Hayesod), which received for Zionist projects during the eight years 1921-1929 a total of approximately $18,000,000.
It maintains a complete educational system, including the Hebrew university at Jerusalem, a technical institute at Haifa, four technical and one music school, four normal schools, six secondary schools, and ninety-seven elementary schools.
Under Zionist auspices there has been organized also:
1. The Women's International Zionist Organization;
2. The Sick Benefit Fund17 with a membership of 15,000.
Of the fifteen million Jews in the world today, 1,200,000 are enrolled as members of the Zionist organization. To secure the co-operation of all Jews and thus broaden its base of support, the organization entered into long negotiations with non-Zionists in America.18 In these, Samuel Untermeyer, Zionist, law partner of Louis Marshall (ostensibly anti-Zionist) in New York, took a leading part. The Zionist body altered its name to " World Zionist Organization "; then in 1923, as money was not coming in fast enough, Chaim Weizmann at the Carlsbad congress suggested that the latter should be transformed into the " Jewish Agency under the Mandate ", and should admit all non-Zionist Jews. Alfred Mond, the late Lord Melchett President of the English Zionist federation, was requested to go to America to promote the new Jewish agency and welcome Louis Marshall and his non-Zionist following into it. While in America, Mond said:19
" The Jewish Agency under the mandate is the broadest possible basis for all those who wish to help. It will be an immense aid to Palestine and a great strength to the Zionist organization, and I am glad to think the negotiations which had been carried on in London, favoring a committee to include the Zionist executive and representatives of the most important Jewish bodies have been brought to a successful result. I told Chaim Weizmann that it will be one of the greatect honours that can be conferred on me to serve on a board of that kind."20
After long negotiations, a basis of agreement was finally reached in August 1929. Zionists and non-Zionists are now merged in a new body known as the Jewish Agency: its council includes an equal number of Zionists and non-Zionists : the executive committee of the council, consisting of twenty Zionists and twenty non-Zionists, is henceforth to occupy the privileged position described under article 4 of the mandate.
Such, in brief, are the visible organs established by Zionists for realizing their aim. What the sums collected by these and other organs would total is not easy to estimate. The Zionist organization is said to have spent seven million pounds ($34,000,000),2i and Baron Edmond de Rothschild an additional $50,000,000 in Palestine. 22 The first sum, however, represents but a fraction of the sums collected. The Keren hayesod alone brought in $18,000,000; and, in the single month of September 1929, the Jews of the United States raised more than ?1,500,000.23 A conservative estimate of the funds that have passed through Zionist hands since the Balfour declaration would be $100,000,000, irrespective of the large sums spent annually by the British government. Had such a large capital been placed in competent hands, there would be no need for further appeals or loans. Yet in May 1931, Alfred Mond made personal efforts to float a projected Zionist International loan and endeavoured to get the Italian government to join with the governments of Great Britain, France and Germany in guaranteeing it.24
But the Zionist administration of funds has been not only incompetent but irregular. A single instance may suffice.
It concerns the opposition made by American Zionists to the administration of Louis Lipsky, President of the American Zionist organization, and the resignation from that body of Rabbi Stephen Wise, Samuel Rosensohn and Lawrence Berenson.
At the Atlantic City (U. S. A.) Zionist convention the previous year, the disclosure had been made of the mismanagement of funds, and Berenson and Rosensohn were appointed to enquire into the affairs of the organization and restore the confidence of the Zionists in the country.
Berenson said later:25
" One of the first things we did was to create a thing heretofore unknown to the organization: namely a balanced budget—whereby the organization could never spend or invent a necessity for sums in excess of the budget. We found a deficit of $175,000, exclusive of guarantees, which had been created under the leadership of Mr. Louis Lipsky in the year or two prior to the Atlantic City convention. In the creation of a balanced budget, it became necessary to eliminate a lot of expenditures such as subsidies and compensation to favoured individuals.26
" A note on the Mercantile Bank (New York) was endorsed by the organization for the American Zion Commonwealth for $285,000. A petition of bankruptcy has been filed against the American Zion Commonwealth in Palestine. An attempt is now being made to save the Commonwealth and to raise $200,000. That is futile. The liabilities are $1,068,000. The assets consist of approximately $400,000 of accounts receivable, money owed by American purchasers of the lands in Palestine, and which will not be paid until the deeds are produced; but those deeds can not be produced. The remaining asset is land in Palestine, purchased in the land boom a few years ago. In part, the moneys received, instead of being applied to acquire the deeds, were used to purchase additional lands. The American Zion Commonwealth attempted to build an hotel, but the project had to be abandoned. The Commonwealth has other contingent liabilities, and the Arabs threaten to foreclose.
" One of the obligations of the Zionist Organization of America was the endorsement of this note on the Central Mercantile Bank of New York for $285,000. President Weinstein and Rosenblatt had a hand in that work, and were the two prime movers in the land speculation. When the speculation was rife and it looked as though the America Zion Commonwealth would make money, Mr. Lipsky, a man without any business experience, endorsed the American Zion Commonwealth as an American Zionist institution, ran editorials in the New Palestine and other Zionist publications, and was largely responsible for inducing the American purchasers to make deposits for the acquisition of lands through the American Zion Commonwealth. Thus the United Palestine Appeal felt compelled to advance in cash to the American Zion Commonwealth a sum of $320,000; and about $125,000 more of the United Palestine Appeal money had to be used to pull the American Zion Commonwealth out of its difficulties.
" The endorsement was placed upon that note by Mr. Lipsky without the knowledge, consent or approval of anybody in the Zionist organization.
" The United Palestine Appeal found it necessary to advance these sums of money, because the indignation of the land purchasers was injuring the United Palestine Appeal campaign, and even affecting the confidence in the Zionist organization."
There remains to consider whether the native population of Palestine has benefited by the mandate. It is recalled that 79 per cent, of the population at the time of the St. Remo award was Moslem and it is therefore fitting to weigh the complaints of the Palestine Arabs. These may be grouped as follows:
1. Prior to the British occupation, Jews and Arabs lived together in tranquillity; since, there have been four serious breaks, of which three occurred in 1920 and 1921 and totalled 104 killed and 400 wounded; the
last was still more serious. In view of the fact that each break has inspired a fruitful campaign of Zionist appeals, there would seem to be a deeper connection
between the former and the latter.
2. The purpose of article 22 of the League covenant was to promote " the well-being and development of the people" of the mandated territories. Alien Jews,
living outside Palestine, did not come within the scope of this aim. The Balfour declaration prevented Pales tine from creating those self-governing institutions described in article 2 of the mandate. Article 20 of the League covenant provided that all states members of the League must take immediate steps to procure their release from any undertakings inconsistent with the terms of the covenant: the Balfour declaration fell under this category.
3. Because of the Balfour declaration, the British authorities set up in Palestine a Jewish agency whose function was to advance Jewish interests above all others; Jews should be represented in a Palestinian legislature only in proportion to their numbers.
4. The Jewish national home policy cannot be accepted by the Arabs. If it constituted a reason for letting the
Jews outside Palestine enter the country " as of right and not on sufferance," it was the more reason that the Arabs themselves should be confirmed in their national home as against all intruders, and immigration placed in their control. The Jews already in Palestine were there by right and should enjoy the same status as the Arabs. But to argue (as the British did) that the right of the present Jewish community in Palestine should be extended to all the Jews of the world, was to adopt a line of reasoning " which no people, let alone the Arabs, would accept if applied to itself."27 5. The Arab-speaking inhabitants, to whom Palestine is Falastin (Philistia) resent its being referred to in all official documents as Eretz-Israel (land of Israel). They do not see why a country which they are accustomed to think of as their own should suddenly become Eretz Israel without their consent, simply because it has pleased other nations to set up in it a Jewish national home. They point out that their own possession of the country since the seventh century gives them rights to-day which the Jews scattered abroad do not possess. The next question is, have the Jews as a whole benefited by the national home policy ? The native Jewish population of Palestine is in much the same position as the Arab population: it has suffered from a large influx of immigrants causing acute unemployment. Nor have the immigrants benefited greatly. Although their future depended largely on agricultural development, the majority of Jewish immigrants, as shown by official figures and estimates, settled in the towns: in 1922 there were found to be 68,000 Jews in urban areas and only 15,000 in rural areas; in 1925, 85,000 in urban against 23,000 in rural.28 In 1926 and 1927 unemployment grew so acute that the Zionist organization had to resort to doles in the chief centres of Jewish population.29 For the seven years 1922-1928 the total number of Jewish immigrants was 79,894, nearly as many as the Jews in the country at the time of the British occupation; the total number of Jewish emigrants (mostly disappointed immigrants) for that same period was 23,761.
The huge sums raised on the pretext of a national home, and the new taxes devised and levied by the Zionist organization have been a heavy drain on Jewry as a whole, without any palpable compensation.30 What of Great Britain? She has long desired to control the Palestine-Transjordan-Iraq route; by the Balfour declaration she was led to the belief that a friendly Jewish population in Palestine would be the best possible guarantee of continued British control of this route which flanks the Suez canal and guards the approach to India. Apparently it is her intention to continue to seek some means of reconciling conflicting interests in Palestine. But her prestige has already suffered: Arab discontent in Palestine has spread to Iraq and India; the Jews have been the first to go back on her and make her responsible for all their difficulties. Moreover Palestine is a heavy drain on her treasury: to it she has had to advance several loans, of which the first in 1927 was for ?4,475,000. The Palestine administration has a public debt, guaranteed by the British treasury; it also has a yearly deficit, which in 1928 amounted to approximately ?800,000.
In conclusion, it is seen that the Zionists, through undue political influence, engaged England in carrying out a Jewish national home policy. This policy, contrary to England's prior engagements and against her own best interests, has resulted in a costly and futile experiment.
It has created a new politico-racial problem in the near east, and has been disastrous to the native population of Palestine, and even to Jewry taken as a whole. But to its Zionist promoters, it has brought vast influence through the expansion of their own powerful, international organization, and millions and millions in revenue.
World Zionist organization, or Jewish agency, or Alliance Israelite Universelle—whatever name it takes, it is at bottom always the Kahal with its eighteen centuries of accumulated experience. Its aims and principles, whether shrouded in the mysticism of the Talmud or bluntly stated in the Protocols, are the same to-day as under the Roman empire. But in recent years the technical improvements in its methods of operating3! and the debility of national governments32 have advanced its cause with singular rapidity. Just fifty years ago, a German wrote:33 " Russia is the last defence against the Jews, and its surrender is only a matter of time. The elastic spirit of Jewish intrigue will crush Russia in a revolution, such as the world has never seen the like. When it has overthrown Russia, it will have nothing to fear from any quarter; when it has seized in Russia all the offices of state as it has done with us, then the Jews will openly undertake the destruction of western civilization, and this " last hour " of condemned Europe will strike within a hundred or a hundred and fifty years at the latest, since the march of events moves more rapidly in our era than in preceding centuries."
1. Supra, ch. V. * 1922-1932
2. Supra, ch. V.
3. J. de V. Loder, The Truth about Mesopotamia, Palestine, and Syria, p. 19. See also, Colonial Office, Correspondence with Palestine Arab Delegation andihe Zionist Organization, Cmd. 1700, pp. 20, 26; H. W. V. Temperley, VI, History of the Peace Conference of Paris, p. 126.
4. A. Rihani, Around the Coasts of Arabia, ch. IX.
5. At a meeting at the metropolitan opera house, Philadelphia: Jewish Chronicle (May 25, 1928), p. 18.
6. The Balfour declaration was never submitted to either the French or British Parliament. On June 21, 1922, the House of Lords passed a resolution expressing its dissatisfaction with the terms of the mandate. Current History (Sept. 1922), p. 1008.
7. K. de V. Loder, The Truth about Mesopotamia, Palestine, and Syria, p. 32.
8. H. W. V. Temperley, I, A History of the Peace Conference of Paris, p. 434.
9. Ibid., p. 145. If Palestine belongs to the Jews by historic right, then Spain by the same right should be handed over to the Moors.
10. The mandate was approved by the council of the League of Nations on July 24, 1922.
11. Colonial Office, Report of the High Commissioner on the Adminis tration of Palestine (1920-1925), p. 48.
12. Allenby's troops had a song in which the chorus ran : " And they gave the holy city To the Zionist committee."
13. Fraternities such as the Order of Ancient Maccabeans, the Mizrachi, the Poale Zion, and Hitachduth.
14. Foreign Policy Association, Information Service (New York, Oct. 16, 1929), vol. V, no. 16, p. 279.
15. Ibid., p. 280.
16. Zionist Executive Report (1929), pp. 278, 283.
17. Cf. supra, ch. II.
18. Supra, ch. V.
19. Speech at the Town Hall, New York, Sept. 26, 1923.
20. The part played by Alfred Mond, now Lord Melchett, is some what mystifying. Very closely connected with Chaim Weizmann in the chemical company of Brunner, Mond and Co., he was a Zionist and favoured the Balfpur declaration, then he favoured the Jewish Agency. In June 1928, at his country house in England, a secret conference of the
Jewish Agency took place, with Weizmann, Felix Warburg, Louis Marshall and Otto Wasserman. Yet on October 26,1928, there appeared a singular interview given by Lord Melchett deprecating the Jewish Agency, with such exclamations as: " Oh, what is it? What does it want to be? Who needs it? " Jewish Chronicle (October 26,1928). In
April 1929, he is once more praising and advocating the Agency: Jewish Daily Bulletin (April 24, 1929).
21. Report of the Administration of Palestine and Trans-Jordan (1928) p. 117.
22. Reports of the Experts submitted to the Joint Palestine Survey Commission (1928), p. 34.
23. Foreign Policy Assoc., op. cit., p. 273.
24. Jewish Chronicle (May 18, 1928), p. 28.
25. Address on April 29, 1928, in Washington, D. C. Jewish Daily Bulletin, May 3, 1928.
26. Our italics.
27. Colonial Office, Correspondence with the Palestine Arab Delega tion and the Zionist Organization (1922), pp. 18, 19.
28. Foreign Policy Assoc., op. cit., p. 287.
29. Report on the administration of Palestine and Transjordan (1927), p. 29.
30. The financial activities of Zionism before and after its transformation into the ewish world agency have a wide scope. They range from shekel gathering from every member of the Jewish community, innumerable appeals for funds for Palestine, direct taxation " a'aser " of every Zionist Jew, equally innumerable appeals for various relief funds, for government loans, etc. The money thus gathered represents huge yearly revolving funds hich constantly replenish the coffers of Jewish international financiers. How little such funds really benefit the Jewish needy masses can be judged from the constant ppeals for relief and the yearly deficits in every department. The Keren hayesod, the Keren hayemeth, the United Palestine Appeal, the Ort, the Russian colonization Fund, the Agro Joint for Jewish Farm settlements in Russia, the Joint Distributing Committee are a few of the outstanding fund-collecting-Jewish organizations.
31. In organizing revolutions, founding pseudo-religious fraternities like the Freemasons, Theosophists, etc.
32. Partly due to the increased facility of communication and con sequent breakdown of national feeling, partly to the spread of dema gogic ideals, sentimentalism, etc.
33. Wilhelm Marr, who took an active part in the revolution of 1848, in Der Sieg des Judentums fiber das Christentum (1879).
PART TWO THE PROTOCOLS
I. HOW THE PROTOCOLS CAME TO RUSSIA
The word " protocol "i was used to signify a fly-leaf pasted at the top of an official document, bearing either the opening formula or a summary of the contents for convenient reference. The original draft of a treaty was usually pasted on in this way, that the signatories might check the correctness of the engrossed copy before signing. The draft itself being based on the discussion at the conference, the word came to mean also the minutes of the proceedings.
In this instance " the protocols " mean the " draft of the plan of action " of the Jewish leaders. There have been many such drafts at different periods in Jewish history since the dispersion, but few of them have come into general circulation. In all, the principles and morality are as old as the tribe. By way of illustration we give an instance which occurred in the fifteenth century.
In 1492, Chemor, chief Rabbi of Spain, wrote to the Grand Sanhedrin, which had its seat in Constantinople, for advice, when a Spanish law threatened expulsion.2 This was the reply:
" Beloved brethren in Moses, we have received your letter in which you tell us of the anxieties and misfortunes which you are enduring. We are pierced by as great pain to hear it as yourselves.
The advice of the Grand Satraps and Rabbis is the following:
1. As for what you say that the King of Spain 3 obliges you to become Christians: do it, since you cannot do otherwise.
2. As for what you say about the command to despoil you of your property: make your sons merchants that they may despoil, little by little, the Christians of theirs.
3. As for what you say about making attempts on your lives: make your sons doctors and apothecaries, that they may take away Christians' lives.
4. As for what you say of their destroying your syna gogues: make your sons canons and clerics in order that they may destroy their churches.
5. As for the many other vexations you complain of: arrange that your sons become advocates and lawyers, and see that they always mix in affairs of State, that by putting Christians under your yoke you may dominate the world and be avenged on them.
6. Do not swerve from this order that we give you, because you will find by experience that, humiliated as you are, you will reach the actuality of power.
(Signed) PRINCE OF THE JEWS OF CONSTANTINOPLE."
The protocols given to the world by Nilus are only the latest known edition of the Jewish leaders programme. The story of how the latter came into general circulation is an interesting one.
In 1884 the daughter of a Russian general, Mile. Justine Glinka, was endeavouring to serve her country in Paris by obtaining political information, which she communicated to General Orgevskii4 in St. Petersburg. For this purpose she employed a Jew, Joseph Schorst,5 member of the Miz-raim Lodge in Paris. One day Schorst offered to obtain for her a document of great importance to Russia, on payment of 2,500 francs. This sum being received from St. Petersburg was paid over and the document handed to Mile. Glinka.6
She forwarded the French original, accompanied by a Russian translation, to Orgevskii, who in turn handed it to his chief, General Cherevin, for transmission to the Tsar. But Cherevin, under obligation to wealthy Jews, refused to transmit it, merely riling it in the archives.7
Meantime there appeared in Paris certain books on Russian court life8 which displeased the Tsar, who ordered his secret police to discover their authorship. This was falsely attributed, perhaps with malicious intent,9 to Mile. Glinka, and on her return to Russia she was banished to her estate in Orel. To the marechal de noblesse of this district, Alexis Sukhotin, Mile. Glinka gave a copy of the Protocols. Sukhotin showed the document to two friends, Stepanov and Nilus; the former had it printed and circulated privately in 1897; the second, Professor Sergius A. Nilus, published it for the first time in Tsarskoe-Tselo (Russia) in 1901, in a book entitled The Great Within the Small. Then, about the same time, a friend of Nilus, G. Butmi, also brought it out and a copy was deposited in the British Museum on August 10, 1906.
Meantime, through Jewish members10 of the Russian police, minutes of the proceedings of the Basle congress11 in 1897 had been obtained and these were found to correspond with the Protocols.12
In January 1917, Nilus had prepared a second edition, revised and documented, for publication. But before it could be put on the market, the revolution of March 1917 had taken place, and Kerenskii, who had succeeded to power, ordered the whole edition of Nilus's book to be destroyed. In 1924, Prof. Nilus was arrested by the Cheka in Kiev, imprisoned, and tortured; he was told by the Jewish president of the court, that this treatment was meted out to him for " having done them incalculable harm in publishing the Protocols ". Released for a few months, he was again led before the G. P. U. (Cheka), this time in Moscow and confined. Set at liberty in February 1926, he died in exile in the district of Vladimir on January 13, 1929.
A few copies of Nilus's second edition were saved and sent to other countries where they were published: in Germany, by Gottfreid zum Beek (1919); in England, by The Britons (1920); in France, by Mgr. Jouin in La Revue Internationale des SocUtes Secretes, and by Urbain Gohier in La Vieille France; in the United States, by Small, Maynard & Co. (Boston 1920), and by The Beckwith Co (New York 1921). Later, editions appeared in Italian, Russian, Arabic, and even in Japanese.
Such is the simple story of how these Protocols reached Russia and thence came into general circulation.
Mr. Stepanov's deposition'3 relative to it is here given as corroboration.
" In 1895, my neighbour in the district of Toula, Major (retired) Alexis Sukhotin, gave me a manuscript copy of the Protocols of the Wise Men ofZion. He told me that a lady of his acquaintance, whose name he did not mention, residing in Paris, had found it at the house of a friend, a Jew. Before leaving Paris, she had secretly translated it and had brought this one copy to Russia and given it to Sukhotin.
"At first I mimeographed this translation, but finding it difficult to read, I resolved to have it printed, making no mention of the date, town, or printer's name. In this I was helped by Arcadii Ippolitovich Kelepovskii, who at that time was chief of the household of Grand Duke Sergius.
He gave the document to be printed by the district printing press. This took place in 1897. Sergius Nilus inserted these Protocols in his work and added his own commentary. (Signed) PHILIP PETROVICH STEPANOV."
Formerly Procurator of the Synod of Moscow, Chamberlain, Privy Councillor, and (in 1897) Chief of the Moscow Kursk Railway in the town of Orel. April 17, 1927.
Witnessed by PRINCE DIMITRI GALITZIN. President of the Russian Colony of Emigrants at Stari Fontag.
1. From Greek, protos (first) + holla (glue).
2. The reply is found in the sixteenth century Spanish book, La Silva Curiosa, by Julio-Iniguez de Medrano (Paris, Orry, 1608), on pages 156 and 157, with the following explanation: " This letter following was found in the archives of Toledo by the Hermit of Salamanca, (while) searching the ancient records of the kingdoms of Spain; and, as it is expressive and remarkable, I wish to write it here."—vide, photostat facing page 80.
4. At that time Secretary to the Minister of the Interior, General Cherevin.
5. Alias Schapiro, whose father had been sentenced in London, two years previous, to ten years penal servitude for counterfeiting.
6. Schorst fled to Egypt where, according to French police archives, he was murdered.
7. On his death in 1896, he willed a copy of his memoirs containing the Protocols to Nicholas II.
8. Published under the pseudonym " Count Vassilii", their real author was Mme. Juliette Adam, using material furnished by Princess Demidov-San Donate, Princess Radzivill, and other Russians.
9. Among the Jews in the Russian secret service in Paris was Maniulov, whose odious character is drawn by M. Pateologue, Memoires.
10. Notably Eno Azev and Efrom. The latter, formerly a rabbi, died in 1925 in a monastery in Serbia, where he had taken refuge; he used to tell the monks that the protocols were but a small part of Jewish plans for ruling the world and a feeble expression of their hatred of the gentiles.
11. Supra, Part I.
12. The Russian government had learned that at meetings of the B'nai Brith in New-York in 1893-94, Jacob Schiff (supra, 52, 53) had been named chairman of the committee on the revol utionary movement in Russia.
13. The translation is the author's; appended facing page 81. a photostat of the original is
II. HOW AN AMERICAN EDITION WAS SUPPRESSED
There is a saying in several languages that only the truth hurts. Recognizing the fact beneath this expression, one is little surprised at the zeal with which certain parties seek to disprove documentary evidence. If the evidence were false, then it would be ignored by those concerned and pass quickly into the realm of forgotten things. But if the evidence is genuine and open to verification from many angles, then the truth will hurt, and thus not be ignored.
If this reasoning is correct, the violent methods used by the Jews, particularly those affiliated with the Zionist movement, to discredit and suppress the document entitled The Protocols of the Elders ofZion, would alone constitute a proof of its authenticity.
Nilus and Butmi had published the document without comment. Its success was therefore entirely due to:
1. The self-evident character of the document.
2. The logical reasoning expressed in clear, simple terms;
3. The explanation it gives of international politics;
4. The fact that the events predicted in it have actually occurred since.
But if its publishers gave no guarantee of its genuineness, those who have attacked it have failed even more conspicuously to discredit and refute it. To quote Nesta Webster, in her World Revolution:1
"The truth is, then, that the Protocols have never been refuted, and the futility of the so-called refutations published, as also the fact of their temporary suppression, have done more to convince the public of their authenticity than all the anti-Semite writings on the subject put together".
There is plenty of indisputable, documentary evidence which explains the Jewish plan of action, without recourse to the Protocols. Their importance lies in the fact that, published at a definite date, they foretold historical events which have upset the world, that they explained these events by the principles set forth in the work itself: this fact makes it superfluous to enquire whether the author of the Protocols is the Zionist Congress in corpore, a member of the congress, or some Jewish (or even Christian) thinker. Their source is of small moment: the facts, the relation of cause and effect, are there; the existence of the work prior to the events foretold in it can never be brought into question, and that is enough.
The first attempt at refutation appeared in 1920, entitled, The Jewish Bogey and the Forged Protocols of the Learned Elders ofZion, by a Jew, Lucien Wolf; it was followed by articles in the Metropolitan (New York) signed " William Hard ". The effect of these articles, contrary to the intention of their authors, was to draw wider public attention to the existence of the Protocols. At the same time in America the Jewish Anti-Defamation League2 filled the papers with denunciations of the libel from all parts of the country, thus proving how powerful is Jewish organization. One of its members was Louis Marshall, and, as an illustration of its activity, the story of the suppression of the edition of the Protocols which an American publishing house tried to bring out, is instructive. It shows not only the pressure the Jews can bring to bear on anyone who dares to lift his finger against them, but their own mental attitude of absolute intolerance towards others, while demanding of the world complete acquiescence in their schemes.
George Haven Putnam, head of the firm Putnam & Son, New York, after his annual visit to London, brought out in 1920 an American edition of The Cause of World Unrest?
About the same time, he decided to issue The Protocols of the Elders of Zion in book form. Advance notices were released and the book set up and ready to go on the stands about October 15. On the eve of its appearance, Putnam received the following letter from Louis Marshall.4
MY DEAR SIR:
As one who believes in those qualities that constitute the true American spirit, I have been greatly disturbed by the accounts given by the newspapers of the outrage to which you were subjected at the meeting held at Erasmus High School in Brooklyn the other evening. Knowing your patriotism, I can only regard the alleged cause, namely, that you had condemned the Declaration of Independence and were of the opinion that we owed an apology to England for severing our relations with her, as a slander, born of prejudice and ignorance.
I had scarcely finished reading this episode which had thus aroused my indignation, when I found upon my table a book, bearing the imprint of your firm, entitled The Cause of World Unrest, bound in a flaming red and purporting to be a republication of articles that have recently appeared in the London Morning Post with which I had become familiar. To say that I was shocked that your honoured name should be made the vehicle of disseminating among the American people these outpourings of malice, intolerance and hatred, this witches' broth of virulent poison, is merely to confess the poverty of my vocabulary. On opening the book I turned to the publishers' note, which was apologetic and disclaimed responsibility for the publication. It was followed by an introduction which made it absolutely clear that the purpose of the book was to charge the Jews with an age-long conspiracy to destroy civilization in order that they might absorb the wealth and power of the world. Thus proclaimed, at length came the stupid drivel intended to support this thesis and calculated to make the Jew repulsive in the eyes of his fellow-men and to exterminate him, not figuratively, but literally, appealing, as it does, to the lowest passions and proceeding upon the same processes that were employed in the Middle Ages for the same object. Then it was the blood accusation, the charge of poisoning wells, of spreading plagues and pestilence, of the desecration of the Host. Now it is pretended conspiracy to overturn the economic system of the world by inciting warfare and revolution.
Pict 1. LA SILVA CURIOSA: Photostat of the letter from the Grand S;iiihc<lrin>l Conslnntinople to the Chief Rabbi of Spain in 1492, ID be ('omul in UK- sixteenth century Spanish book by Julio-lniguez (I'niis. Orry, I608).
Pict 2. LA SILVA CURIOSA: continued.
Pict 3. MR. STEPANOVS DEPOSITION: the story of how the Protocols reached Russia and thence came into general circulation.
Pict 4. MR. STEPANOV'S DEPOSITION: continued
The slightest knowledge of history, the most elementary capacity for analysis, or even a minute inkling as to what the Jew is and has been, would suffice to stamp this book and the forged Protocols on which it is based, as the most stupendous libel in history. These writings are the work of a band of conspirators who are seeking to continue to make the Jew, as he has been in all the centuries, the scapegoat of autocracy. The Protocols bear the hall-mark of the secret agents of the dethroned Russian bureaucracy, and the book which you have published is a mere babbling reiteration of what the murderers of the Ukraine, of Poland, and of Hungary are urging as justification for the holocausts of the Jews in which they have been engaged. It has been intimated, and there is much to sustain the theory, that the real purpose of these publications in the United States and in England is to arouse sufficient hostility against the Jews to subject them to mob violence and thus to give justification to those who have incited pogroms in Eastern Europe.
I have also observed that, upon the cover of the book to which I am now referring, you are advertising the publication of The Protocols, which I unhesitatingly denounce as on their face palpable forgeries. If you were called upon to circulate counterfeit money or forged bonds, you would shrink in horror at the suggestion. What you have done and what you propose to do is, however, in morals, incalculably worse. You are assisting in spreading falsehoods, in uttering libels, the effect of which will be felt for decades to come. You are giving them respectability, whilst the name of the author is shrouded in secrecy. Even Mr. Gwynne does not avow paternity for the book which he has heralded. Much as you may desire to shake off responsibility, therefore, the real responsibility for hurling this bomb, for such it is, prepared though it has been by others, rests upon you. Whoever may read this book and is of such a low type of intelligence as to be influenced by it, will not be apt to draw the fine ethical distinctions with which you are seeking to salve your conscience. As a patriotic American, do you believe that you are contributing to the creation of that spirit of justice and fair-play, of unity and harmony, which is the very foundation of that Americanism for which every good citizen has yearned, when you stimulate hatred and passion by the publication of these dreadful falsehoods? If there should occur in this country, in consequence of those publications and those of Henry Ford, what is earnestly desired by the anti-Semites with whom you have arrayed yourself, do you suppose that, when the Almighty calls you to a reckoning and asks you whether you have ever borne false witness against your neighbour, you will be guiltless in His eyes because of your publishers' note disavowing responsibility ?
I know that you must have been pained, as I was when I read of the treatment to which you were subjected, because of lying accusations directed against you. Are you able to appreciate the pain, the grief, the agony, that you are causing three millions of your fellow-countrymen and to millions of men, women and children in other parts of the world by your participation in the disgraceful and inhuman persecution which is now being insidiously carried on by means of publications in the distribution of which you are now actively engaged ? I look upon this as a tragedy.
Major Putnam, still feeling and sincerely believing that he was an independent American, though not a very brave one, for throughout he uses the name of Mr. Gwynne as a screen, answered:
New York, October 15th, 1920. DEAR MR. MARSHALL:
Your letter of the 13th inst., which has to do with the publication of the volume entitled World Unrest and the announcement of the companion volume The Protocols, has been read before the members of our publishing board and has received the respectful consideration to which any communication from a citizen of your standing and reputation is assuredly entitled. I am asked by my associates to make report as follows as to our own understanding of the matters in question:
1. We are not prepared to accept your view of the responsibility that attaches to a publishing imprint, or to the association of such imprint with one volume or another. We believe that our own policy in this matter is in accord with that of the leading publishing houses on both sides of the Atlantic. It would be impossible to carry on the business of publishing books of opinion, whether the opinions have to do with the issues of to-day or with matters of the past, if the publisher was assumed to be in accord with the con clusions arrived at by one author or another. It is the intention to bring into print only such volumes as may present on such issues information that is understood to
make an addition to the knowledge of the subject, or con clusions which appear to be entitled to consideration, to analysis, or possibly to refutation.
2. We have on our own catalogue, for instance, volumes expressing almost every phase of theological or religious belief. The list includes some books accepted by the Christian Scientists as fairly representative of their doctrines. In publishing such books we have, of course, no intention of
announcing ourselves as upholding the theories of the Christian Scientists any more than in the publication of a volume by a Presbyterian divine we have expressed our acceptance of the Westminster catechism, or in printing a book by an Episcopal friend, we have been prepared to approve the reasonableness of the thirty-nine articles.
3. The volume, World Unrest, was, as you will have noted, brought into publication in London at the instance of Mr. Gwynne, the scholarly editor of the Morning Post. You doubtless have knowledge of the journals of England and will realize that the Post does not belong to the sensation-monger journals like Bottomley's John Bull or Hearst's American. It is a conservative paper which has the reputation of avoiding sensational material.
Mr. Gwynne had convinced himself that the papers brought into print in the Post, and later published under his direction in book form, were deserving of consideration. As we have stated in the publisher's note, we are not prepared to express any opinion whatsoever in regard to the so-called information presented, or as to the weight of the conclusions arrived at by the writer and endorsed by Mr. Gwynne. The recommendation came to us that, as the Gwynne volume used as a large part of its text the document entitled The Protocols, the readers of World Unrest would be interested in having an opportunity of examining the full text of The Protocols. You have already knowledge of this curious document. It has, it seems, been in print since 1905, and possibly earlier. An edition was published some months back by Eyre & Spottiswoode, conservative law publishers of London. The text that was brought to us is a translation freshly made from the Russian and is accompanied by a record of what is known of the original document.5
It is evident that the document has, as you point out, no voucher for authenticity and it is quite possible that it will be found to possess no historic importance. Attention has again been directed to it during the past year simply on the ground, according at least to the understanding of Mr. Gwynne's author and of himself, that certain of the instructions given and policies recommended in The Protocols appear to have been carried out by the bolshevik government in Russia. Certain suggestions in The Protocols have also been connected with the policies of the Zionists, policies which, according to Mr. Gwynne and some other writers, are causing serious unrest in Palestine, Syria and Arabia.
In presenting The Protocols to American readers in a carefully printed edition, we have not the least intention of expressing the view that the documents are authentic, or that they will in the end be considered as possessing historic authority.
Mr Gwynne takes the ground that neither World Unrest nor The Protocols -themselves present charges against the Jews as a whole. They emphasize certain things that have been done, or are alleged to have been done, by certain groups of Jews. It would be as fair to say that a record of lynching in Texas or Arkansas, or a record of the attempt of the Bryan group to secure the payment of debts fifty cents on the dollar, was to be considered as a charge against the whole American people.
Mr. Gwynne's associates take the ground that the leading Jews on both sides of the Atlantic, men whose patriotism is unquestioned, ought not to put these documents to one side as of trifling importance. The time may very properly have come at which the charges made as said, only against certain groups of Jews should be analyzed by the Jews whose judgments would be accepted as authoritative by English and American readers. If the charge is unfounded that bolshevism as carried on in Russia has been conducted largely under Jewish direction, the statement ought to be refuted.
I received only yesterday a copy of a monthly entitled The Brooklyn Anti-Bolshevist. The magazine undertakes to make " defense of American institutions against the Jewish bolshevist doctrines of Morris Hillquit and Leon Trotzki." It seems to me that American citizens of the Jewish race (and the group comprises some of the best citizens that we have) might properly interest themselves in making clear to the public that there is no foundation for any charge against the World Patriotism of the Jewish race.6
I wish very much that you might yourself be interested in preparing a volume that should give consideration to the whole subject matter and particularly, of course, to these publications which have come into print as a result of the world's indignation against the Moscow government.
G. P. Putnam's Sons would be well pleased to associate the imprint of their New York and London Houses with such a volume from the pen of a distinguished jurist like yourself.
One further thought occurs to me: You and I are believers in freedom of speech. We recognize that in war times certain reservations are in order for the sake of the nation, but we hold that, with the necessary reservations as to the rights of an individual, or as to a possible libel upon an individual, it is in order, and, from the point of view of the community, wise, to allow full freedom for platform utterances. If, however, this be true for the spoken word it should logically be applicable also to the word, that comes into print.
In case you may be interested in considering the suggestion of a monograph from your pen to be prepared by yourself, or by some competent authority whom you might be able to interest, I should be ready to keep an appointment for a personal word at such time and place as you might find convenient.
Submitting the suggestion for your consideration, I am, with cordial regards,
Yours faithfully, GEORGE HAVEN PUTNAM.
The suggestion of a ' monograph' from Louis Marshall's pen was somewhat ironical. There is no doubt that on October, 15, 1920, Major Putnam still felt himself an independent American.
And the binding of The Protocols went on as usual.
But on October 29th came one more letter from the president of the American Jewish committee:
New York City, October 29th, 1920. MY DEAR SIR:
Absence from the city and professional engagements have prevented me from replying earlier to yours of the 15th inst., in which you define your policy regarding the publication of The Cause of the World Unrest and your announcement of your intended publication of The Protocols.
I cannot accept the theories on which you seek to justify acts which, in all moderation, I sought to characterize in my letter of the 13th inst. You disregard entirely the proposition on which my criticism is based. Nobody can go farther than I do in upholding the freedom of the press and freedom of speech. - It has been my privilege to aid in the creation of important precedents in furtherance of these fundamentals of liberty. Libel and slander, however, have always been looked upon in American law as abuses of a free press and of free speech and as attacks upon the integrity of the constitutional guarantees that you invoke. Nor do I question the right of any publisher to issue " books of opinion " to whatever subject the opinions may relate.
They may be polemical or they may attack the soundness of scientific, political or theological theories or doctrines. No fair-minded man would for a moment venture to find fault because of strictures directed against his cherished doxy.
The Protocols and The Cause of World Unrest are not, however, books of opinion. They assume to deal with facts. The Protocols purport to be the pronouncements of so-called " Wise Men of Zion". The Cause of World Unrest undertakes to charge that the Jews and the Freemasons are together engaged in a conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and the arrogation by them of world domination. It is these alleged facts that I denounce as falsehoods and as libels criminal in intent and criminal in their operation. The Protocols, which are made the basis of the Cause of World Unrest and which you properly describe as companion volumes, are so intrinsically false that even Mr. Gwynne concedes that he himself has a serious doubt as to their genuineness. That The Protocols are a fabrication similar to those that have appeared in every period of history, appears from every line of that document. I am credibly informed that the manuscript was offered for publication to seven different publishing houses in this country, who refused to have their names connected with it, before Small, Maynard & Co, undertook to issue it to the American public. The author of the Cause of World Unrest hides behind anonymity. You yourself speak of the author as being " Mr. Gwynne's author." Apparently even you do not know the pedigree of this incendiary book. Yet you have, I repeat, given it your endorsement by publishing it, even though you disavow responsibility. Your position is that of one who endorses a note to give it currency and at the same time makes a mental reservation against meeting his obligation.
No, Major Putnam, the principle which you seek to establish will not work. Whoever touches pitch is defiled. Whoever retails falsehoods and spreads them, whether it be orally or through the medium of the press, is responsible for those falsehoods. It will not do to say that you have many friends among the Jews whom you respect and that these books are not intended to reflect upon all Jews. The world is not so discriminating. People whose passions are aroused
do not differentiate. The forger of The Protocols and the mysterious author of The Cause of World Unrest make no distinctions. Neither did their prototypes of the middle ages, nor the black hundreds of modern Russia, indulge in such refinements. Troy and Tyre were alike to them.
Do not for a moment misunderstand me. I contend that there are no Jews who are now engaged or who have ever been engaged in a conspiracy such as that charged by you as existing in these books which emerge smoking from your presses. The cry of Bolshevism will not suffice. Your reference to the Brooklyn Anti-Bolshevist shows what a sad pass you have reached. To shelter yourself behind the bulwarks of an infamous pasquinade of the guttersnipe variety and to insinuate that because that sheet pretends to defend American institutions " against the Jewish bolshevist doctrines of Morris Hillquit and Leon Trotzki " you may therefore descend to the same depths, is a revelation to me. I had not believed that any real, true American would thus lend himself to the creation of ill-will and malevolence. The fact that out of the mass of Russian Jews there is an infinitesimal percentage who are Bolshevists, affords no justification for laying the sins of Bolshevism at the door of the Jewish people. To say that Bolshevism is a Jewish movement is as ridiculous as to say that the Jews are responsible for capitalism, or because there are Jewish musicians, actors and poets, that music, the drama and poetry are Jewish movements.
I am not a Zionist, and yet I regard the slurs that these books are attempting to make against Zionism to be unworthy. The very Zionists whom these books are attacking have been persecuted by the Bolsheviks and have been denounced as counter-revolutionists, just as the mass of the Jews of Russia have been pursued as members of the bourgeoisie. I am not a member of the Masonic or of any other secret order, but the attempt in these books to charge Freemasonry with participation in such a conspiracy as is proclaimed almost argues the existence of a pathological condition on the part of the author that betokens mental aberration. When one remembers that fifteen of the presidents of the United States, including George Washington, have been Freemasons, it is unnecessary to go further in condemnation of these volumes which you are pleased to denominate " books of opinion ".
I had not believed that a Jew in this country would ever be called upon to occupy the humiliating position of defending his people against the charges such as those which are being spread broadcast through your agency. If ever the time comes when it shall be desirable to answer such books, I am quite sure that it will be unnecessary for me to avail myself of your invitation to make use of the services of your firms as publishers.
Very truly yours, Louis MARSHALL.
Two days later, Putnam bowed before the will of Jewry in the following terms:
November 1st, 1920. DEAR MR MARSHALL:
Mr Gwynne, at whose instance we brought into print the American edition of his volume on World Unrest, had taken the ground that the publication of the document known as The Protocols might throw light on the organization of the Bolshevists. Their operations have caused grave concern throughout the world and they are, therefore, a matter of legitimate public discussion.
It was his opinion that if it had not been for the apprehension aroused by bolshevism, the document would probably have been permitted to rest in obscurity.
An edition of The Protocols was, therefore, published in London by Eyre & Spottiswoode, law publishers of high standing.
It had seemed to us that the readers of " The World Unrest " were entitled to have the opportunity of examining the complete document (to which frequent references are made in Mr Gwynne's volume) and we had, therefore, undertaken the publication of a carefully prepared translation by us, which is now nearly in readiness, and has involved a considerable outlay.
We now find, however, that an edition printed in Boston is being distributed as a regular publication. There is no necessity for bringing into print another volume containing substantially the same material. We have decided, therefore, in deference to the objections raised by yourself, and by my valued friend, Oscar Strauss, not to proceed1 with the publication. I am, Yours very truly.
GEORGE HAVEN PUTNAM.
What had taken place between October 29 and November 1 ? Putnam wrote to one of the parties interested that so much pressure was brought to bear on him that he had to give up publishing The Protocols, and would be obliged to withdraw unsold copies of World Unrest. It is safe to conclude that Putnam's firm was threatened with bankruptcy if it persisted. We understand that Small, Maynard & Co. of Boston and The Beckwith Co. of New York and in fact practically every firm which has published The Protocols had difficulties within a year or two. Of course it is said that that is purely accidental: but it was just such an " accident " that Putnam wished to avoid!
1. 1st edition, p. 305.
2. This League compelled the Beckwith Co, which subsequently published the Protocols after Putnam's withdrawal, to insert in every copy sold a copy of the Jewish Anti-Defamation League's refutation.
3. The reproduction in book form of a series of articles which had appeared in the Morning Post of London.
4. See ante, ch. V.
5. This edition prepared by G. H. Putnam was subsequently published by The Beckwith Company, 299 Madison Avenue, New York.
6. Our italics.
7. Our italics.
III. MORE ATTEMPTS AT REFUTATION THE LONDON TIMES LENDS A HAND
While the Jews have succeeded in having the Protocols suppressed, entirely in Russia, Poland, Rumania, and other countries in Eastern Europe, and partially in England and America, they have failed in their many ingenious efforts to have them refuted by non-Jews. Indeed the so-called refutations with which their henchmen flooded the press in 1920-21 reveal more of the real nature, workings, and associations of the Jews and their agents than they rebut the evidence of the Protocols.
It is noteworthy that not one of these numerous and contradictory refutations bears an honest, non-Jewish signature. There is the article of the notorious Princess Radzivill1 published in the Jewish Tribune (New York) for March 11, 1921, and followed by a statement by her friend, Mrs. Hurlbut. The former2 makes no mention of Mile. Glinka and describes the forgery of the protocols by Golovinskii and a renegade Jew, Manassevich Manuilov, in Paris in 1904 ". Further on, oblivious of chronology, she states that General Cherevin willed her his memoirs, including the protocols, at the time of his death in 1896. Golovinskii and Manuilov might, it would seem, have saved themselves trouble by procuring a copy of the document, which, according to Mr. Stepanov's testimony,3 had been printed and privately circulated in 1897.
Another person who wrote against the protocols, A. du Chayla, can hardly be taken more seriously. An article of his appeared on May 14, 1921, in the Tribune Juive of Paris; and later, another article on June 13 in the New York Call, a violent Communist sheet, besides articles in Soviet publications. Prof. Nilus mentions in one of his books4 meeting this Frenchman, who then paraded as a devotee of the Russian Orthodox Church. The character of this adventurer is well drawn in the reply his articles drew from a Russian lady, Madame Fermor, which is given in full.
" Lately there appeared in the Russian paper Poslednii Novosti, Nos. 331-332 a series of articles by Count Alexander de Chayla, in which he casts doubt on the authenticity of a certain document (The Protocols of the Elders of Ziori), because obtained by a man who did not inspire confidence.
"If the value of a document be based on the credit of the person by whom it is produced, one must also analyze the character of him who discredits it.
"That is why I am prompted to narrate how I became acquainted with Count du Chayla.
"I usually spent the summer on my estate in White Russia, in a village near Moguileff, where there is a famous convent. There, one day, about ten years ago, I was visited by the Superior, the Archimandrite Arsene, who introduced a young man, Count du Chayla. Du Chayla had been sent to the convent to study the Russian language and the Orthodox religion of which he pretended to be a devotee.
"Mr. Sabler5 had invited him to come to Russia and sent him to the celebrated monastery of Optina Poustine, whence he was sent to our monastery to serve as an example of anti-Catholic propaganda.
"It must be admitted that he lived up to his character and showed himself more of a Russian Orthodox than the Patriarch himself. Thanks to his zeal, beautifully sculptured angels in the Renaissance style were removed from the chapel of our monastery: du Chayla found them too Catholic. He told me the great joy he felt when he smashed these angels with a hammer. When I reproached him with an act of vandalism, his intolerance betrayed itself in the hatred which he then manifested against the Jews. Many a time I heard him say: " One must have a good pogrom in Russia." One can understand my astonishment when I read in his articles a false accusation of propaganda for pogroms against the White Army, which he now blames, he, who so loudly proclaimed that pogroms were a necessity! It is from him that I heard of the existence of Drumont's books, which he praised eloquently; he used to advise me to read them that I might understand to what extent the Jews had conquered France. He used to predict that the same fate would overtake Russia, if ever the Jews were granted full civil rights.
"Great was my surprise when I read du Chayla's attack on Drumont, whose books he now calls lies. He, who had so much admired Drumont.
"As I followed du Chayla's life in Russia, I was amazed to see the extraordinary rapidity of his political and ecclesiastical career. He became an intimate friend of the Bishops known for their Orthodoxy, and he preached the sacred and absolute power of the Russian Monarch and implacable hatred towards all foreigners. We saw du Chayla as an intimate friend of the Bishops Anthony of Volinia and Evlogii of Holm, frequent the famous salon of Countess Ignatieff. As he rose in Russian society, his activities shifted from the religious field: he took up politics, and, as a follower of Count Bobrinsky, leader of the Pan-Slavic Party, he was sent to Austria on a secret mission among the Galicians. He was subsequently arrested for espionage.
"After his return to Russia, he directed a violent campaign against the smaller racial groups of the empire, especially against the Poles and Finns. As du Chayla was always in need of money, I recommended him to the president of the commission for the affairs of Finland, Mr. Korevo, who used him for anti-Finnish propaganda in the foreign press. At the time of the declaration of war, du Chayla was a student in the theological academy of Petrograd; he was appointed chief of a field hospital organized by Bishop Pitirim and provided with funds from Rasputin. Then I lost sight of him until after the revolution, when I heard of him as an agent provocateur, inciting the Cossacks against the White Army. In 1919 du Chayla was tried by court martial and convicted of seditious activities in the pay of the Soviets. The sentence was published in the newspapers of the Crimea.
"I was astonished to find his name appended to an article in a Russian newspaper notorious for its equivocal position concerning the reconstruction of Russia. (Signed) TATIANA FERMOR."
June 9th, 1921—Paris.
Not satisfied—and rightly so—with these efforts to discredit the Protocols, and yet unable to attach the signature of a noted gentile writer to their denials, the Jews sought another expedient: the seal of approval of one of the best known newspapers would impress the general public. Heretofore the articles had borne the name of private persons: now an official exposure of the protocols was to be published over the signature of the " Correspondent of The London Times in Constantinople ". The identity of the " correspondent " was not revealed,^ although the most elementary sense of justice would insist on giving full credit to the gentleman who had made such a momentous discovery. Nor is there any evidence of his having been in Constantinople. Anyone who writes to the editor of a newspaper is a correspondent, and the number of lies which gain circulation in this fashion is notorious. The " sensational discovery " which. The Times1 thus gave to its readers was that the protocols were a " clumsy plagiarism " of a French book it called " The Dialogues of Geneva", published in Brussels in 1865.
The " correspondent" tells in a easy, off-hand manner and with perfect self-assurance, about meeting in Constantinople a Mr. W, who said: " Read this book through and you will find irrefutable proof that the Protocols of the Learned Elders ofZion is a plagiarism ".
So it wasn't the correspondent who deserved the credit for the " sensational discovery " after all; but a " Mr. X, a Russian landowner with English connexions ". Again, it is a pity that the gentleman should not have given his name and received the large reward which would surely have been his, from those who have been so active in suppressing and refuting the Protocols.
Then follows the story of Mr. X, with his views on religion, politics, secret societies, and the rest: this Mr. X is an old-fashioned gentleman and the reader is ready to believe every word, as reported by " our correspondent". Mr. X. explains how he obtained the copy of the Geneva Dialogues from an old Okhrana officer; this establishes the fact that the Russian police had made use of the book to forge the Protocols. In fact the " correspondent " goes on to identify this very copy of the Geneva Dialogues as belonging to A. Sukhotin—there is an " A. S. " scratched in the back which is conclusive—and from which the protocols were plagiarized and given to Nilus. Parallel passages from the Dialogues and the protocols are set opposite each other; and the English reader, never at home in Continental politics, is led into speculations on Napoleon Ill's relations with the Carbonari, his employment of Corsicans in the police, the employment of Corsicans by the Russian police, the knowledge Corsicans had of the existence of the Geneva Dialogues, Joly's purpose in writing them, the influence of Philippe, a Lyons mystic, on the Tsar, and so on, until the reader is completely overwhelmed. When he has reached this state, he is told: " At any rate, the fact of the plagiarism has now been conclusively established, and the legend [of the Protocols] may be allowed to pass into oblivion."
The publication of this news from Constantinople was hailed by all the Jews, whose instant enthusiasm is no less revealing than the following letter from a leading Zionist, which appeared in The Times on the same day as the "discovery".
To the Editor—The Times,
Your Constantinople correspondent, who has done a world service in tracking to their source the Protocols (for they have been carefully published throughout the world), says: "There is no evidence to show how the Geneva Dialogues reached Russia." In your leading article, however, you suggest that the protocols were forged under the auspices of Rachkovskii, head of the Russian secret police in Paris. This appears to be the truth. M. A. du Chayla, a French student of theology at St. Petersburg in 1910, who was in 1918 on the staff of the army of the Cossacks of the Don, has testified through the Tribune Juive (Paris, May 14, 1921) that Nilus told him that the protocols were sent him from Paris by his friend, Mme. K—, who had received them from General Rachkovskii. M. du Chayla confirms a suggestion of yours, that the courier who brought the ms. from Paris was Alexander Sukhotin. He has seen this very ms., which, being in poor French and varying penmanship, suggests a complex authorship in the Russian police bureau. The fact that the Geneva Dialogues have now been bought from an exmember of it, completes the chain.
That the object of the publication of 1905 was to drown the Russian revolution in Jewish blood, I, like you, have asserted. But it appears that there was a previous edition in 1902 in the shape of an appendix to a reprint of a pietistic work by Nilus, and the motive behind this earlier publication throws another curious sidelight upon the old Russian court. For that publication was apparently a move in the game to discredit in favour of Nilus a Lyons mystic. Philippe, of whose power over the Tsar the Grand Duchess Elizabeth disapproved. Knowing that Nilus was designed as Philippe's supplanter, Rachkovskii, it is thought, wished to secure his good graces by providing him with a valuable weapon against Russian liberalism.
I am sorry that your correspondent should conclude with the suggestion that those parts of the protocols not in the Geneva Dialogues may possibly have been supplied by Jews who spied on their co-religionists; for this far-fetched hypothesis gives a gleam of hope to the considerable number of organs throughout Europe that live only in the Protocols. Now is your correspondent accurate in thinking that only moral harm has been done by this historic forgery? M. du Chayla offers evidence that it has helped to goad on those countless pogroms in the Ukraine, of whose horrors Western Europe is almost ignorant. As for Nilus, he appears to be a fanatical mystagogue, honest enough except for that theological twist which betrayed itself when, confronted by the suspicion that the Protocols were forged, he replied: " Even if they were, God who could speak through Balaam's ass, could also put the truth in a liar's mouth."
ISRAEL ZANGWILL ". Far End, East Preston, Sussex, August 18, 1921.
Since then, to some extent, the Protocols have been forgotten. But, Audiatur et altera pars, in the words of Max Nordau.8 The Times " correspondent " would convince us that there are similar or identical passages to be found in the Protocols and in the Dialogues; and this we readily admit. We go farther: identical passages will be found in earlier Protocols9 which go back to the days before the dispersion.
By way of illustration, let it be assumed that the Book of Common Prayer used in the Anglican Church were unknown to the Jews. Suppose, then, that a copy of it were secretly obtained by a certain Jew and published, and that the Jews were shocked by the Anglican doctrine of which they learned in this way for the first time. It would then be easy for another Jew to show that the Book of Common Prayer was a plagiarism: it contains passages copied, word for word, from the Gospels; the Psalms are a transcript from King James' Bible; and so on. And not only that, but there are many parallels to be found in the secular literature. " At any rate ", one can imagine the second Jew saying at the end, " the fact of plagiarism has been conclusively established, and we may therefore affirm that no such Book of Common Prayer is used in the worship of the Church of England."
The second Jew would be right in pointing out the parallels in the earlier literature—though his conclusion would be ridiculous—for there is a very real connection: and so it is with the Protocols.
One might have thought that The Times, in its desire to publish the truth about the Protocols, would at least have given the correct title of the Geneva Dialogues, it is, Dialogues aux Enfers entre Machiavelli et Montesquieu, published anonymously in Brussels in 1865. Moreover a minute's search in a library catalogue shows that another book, bearing a similar title, was published some years earlier: namely, Machiavelli, Montesquieu & Rousseau, by Jacob Venedey, published by Franz Dunnicker in Berlin in 1850. The Times, with its interest in plagiarisms, might have been tempted to glance at this latter volume as also at The Prince by Machiavelli and L'Esprit des Lois by Montesquieu. Had it done so, its curiosity would have been amply rewarded: passages quoted from the Protocols as plagiarised from the Dialogues of 1865, are similar to several10 in Venedey's book of 1850, and both Jacob Venedey and Maurice Joly should be branded as plagiarists.
But the resemblance between the Protocols and Venedey's book does not stop with a few parallel passages: the spirit of both is the same; it is revolutionary, whereas the Dialogues of 1865 are socialistic and polemical. The anonymous author merely borrowed certain descriptive passages in Venedey to give colour to his argument.11
Now hadn't The Times better discover a copy of Venedey belonging to a former Okhrana officer, so as to explain how the Russian secret police were able to plagiarize the spirit, as well as a few platitudes and descriptive bits, when forging the Protocols ? Its correspondent in Peiping might make that discovery some day? No, the Peiping correspondent (or any other) will be-very careful not to make that discovery, for the simple reason that Venedey was a Jew, whereas
The Times' point is that the Jews had nothing to do with the drafting of the Protocols. Its argument is that the author of the Dialogues was a Corsican; that the Corsicans in the Paris Police preserved the Dialogues and gave a copy to the Corsican members of the Russian police, who used it to forge the Protocols: these insidious Corsicans!12 But what of Venedey ?
Jacob Venedey, born in Cologne in May, 1805, was early engaged in revolutionary activities which caused his expulsion from Germany. He settled in Paris where, in 1835, he edited a paper of subversive character, called Le Proscrit. Driven from Paris by the police, he moved to Havre, until, thanks to the representations of Arago and Mignet, friends of Cr6mieux, he was allowed to return to the capital. Meanwhile his book, Romanisme, Christianisme et Germanisme, won the praise of the French Academy, Venedey was a close friend and associate of Karl Marx. After spending the years 1843-44 in England, the headquarters of continental revolutionaries, he worked in Brussels for the founding, with Marx in 1847, of a secret organization, " The Communist League of Workers " (later the " Societe internationale de la Democratic ").
After the February revolution in 1848, Venedey joined Marx in Germany, where he became one of the chiefs of the revolutionary committee of Fifty (March, 1848), and was sent as commissar into the Oberland to stand against Hecker. Later elected as a member of the Left from Hesse-Homburg, he continued to serve on the Committee of Fifty. It was at this time that he brought out in Berlin his Machia-yelli, Montesquieu & Rousseau, stressing the views attributed to Machiavelli and Rousseau in favour of despotism and oppression.13
When order was restored in Germany, Venedey was expelled from Berlin and Breslau. He was an active member of the Free Masons and affiliated with the Carbonari;14 he was also closely associated not only with the revolution 12. It is noteworthy that no Corsican has yet raised a voice ofprotest against the charges made in The Times. Yet it is the Corsicanswho are the real victims of a libel, not the Jews tionaries of his day, but (as might be expected) with the leading Jews, the founders of the Alliance Israelite Univer-selle.15 The latter included men of as different political parties as the reactionary-imperialist Fould, the liberal-conservative Disraeli, and the communist-revolutionary Marx, and whether living under an empire, a constitutional monarchy or a republic, all laboured towards a common aim, the establishment of an international Jewish world power.16 Prominent among them and in close touch with Venedey, was Adolphe Isaac Cr6mieux (1798-1880). A Nimes lawyer with an ardent admiration for Napoleon, he became legal adviser to the Bonaparte family and an intimate of Louis Napoleon with whom he joined in overthrowing the government of Louis Philippe in 1849. A member of the Mizraim Lodge, the Scottish Rite (of which he became Supreme Master on the death of Viennet), he was familiar with all new movements; and his influence enabled him to render at least one important service to Jewry by having the Jewish murderers of Father Thomas in Damascus (1841) set at liberty. One of the leaders in the revolution of February ] 848, he was appointed minister of justice under the provisional government, and used all his political influence in the election of Louis Napoleon to the presidency of the republic. Cremieux hoped in this way to be named Prime Minister and to control French policy for a period, as Disraeli did in England somewhat later. Like Disraeli, he had the financial support of the Rothschilds; but when the President chose for his banker another Jew, Fould, and named General Cavaignac premier, Cremieux saw he had lost. Bitterly disappointed, he became so hostile to his former friend that, at the time of the coup d'e"tat in 1851, he was imprisoned at Vincennes. On his release, he identified himself with the enemies of the emperor; these included the communist associates of Marx, Mazzini, Jacob Venedey (already mentioned), Louis Blanc, Ledru Rollin, Pierre Leroux, and a group of socialists, among whom was Maurice Joly.17
Joly, some thirty years younger than Cr6mieux, with an inherited hatred of the Bonapartes, seems to have fallen very largely under his influence. Through Cr6mieux, Joly became acquainted with communists and their writings. Though, until 1871 when his ambition for a government post turned him into a violent communist, he had not in 1864 gone beyond socialism, he was so impressed with the way they presented their arguments that he could not, if the chance were offered, refrain from imitating it. And this chance came in 1864-1865, when his hatred of Napoleon, whetted by Crdmieux, led him to publish anonymously in Brussels the Dialogues aux Enfers entre Machiavelli et Montesquieu. In this work he tells us,18 " Machiavelli represents the policy of Might, while Montesquieu stands for that of Right: Machiavelli will be Napoleon, who will himself describe his abominable policy ". It was natural that he should choose the Italian Machiavelli to stand for Bonaparte, and the Frenchman Montesquieu, for the ideal statesman: it was equally natural that he should put in the mouth of Machiavelli some of the same expressions which Venedey had put in it, and which Joly had admired. His own view was: " Socialism seems to me one of the forms of a new life for the people emancipated from the traditions of the old world. I accept a great many of the solutions offered by socialism; but I reject communism, either as a social factor, or as a political institution. Communism is but a school of socialism. In politics, I understand extreme means to gain one's ends—in that at least, I am a Jacobin."19
The French authorities, however, penetrated the thinlydisguised satire: Joly was arrested and sentenced to two years imprisonment (April, 1865). But the Dialogues had pleased Cremieux as much as they had displeased the emperor, and, when his term expired, his Jewish patron rallied to his support: Joly was able to found a legal review, Le Palais, with Jules Favre, Desmaret, Leblond, Arago, Berryer, and Adolphe Cremieux as its principal stockholders.
With the fall of Napoleon III, Adolphe Cremieux once more took an open part in politics. Pushing to the front his former secretary, Gambetta, he directed through him the negotiations with Bismarck. Bismarck himself was guided by the Jew Bamberger (1832-1899), a former revolutionary of '48, but who had for years managed the Paris branch of the Jewish bank Bischofsheim & Gold-schmidt; he was also a friend of Cremieux. A third Jew in the negotiations was the son of James Rothschild.20 In this way, care was taken that the treaty should be satisfactory, if not entirely to the signatories, yet at least so to the Alliance Israelite Universelle.
From then (1871) until his death in 1880, as President of the Alliance Israelite Universelle and Supreme Master of the Scottish Rite, Cremieux was one of the promoters of the anti-clerical movement following the Franco-Prussian war. His favourite theme was that there should be one cult: speaking at a general assembly of the Alliance he said: " The Alliance is not limited to our cult; it voices its appeal to all cults and wants to penetrate in all religions, as it has penetrated into all countries. Let us endeavour boldly to bring about the union of all cults under one flag of " Union and Progress ": such is the motto of humanity."21
One cult, one flag. Are the Protocols of Nilus, or the words of Machiavelli in Joly's book or in Venedey's book, anything but an elaborate exposition of the ideas thus briefly expressed by Cremieux? His activities are one of the best examples of Jewish internationalism. Thus the principal attempt to discredit the Protocols leads directly into historical studies which substantiate and illustrate their doctrine in a remarkable and unexpected manner.
1. Princess Catherine Radzivill was convicted of forgery in London on April 30,1902, the amount involved being ?3,000, and was sentenced to two years in prison (London Times, April 16, 29, and May 1, 1902). On October 13, 1921, suit was filed against her by the Hotel Embassy, New York, for failure to pay her bill of $1,239, and on October 30 she
was arrested on the instance of the Hotel Shelbourne, New York, on a charge of defrauding the hotel of $352. (New York World, Oct. 14 and
31, 1921). Later she went to live with her friend Mrs. Hurlbut at 503 West 124th Street, New York.
2. She was one of the Russian Liberals in Paris in 1884 who furnished Mme. Juliette Adam with details of Russian court life. She has since claimed the authorship of the books by " Count Vassilii", really written by Mme. Adam.
3. Supra, p. 75.
4. Entitled On the Bank of the River of God.
5. Sabler was Procurator of the Holy Synod at St. Petersburg: he supported Rasputin and other pseudo-mystics and had a disastrous influence on the Russian Church. (Cf. Paleologue, Memoires, 1927).
6. Philip Graves.
7. August 16, 17, 18, 1921: the articles were reprinted in a booklet entitled, The Truth about The Protocols, 24 pages.
8. Supra, p. 41 (note 25).
9. Supra, pp. 71, 72.
10. For example, the passage referring to Vishnu is found in Machiavelli, Montesquieu & Rousseau, in the Dialogues, and in Protocol
11. Space does not allow us here to trace the links between Jacob Venedey, the Alliance Israelite Universelle, Adolphe Cre'mieux, Maurice Joly, and Jules Janin.
13. Another case of plagiarism at work!
14. Cf. Die Bauhiitte, Feb. 1871, date of Venedey's death.
15. Supra, p. 30.
16. In his novel Coningsby (London, 1844), Disraeli draws a picture from life of the Jews ruling the world from behind thrones as graphic as anything in the Protocols of Nilus. (It is expected that The Times will shortly be in a position to establish conclusively that Coningsby is a plagiarism of a Byzantine novel of the XVIIth century). The passage in which Rothschild (Sidonid) describes this runs as follows:
" If I followed my own impulse, I would remain here," said Sidonia. " Can anything be more absurd than that a nation should apply to an individual to maintain its credit, and with its credit, its existence as an empire and its comfort as a people; and that individual one to whom its laws deny the proudest rights of citizenship, the privilege of sitting in its senate and of holding land; for though I have been rash enough to buy several estates, my own opinion is that by the existing law of England, an Englishman of Hebrew faith cannot possess the soil."
" But surely it would be easy to repeal a law so illiberal." " Oh! as for illiberality, I have no objection to it if it be an element of power. Eschew political sentimentality. What I contend is that if you permit men to accumulate property, and they use that permission to a great extent, power is inseparable from that property, and it is in the last degree impolitic to make it in the interest of any powerful class to oppose the institutions under which they live. The Jews, for example, independent of the capital qualities for citizenship which they possess in their industry, temperance, and energy and vivacity of mind, are a race essentially monarchical, deeply religious, and shrinking themselves from converts as from a calamity, are ever anxious to see the religious systems of the countries in which they live, flourish; yet since your society has become agitated in England and powerful combinations menace your institutions, you find the once loyal Hebrew invariably arrayed in the same ranks as the leveller and the latitudinarian, and prepared to support rather than tamely continue under a system which seeks to degrade him. The Tories lose an important election at a critical moment; 'tis the Jews come forward to vote against them. The Church is alarmed at the scheme of a latitudinarian university, and learns with relief that funds are not forthcoming for its establishment; a Jew immediately advances and endows it. Yet the Jews, Coningsby, are essentially Tories. Toryism indeed is but copied from the mighty
prototype which has fashioned Europe. And every generation they must become more powerful and more dangerous to the society which is hostile to them. Do you think that the quiet humdrum persecution of a decorous representative of an English university can crush those who have successively baffled the Pharaohs, Nebuchadnezzar, Rome, and the feudal ages? The fact is you cannot destroy a pure race of the Caucasian organisation. It is a physiological fact; a simple law of nature, which has baffled Egyptian and Assyrian kings, Roman emperors, and Christian inquisitors. No penal laws, no physical tortures, can effect that a superior race should be absorbed in an inferior, or be destroyed by it. The mixed persecuting races disappear, the pure persecuted race remains. And at this moment, in spite of centuries, or tens of centuries, of degradation, the Jewish mind exercises a vast influence on the affairs of Europe. I speak not of their laws, which you still obey; of their literature, with which your minds are saturated; but of the living Hebrew intellect.
" You never observe a great intellectual movement in Europe in which the Jews do not greatly participate. The first Jesuits were Jews: that mysterious Russian diplomacy which so alarms Western Europe is organised and principally carried on by Jews; that mighty revolution (of 1848) which will be in fact a second and greater Reformation, and of which so little is as yet known in England, is entirely developing under the auspices of Jews, who almost monopolise the professorial chairs of Germany. Neander, the founder of Spiritual Christianity, and who is Regius Professor of Divinity in the University of Berlin, is a Jew. Benary, equally famous, and in the same university, is a Jew. Wehl, the Arabic Professor of Heidelberg, is a Jew. Years ago, when I was in Palestine, I met a German student who was accumulating materials for the history of Christianity and studying the genius of the place; a modest and learned man. It was Wehl; then unknown, since become the first Arabic scholar of the day, and the author of the life of Mahomet. But for the German professors of this race, their name is legion. I think there are more than ten at Berlin alone.
" I told you just now that I was going up to town to-morrow, because I always made it a rule to interpose when affairs of state were on the carpet. Otherwise, I never interfere. I hear of peace and war in newspapers, but I am never alarmed, except when I am informed that the sovereigns want treasure; then I know that monarchs are serious.
" A few years back we were applied to by Russia. Now there has been no friendship between the Court of St Petersburg and my family. It has Dutch connections which have generally supplied it; and our representations in favour of the Polish Hebrews, a numerous race, but the most suffering and degraded of all the tribes, have not been very agreeable to the Czar. However circumstances drew to an approximation between the Romanoffs and the Sidonias. I resolved to go myself to St. Petersburg. I had on my arrival an interview with the Russian Minister of Finance, Count Cancrin; I beheld the son of a Lithuanian Jew. The loan was connected with the affairs of Spain; I resolved on repairing to Spain from Russia. I travelled without intermission. I had an audience immediately on my arrival with the Spanish minister, Senor Mendizabel; I beheld one like myself, the son of a Nuevo Christiano, a Jew of Aragon. In consequence of what transpired at Madrid, I went straight to Paris to consult the President of the French Council; I beheld the son of a French Jew, a hero, an imperial marshal and very properly so, for who should be military heroes if not those who worship the Lord of Hosts? "
" And is Soult a Hebrew? "
" Yes, and others of the French marshals, and the most famous, Massena, for example; his real name was Mannaseh: but to my anecdote. The consequence of our consultations was that some northern power should be applied to in a friendly and mediative capacity. We fixed on Prussia, and the President of the Council made an application to the Prussian minister, who attended a few days after our conference. Count Arnim entered the cabinet, and I beheld a Prussian Jew. So you see, my dear Coningsby, that the world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes (pp. 249-252).
17. His father was Philippe Lambert Joly, born at Dieppe, Attorney- General of the Jura under Louis-Philippe for ten years. His mother, Florentine Corbara Courtois, was the daughter of Laurent Courtois, paymaster-general of Corsica, who had an inveterate hatred of Napo leon I. Maurice Joly was born in 1831 at Lons-le-Saulnier and educated
at Dijon: there he had begun his law studies, but left for Paris in 1849 to secure a post in the Ministry of the Interior under M. Chevreau and just before the coup d'etat. He did not finish his law studies till 1860. Committed suicide in 1878.
18. Maurice Joly: son passe, son programme (autobiography), Paris, 1870.
20. Bismarck, who had met the latter's grandfather, knew that Rothschild's real name was Meyer, and regarded him as an " Israelitish citizen of Frankfurt", hence a German subject. To make matters worse, the victor was obliged to discuss the terms of peace with this renegade subject in French, the language of the vanquished, because
Rothschild professed not to understand German. Corti, House of Rothschild, vol. II.
21. Speech made on May 31, 1864; " Union and Progress " was the name given to several revolutionary associations and Masonic lodges. " One cult" is strongly reminiscent of Protocol XVI, infra. Cf. Cr6mieux, Paris, Capitate des Religions.
IV. TEXT AND COMMENTARY OF THE PROTOCOLS
The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion may be briefly described as a blueprint for the domination of the world by a secret brotherhood. Whatever may be the truth about their authorship—and, as will be shown, this has been the subject of bitter dispute—there can be no doubt that the world society to which they look forward is nothing more or less than a world police state.
The book in which the Protocols were first embodied was published by Professor Sergyei A. Nilus in Russia in 1905, a copy being received in the British Museum on August 10th, 1906. Professor Nilus's concern was to expose what he believed to be a ruthless, cold-blooded conspiracy for the destruction of Christian civilisation. Earlier, in August and September, 1903, the Russian newspaper Snamia had published the Protocols, and they are also believed to have been published in the winter of 1902/1903 in the newspaper Moskowskija Wiedomosti. They remained unknown outside Russia, however, until after the Bolshevik Revolution, when Russian emigrants brought Nilus's book to North America and Germany.
The similarity between what was forecast in the Protocols and the fate which had befallen Russia under the Bolsheviks was so marked that, after these long years of neglect, they rapidly became one_of the most famous (or notorious) documents in the world.
In Bolshevik Russia, the penalty for their mere possession was death. It remains so to this day, both in the Soviet Union and in the Satellite countries. Outside the Iron Curtain, in South Africa possession of the Protocols is also forbidden by law, although the penalty is less drastic.
As a result of their rapidly growing fame, numerous attempts were made to discredit the Protocols as a forgery. But it was not until 1933 that the Jews resorted to legal action. On 26th June, 1933, the Federation of Jewish Communities of Switzerland and the Berne Jewish Community brought an action against five members of the Swiss National Front, seeking a judgment that the Protocols were a forgery and a prohibition of their publication.1 The procedure of the Court was astounding, the provisions of the Swiss Civil Code being deliberately set aside. Sixteen witnesses called by the plaintiffs were heard, but only one of the forty witnesses called by the defendants was allowed a hearing. The judge allowed the plaintiffs to appoint two private stenographers to keep the register of proceedings during the hearing of their witnesses, instead of entrusting the task to a Court official.
In view of these and similar irregularities, it was not surprising that, after the case had lasted just on two years, the Court pronounced the Protocols to be a forgery and demoralising literature. The decision was given on 14th May, 1935, but it was announced in the Jewish Press before it was delivered by the Court I
On 1st November, 1937, the Swiss Court of Criminal Appeal quashed this judgment in its entirety. Jewish propagandists, however, still declare that the Protocols have been "proved" to be a forgery.
It was natural that the Jews should try to discredit the Protocols, for their growing fame was focussing more public attention on other revealing utterances.
In Disraeli's The Life of Lord George Bentinck, written in 1852, there occurs this quotation:—
"The influence of the Jews may be traced in the last outbreak of the destructive principle in Europe. An insurrection takes place against tradition and aristocracy, against religion and property. Destruction of the Semitic principle, extirpation of the Jewish religion, whether in the Mosaic or the Christian form, the natural equality of men and the abrogation of property are proclaimed by the Secret Societies which form Provisional Governments and men of Jewish Race are found at the head of every one of them. The people of God co-operate with atheists; the most skilful accumulators of property ally themselves with Communists; the peculiar and chosen Race touch the hand of all the scum and low castes of Europe; and all this because they wish to destroy that ungrateful Christendom which owes to them even its name, and whose tyranny they can no longer endure."
Max Nordau, a Jew, speaking at the Zionist Congress at Basle in August 1903, made this astonishing "prophesy":—
"Let me tell you the following words as if I were showing you the rungs of a ladder leading upward and upward: Herzl, the Zionist Congress, the English Uganda proposition, the future world war, the peace conference, where with the help of England a free and Jewish Palestine will be created."
Walter Rathenau, the Jewish banker behind the Kaiser, writing in the German Weiner Frei Presse, December 24th 1912, said:—
"Three hundred men, each of whom knows all the others, govern the fate of the European continent, and they elect their successors from their entourage."
Confirmation of Rathenau's statement came twenty years later in 1931 when Jean Izoulet, a prominent member of the Jewish Alliance Israelite Universelle, wrote in his Paris la Capitale des Religions:—
"The meaning of the history of the last century is that today 300 Jewish financiers, all Masters of Lodges, rule the world."
The London Jewish Chronicle, on April 4th, 1919, declared :—
"There is much in the fact of Bolshevism itself, in the fact that so many Jews are Bolshevists, in the fact that the ideals of Bolshevism at many points are consonant with the finest ideals of Judaism." and on March 15th, 1923, the Jewish World asserted:—
"Fundamentally Judaism is Anti-Christian."
These and many similar assertions from Jewish sources were damaging enough from the Jewish point of view. Taken in conjunction with the Protocols, with which more and more people were becoming familiar, they were damning.
The attitude of many people whose concern over the growing attack on Christian civilisation was rapidly increasing was summed up by the late Henry Ford senior, the founder of the world-famous motor manufacturing company. In an interview published in the New York World on February 17th, 1921, Mr. Ford declared:
"The only statement I care to make about the Protocols is that they fit in with what is going on. They are sixteen years old, and have fitted the world situation up to this time. THEY FIT IT NOW."
Those who, like Henry Ford, could see that "they fit it now" only sixteen years after Nilus's first publication of the Protocols, naturally tended to concentrate their attention on the relatively recent phenomenon of Bolshevism. Few of them then understood the equally dangerous, if more insidious, danger of internationalism.
Now, however, more than half a century after Nilus's publication of the Protocols, the reality of that danger must be crystal clear to anybody who views the world situation objectively.
The Protocols are full of references to a "super-Government". Protocol VI, for example, states:—
"In every possible way we must develop the significance of our super-Government by representing it as the Protector and Benefactor of all those who voluntarily submit to us."
That is exactly the way in which the United Nations organisation, set up at the end of the second World War, is represented to those who voluntarily submit to it.
It is exactly the way the various United Nations special agencies—U.N.E.S.C.O. (U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation); I.L.O. (International Labour Organisation); W.H.O. (World Health Organisation); F.A.O. (Food and Agriculture Organisation); Commission on Human Rights; Genocide Convention, etc.—are represented.
For some years there has been in existence an international organisation calling itself the World Association of Parliamentarians for World Government, which pursues the same objective as that of another long-established international organisation, Federal Union. This body does not disguise the fact that the United Nations, by means of a few relatively minor changes in its Charter, could be transformed virtually overnight into a World Government.
There has long been agitation for the creation of a World Police Force. This would enable the United Nations super-Government to function as the master of an all-powerful World Police State, and the closing years of the 1950'.? have seen the agitators for a World Police Force come close to achieving their objective. The U.N. Emergency Force, established after the Suez crisis of 1956, has been openly regarded as a "pilot scheme".
Should the few changes in the Charter necessary to transform the U.N. into a super-Government be made, it will have in the special agencies ready made Ministries of Education (or Propaganda), Labour, Health, Food and Agriculture, "Justice" etc.
Can it be an accident that these things are so accurately fore-shadowed in the Protocols?
The full-scale World super-Government is not the only, nor perhaps the most immediate, danger. It is obvious to everyone that the nations of the East are being herded into subjection under the dominance of the Soviet Union. But what of the nations of the West? Are they really the "free nations" which they are popularly supposed to be?
Far from it! They are being herded into the same sort of pen as are the nations of the East under Communism—and often on the pretext that this is the only way in which they can save themselves from Communism. Late in 1957, the process had gone far enough to be given an official name. That name was the "policy of inter-dependence".
The nations of the West are being brought under international control at political, military and economic levels. They are rapidly in process of becoming controlled also on the social level. All alike are being told that their only hope lies in the surrender of national sovereignty.
National Parliaments must give way to such bodies as the Council of Europe or the Atlantic Council. National Forces must be submerged in such bodies as the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (N.A.T.O.), the Baghdad Pact or the South-East Asia Treaty Organisation (S.E.A.T.O.), so that no nation has control over its own means of defence. National economies must be submerged in such bodies as the Organisation for European Economic Co-operation (O.E.E.C.), the European Payments Union (E.P.U.) or the World Bank, so that no nation may control its own economic destiny.
Even on the social level, individual national distinctions must disappear. For example, under the "Common Market" Treaty which unites six European nations on the economic plane, provision is made for the "equalisation of social policies". And strenuous efforts have been made to herd other European nations, Great Britain among them, into this same pen in the associated European Free Trade Area.
In 1934, when the leader of the British Labour Party (Mr. Clement Attlee) told the party's annual conference:—
"We are deliberately putting loyalty to a world order above loyalty to our own country", he was widely execrated.
Twenty-three years of propaganda, however, leave their mark, and when, in 1957, a Conservative Prime Minister of Britain told the British people that they must surrender some of their national sovereignity to an unknown international cabal, scarcely a voice was raised in protest. At the close of 1957 there was an official declaration of the British Government's support for the plan which was foreshadowed in the Protocols over sixty years ago. The Earl of Gosford, Joint Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, said in the House of Lords on 7th November, 1957:—
"Her Majesty's Government are fully in agreement with World Government. We agree that this must be the goal, and that every step that is humanly possible must be taken to reach that goal."
All over the world, "federation", "integration", "regionali-sation" and "inter-dependence" are the order of the day. All this is foreshadowed in the Protocols, published more than half-a-century ago by Sergyei Nilus, which, we are told, are a forgery.
Can all this be coincidence? Could any forger be so prescient?
Or are the Protocols what Nilus and many others believed them to be—the blueprint of a conspiracy to destroy Christian civilisation and place the whole world under the domination of a small, select cabal ?
I — "AGENTUR" and "The Political"
There are two words in this translation which are unusual, the words "Agentur" and "political" used as substantives. "Agentur" appears to be adopted from the original text and it means the whole body of agents and agencies directed by the Elders, whether members of the tribe or their Gentile tools.
By "the Political" Mr. Marsden means, not exactly the "body politic" but the entire machinery of politics.
II—The Symbolic Snake of Judaism
Protocol III opens with a reference to the Symbolic Snake of Judaism. In his Epilogue to the 1905 Edition of the Protocols Nilus gives the following interesting account of this symbol:—
According to the records of secret Jewish Zionism, Solomon and other Jewish learned men had already, in 929 B.C., thought out a theoretical scheme for the peaceful conquest of the whole universe by Zion.
As the course of history unfolded, this scheme was elaborated in detail and completed by later generations of men who had been initiated into their secrets. These learned men decided by peaceful means to conquer the world for Zion with the slyness of the Symbolic Snake, whose head was to represent those who have been initiated into the plans of the Jewish administration, and the body of the Snake to represent the Jewish people—the administration was always kept secret, even from the Jewish nation itself. As this Snake penetrated into the hearts of the nations which it encountered it undermined and devoured all the non-Jewish power of these States. It is foretold that the Snake has still to finish its work, strictly adhering to the designed plan, until the course which it has to run is closed by the return of its head to Zion and until, by this means, the Snake has completed its round of Europe and has encircled it—and until, by dint of enchaining Europe, it has encompassed the whole world. This it is to accomplish by using every endeavour to subdue the other countries by economic conquest.
The return of the head of the snake to Zion can only be accomplished after the power of all the Sovereigns of Europe has been laid low, that is to say, when by means of economic crises and wholesale destruction effected everywhere, there shall have been brought about spiritual demoralisation and moral corruption, chiefly with the assistance of Jewish women masquerading as French, Italians, etc. Their example is the surest method of encouraging licentiousness among the leaders of the nations.
A map of the course of the Symbolic Snake is shown as follows:—Its first stage in Europe was in 429 B.C. in Greece, where, about the time of Pericles, the Snake first started eating into the power of that country. The second stage was in Rome in the time of Augustus, about 69 B.C. The third in Madrid in the time of Charles V, in A.D. 1552. The fourth in Paris about 1790, in the time of Louis XVI. The fifth in London from 1841 onwards (after the downfall of Napoleon). The sixth in Berlin in 1871 after the Franco-Prussian war. The seventh in St. Petersburg, over which is drawn the head of the Snake under the date of 1881.
All these states which the Snake traversed have had the foundations of their constitutions shaken, Germany, with its apparent power, forming no exception to the rule. In economic conditions England and Germany are spared, but only till the conquest of Russia is accomplished by the Snake, on which at present (i.e., 1905) all its efforts are concentrated. The further course of the Snake is not shown on this map, but arrows indicate its next movement towards Moscow, Kieff and Odessa.
It is now well known to us to what extent the latter cities form the centres of the militant Jewish race. Constantinople is shown as the last stage of the Snake's course before it reaches Jerusalem. (This map was drawn years before the occurrence of the "Young Turk"—i.e., Jewish— Revolution in Turkey).
III—The term GOYIM
The term "Goyim", meaning Gentiles or non-Jews, is used throughout the Protocols and is retained by Mr. Marsden.
THE BASIC DOCTRINE
Right lies in Might—Politics versus Morals—The End justifies the Means —"Liberty, Equality, Fraternity"—The New Aristocracy.
Putting aside fine phrases we shall speak of the significance of each thought: by comparison and deduction we shall throw light upon surrounding facts.
What I am about to set forth, then, is our system from the two points of view, that of ourselves and that of the goyim (i.e., non-Jews).
It must be noted that men with bad instincts outnumber good men, and therefore the best results in governing them are attained by violence and terrorisation, and not by academic discussions. Every man aims at power, everyone would like to become a dictator if only he could, and rare indeed are the men who would not be willing to sacrifice the welfare of all for the sake of securing their own welfare.
What has restrained the beasts of prey who are called men? What has served for their guidance hitherto?
At the dawn of society they were subjected to brutal and blind force; afterwards—to Law which is the same force, only disguised. I draw the conclusion that by the law of nature right lies in force.
Political freedom is an idea but not a fact, and one must know how to use it as a bait whenever it appears necessary to attract the masses of the people to one's party for the purpose of crushing another who is in authority. This task is rendered easier if the opponent has himself been infected with the idea of freedom, so-called liberalism, and for the sake of an idea, is willing to yield some of his power. It is precisely here that the triumph of our theory appears; the slackened reins of government are immediately, by the law of life, caught up and gathered together by a new hand, because the blind might of the nation cannot for one single day exist without guidance, and the new authority merely fits into the place of the old already weakened by liberalism.
In our day the power which has replaced that of the rulers who were liberal is the power of Gold. Time was when Faith ruled. Freedom is an impossible ideal to achieve because no one knows how to use it with moderation. It is enough to hand over a people to self-government for a certain length of time for that people to be turned into a disorganised mob. Thereafter there arises internecine strife, which soon devolves into class warfare, in the midst of which States burn down and their importance is reduced to that of a heap of ashes.
Whether a State exhausts itself in its own convulsions, whether its internal discord brings it under the power of external foes—in any case it can be accounted irretrievably lost: it is in our power. The despotism of Capital, which is entirely in our hands, reaches out to it a straw that the State, willy-nilly, must take hold of: if not—it goes to the bottom.
Should anyone of a liberal mind say that such reflections as the above are immoral I would put the following questions :—If every State has two foes and if in regard to the external foe it is allowed and not considered immoral to use every manner and art of conflict, as for example to keep the enemy in ignorance of plans of attack and defence, to attack him by night or in superior numbers, then in what way can the same means in regard to a worse foe, the destroyer of the structure of society and the commonweal, be called immoral and not permissible?
Is it possible for any sound logical mind to hope with any success to guide crowds by the aid of reasonable counsels and arguments, when any objection or contradiction, senseless though it may be, can be made, and when such objection may find more favour with the people, whose powers of reasoning are superficial? Men in masses and the men of the masses, being guided solely by petty passions, paltry beliefs, customs, traditions and sentimental theorism, fall a prey to party dissension, which hinders any kind of agreement even on the basis of a perfectly reasonable argument. Every resolution of a crowd depends upon a chance or packed majority, which, in its ignorance of political secrets,
puts forth some ridiculous resolution that lays in the administration a seed of anarchy.
The political has nothing in common with the moral. The ruler who is governed by the moral is not a skilled politician, and is therefore unstable on his throne. He who wishes to rule must have recourse both to cunning and to make-believe. Great national qualities, like frankness and honesty, are vices in politics, for they bring down rulers from their thrones more effectively and more certainly than the most powerful enemy. Such qualities must be the attributes of the kingdoms of the goyim, but we must in no wise be guided by them.
Our right lies in force. The word "right" is an abstract thought and proved by nothing. The word means no more than:—Give me what I want in order that thereby I may have proof that I am stronger than you.
Where does right begin? Where does it end?
In any State where central authority is weak, and where laws and rulers have lost their personality amid the flood of rights ever multiplying out of liberalism, I find a new right—to attack by the right of the strong, and to scatter to the winds all existing forces of order and regulation, to reconstruct all institutions and to become the sovereign lord of those who have left to us the rights of their power by laying them down voluntarily in their liberalism.
Our power in the present tottering condition of all forms of power will be more invincible than any other, because it will remain invisible until the moment when it has gained such strength that no cunning can any longer undermine it.
Out of the temporary evil we are now compelled to commit will emerge the good of an unshakeable rule, which will restore the regular course of the machinery of the national life, brought to nought by liberalism. The result justifies the means. Let us, however, in our plans, direct our attention not so much to what is good and moral as to what is necessary and useful.
Before us is a strategic plan from which we cannot deviate without running the risk of seeing the labour of many centuries brought to naught.
In order to elaborate satisfactory forms of action it is necessary to have regard to the rascality, the slackness, the instability of the mob, its lack of capacity to understand and respect the conditions of its own life, or its own welfare. It must be understood that the might of a mob is blind, senseless and unreasoning force, ever at the mercy of a suggestion from any side. The blind cannot lead the blind without bringing them into the abyss; consequently members of the mob, upstarts from the people even though they may have a genius for wisdom, yet having no understanding of the political, cannot come forward as leaders of the mob without bringing the whole nation to ruin.
Only one trained from childhood for independent rule can understand the meaning of the words that can be constructed from the political alphabet.
A people left to itself, that is, to upstarts from its midst, brings itself to ruin by party dissensions excited by the pursuit of power and honours and disorders arising therefrom. Is it possible for the masses of the people calmly and without petty jealousies to form judgements, to deal with the affairs of the country, which cannot be mixed up with personal interests? Can they defend themselves from an external foe? It is unthinkable, for a plan broken up into as many parts as there are heads in the mob loses all homogeneity, and thereby becomes unintelligible and impossible to execute.
It is only with a despotic ruler that plans can be elaborated extensively and clearly in such a way as to distribute the whole properly among the several parts of the machinery of the State: from this the conclusion is inevitable that a satisfactory form of government for any country is one that is concentrated in the hands of one responsible person. Without an absolute despotism there can be no existence for civilisation which is carried on not by the masses but by their guide, whosoever that person may be. The mob is a savage and displays its savagery at every opportunity. The moment the mob seizes freedom in its hands it quickly turns to anarchy, which in itself is the highest degree of savagery.
Behold the alcoholised animals, bemused with drink, which freedom permits them to consume to excess. It is not for us and ours to walk that road. The peoples of the goyim are bemused with alcoholic liquors; their youth has grown stupid on classicism and from early immorality, into which it has been inducted by our special agents—by tutors, lackeys, governesses in the houses of the wealthy, by clerks and others, by our women in the places of dissipation frequented by the goyim. Among the latter I also include the so-called "society ladies," voluntary followers of the others in corruption and luxury.
Our countersign is—Force and Make-believe. Only force conquers in political affairs, especially if it be concealed in the talents essential to statesmen. Violence must be the principle, and cunning and make-believe the rule for governments which do not want to lay down their crowns at the feet of agents of some new power. This evil is the one and only means to attain the end, the good. Therefore we must not stop at bribery, deceit and treachery when they should serve towards the attainment of our end. In politics one must know how to seize the property of others without hesitation if by it we secure submission and sovereignty.
Our State, marching along the path of peaceful conquest, has the right to replace the horrors of war by less noticeable and more satisfactory sentences of death, necessary to maintain the terror which tends to produce blind submission. Just but merciless severity is the greatest factor of strength in the State: not only for the sake of gain but also in the name of duty, for the sake of victory, we must keep to the programme of violence and make-believe. The doctrine of squaring accounts is precisely as strong as the means of which it makes use. Therefore it is not so much by the means themselves as by the doctrine of severity that we shall triumph and bring all governments into subjection to our super-government. It is enough for them to know that we are merciless for all disobedience to cease.
Far back in ancient times we were the first to cry among the masses of the people the words "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity," words many times repeated since those days by stupid poll-parrots who from all sides round flew down upon these baits and with them carried away the well-being of the world, true freedom of the individual, formerly so well guarded against the pressure of the mob. The would-be wise men of the goyim, the intellectuals, could not fathom these abstract words; did not note the contradiction of their meaning and interrelation; did not see that in nature there is no equality, cannot be freedom: that Nature herself has established inequality of minds, of characters, and capacities, just as immutably as she has established subordination to her laws: never stopped to think that the mob is a blind thing, that upstarts elected from among it to bear rule are, in regard to the political, the same blind men as the mob itself, that the adept, though he be a fool, can yet rule, whereas the non-adept, even if he were a genius, understands nothing in the political—to all these things the goyim paid no regard; yet all the time dynastic rule rested upon these tenets: for the father passed on to the son a knowledge of the course of political affairs in such wise that none should know it but members of the dynasty and none could betray it to the governed. As time went on the meaning of the dynastic transference of the true position of affairs in the political was lost, and this aided the success of our cause.
In all corners of the earth the words "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity" brought to our ranks, thanks to our blind agents, whole legions who bore our banners with enthusiasm. And all the time these words were canker-worms at work boring into the well-being of the goyim, putting an end everywhere to peace, quiet, solidarity and destroying all the foundations of the goya States. As you will see later, this helped us to our triumph: it enabled us to grasp, among other things, the master card—the destruction of the privileges, or in other words of the very existence of the aristocracy of the goyim, that class which was the only defence peoples and countries had against us. On the ruins of the natural and genealogical aristocracy of the goyim we have set up the aristocracy of our educated class headed by the aristocracy of money. The qualifications for this aristocracy we have established in wealth, which is dependent upon us, and in knowledge, for which our learned elders provide the motive force.
Our triumph has been rendered easier by the fact that in our relations with the men whom we wanted we have always worked upon the most sensitive chords of the human mind, upon the cash account, upon the cupidity, upon the insatiability for material needs of man; and each one of these human weaknesses, taken alone, is sufficient to paralyse initiative, for it hands over the will of men to the disposition of him who has bought their activities.
The abstraction of freedom has enabled us to persuade the mob in all countries that their government is nothing but the steward of the people who are the owners of the country, and that the steward may be replaced like a worn-out glove.
It is this possibility of replacing the representatives of the people which has placed them at our disposal, and, as it were, given us the power of appointment.
Routine scientific government—Darwinism, Marxism, Nietzcheism—Press-inculcated mentality.
It is indispensable for our purposes that wars, as far as assible, should not result in territorial gains: war will urns be brought on to the economic ground, where the nations will not fail to perceive in the assistance we give the strength of our predominance, and this state of things will put both sides at the mercy of our international agentur, which possesses millions of eyes ever on the watch and unhampered by any limitations whatsoever. Our international rights will then wipe out national rights, in the proper sense of right, and will rule the nations precisely as the civil law of States rules the relations of their subjects among themselves. The administrators, whom we shall choose from among the public with strict regard to their capacities for servile obedience, will not be persons trained in the arts of government and will therefore easily become pawns in our game in the hands of men of learning and genius, who will be their advisers, specialists bred and reared from early childhood to rule the affairs of the whole world. As is well known to you, these specialists of ours have been drawing the information they need to fit them for rule from our political plans, from the lessons of history, from observations made of the events of every moment as it passes. The goyim are not guided by practical use of unprejudiced historical observation, but by theoretical routine without any critical regard for consequent results. We need not, therefore, take any account of them—let them amuse themselves until the hour strikes, or live on hopes of new forms of enterprising pastime, or on the memories of all they have enjoyed. For them, let that play the principal part which we have persuaded them to accept as the dictates of science (theory). It is with this object in view that we are constantly, by means of our press, arousing a blind confidence in these theories. The intellectuals of the goyim will puff themselves up with their knowledge and without any logical verification will put into effect all the information available from science, which our agentur specialists have cunningly pieced together for the purpose of educating their minds in the direction we want.
Do not suppose for a moment that these statements are empty words: think carefully of the successes we arranged for Darwinism, Marxism, Nietzcheism. To us Jews, at any rate, it should be plain to see what a disintegrating effect these directives have had upon the minds of the goyim.
It is indispensable for us to take account of the thoughts, characters, tendencies of the nations in order to avoid making slips in the political and in the direction of administrative affairs. The triumph of our system, and of the machinery of which it is composed, which may vary according to the temperament of the peoples we encounter, will not be assured unless its practical application is based upon a resume of the lessons of the past in the light of the present.
In the hands of the States of to-day there is a great force that creates the movement of thought in the people, and that is the Press. The part played by the Press is to keep pointing out requirements supposed to be indispensable, to give voice to the complaints of the people, to express and to create discontent. It is in the Press that the triumph of freedom of speech finds its incarnation. But the goyim States have not known how to make use of this force; and it has fallen into our hands. Through the Press we have gained the power to influence while remaining ourselves in the shade; thanks to the Press we have got the gold in our hands, notwithstanding that we have had to gather it out of oceans of blood and tears. But it has paid us, though we have sacrificed many of our people. Each victim on our side is worth in the sight of God a thousand goyim.
METHODS OF CONQUEST
The Symbolic Snake—"People's Rights"—Liquidation of the Goyim—"Sovereign Lord of the World"—Universal economic crisis—"Ours they will not touch..."—Secret Masonic agents.
Today I may tell you that our goal is now only a few steps off. There remains but a small space to cross of the long path we have trodden before the cycle of the Symbolic Snake, by which we symbolise our people, will be completed. When this ring closes, all the States of Europe will be locked in its coil as in a powerful vice.
The constitutional scales of these days will shortly break down, for we have established them with a certain lack of accurate balance in order that they may oscillate incessantly until they wear through the pivot on which they turn. The goyim are under the impression that they have welded them sufficiently strong and they have all along kept on expecting that the scales would come into equilibrium. But the pivots—the kings onJtheir thrones—are hemmed in by their representatives, who play the fool, distraught with their own uncontrolled and irresponsible power. This power they owe to the terror which has been breathed into the palaces. As they have lost contact with their people, the kings on their thrones are no longer able to come to terms with them and so strengthen themselves against seekers after power. We have made a gulf between the far-seeing Sovereign Power and the blind force of the people so that both have lost all meaning, for like the blind man and his stick, both are powerless apart.
In order to incite seekers after power to abuse it we have set all forces in opposition one to another, breaking up their liberal tendencies towards independence. To this end we have stirred up every form of enterprise, we have armed all parties, we have set up authority as a target for every ambition. Of States we have made gladiatorial arenas where a host of confused issues contend .... A little more, and disorders and bankruptcy will be universal ....
Babblers inexhaustible have turned into oratorical contests the sittings of Parliament and Administrative Boards. Bold journalists and unscrupulous pamphleteers daily fall upon executive officials. The abuse of power is the final lever preparing all institutions for their overthrow, when everything will fly skywards under the blows of the maddened mob.
All people are chained down to heavy toil by poverty more firmly than ever they were chained by slavery and serfdom; from these they might free themselves, one way and another these problems could be overcome, but from want they will never get away. We have included in the constitution such rights as to the masses appear fictitious and not actual rights. All these so-called "People's Rights" can exist only as an idea which can never be realised in practical life. What is it to the proletarian labourer, bowed double over his heavy toil, crushed by his lot in life, if talkers get the right to babble, if journalists get the right to scribble any nonsense side by side with good stuff, once the proletariat obtains no other profit from the constitution, save only those pitiful crumbs which we fling them from our table in return for their voting in favour of what we dictate, in favour of the men we place in power, the servants of our agentur .... Republican rights for a poor man are no more than a bitter piece of irony, for since he is obliged to toil almost all day, on the one hand, he is unable to use them, and on the other, they rob him of all guarantee of regular and certain earnings by making him dependent on strikes by his comrades or lockouts by his masters.
The people under our guidance have annihilated the aristocracy, who were their one and only defence and foster-mother for the sake of their own advantage which is inseparably bound up with the well-being of the people. Nowadays, with the destruction of the aristocracy, the people have fallen into the grips of merciless money-grinding scoundrels who have laid a pitiless and cruel yoke upon the necks of the workers.
We appear on the scene as the alleged saviours of the worker from this oppression and we suggest that he should enter the ranks of our fighting forces—Socialists, Anarchists, Communists—to whom we always give support in accordance with an alleged brotherly rule (of the solidarity of all humanity) of our social masonry. The aristocracy, which enjoyed by law the labour of the workers, was interested in seeing that the workers were well fed, healthy and strong. We are interested in just the opposite—in the diminution, the killing out of the goyim. Our power is in the chronic shortness of food and physical weakness of the worker because by all that this implies he is made the slave of our will, and he will not find in his own authorities either strength or energy to set against our will. Hunger gives capital the right to rule the worker more surely than it was given to the aristocracy by the legal authority of kings.
By want and the envy and hatred which it engenders we shall move the mobs and with their hands we shall wipe out all those who hinder us on our way.
When the hour strikes for our Sovereign Lord of all the World to be crowned it is these same hands which will sweep away everything that might be a hindrance thereto.
The goyim have lost the habit of thinking unless prompted by the suggestions of our specialists. Therefore they do not see the urgent necessity of what we, when our kingdom comes, shall adopt at once, namely this, that it is essential to reach in national schools one simple, true piece of knowledge, the basis of all knowledge—the knowledge of the structure of human life, of social existence, which requires division of labour, and, consequently, the division of men into classes and conditions. It is essential for all to know that owing to difference in the objects of human activity there cannot be any equality, that he who by any act of his own compromises a whole class cannot be equally responsible before the law with him who affects no one but only his own honour. The true knowledge of the structure of society, into the secrets of which we do not admit the goyim, would demonstrate to all men that position and work must be kept within a certain circle, that they may not become a source of human suffering, arising from an education which does not correspond with the work which individuals are called upon to do. After a thorough study of this knowledge the people will voluntarily submit to authority and accept such position as is appointed them in the State. In the present state of knowledge and the direction we have given to its development the people, blindly believing things in print, cherishes—thanks to promptings intended to mislead and to its own ignorance—a blind hatred towards all conditions which it considers above itself, for it has no understanding of the meaning of class and condition.
This hatred will be still further magnified by the effects of an economic crisis, which will stop dealings on the exchanges and bring industry to a standstill. We shall create by all the secret subterranean methods open to us and with the aid of gold, which is all hi our hands, a universal economic crisis whereby we shall simultaneously throw upon the streets whole mobs of workers in all the countries of Europe. These mobs will rush delightedly to shed the blood of those whom, in the simplicity of their ignorance, they have envied from their cradles, and whose property they will then be able to loot.
Ours they will not touch, because the moment of attack will be known to us and we shall take measures to protect our own.
We have demonstrated that progress will bring all the goyim to the sovereignty of reason. Our despotism will be precisely that; for it will know how to pacify all unrest by wise severities, to cauterise liberalism out of all institutions.
When the populace has seen that all sorts of concessions and indulgences are yielded it in the name of freedom, imagining itself to be sovereign lord it has stormed its way to power, but, naturally, like every other blind man, it has come upon a host of stumbling blocks, it has rushed to find a guide, it has never had the sense to return to the former state and it has laid down its plenipotentiary powers at our feet. Remember the French Revolution, to which it was we who gave the name of "Great": the secrets of its preparations are well known to us for it was wholly the work of our hands.
Ever since that time we have been leading the peoples from one disenchantment to another, so that in the end they should turn also from us in favour of that King-Despot of the blood of Zion, whom we are preparing for the world.
At the present day we are, as an international force, invincible, because if attacked by some we are supported by other States. It is the bottomless rascality of the goyim peoples, who crawl on their bellies to force, but are merciless towards weakness, unsparing to faults and indulgent to crimes, unwilling to bear the contradictions of a free social system but patient unto martyrdom under the violence of a bold despotism—it is those qualities which are aiding us to independence. From the premier-dictators of the present day the goyim peoples suffer patiently and bear abuses for the least of which they would have beheaded twenty kings.
What is the explanation of this phenomenon, this curious inconsequence of the masses of the peoples in their attitude towards what would appear to be events of the same order?
It is explained by the fact that these dictators whisper to the peoples through their agents that through these abuses they are inflicting injury on the States with the highest purpose—to secure the welfare of the peoples, the international brotherhood of them all, their solidarity and equality of rights. Naturally they do not tell the peoples that this unification must be ccomplished only under our sovereign rule.
And thus the people condemn the upright and acquit the guilty, persuaded ever more and more that it can do whatsoever it wishes. Thanks to this state of things the people are destroying every kind of stability and creating disorders at every step.
The word "freedom" brings out the communities of men to fight against every kind of force, against every kind of authority, even against God and the laws of nature. For this reason we, when we come into our kingdom, shall have to erase this word from the lexicon of life as implying a principle of brute force which turns mobs into bloodthirsty beasts.
These beasts, it is true, fall asleep again every time when they have drunk their fill of blood, and at such times can easily be riveted into their chains. But if they be not given blood they will not sleep but continue to struggle.
MATERIALISM REPLACES RELIGION
Stages of a Republic—Gentile masonry a screen—International speculation in industry—Cult of Gold.
Every republic passes through several stages. The first of these is comprised in the early days of mad raging by the blind mob, tossed hither and thither, right and left: the second is demagogy from which is born anarchy, and that leads inevitably to despotism—not any longer legal and overt, and therefore responsible, despotism, but unseen and secretly hidden, yet nevertheless sensibly felt despotism in the hands of some secret organisation or other, whose acts are the more unscrupulous in as much as it works behind a screen, behind the backs of all sorts of agents, to change whom not only does not injuriously affect but actually aids the secret force by saving it, thanks to continual changes, from the necessity of expending its resources on rewarding long services.
Who and what is in a position to overthrow an invisible force? And this is precisely what our force is. Gentile masonry blindly serves as a screen for us and our objects, but the plan of action of our force, even its very abiding-place, remains for the whole people an unknown mystery.
But even freedom might be harmless and have its place in the State economy without injury to the well-being of the peoples if it rested upon the foundation of faith in God, upon the brotherhood of humanity, unconnected with the conception of equality, which is negatived by the very laws of creation, for they have established subordination. With such a faith as this a people might be governed by a wardship of parishes, and would walk contentedly and humbly under
the guiding hand of its spiritual pastor submitting to the dispositions of God upon earth. This is the reason why it is indispensable for us to undermine all faith, to tear out of the minds of the goyim the very principle of Godhead and the spirit, and to put in its place arithmetical calculations and material needs.
In order to give the goyim no time to think and take note, their minds must be diverted towards industry and trade. Thus, all the nations will be swallowed up in pursuit of gain and in the race for it will not take note of their common foe. But again, in order that freedom may once for all disintegrate and ruin the communities of the goyim, we must put industry on a speculative basis: as a result, what is withdrawn from the land by industry will slip through their hands and pass into speculation, that is, to our classes.
The intensified struggle for superiority and shocks delivered to economic life will create, nay, have already created, disenchanted, cold and heartless communities. Such communities will foster a strong aversion towards the higher political and towards religion. Their only guide is gain, that is Gold, which they will erect into a veritable cult, for the sake of those material delights which it can give. Then will the hour strike when, not for the sake of attaining the good, not even to win wealth, but solely out of hatred towards the privileged, the lower classes of the goyim will follow our lead against our rivals for power, the intellectuals of the goyim.
DESPOTISM & MODERN PROGRESS
Centralised Government—Gulfs separating States—Sham eloquence to overcome public opinion—Super-Government Administration.
What form of administrative rule can be given to communities in which corruption has penetrated everywhere, communities where riches are attained only by the clever surprise tactics of semi-swindling tricks; where looseness reigns; where morality is maintained by penal measures and harsh laws but not by voluntarily accepted principles; where the feelings towards faith and country are obliterated by cosmopolitan convictions? What form of rule is to be given to these communities if not that despotism which I shall describe to you later? We shall create an intensified centralisation of government in order to grip in our hands all the forces of the community. We shall regulate mechanically all the actions of the political life of our subjects by new laws. These laws will withdraw one by one all the indulgences and liberties which have been permitted by the goyim, and our kingdom will be distinguished by a despotism of such magnificent proportions as to be at any moment and in every place in a position to wipe out any goyim who oppose us by deed or word.
We shall be told that such a despotism as I speak of is not consistent with the progress of these days, but I will prove to you that it is.
In the times when the peoples looked upon kings on their thrones as on a pure manifestation of the will of God, they submitted without a murmur to the despotic power of kings: but from the day when we insinuated into their minds the conception of their own rights they began to regard the occupants of thrones as mere ordinary mortals. The holy unction of the Lord's Annointed has fallen from the heads of kings in the eye of the people, and when we also robbed them of their faith in God the might of power was flung upon the streets into the place of public proprietorship and was seized by us.
Moreover, the art of directing masses and individuals by means of cleverly manipulated theory and verbiage, by regulations of life in common and all sorts of other tricks, in all of which the goyim understand nothing, belongs likewise to the specialists of our administrative brain. Reared on analysis, observation, on delicacies of fine calculation, in this species of skill we have no rivals, any more than we have in the drawing up of plans of political action and solidarity. In this respect the Jesuits alone might have compared with us, but we have contrived to discredit them in the eyes of the unthinking mob as an overt organisation, while we ourselves all the while have kept our secret organisation in the shade. However, it is probably all the same to the world who is its sovereign lord, whether the head of Catholicism or our despot of the blood of Zion! But to us, the Chosen People, it is very far from being a matter of indifference.
For a time perhaps we might be successfully dealt with by a coalition of the goyim of all the world: but from this danger we are secured by the discord existing among them whose roots are so deeply seated that they can never now be plucked up. We have set one against another the personal and national reckonings of the goyim, religious and race hatreds, which we have fostered into a huge growth in the course of the past twenty centuries. This is the reason why there is not one State which would anywhere receive support if it were to raise its arm, for every one of them must bear in mind that any agreement against us would be unprofitable to itself. We are too strong—there is no evading our power. The nations cannot come to even an inconsiderable private agreement without our secretly having a hand in it.
Per Me reges regnant. "It is through me that Kings reign." And it was said by the prophets that we were chosen by God Himself to rule over the whole earth. God has endowed us with genius that we may be equal to our task. Were genius in the opposite camp it would still struggle against us, but even so a newcomer is no match for the old-established settler: the struggle would be merciless between us, such a fight as the world has never yet seen. Aye, and the genius on their side would have arrived too late. The wheels of the machinery of all States are moved by the force of the engine, which is in our hands, and that engine of the machinery of States is—Gold. The science of political economy invented by our learned elders has for long past been giving royal prestige to capital.
Capital, if it is to co-operate untrammelled, must be free to establish a monopoly of industry and trade: this is already being put in execution by an unseen hand in all quarters of the world. This freedom will give political force to those engaged in industry, and that will help to oppress the people. Nowadays it is more important to disarm the peoples than to lead them into war; more important to use for our advantage the passions which have burst into flames than to quench their fire; more important to catch up and interpret the ideas of others to suit ourselves than to eradicate them. The principal object of our directorate consists in this: to debase the public mind by criticism; to lead it away from serious reflection calculated to arouse resistance; to distract the forces of the mind towards a sham fight of empty eloquence.
In all ages the peoples of the world, equally with individuals, have accepted words for deeds, for they are content with a show and rarely pause to note, in the public arena, whether promises are followed by performances. Therefore we shall establish show institutions which will give eloquent proof of their benefit to progress.
We shall assume the liberal physiognomy of all parties, of all directions, and we shall give that physiognomy a voice in orators who will speak so much that they will exhaust the patience of their hearers and produce an abhorrence of oratory.
In order to put public opinion into our hands we must bring it into a state of bewilderment by giving expression from all sides to so many contradictory opinions and for such length of time as will suffice to make the goyim lose their heads in the labyrinth and come to see that the best thing is to have no opinion of any kind in matters political, which it is not given to the public to understand, because they are understood only by him who guides the public. This is the first secret.
The second secret requisite for the success of our government is comprised in the following: To multiply to such an extent national failings, habits, passions, and conditions of civil life, that it will be impossible for anyone to know where he is in the resulting chaos, so that the people in consequence will fail to understand one another. This measure will also serve us in another way, namely, to sow discord in all parties, to dislocate all collective forces which are still unwilling to submit to us, and to discourage any kind of personal initiative which might in any degree hinder our affair. There is nothing more dangerous to us than personal initiative: if it has genius behind it, such initiative can do more than can be done by millions of people among whom we have sown discord. We must so direct the education of the goyim communities that whenever they come upon a matter requiring initiative they drop their hands in despairing impotence. The strain which results from freedom of action saps the forces when it meets with the freedom of another. From this collision arise grave moral shocks, disenchantments, failures. By all these means we shall so wear down the goyim that they will be compelled to offer us international power of a nature that will enable us without any violence gradually to absorb all the State forces of the world and to form a Super-Government. In place of the rulers of to-day we shall set up a bogey which will be called the Super-Government Administration. Its hands will reach out in all directions like nippers and its organisation will be of such colossal dimensions that it cannot fail to subdue all the nations of the world.
Pict 5. дПЪЧПМЕОП ГЕОЪХТПА. нПУЛЧБ, 28 УЕОФСВТС 1905 ЗПДБ.
The Subtitle page from the 2nd edition (1905) with the words: Passed by the Censor Moscow. 28th of September, 1905. The British Museum Library stamp is shown.
Reservoirs of riches—Destruction ofgoy aristocracy—Vicious circle of rising prices.
We shall soon begin to establish huge monopolies, reservoirs of colossal riches, upon which even large fortunes of the goyim will depend to such an extent that they will go to the bottom together with the credit of the States on the day after the political smash ....
You gentlemen here present who are economists, just imagine the significance of this combination! ....
In every possible way we must develop the significance of our Super-Government by representing it as the Protector and Benefactor of all those who voluntarily submit to us.
The aristocracy of the goyim as a political force, is dead —we need not take it into account; but as landed proprietors they can still be harmful to us since as such they are self-sufficient. It is essential therefore for us at whatever cost to deprive them of their land. This object will be best attained by increasing the burdens upon landed property— in loading lands with debts. These measures will check land-holding and keep it in a state of humble and unconditional submission.
The aristocrats of the goyim, being hereditarily incapable of contenting themselves with little, will rapidly burn up and fizzle out.
At the same time we must intensively patronise trade and industry, but, first and foremost, speculation, whose part is to provide a counterpoise to industry: the absence of speculative industry will multiply capital in private hands and will serve to restore agriculture by freeing the land from indebtedness to the land banks. We want industry to drain off from the land both labour and capital and by means of speculation transfer into our hands all the money of the world, and thereby throw all the goyim into the ranks of the proletariat. Then the goyim will bow down before us, if for no other reason but to get the right to exist.
To completely ruin the industry of the goyim we shall bring to the assistance of speculation the luxury which we have developed among the goyim, that greedy demand for luxury which is swallowing up everything. We shall raise the rate of wages which, however, will not bring any advantage to the workers, for, at the same time, we shall produce a rise in prices of the first necessaries of life alleging that it arises from the decline of agriculture and cattle-breeding; we shall further undermine sources of production, artfully and deeply by accustoming the workers to anarchy and to drunkenness, and side by side therewith taking all measures to extirpate from the face of the earth all the educated forces of the goyim.
In order that the true meaning of things may not strike the goyim before the proper time we shall mask it under an alleged ardent desire to serve the working classes and the great principles of political economy about which our economic theories are carrying on an energetic propaganda.
Encouraging an arms race—Universal war to check goy opposition—The guns of America, China and Japan.
The intensification of armaments, the increase of police forces—are all essential for the completion of the aforementioned plans. We desire that there should be in all the States of the world, besides ourselves, only the masses of the proletariat, a few millionaires devoted to our interests, police and soldiers.
Throughout all Europe, and by means of relations with Europe, in other continents also, we must create ferments, discords, and hostility. Therein we gain a double advantage. In the first place we keep in check all countries, for they well know that we have the power whenever we like to create disorders or to restore order. All these countries are accustomed to see in us an indispensable force of coercion. In the second place, by our intrigues we shall tangle up all the threads which we have woven into the cabinets of all States by means of the political, by economic treaties, or loan obligations. In order to succeed in this we must use great cunning and penetration during negotiations and agreements, but, as regards what is called the "official language," we shall keep to opposite tactics and assume the mask of honesty and compliancy. In this way the peoples and governments of the goyim, whom we have taught to look only at the outside of whatever we present to their notice, will still continue to accept us as the benefactors and saviours of the human race.
We must be in a position to respond to every act of opposition by war with the neighbours of that country which dares to oppose us: but if these neighbours should also venture to stand collectively together against us, then we must offer resistance by a universal war.
The principal factor of success in the political is the secrecy of its undertakings: the word should not agree with the deeds of the diplomat.
We must compel the government of the goyim to take action in the direction favoured by our widely-conceived plan, already approaching the desired consummation, by what we shall represent as public opinion, secretly prompted by us through the means of that so-called "Great Power"— the Press, which with a few exceptions that may be disregarded, is already entirely in our hands.
In a word, to sum up our system of keeping the governments of the goyim in Europe in check, we shall show our strength to one of them by terrorist attempts and to all, if we allow the possibility of a general rising against us, we shall respond with the guns of America or China or Japan.
Legal justification for audacity—Super-educational training— Control of bankers, industrialists and capitalists.
We must arm ourselves with all the weapons which our opponents might employ against us. We must search out the very finest shades of expression and knotty points in the Lexicon of legal justification for those cases where we shall have to pronounce judgments that might appear abnormally audacious and unjust, for it is important that these resolutions should be set forth in expressions that shall seem to be the most exalted moral principles cast into legal form. Our directorate must surround itself with all these forces of civilization among which it will have to work. It will surround itself with publicists, practical jurists, administrators, diplomats and finally, with persons prepared by a special super-educational training in our special schools. These persons will have cognizance of all the secrets of the social structure, they will know all the languages that can be made up by political alphabets and words; they will be made acquainted with the whole underside of human nature, with all its sensitive chords on which they will have to play. These chords are the cast of mind of the goyim, their tendencies, shortcomings, vices and qualities, the particularities of classes and conditions. Needless to say that the talented assistants of authority, of whom I speak, will not be taken from among the goyim, who are accustomed to perform their administrative work without giving themselves the trouble to think what its aim is, and never consider what it is needed for. The administrators of the goyim sign papers without reading them, and they serve either for mercenary reasons or for ambition.
We shall surround our government with a whole world of economists. That is the reason why economic sciences form the principal subject of the teaching given to the Jews. Around us again will be a whole constellation of bankers, industrialists, capitalists and—the main thing—millionaires, because in substance everything will be settled by the question of figures.
For a time, until there will no longer be any risk in entrusting responsible posts in our States to our brother-Jews, we shall put them in the hands of persons whose past and reputation are such that between them and the people lies an abyss, persons who, if they disobey our instructions, must face criminal charges or disappear—this in order to make them defend our interests to their last gasp.
Meaning of anti-semitism—Source of the all-engulfing terror, Boosting of false theories.
In applying our principles let attention be paid to the character of the people in whose country you live and act: a general, identical application of them, until such time as the people shall have been re-educated to our pattern, cannot succeed. But by approaching their application cautiously you will see that not a decade will pass before the most stubborn character will change and we shall add a new people to the ranks of those already subdued by us.
The words of the liberal, which are in effect the words of our masonic watchword, namely, "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity," will, when we come into our kingdom, be changed by us into words no longer a watchword, but only an expression of idealism, namely, into: "The right of liberty, the duty of equality, the ideal of brotherhood." That is how we shall put it—and so we shall catch the bull by the horns . . . . De facto we have already wiped out every kind of rule except our own, although de jure there still remain a good many of them. Nowadays, if any States raise a protest against us it is only pro forma at our discretion, and by our direction, for their anti-Semitism is indispensable to us for the management of our lesser brethren. I will not enter into further explanations, for this matter has formed the subject of repeated discussion amongst us.
For us there are no checks to limit the range of our activity. Our Super-Government subsists in extra-legal conditions which are described in the accepted terminology by the energetic and forcible word—Dictatorship. I am in a position to tell you with a clear conscience that at the proper time we, the law-givers, shall execute judgment and sentence, we shall slay and we shall spare; we, as head of all our troops, are mounted on the steed of the leader. We rule by force of will, because in our hands are the fragments of a once powerful party, now vanquished by us. And the weapons in our hands are limitless ambition, burning greediness, merciless vengeance, hatred and malice.
It is from us that the all-engulfing terror proceeds. We have in our service persons of all opinions, of all doctrines, restoring monarchists, demagogues, socialists, communists, and Utopian dreamers of every kind. We have harnessed them all to the task: each one of them on his own account is boring away at the last remnants of authority, is striving to overthrow all established forms of order. By these acts all states are in torture; they exhort to tranquillity, they are ready to sacrifice everything for peace: but we will not give them peace until they openly acknowledge our international Super-Government, and with submissiveness.
The people have raised a howl about the necessity of settling the question of Socialism by way of an international agreement. Division into fractional parties has given them into our hands, for, in order to carry on a contested struggle, one must have money, and the money is all in our hands.
We might have reason to apprehend a union between the "clear-sighted" force of the goy kings on their thrones and the "blind" force of the goy mobs, but we have taken all needful measure against any such possibility: between the one and the other force we have erected a bulwark in the shape of a mutual terror between them. In this way the blind force of the people remains our support and we, and we only, shall provide them with a leader and, of course, direct them along the road that leads to our goal.
In order that the hand of the blind mob may not free itself from our guiding hand, we must every now and then enter into close communion with it, if not actually in person, at any rate through some of the most trusty of our brethren. When we are acknowledged as the only authority we shall discourse with the people personally on the market places, and we shall instruct them on questions of the political in such wise as may turn them in the direction that suits us.
Who is going to. verify what is taught in the village schools ? But what an envoy of the government or a king on his throne himself may say cannot but become immediately known to the whole State, for it will be spread abroad by the voice of the people.
In order not to annihilate the institutions of the goyim before it is time we have touched them with craft and delicacy, and have taken hold of the ends of the springs which move their mechanism. These springs lay in a strict but just sense of order; we have replaced them by the chaotic licence of liberalism. We have got our hands into the administration of the law, into the conduct of elections, into the press, into the liberty of the person, but principally into education and training as being the corner-stones of a free existence.
We have fooled, bemused and corrupted the youth of the goyim by rearing them in principles and theories which are known to us to be false although it is by us that they have been inculcated.
Above the existing laws, without substantially altering them, and by merely twisting them into contradictory interpretations, we have erected something grandiose in the way of results. These results found expression first in the fact that the interpretations masked the laws: afterwards they entirely hid them from the eyes of the governments since it had become impossible to understand the tangled web of legislation.
This is the origin of the theory of arbitration.
You may say that the goyim will rise upon us, arms in hand, if they guess what is going on before the time comes; but in the West we have prepared against this a manoeuvre of such appalling terror that the very stoutest hearts quail— the undergrounds, those subterranean corridors, before the time comes, will be driven under all capitals, from whence those capitals will be blown into the air with all their organisations and archives.
PREPARING FOR POWER
Camouflaged political freedom—Universal suffrage—The rise of republics—Transition to masonic despotism—Proclamation of the "Lord of all the World"—Innoculation of diseases.
Today I begin with a repetition of what I said before, and I beg you to bear in mind that government and peoples are content in the political with outside appearances. And how, indeed, are the goyim to perceive the underlying meaning of things when their representatives give the best of their energies to enjoying themselves? For our policy it is of the greatest importance to notice this detail; it will be of assistance to us when we come to consider the division of authority, freedom of speech, of the press, of religion (faith), of the law of association, of equality before the law, of the inviolability of property, of the dwelling, of taxation (the idea of concealed taxes), of the reflex force of the laws. All these questions are such as ought not to be touched upon directly and openly before the people. In cases where it is indispensable to touch upon them they must not be categorically named, it must merely be declared without detailed exposition that the principles of contemporary law are acknowledged by us. The reason for keeping silence in this respect is that by not naming a principle we leave ourselves freedom of action, to drop this or that out of it without attracting notice; if they were all categorically named they would all appear to have been already given.
The mob cherishes a special affection and respect for the geniuses of political power and accepts all their deeds of violence with the admiring response: "rascally, well, yes, it is rascally, but it's clever! . . . a trick, if you like, but how craftily played, how magnificently done, what impudent audacity!" ....
We count upon attracting all nations to the task of erecting the new fundamental structure, the project for which has been drawn up by us. This is why, first and foremost, it is indispensable for us to arm ourselves and to store up in ourselves that absolutely reckless audacity and irresistible might of the spirit which in the person of our active workers will break down all hindrances in our way.
When we have accomplished our coup d'etat we shall say then to the various peoples: "Everything has gone terribly badly, all have been worn out with sufferings. We are destroying the causes of your torment—nationalities, frontiers, differences of coinages. You are at liberty, of course, to pronounce sentence upon us, but can it possibly be a just one if it is confirmed by you before you make any trial of what we are offering you." .... Then will the mob exalt us and bear us up in their hands in a unanimous triumph of hopes and expectations. Voting, which we have made the instrument which will set us on the throne of the world by teaching even the very smallest units of members of the human race to vote by means of meetings and agreements by groups, will then have served its purposes and will play its part then for the last time by a unanimity of desire to make close acquaintance with us before condemning us.
To secure this we must have everybody vote without distinction of classes and qualifications, in order to establish an absolute majority, which cannot be got from the educated propertied classes. In this way, by inculcating in all a sense of self-importance, we shall destroy among the goyim the importance of the family and its educational value and remove the possibility of individual minds splitting off, for the mob, handled by us, will not let them come to the front nor even give them a hearing; it is accustomed to listen to us only who pay it for obedience and attention. In this way we shall create a blind, mighty force which will never be in a position to move in any direction without the guidance of our agents set at its head by us as leaders of the mob. The people will submit to this regime because it will know that upon these leaders will depend its earnings, gratifications and the receipt of all kinds of benefits.
A scheme of government should come ready made from one brain because it will never be clinched firmly if it is allowed to be split into fractional parts in the minds of many. It is permissible, therefore, for us to know of the scheme of action but not to discuss it lest we disturb its artfulness, the interdependence of its component parts, the practical force of the secret meaning of each clause. To discuss and make alterations in a labour of this kind by means of numerous votes is to impress upon it the stamp of all the reasoning and misunderstanding which has failed to penetrate the depth and extent of its plottings. We want our schemes to be forcible and suitably concocted. Therefore we ought not to fling the work of genius of our guide to the fangs of the mob or even to a selected company.
These schemes will not turn existing institutions upside down just yet. They will only effect changes in their economy and consequently in the whole combined movement of their progress, which will thus be directed along the paths laid down in our schemes.
Under various names there exists in all countries approximately one and the same thing. Representation, Ministry, Senate, State Council, Legislative and Executive Corps. I need not explain to you the mechanism of the relation of these institutions to one another, because you are aware of all that; only take note of the fact that each of the above-named institutions corresponds to some important function of the State, and I would beg to remark that the word "important" I apply not to the institution but to the function, consequently it is not the institutions which are important but their functions. These institutions have divided up among themselves all the functions of government—administrative, legislative, executive, wherefore they have come to operate as do the organs in the human body. If we injure one part in the machinery of State, the State falls sick, like a human body, and . . . will die.
When we introduced into the State organism the poison of Liberalism its whole political complexion underwent a change. States have been seized with a mortal illness— blood-poisoning. All that remains is to await the end of their death agony.
Liberalism produced Constitutional States, which took the place of what was the only safeguard of the goyim, namely. Despotism; and a constitution, as you well know, is nothing else but a school of discord, misunderstanding, quarrels, disagreements, fruitless party agitations, party whims—in a word, a school of everything that serves to destroy the personality of State activity. The tribune of the "talkeries" has, no less effectively than the Press, condemned the rulers to inactivity and impotence, and thereby rendered them useless and superfluous, for which reason indeed they have been in many countries deposed. Then it was that the era of republics became a possibility that could be realized; and then it was that we replaced the ruler by a caricature of a government—by a president, taken from the mob, from the midst of our puppet creatures, our slaves. This was the foundation of the mine which we have laid under the goy people, I should rather say, under the goy peoples.
In the near future we shall establish the responsibility of presidents.
By that time we shall be in a position to disregard forms in carrying through matters for which our impersonal puppet will be responsible. What do we care if the ranks of those striving for power should be thinned, if there should arise a deadlock from the scarcity of finding presidents, a deadlock which will finally disorganise the country? ....
In order that our scheme may produce this result we shall arrange elections in favour of such presidents as have in their past some dark, undiscovered stain, some "Panama" or other—then they will become trustworthy agents for the accomplishment of our plans, being afraid, on the one hand, of revelations, and eager, on the other, for what everyone who has attained power desires, namely, the retention of the privileges, advantages and honour connected with the office of president. The chamber of deputies will protect and elect presidents, but we shall take from it the right to propose new, or make changes in, existing laws, for this right will be given by us to the responsible president, a puppet in our hands. Naturally, the authority of the president will then become a target for every possible form of attack, but we shall provide him with a means of self-defence in the right of an appeal to the people, for the decision of the people over the heads of their representatives that is to say, an appeal to that same blind slave of ours— the majority of the mob. Independently of this we shall invest the president with the right to declare a state of war. We shall justify this last right on the ground that the president as chief of the whole army of the country must be able to command it, should it be needed to defend the new republican constitution, since the right to defend it will belong to him as the responsible representative of this constitution.
It is easy to understand that in these conditions the key of the shrine will lie in our hands, and no one outside ourselves will any longer direct the force of legislation.
Besides this we shall, with the introduction of the new republican constitution, take from the Chamber the right of interpellation on government measures, on the pretext of preserving political secrecy, and, further, we shall by the new constitution reduce the number of representatives to a minimum, thereby proportionately reducing political passions and the passion for politics. If, however, they should, which is hardly to be expected, burst into flame, even in this minimum we shall nullify them by a stirring appeal and a reference to the majority of the whole people .... Upon the president will depend the appointment of presidents and vice-presidents of the Chamber and the Senate. Instead of constant sessions of Parliaments we shall reduce their sittings to a few months. Moreover, the president, as chief of the executive power, will have the right to summon and dissolve Parliament, and, in the latter case, to prolong the time for the appointment of a new parliamentary assembly. But in order that the consequences of all these acts which in substance are illegal, should not, prematurely for our plans, fall upon the responsibility established by us of the president, we shall instigate ministers and other officials of the higher administration about the president to evade his dispositions by taking measures of their own, for doing which they will be made the scapegoats in his place .... This part we especially recommend to be given to be played by the Senate, the Council of State, or the Council of Ministers, but not to an individual official.
The president will, at our discretion, interpret the sense of such of the existing laws as admit of various interpretations; he will further annul them when we indicate to him the necessity to do so. Besides this, he will have the right to propose temporary laws, and even new departures in the government constitutional working, the pretext both for the one and the other being the requirements for the supreme welfare of the State.
By such measures we shall obtain the power of destroying little by little, step by step, all that at the outset when we enter on our rights, we are compelled to introduce into the constitutions of States to prepare for the transition to the imperceptible abolition of every kind of constitution, and then the time is come to turn every form of government into our despotism.
The recognition of our despot may also come before the destruction of the constitution; the moment for this recognition will come when the peoples, utterly wearied by the irregularities and incompetence—a matter which we shall arrange for—of their rulers, will clamour: "Away with them and give us one king over all the earth who will unite us and annihilate the causes of discords—frontiers, nationalities, religions, State debts—who will give us peace and quiet which we cannot find under our rulers and representatives."
But you yourselves perfectly well know that to produce the possibility of the expression of such wishes by all the nations it is indispensable to stir up the people's relations with their governments in all countries so as utterly to exhaust humanity with dissension, hatred, struggle, envy and even to use torture, starvation, the inoculation of disease and want, so that the goyini see no other course open to them than to take refuge in our complete sovereignty in money and in all else.
But if we give the nations of the world a breathing space the moment we long for is hardly likely ever to arrive.
THE TOTALITARIAN STATE
The new constitution—Abolition of the rights of man— "Show" army of masonic lodges.
The State Council has been, as it were, the emphatic expression of the authority of the ruler; it will be, as the "show" part of the Legislative Corps, what may be called the editorial committee of the laws and decrees of the ruler.
This then, is the programme of the new constitution. We shall make Law, Right and Justice (1) in the guise of proposals to the Legislative Corps, (2) by decrees of the president under the guise of general regulations, of orders of the Senate and of resolutions of the State Council in the guise of ministerial orders, (3) and in case a suitable occasion should arise—in the form of a revolution in the State.
Having established approximately the modus agendi we will occupy ourselves with details of those combinations by which we have still to complete the revolution in the course of the machinery of State in the direction already indicated. By these combinations I mean the freedom of the Press, the right of association, freedom of conscience, the voting principle, and many another that must disappear for ever from the memory of man, or undergo a radical alteration the day after the promulgation of the new constitution. It is only at that moment that we shall be able at once to announce all our orders, for, afterwards, every noticeable alteration will be dangerous, for the following reasons: if this alteration be brought in with harsh severity and in a sense of severity and limitations, it may lead to a feeling of despair caused by fear of new alterations in the same direction: if, on the other hand, it be brought in in a sense of further indulgences it will be said that we have recognised our own wrongdoing and this will destroy the prestige of the infallibility of our authority, or else it will be said that we have become alarmed and are compelled to show lenience for which we shall get no thanks because it will be supposed to be compulsory .... Both the one and the other are injurious to the prestige of the new constitution. We desire that from the first moment of its promulgation, while the peoples of the world are still stunned by the accomplished fact of the revolution, still in a condition of terror and uncertainty, they should recognize once for all that we are so strong, so inexpugnable, so superabundantly rilled with power, that in no case shall we take any account of them, and so far from paying any attention to their opinions or wishes, we are ready and able to crush with irresistible power all expression or manifestation thereof at every moment and in every place, that we have seized at once everything we wanted and shall in no case divide our power with them .... Then in fear and trembling they will close their eyes to everything, and be content to await what will be the end of it all.
The goyim are a flock of sheep, and we are their wolves. And you know what happens when the wolves get hold of the flock? ....
There is another reason also why they will close their eyes: for we shall keep promising them to give back all the liberties we have taken away as soon as we have quelled the enemies of peace and tamed all parties ....
It is not worth while discussing how long they will be kept waiting for the return of their liberties ....
For what purpose then have we invented this whole policy and insinuated it into the minds of the goy without giving them any chance to examine its underlying meaning? For what, indeed, if not in order to obtain in a roundabout way what is for our scattered tribe unattainable by the direct road ? It is this which has served as the basis of our organisation of secret Masonry which is not known to, and whose aims are not even so much as suspected by, these goy cattle attracted by us into the "show" army of Masonic Lodges in order to throw dust in the eyes of their fellows.
God has granted to us, His Chosen People, the gift of the dispersion, and in this which appears in all eyes to be our weakness, has come forth all our strength, which has now brought us to the threshold of sovereignty over all the world.
There now remains not much more for us to construct upon the foundation we have laid.
CONTROL OF THE PRESS
Masonic "freedom"—Control of printing and publishing— Vishnu, idol of the Press.
The word "freedom" which can be interpreted in various ways, is defined by us as follows:— Freedom is the right to do that which the law allows. This interpretation of the word will at the proper time be of service to us, because all freedom will thus be in our hands, since the laws will abolish or create only that which is desirable for us according to the aforesaid programme.
We shall deal with the press in the following way: what is the part played by the press of to-day? It serves to excite and inflame those passions which are needed for our purpose or else it serves selfish ends of parties. It is often vapid, unjust, mendacious, and the majority of the public have not the slightest idea what ends the press really seves. We shall saddle and bridle it with a tight rein: we shall do the same also with all productions of the printing press, for where would be the sense in silencing the attacks of the press if we remain targets for pamphlets and books? The produce of publicity, which nowadays is a source of heavy expense owing to the necessity of censorship, will be turned by us into a very lucrative source of income to our State: we shall lay on it a special stamp tax and require deposits of caution-money before permitting the establishment of any organ of the press or of printing offices: these will then have to guarantee our government against any kind of attack on the part of the press. For any attempt to attack us, if such still be possible, we shall inflict fines without mercy. Such measures as stamp tax, deposit of caution-money and fines secured by these deposits, will bring in a huge income to the government. It is true that party organs might not spare money for the sake of publicity, but these we shall shut up at the second attack upon us. No one shall with impunity lay a finger on the aureole of the infallibility of our government. The pretext for stopping any publication will be the alleged plea that it is agitating the public mind without occasion or justification. I beg you to note that among those making attacks upon us will also be organs established by us, but they will attack exclusively points that we have pre-determined to alter.
Not a single announcement will reach the public without our control. Even now this is already being attained by us inasmuch as all news items are received by a few agencies, in whose offices they are focused from all parts of the world. These agencies will then be already entirely ours and will give publicity only to-what we dictate to them.
If we have already contrived to possess ourselves of the minds of the goy communities to such an extent that they all come near looking upon the events of the world through the coloured glasses of those spectacles we are setting astride their noses; if already there is not a single State where there exist for us any barriers to admittance into what goy stupidity calls State secrets: what will our position be then, when we shall be acknowledged supreme lords of the world in the person of our king of all the world ....
Let us turn again to the future of the printing press. Every one desirous of being a publisher, librarian, or printer, will be obliged to provide himself with the diploma instituted therefore, which, in case of any fault, will be immediately impounded. With such measures the instrument of thought will become an educative means in the hands of our government, which will no longer allow the mass of the nation to be led astray in by-ways and fantasies about the blessings of progress. Is there any one of us who does not know that these phantom blessings are the direct roads to foolish imaginings which give birth to anarchical relations of men among themselves and towards authority, because progress, or rather the idea of progress, has introduced the conception of every kind of emancipation, but has failed to establish its limits .... All the so-called liberals are anarchists, if not in fact, at any rate in thought. Every one of them is hunting after phantoms of freedom, and falling exclusively into licence, that is, into the anarchy of protest for the sake of protest ....
We turn to the periodical press. We shall impose on it, as on all printed matter, stamp taxes per sheet and deposits of caution-money, and books of less than 30 sheets will pay double. We shall reckon them as pamphlets in order, on the one hand, to reduce the number of magazines, which are the worst form of printed poison, and, on the other, in order that this measure may force writers into such lengthy productions that they will be little read, especially as they will be costly. At the same time what we shall publish ourselves to influence mental development in the direction laid down for our profit will be cheap and will be read voraciously. The tax will bring vapid literary ambitions within bounds and the liability to penalties will make literary men dependent upon us. And if there should be any found who are desirous of writing against us, they will not find any person eager to print their productions. Before accepting any production for publication in print the publisher or printer will have to apply to the authorities for permission to do so. Thus we shall know before hand of all the tricks being prepared against us and shall nullify them by outstripping them with explanations on the subject treated of.
Literature and journalism are two of the most important educative forces, and therefore our government will become proprietor of the majority of the journals. This will neutralise the injurious influence of the privately-owned press and will put us in possession of a tremendous influence upon the public mind .... If we give permits for ten journals, we shall ourselves found thirty, and so on in the same proportion. This, however, must in nowise be suspected by the public. For this reason all journals published by us will be in appearance, of the most opposite tendencies and opinions, thereby creating confidence in us, and bringing over to us our quite unsuspicious opponents, who will thus fall into our trap and be rendered harmless.
In the front rank will stand organs of an official character. They will always stand guard over our interests, and therefore their influence will be comparatively insignificant.
In the second rank will be the semi-official organs, whose part it will be to attract the tepid and indifferent.
In the third rank we shall set up our own opposition, which, to all appearance, in at least one of its organs, will present what looks like the very antipothesis to us. Our real opponents at heart will accept this simulated opposition as their own and will show us their cards.
All our newspapers will be of all possible complexions— aristocratic, republican, revolutionary, even anarchical— for so long, of course, as the constitution exists .... Like the Indian idol Vishnu, they will have a hundred hands, and every one of them will have a finger on any one sector of public opinion as required. When a pulse quickens these hands will lead opinion in the direction of our aims, for an excited patient loses all power of judgment and easily yields to suggestion. Those fools who will think they are repeating the opinion of a newspaper of their own camp will be repeating our opinion or any opinion that seems desirable for us. In the vain belief that they are following the organ of their party they will in fact follow the flag which we hang out for them.
In order to direct our newspaper militia in this sense we must take especial and minute care in organising this matter. Under the title of central department of the press we shall institute literary gatherings at which our agents will without attracting attention issue the orders and watchwords of the day. By discussing and controverting, but always superficially, without touching the essence of the matter, our organs will carry on a sham fight fusillade with the official newspapers solely for the purpose of giving occasion for us to express ourselves more fully than could well be done from the outset in official announcements, whenever, of course, that is to our advantage.
These attacks upon us will also serve another purpose, namely, that our subjects will be convinced of the existence of full freedom of speech and so give our agents an occasion to affirm that all organs which oppose us are empty babblers, since they are incapable of finding any substantial objections to our orders.
Methods of organisation like these, imperceptible to the public eye but absolutely sure, are the best calculated to succeed in bringing the attention and the confidence of the public to the side of our government. Thanks to such methods we shall be in a position as from time to time may be required, to excite or tranquillize the public mind on political questions, to persuade or confuse, printing now truth, now lies, facts or their contradictions, according as they may be well or ill received, always very cautiously feeling our ground before stepping upon it ... We shall have a sure triumph over our opponents since they will not have at their disposition organs of the press in which they can give full and final expression of their views, owing to the aforesaid methods of dealing with the press. We shall not even need to refute them except very superficially.
Trial shots like these, fired by us in the third rank of our press, in case of need, will be energetically refuted by us in our semi-official organs.
Even nowadays, take only the French press, there are forms which reveal masonic solidarity in acting on the watchword: all organs of the press are bound together by professional secrecy; like the augurs of old, not one of their number will give away the secret of his sources of information unless it is resolved to announce them. Not one journalist will venture to betray this secret for not one of them is ever admitted to practice literature unless his whole past has some disgraceful sore or other .... These sores would be immediately revealed. So long as they remain the secret of a few the prestige of the journalist attracts the majority of the country—the mob follow after him with enthusiasm.
Our calculations are especially extended to the provinces. It is indispensable for us to inflame there those hopes and impulses with which we could at any moment fall upon the capital, and we shall represent to the capitals that these expressions are the independent hopes and impulses of the provinces. Naturally, the source of them will be always one and the same—ours. We require that, until such time as we are in the plenitude of power, the capitals should find themselves stifled by the provincial opinion of the nation, i.e., of a majority arranged by our agentur. It is essential for our purpose that at the psychological moment the capitals should not be in a position to discuss an accomplished fact for the simple reason, if for no other, that it has been accepted by the public opinion of a majority in the provinces.
When we are in the period of the new regime prior to the transition to that of the assumption of our full sovereignty we must not admit any revelations by the press of any form of public dishonesty; it is necessary that the new regime should be thought to have so perfectly contented everybody that even criminality has disappeared . . . Cases of the manifestation of criminality should remain known only to their victims and to chance witnesses—no more.
Daily bread—Recreation centres—The unsuspected plan.
The need for daily bread forces the goyim to keep silence and be our humble servants. Agents taken on to our press from among the goyim will at our orders discuss anything which it is convenient for us to issue directly in official documents, and we meanwhile, quietly amid the din of the discussion so raised, shall simply take and carry through such measures as we wish and then offer them to the public as an accomplished fact. No one will dare to demand the abrogation of a matter once settled, all the more so as it will be represented as an improvement .... And immediately the press will distract the current of thought towards new questions (have we not trained people always to be seeking something new ?) Into the discussions of these new questions will throw themselves those of the brainless dispensers of fortunes who are not able even now to understand that they have not the remotest conception about the matters which they undertake to discuss. Questions of the political are beyond the comprehension of any save those who have guided it already for many ages, the creators.
From all this you will see that in securing the opinion of the mob we are only facilitating the working of our machinery, and you may remark that it is not for actions but for words issued by us on this or that question that we seem to seek approval. We are constantly making public declaration that we are guided in all our undertakings by the hope, joined to the conviction, that we are serving the common weal.
In order to distract people who may be too troublesome from discussing questions of the political we are now putting forward what we allege to be new questions of the political, namely, questions of industry. In this sphere let them discuss themselves silly! The masses agree to remain inactive, to take a rest from what they suppose to be political activity (in which we trained them in order to use them as a means of combating the goy governments) only on condition of being found new employments, in which we are prescribing them something that looks like the same political object. In order that the masses themselves may not guess what they are about, we further distract them with amusements, games, pastimes, passions, people's palaces .... Soon we shall begin through the press to propose competitions in art, in sport of all kinds: these interests will finally distract their minds from questions in which we should find ourselves compelled to oppose them. Growing more and more unaccustomed to reflect and form any opinions of their own, people will begin to
talk in the same tones as we, because we alone shall be offering them new directions for thought... of course through such persons as will not be suspected of solidarity with us.
The part played by the liberals, Utopian dreamers, will be finally played out when our government is acknowledged. Till such time they will continue to do us good service. Therefore we shall continue to direct their minds to all sorts of vain conceptions of fantastic theories, new and apparently progressive: for have we not with complete success turned the brainless heads of the goyim with progress, till there is not among the goyim one mind able to perceive that under this word lies a departure from truth in all cases where it is not a question of material inventions, for truth is one, and in it there is no place for progress. Progress, like a fallacious idea, serves to obscure truth so that none may know it except us, the Chosen of God, its guardians.
When we come into our kingdom our orators will expound great problems which have turned humanity upside down in order to bring it in the end under our beneficent rule.
Who will ever suspect then that all these peoples were stage-managed by us according to a political plan which no one has so much as guessed at in the course of many centuries?
ASSAULT ON RELIGION
Destruction of existing religions and substitution of the religion of Moses—A new era of slavery—Pornography encouraged in progressive countries.
When we come into our kingdom it will be undesirable for us that there should exist any other religion than ours of the One God with whom our destiny is bound up by our position as the Chosen People and through whom our same destiny is united with the destinies of the world. We must therefore sweep away all other forms of belief. If this gives birth to the atheists whom we see to-day it will not, being only a transitional stage, interfere with our views, but will serve as a warning for those generations which will hearken to our preaching of the religion of Moses, that, by its stable and thoroughly elaborated system, has brought all the peoples of the world into subjection to us. Therein we shall emphasise its mystical right, on which as we shall say, all its educative power is based .... Then at every possible opportunity we shall publish articles in which we shall make comparisons between our beneficent rule and those of past ages. The blessings of tranquillity, though it be a tranquillity forcibly brought about by centuries of agitation, will throw into higher relief the benefits to which we shall point. The errors of the goyim governments will be depicted by us in the most vivid hues. We shall implant such an abhorrence of them that the peoples will prefer tranquillity in a state of serfdom to those rights of vaunted freedom which have tortured humanity and exhausted the very sources of human existence, sources which have been exploited by a mob of rascally adventurers who know not what they do .... Useless changes of forms of government to which we instigated the goyim when we were undermining their state structures will have so wearied the peoples by that time that they will prefer to suffer anything under us rather than run the risk of enduring again all the agitations and miseries they have gone through.
At the same time we shall not omit to emphasise the historical mistakes of the goy governments which have tormented humanity for so many centuries by their lack of understanding of everything that constitutes the true good of humanity in their chase after fantastic schemes of social blessings, never noticing that these schemes kept on producing a worse and never a better state of the universal relations which are the basis of human life ....
The whole force of our principles and methods will lie in the fact that we shall present them and expound them as a splendid contrast to the dead and decomposed old order of things in social life.
Our philosophers will discuss all the shortcomings of the various beliefs of the goyim. But no one will ever bring under discussion our faith from its true point of view since this will be fully learned by none save ours, who will never dare to betray its secrets.
In countries known as progressive and enlightened, we have created a senseless, filthy, abominable literature. For
some time after our entrance to power we shall continue to encourage its existence in order to provide a telling relief by contrast to the speeches, party programme, which will be distributed from exalted quarters of ours .... Our wise men, trained to become leaders of the goyim, will compose speeches, projects, memoirs, articles, which will be used by us to influence the minds of the goyim, directing them towards such understanding and forms of knowledge as have been determined by us.
Simultaneous world revolution—Purpose and direction of masonry—The Chosen people—Dogmatic right of the strong The King of Israel.
When we at last definitely come into our kingdom by the aids of coups d'etat prepared everywhere for one and the same day, after the worthlessness of all existing forms of government has been definitely acknowledged (and not a little time will pass before that comes about, perhaps even a whole century) we shall make it our task to see that against us such things as plots shall no longer exist. With this purpose we shall slay without mercy all who take arms (in hand) to oppose our coming into our kingdom. Every kind of new institution of anything like a secret society will also be punished with death; those of them which are now-in existence, are known to us, serve us and have served us, we shall disband and send into exile to continents far removed from Europe. In this way we shall proceed with those goy masons who know too much; such of these as we may for some reason spare will be kept in constant fear of exile. We shall promulgate a law making all former members of secret societies liable to exile from Europe as the centre of our rule.
Resolutions of our government will be final, without appeal.
In the goy societies, in which we have planted and deeply rooted discord and protestantism, the only possible way of restoring order is to employ merciless measures that prove the direct force of authority: no regard must be paid to the victims who fall, they suffer for the well-being of the future. The attainment of that well-being, even at the expense of sacrifices, is the duty of any kind of government that acknowledges as the justification for its existence not only its privileges but its obligations. The principal guarantee of stability of rule is to confirm the aureole of power, and this aureole is attained only by such a majestic inflexibility of might as shall carry on its face the emblems of inviolability from mystical causes—from the choice of God. Such was until recent times, the Russian autocracy, the one and only serious foe we had in the world, without counting the Papacy. Bear in mind the example when Italy, drenched with blood, never touched a hair of the head of Sulla who had poured forth that blood. Sulla enjoyed an apotheosis for his might in the eyes of the people, though they had been torn in pieces by him, but his intrepid return to Italy ringed him round with inviolability. The people do not lay a finger on him who hypnotises them by his daring and strength of mind.
Meantime, however, until we come into our kingdom, we shall act in the contrary way: we shall create and multiply free masonic lodges in all the countries of the world, absorb into them all who may become or who are prominent in public activity, for in these lodges we shall find our principal intelligence office and means of influence. All these lodges we shall bring under one central administration, known to us alone and to all others absolutely unknown, which will be composed of our learned elders. The lodges will have their representatives who will serve to screen the above-mentioned administration of masonry and from whom will issue the watchword and programme. In these lodges we shall tie together the knot which binds together all revolutionary and liberal elements. They will be composed of all strata of society. The most secret political plots will be known to us and will fall under our guiding hands on the
very day of their conception. Among the members of these lodges will be almost all the agents of international and national police, since their service is for us irreplaceable in the respect that the police are in a position not only to use their own particular measures with the insubordinate, but also to screen our activities and provide pretexts for discontents, et cetera.
The class of people who most willingly enter into secret societies are those who live by their wits, careerists, and in general people, mostly light-minded, with whom we shall have no difficulty in dealing and in using to wind up the mechanism of the machine devised by us. If this world grows agitated the meaning of that will be that we have had to stir it up in order to break up its too great solidarity. But if there should arise in its midst a plot, then at the head of that plot will be no other than one of our most trusted servants. It is natural that we and no other should lead masonic activities, for we know whither we are leading, we know the final goal of every form of activity whereas the goyim have knowledge of nothing, not even of the immediate effect of action; they put before themselves, usually, the momentary reckoning of the satisfaction of their self-opinion in the accomplishment of their thought without even remarking that the very conception never belonged to their initiative but to our instigation of their thought....
The goyim enter the lodges out of curiosity or in the hope of getting a nibble from the public pie, and some of them in order to obtain a hearing before the public for their impracticable and groundless fantasies: they thirst for the emotion of success and applause, of which we are remarkably generous. And the reason why we give them this success is to make use of the high conceit of themselves to which it gives birth, for that insensibly disposes them to assimilate our suggestions without being on their guard against them in the fullness of their confidence that it is their own infallibility which is giving utterance to their own thoughts and that it is impossible for them to borrow those of others .... You cannot imagine to what extent the wisest of the goyim can be brought to a state of unconscious naivete through this high conceit of themselves, and at the same time how easy it is to take the heart out of them by the slightest ill-success, though it be nothing more than silencing the applause they enjoyed, and reducing them to slavish submission for the sake of winning a renewal of success .... By so much as ours disregard success if only they can carry through their plans, by so much the goyim are willing to sacrifice any plans only to have success. This psychology of theirs materially facilitates for us the task of setting them in the required direction. These tigers in appearance have the souls of sheep and the wind blows freely through their heads. We have set them on the hobbyhorse of an idea about the absorption of individuality by the symbolic unit of collectivism .... They have never yet and they never will have the sense to reflect that this hobbyhorse is a manifest violation of the most important law of nature, which has established from the very creation of the world one unit unlike another and precisely for the purpose of instituting individuality ....
If we have been able to bring them to such a pitch of stupid blindness is it not proof and amazingly clear proof of the degree to which the mind of the goyim is undeveloped in comparison with our mind? This it is, mainly, which guarantees our success.
And how far-seeing were our learned elders in ancient times when they said that to attain a serious end it behoves us not to stop at any means or to count the victims sacrificed for the sake of that end .... We have not counted the victims of the seed of the goy cattle, though we have sacrificed many of our own, but for that we have now already given them such a position on the earth as they could not even have dreamed of. The comparatively small numbers of the victims from the number of ours have preserved our nationality from destruction.
Death is the inevitable end for all. It is better to bring that end nearer to those who hinder our affairs than to ourselves, to the founders of this affair. We execute masons in such wise that none save the brotherhood can ever have a suspicion of it, not even the victims themselves of our death sentence, they all die when required as if from a normal kind of illness .... Knowing this, even the brotherhood in its turn dare not protest. By such methods we have plucked out of the midst of masonry the very root of protest against our disposition. While preaching liberalism to the goyim we at the same time keep our own people and our agents in a state of unquestioning submission.
Under our influence the execution of the laws of the goyim has been reduced to a minimum. The prestige of the law has been exploded by the liberal interpretations introduced into this sphere. In the most important and fundamental affairs and questions judges decide as we dictate to them, see matters in the light wherewith we enfold them for the administration of the goyim, of course, through persons who are our tools though we do not appear to have anything in common with them—by newspaper opinion or by other means .... Even senators and the higher administration accept our counsels. The purely brute mind of the goyim is incapable of analysis and observation, and still more of foreseeing whither a certain manner of setting a question may tend.
In this difference in capacity for thought between the goyim and ourselves may be clearly discerned the seal of our position as the Chosen People and of our higher quality of humanness, in contradistinction to the brute mind of the goyim. Their eyes are open, but see nothing before them and do not invent (unless, perhaps, material things). From this it is plain that nature herself has destined us to guide and rule the world.
When comes the time of our overt rule, the time to manifest its blessings, we shall remake all legislatures, all our laws will be brief, plain, stable, without any kind of interpretations, so that anyone will be in a position to know them perfectly. The main feature which they will hold in common is submission to orders, and this principle will be carried to a grandiose height. Every abuse will then disappear since all, down to the lowest unit, will be held responsible before the higher authority of the representative of power. Abuses of power subordinate to this last instance will be so mercilessly punished that none will be found anxious to try experiments with their own powers. We shall pursue jealously every action of the administration on which depends the smooth running of the machinery of the State, for slackness in this produces slackness everywhere; not a single case of illegality or abuse of power will be left without exemplary punishment.
Concealment of guilt, connivance between those in the service of the administration—all this kind of evil will disappear after the very first examples of severe punishment. The aureole of our power demands suitable, that is, cruel punishment for the slightest infringement, for the sake of gain, of its supreme prestige. The sufferer, though his punishment may exceed his fault, will count as a soldier falling on the administrative field of battle in the interest of authority, principle and law, which do not permit that any of those who hold the reins of the public coach should turn aside from the public highway to their own private paths. For example: our judges will know that whenever they feel disposed to plume themselves on foolish clemency they are violating the law of justice which is instituted for the exemplary edification of men by penalties for lapse and not for display of the spiritual qualities of the judge .... Such qualities it is proper to show in private life, but not in a public square which is the educational basis of human life.
Our legal staff will not serve beyond the age of 55, firstly because old men hold more obstinately to prejudiced opinions and are less capable of submitting to new directions, and secondly because after this measure we will enjoy greater elasticity in changing the staff, which will thus the more easily bend under our pressure: he who wishes to keep his place will have to give blind obedience to deserve it. In general, our judges will be elected by us only from among those who thoroughly understand that the part they have to play is to punish and apply laws and not dream about the manifestations of liberalism at the expense of the educational scheme of the State, as the goyim in these days imagine it to be. This method of shuffling the staff will serve also to explode any collective solidarity of those in the same service and will bind all to the interests of the government upon which their fate will depend. The young generation of judges will be trained in certain views regarding the inadmissibility of any abuses that might disturb the established order of our subjects among themselves.
In these days the judges of the goyim create indulgences to every kind of crimes, not having a just understanding of their office, because the rulers of the present age in appointing judges to office take no care to inculcate in them a sense of duty and consciousness of the matter which is demanded of them. As a brute beast lets out its young in search of prey, so do the goyim give their subjects places of profit without thinking to make clear to them for what purpose such place was created. This is the reason why their governments are being ruined by their own forces through acts of their own administration.
Let us borrow from the example of the results of these actions yet another lesson for our government.
We shall root out liberalism from all the important strategic posts of our government on which depends the training of subordinates for our State structure. Such posts will fall exclusively to those who have been trained by us for administrative rule. To the possible objection that the retirement of old servants will cost the Treasury heavily, I reply, firstly, they will be provided with some private service in place of what they lose, and, secondly, I have to remark that all the money in the world will be concentrated in our hands, consequently it is not our government that has to fear expense.
Our absolutism will in all things be logically consecutive and therefore our supreme will in each one of its decrees will be respected and unquestionably fulfilled: it will ignore all murmurs, all discontents of every kind and will destroy to the root every kind of manifestation of them in act by punishment of an exemplary character.
We shall abolish the right of cassation, which will be transferred exclusively to our disposal—to the cognizance of our ruler, for we must not allow the conception among the people of a thought that there could be such a thing as a decision that is. not right by judges set up by us. If, however, anything like this should occur, we shall ourselves cassate the decision, but inflict therewith such exemplary punishment on the judge for lack of understanding of his duty and the purposes of his appointment as will prevent a repetition of such cases .... I repeat that it must be borne in mind that we shall know every step of our administration which only needs to be closely watched for the people to be content with us, for it has the right to demand from a good government a good official.
Our government will have the appearance of a patriarchal paternal guardianship on the part of our ruler. Our own nation and our subjects will discern in his person a father caring for their every need, their every act, their every interrelation as subjects one with another, as well as their relations to the ruler. They will then be so thoroughly imbued with the thought that it is impossible for them to dispense with this wardship and guidance, if they wish to live in peace and quiet, that they will acknowledge the autocracy of our ruler with a devotion bordering on Apotheosis, especially when they are convinced that those whom we set up do not put their own in place of his authority but only blindly execute his dictates. They will be rejoiced that we have regulated everything in their lives as is done by wise parents who desire to retain their children in the cause of duty and submission. For the peoples of the world in regard to the secrets of our state are ever through the ages only children under age, precisely as are also their governments.
As you see, I found our despotism on right and duty: the right to compel the execution of duty is the direct obligation of a government which watches over its subjects like a father. It has the right of the strong that it may use it for the benefit of directing humanity towards that order which is defined by nature, namely, submission. Everything in the world is in a state of submission, if not to man, then to circumstances or to its own inner character, in all cases to what is stronger. And so shall we be this something stronger for the sake of good.
We are obliged without hesitation to sacrifice individuals, who commit a breach of established order, for in exemplary punishment of evil lies a great educational problem.
When the King of Israel sets upon his sacred head the crown offered him by Europe he will become patriarch of the world. The indispensable victims offered by him in consequence of their suitability will never reach the number of victims offered in the course of centuries by the mania of magnificence, the emulation between the goy governments.
Our King will be in constant communion with the peoples, making to them from the tribune speeches which fame will in that same hour distribute over all the world.
Emasculation of the Universities—Abolition of freedom of instruction.
In order to effect the destruction of all collective forces except ours we shall emasculate the first stage of collectivism—the universities, by re-educating them in a new direction. Their officials and professors will be prepared for their business by detailed secret programmes of action from which they will not with immunity diverge, not by one iota. They will be appointed with special precaution, and will be so placed as to be wholly dependent upon the Government.
We shall exclude from the course of instruction State Law as also all that concerns the political question. These subjects will be taught to a few dozens of persons chosen for their pre-eminent capacities from among the number of the initiated. The universities must no longer send out from their halls milksops concocting plans for a constitution, like a comedy or a tragedy, busying themselves with questions of policy in which even their own fathers never had any power of thought.
The ill-guided acquaintance of a large number of persons with questions of state creates Utopian dreamers and bad subjects, as you can see for yourselves from the example of the universal education in this direction of the goyim. We must introduce into their education all those principles which have so brilliantly broken up their order. But when we are in power we shall remove every kind of disturbing subject from the course of education and shall make out of the youth obedient children of authority, loving him who rules as the support and hope of peace and quiet.
Classicism, as also any form of study of ancient history, in which there are more bad than good examples, we shall replace with the study of the programme of the future. We shall erase from the memory of men all facts of previous centuries which are undesirable to us, and leave only those which depict all the errors of the government of the goyim. The study of practical life, of the obligations of order, of the relations of the people one to another, of avoiding bad and selfish examples, which spread the infection of evil, and similar questions of an educational nature, will stand in the forefront of the teaching programme, which will be drawn up on a separate plan for each calling or state of life, in no wise generalising the teaching. This treatment of the question is specially important.
Each state of life must be trained within strict limits corresponding to its destination and work in life. The occasional genius has always managed and always will manage to slip through into other states of life, but it is the most perfect folly for the sake of this rare occasional genius to let through into ranks foreign to them the untalented who thus rob of their places those who belong to those ranks by birth or employment. You know yourselves in what all this has ended for the goyim who allowed this crying absurdity.
In order that he who rules may be seated firmly in the hearts and minds of his subjects it is necessary for the time of his activity to instruct the whole nation in the schools and on the market places about his meaning and his acts and all his beneficent initiatives.
We shall abolish every kind of freedom of instruction. Learners of all ages will have the right to assemble together with their parents in the educational establishments as it were in a club: during these assemblies, on holidays, teachers will read what will pass as free lectures on questions of human relations, of the laws of examples, of the limitations which are born of unconscious relations, and, finally, of the philosophy of new theories not yet declared to the world. These theories will be raised by us to the stage of a dogma of faith as a transitional stage towards our faith. On the completion of this exposition of our programme of action in the present and the future I will read you the principles of these theories.
In a word, knowing by the experience of many centuries that people live and are guided by ideas, that these ideas are imbibed by people only by the aid of education provided with equal success for all ages of growth, but of course by varying methods, we shall swallow up and confiscate to our own use the last scintilla of independence of thought, which we have for long past been directing towards subjects and ideas useful for us. The system of bridling thought is already at work in the so-called system of teaching by object lessons, the purpose of which is to turn the goyim into unthinking submissive brutes waiting for things to be presented before their eyes in order to form an idea of them .... In France, one of our best agents, Bourgeois, has already made public a new programme of teaching by object lessons.
ABUSE OF AUTHORITY
The demoralisation of Justice—Wrecking of the Christian religion—Jewish Patriarch Pope of the universe—Secret police employing public informers.
The practice of advocacy produces men cold, cruel, persistent, unprincipled, who in all cases take up an impersonal, purely legal standpoint. Their inveterate habit is to refer everything to the defensive value of its properties and not to the public welfare of its results. They do not usually decline to undertake any defence whatever, they strive for an acquittal at all costs, cavilling over every petty crux of jurisprudence and thereby they demoralise justice. For this reason we shall set this profession into narrow frames which will keep it inside this sphere of executive public service. Advocates, equally with judges, will be deprived of the right to communicate with litigants; they will receive business only from the court and will study it by notes of report and documents, defending their clients after they have been interrogated in court on facts that have appeared. They will receive an honorarium without regard to the quality of the defence. This will render them mere reporters on law-business in the interests of justice and as a counterpoise to the proctor who will be the reporter in the interests of prosecution; this will shorten business before the courts. In this way will be established a practice of honest unprejudiced defence conducted not from personal interest but by conviction. This will also, by the way, remove the present practice of corrupt bargaining between advocates to agree only to let that side win which pays most
We have long past taken care to discredit the priesthood of the goyim, and thereby to ruin their mission on earth, which in these days might still be a great hindrance to us. Day by day its influence on the peoples of the world is falling lower. Freedom of conscience has been declared everywhere, so that now only years divide us from the moment of the complete wrecking of that Christian religion. As to other religions, we shall have still less difficulty in dealing with them, but it would be premature to speak of this now. We shall set clericalism and clericals into such narrow frames as to make their influence move in retrogressive proportion to its former progress.
When the time conies finally to destroy the papal court the finger of an invisible hand will point the nations towards this court. When, however, the nations fling themselves upon it, we shall come forward in the guise of its defenders as if to save excessive bloodshed. By this diversion we shall penetrate to its very bowels and be sure we shall never come out again until we have gnawed through the entire strength of this place.
The King of the Jews will be the real Pope of the Universe, the patriarch of an international Church.
But, in the meantime, while we are re-educating youth in new traditional religions and afterwards in ours, we shall not overtly lay a finger on existing churches, but we shall fight against them by criticism calculated to produce schism ....
In general, then, our contemporary press will continue to criticise State affairs, religions, incapacities of the goyim, always using the most unprincipled expressions in order by every means to lower their prestige in the manner which can only be practised by the genius of our gifted tribe
Our kingdom will be an apologia of the divinity Vishnu, in whom is found its personification—in our hundred hands will be, one in each, the springs of the machinery of social life. We shall see everything without the aid of official police which, in that scope of their rights which we elaborated for the use of the goyim, hinders governments from seeing. In our programme one-third of our subjects will keep the rest under observation from a sense of duty, on the principle of volunteer service to the State. It will then be no disgrace to be a spy and informer, but a merit: unfounded denunciations, however, will be cruelly punished that there may be no development of abuses of this right.
Our agents will be taken from the higher as well as the lower ranks of society, from among the administrative class who spend their time in amusements, editors, printers and publishers, booksellers, clerks, and salesmen, workmen coachmen, lackeys, et cetera. This body, having no rights and not being empowered to take any action on their own account, and consequently a police without any power, will only witness and report. Verification of their reports and arrests will depend upon a responsible group who will control police affairs, while the actual act of arrest will be performed by the gendarmerie and the municipal police. Any persons not denouncing anything seen or heard concerning questions of state will also be charged with and made responsible for concealment, if it be proved that he is guilty of this crime.
Just as nowadays our brethren are obliged at their own risk to denounce to the kabal apostates of their own family or members who have been noticed doing anything in opposition to the kabal, so in our kingdom over all the world it will be obligatory for all our subjects to observe the duty of service to the State in this direction.
Such an organisation will extirpate abuses of authority, of force, of bribery, everything in fact which we by our counsels, by our theories of the superhuman rights of man, have introduced into the customs of the goyim .... But how else were we to procure that increase of causes predisposing to disorders in the midst of their administration? .... Among the numbers of those methods one of the most important is —agents for the restoration of order, so placed as to have the opportunity in their disintegrating activity of developing and displaying their evil inclinations—obstinate self-conceit, irresponsible exercise of authority, and, first and foremost, venality.
ARREST OF OPPONENTS
Measures of secret defence—Undermining authority.
When it becomes necessary for us to strengthen the strict measures of secret defence (the most fatal poison for the prestige of authority) we shall arrange a simulation of disorders or some manifestation of discontents finding expression through the co-operation of good speakers. Round these speakers will assemble all who are sympathetic to his utterances. This will give us the pretext for domiciliary perquisitions and surveillance on the part of our servants from among the number of the goyim police ....
As the majority of conspirators act out of love for the game, for the sake of talking, so, until they commit some overt act we shall not lay a finger on them but only introduce into their midst observation elements .... It must be remembered that the prestige of authority is lessened if it frequently discovers conspiracies against itself: this implies a presumption of consciousness of weakness, or, what is still worse, injustice. You are aware that we have broken the prestige of the goy kings by frequent attempts upon their lives through our agents, blind sheep of our flock, who are easily moved by a few liberal phrases to crimes provided only they be painted in political colours. We have compelled the rulers to acknowledge their weakness in advertising overt measures of secret defence and thereby we shall bring authority to destruction. Our ruler will be secretly protected only by the most insignificant guard, because we shall not admit so much as a thought that there could exist against him any sedition with which he is not strong enough to contend or from which he is compelled to hide.
If we should admit this thought, as the goyim have done and are doing, we should ipso facto be signing a death sentence, if not for our ruler, at any rate for his dynasty, at no distant date.
According to strictly enforced outward appearances our ruler will employ his power only for the advantage of the nation and in no wise for his own or dynastic profits. Therefore, with the observance of this decorum, his authority will be respected and guarded by the subjects themselves, it will receive an apotheosis in the admission that with it is bound up the well-being of every citizen of the State, for upon it will depend all order in the common life of the pack ....
Overt defence of this kind argues weakness in the organisation of his strength.
Our ruler will always be surrounded among the people by a mob of apparently curious men and women, who will occupy the front ranks about him, to all appearance by chance, and will restrain the ranks of the rest out of respect as it will appear for good order. This will sow an example of restraint also in others. If a petitioner appears among the people forcing his way through the ranks and trying to hand in a petition, the first ranks must receive the petition and before the eyes of the petitioner pass it to the ruler, so that all may know that what is handed in reaches its destination, and that, consequently, the ruler himself is subject to control. To exist, the aureole of power requires that the people may be able to say "If the king knew of this," or "the king will hear of it."
With the establishment of official secret defence the mystical prestige of authority disappears: given a certain audacity, and everyone counts himself master of it, the sedition-monger is conscious of his strength, and when occasion serves watches for the moment to make an attempt upon authority .... For the goyim we have been preaching something else, but by that very fact we are enabled to see what measures of overt defence have brought them to.
Criminals with us will be arrested at the first more or less well-grounded suspicion; it cannot be allowed that out of fear of a possible mistake an opportunity of escape should be given to persons suspected of a political lapse or crime, for in these matters we shall be literally merciless. If it is still possible, by stretching a point, to admit a reconsideration of the motive causes in simple crimes, there is no possibility of excuse for persons occupying themselves with questions in which nobody except the government can
understand anything And it is not all governments that
understand true policy.
RULERS AND PEOPLE
Making use of public petitions—Debasing heroism—Martyrdom of sedition-mongers.
If we do not permit any independent dabbling in the political we shall on the other hand encourage every kind of report or petition with proposals for the government to examine all kinds of projects for the amelioration of the condition of the people; this will reveal to us the defects or else the fantasies of our subjects, to which we shall respond either by accomplishing them or by wisely rebutting them to prove the short-sightedness of one who judges wrongly.
Sedition-mongering is nothing more than the yapping of a lap-dog at an elephant. For a well organised government, not from the point of view of the police but of the public, the lap-dog yaps at an elephant entirely unconscious of its strength and importance. It needs no more than to take a good example to show the relative importance of both and the lap-dogs will cease to yap and will wag their tails the moment they set eyes on an elephant.
In order to destroy the prestige of heroism for political crime we shall send it for trial in the category of thieving, murder, and every kind of abominable and filthy crime. Public opinion will then confuse in its conception this category of crime with the disgrace attaching to every other and will brand it with the same contempt.
We have done our best, and I hope we have succeeded, in preventing the goyim from adopting this means of contending with sedition. It was for this reason that through the Press and in speeches indirectly—in cleverly compiled school-books on history, we have advertised the martyrdom alleged to have been accepted by sedition-mongers for the idea of the commonweal. This advertisement has increased the contingent of liberals and has brought thousands of goyim into the ranks of our livestock cattle.
Progressive taxation—Stagnant capital—The ruinous Gold Standard.
Today we shall touch upon the financial programme, which I put off to the end of my report as being the most difficult, the crowning and the decisive point of our plans. Before entering upon it I will remind you that I have already spoken before by way of a hint when I said that the sum total of our actions is settled by the question of figures.
When we come into our kingdom our autocratic government will avoid, from a principle of self-preservation, stupidly burdening the masses of the people with taxes, remembering that it plays the part of father and protector. But as State organisation is costly it is necessary nevertheless to obtain the funds required for it. It will, therefore, elaborate with particular precaution the question of equilibrium in this matter.
Our rule, in which the king will enjoy the legal fiction that everything in his State belongs to him (which may easily be translated into fact), will have power to resort to the lawful confiscation of all sums of every kind for the regulation of their circulation in the State. From this it follows that taxation will best be covered by a progressive tax on property. In this manner the dues will be paid without straining or ruining anybody in the form of a percentage of the amount of property. The rich must be aware that it is their duty to place a part of their superfluities at the disposal of the State since the State guarantees them security of possession of the rest of their property and the right to honest gains. I say honest, for the control over property will do away with robbery on a legal basis.
This social reform must come from above, for the time is ripe for it—it is indispensable as a pledge of peace.
The tax upon the poor man is a seed of revolution and works to the detriment of the State which in hunting after the trifling is missing the big. Quite apart from this, a tax on capitalists diminishes the growth of wealth in private hands where we have in these days concentrated it as a counterpoise to the government strength of the goyim—their State finances.
A tax increasing in a percentage ratio to capital will give a much larger revenue than the present individual or property tax, which is useful to us now for the sole reason that it excites trouble and discontent among the goyim.
The force upon which our king will rest consists in equilibrium and the guarantee of peace, for the sake of which things it is indispensable that the capitalists should yield up a portion of their incomes in order to ensure the working of the machinery of the State. State needs must be paid by those who will not feel the burden and have enough to take from.
Such a measure will destroy the hatred of the poor man for the rich, in whom he will see a necessary financial support for the State, and the organiser of peace and well-being since he will see that it is the rich man who is paying the necessary means to attain these things.
In order that payers of the educated classes should not too much distress themselves over the new payments they will have full accounts given them of the destination of those payments, with the exception of such sums as will be appropriated for the needs of the throne and the administrative institutions.
He who reigns will not have any properties of his own once all in the State represents his patrimony, or else the one would be in contradiction to the other; the fact of holding private means would destroy the right of property in the common possession of all.
Relatives of him who reigns, his heirs excepted, who will be maintained by the resources of the State, must enter the ranks of servants of the State or must work to obtain the right to property; the privilege of royal blood must not serve for spoiling the treasury.
Purchase, receipt of money or inheritance will be subject to the payment of a stamp progressive tax. Any transfer of property, whether money or other, without evidence of payment of this tax, which will be strictly registered by names, will render the former holder liable to pay interest on the tax from the moment of the transfer of these sums up to the discovery of his evasion of declaration of the transfer. Transfer documents must be presented weekly at the local treasury office with notifications of the name, surname and permanent place of residence of the former and the new holder of the property. This transfer with the register of names must begin from a definite sum which exceeds the ordinary expenses of buying and selling of necessaries, and these will be subject to payment only by a stamp impost of a definite percentage of the unit.
Just estimate how many times such taxes as these will cover the revenue of the goyim States.
The State exchequer will have to maintain a definite complement of reserve sums, and all that is collected above that complement must be returned into circulation. From these sums will be organised public works. The initiative in works of this kind, proceeding from State sources, will bind the working class firmly to the interests of the State and to those who reign. From these same sums also a part will be set aside as rewards of inventiveness and productiveness.
On no account should so much as a single unit above the definite and freely estimated sums be retained in the State treasuries, for money exists to be circulated and any kind of stagnation of money acts ruinously on the running of the State machinery, for which it is the lubricant; stagnation of the lubricant may stop the regular working of the mechanism.
The substitution of interest-bearing paper for a part of the token of exchange has produced exactly this stagnation. The consequence of this circumstance are already sufficiently noticeable.
A court of account will also be instituted by us, and in it the ruler will find at any moment a full account of State income and expenditure, with the exception of the current monthly account, not yet made up, and that of the preceding month, which will not yet have been delivered.
The one and only person who will have no interest in robbing the State is its owner, the ruler. This is why his personal control will remove the possibility of leakages or extravagances.
The representative function of the ruler at receptions for the sake of etiquette, which absorbs so much invaluable time, will be abolished in order that the ruler may have time for control and considerations. His power will not then be split up into fractional parts among time-serving favourites who surround the throne for its pomp and splendour, and are interested only in their own and not in the common interests of the State.
Economic crises have been produced by us for the goyim by no other means than the withdrawal of money from circulation. Huge capitals have stagnated, withdrawing money from States which were constantly obliged to apply to those same stagnant capitals for loans. These loans burdened the finances of the State with the payment of interest and made them the bond slaves of these capitals .... The concentration of industry in the hands of capitalists out of the hands of small masters has drained away all the juices of the peoples and with them also of the States ....
The present issue of money in general does not correspond with the requirements per head, and cannot therefore satisfy all the needs of the workers. The issue of money ought to correspond with the growth of population and thereby children also must absolutely be reckoned as consumers of currency from the day of their birth. The revision of issue is a material question for the whole world.
You are aware that the gold standard has been the ruin of the States which adopted it, for it has not been able to satisfy the demands for money, the more so that we have removed gold from circulation as far as possible.
With us the standard that must be introduced is the cost of working-man power, whether it be reckoned in paper or in wood. We shall make the issue of money in accordance with the normal requirements of each subject, adding to the quantity with every birth and subtracting with every death.
The accounts will be managed by each department (the French administrative division), each circle.
In order that there may be no delays in the paying out of money for State needs the sums and terms of such payments will be fixed by decree of the ruler; this will abolish the protection by a ministry of one institution to the detriment of others.
The budgets of income and expenditure will be carried out side by side that they may not be obscured by distance one to another.
The reforms projected by us in the financial institutions and principles of the goyim will be clothed by us in such forms as will alarm nobody. We shall point out the necessity of reforms in consequence of the disorderly darkness into which the goyim by their irregularities have plunged the finances. The first irregularity, as we shall point out, consists in their beginning with drawing up a single budget which increases year after year owing to the following cause: this budget is dragged out to half the year, then they demand a budget to put things right, and this they expend in three months, after which they ask for a supplementary budget, and all this ends with a liquidation budget. But, as the budget of the following year is drawn up in accordance with the sum of the total addition, the annual departure from the normal reaches as much as 50 per cent, in a year, and so the annual budget is trebled in ten years. Thanks to such methods, allowed-by the carelessness of the goy States, their treasuries are empty. The period of loans supervenes, and that has swallowed up remainders and brought all the goy States to bankruptcy.
You understand perfectly that economic arrangements of this kind, which have been suggested to the goyim by us, cannot be carried on by us.
Every kind of loan proves infirmity in the State and a want of understanding of the rights of the State. Loans hang like a sword of Damocles over the heads of rulers, who, instead of taking from their subjects by a temporary tax, come begging with outstretched palm to our bankers. Foreign loans are leeches which there is no possibility of removing from the body of the State until they fall off by themselves or the State flings them off. But the goy States do not tear them off; they persist in putting more on to themselves so that they must inevitably perish, drained by voluntary blood letting.
What also indeed is, in substance, a loan, especially a foreign loan? A loan is—an issue of government bills of exchange containing a percentage obligation commensurate to the sum of the loan capital. If the loan bears a charge of 5 per cent., then in twenty years the State vainly pays away in interest a sum equal to the loan borrowed, in forty years it is paying a double sum, in sixty treble—and all the while the debt remains an unpaid debt.
From this calculation it is obvious that with any form of taxation per head the State is baling out the last coppers of the poor taxpayers in order to settle accounts with wealthy foreigners, from whom it has borrowed money instead of collecting these coppers for its own needs without the additional interest.
So long as loans were internal the goyim only shuffled their money from the pockets of the poor to those of the rich, but when we bought up the necessary person in order to transfer loans into the external sphere all the wealth of States flowed into our cash-boxes and all the goyim began to pay us the tribute of subjects.
If the superficiality of goy kings on their thrones in regard to State affairs and the venality of ministers or the want of understanding of financial matters on the part of other ruling persons have made their countries debtors to our treasuries to amounts quite impossible to pay, it has not been accomplished without on our part heavy expenditure of trouble and money.
Stagnation of money will not be allowed by us and therefore there will be no State interest-bearing paper, except a one-per-cent. series, so that there will be no payment of interest to leeches that suck all the strength out of the State. The right to issue interest-bearing paper will be given exclusively to industrial companies who will find no difficulty in paying out of profits, whereas the State does not make interest on borrowed money like these companies, for the State borrows to spend and not to use in operations.
Industrial papers will be bought also by the government which from being as now a payer of tribute by loan operations will be transformed into a lender of money at a profit. This measure will stop the stagnation of money, parasitic profits, and idleness all of which were useful for us among the goyim so long as they were independent but are not desirable under our rule.
How clear is the undeveloped power of thought of the purely brute brains of the goyim, as expressed in the fact that they have been borrowing from us with payment of interest without ever thinking that all the same these very moneys, plus an addition for payment of interest, must be got by them from their own State pockets in order to settle up with us. What could have been simpler than to take the money they wanted from their own people?
But it is a proof of the genius of our chosen mind that we have contrived to present the matter of loans to them in such a light that they have even seen in them an advantage for themselves.
Our accounts, which we shall present when the time comes in the light of centuries of experience gained by experiments made by us on the goy States, will be distinguished by clearness and definiteness and will show at a glance to all men the advantage of our innovations. They will put an end to those abuses to which we owe our mastery over the goyim, but which cannot be allowed in our Kingdom.
We shall so hedge about our system of accounting that neither the ruler nor the most insignificant public servant will be in a position to divert even the smallest sum from its destination without detection or to direct it in another direction except that which will be once fixed in a definite plan of action.
And without a definite plan it is impossible to rule. Marching along an undetermined road and with undetermined resources brings heroes and demi-gods to ruin.
The goy rulers, whom we once upon a time advised should be distracted from State occupations by representative receptions, observances of etiquette, and entertainments, were only screens for our rule. The accounts of favourite courtiers who replaced them in the sphere of affairs were drawn up for them by our agents, and every time gave satisfaction to short-sighted minds by promises that in the future economies and improvements were foreseen .... Economies from what? From new taxes?—were questions that might have been but were not asked by those who read our accounts and projects.
You know to what they have been brought by this carelessness, at what a pitch of financial disorder they have arrived, notwithstanding the astonishing industry of their peoples.
LOANS AND CREDIT
Bankruptcy—Abolition of money markets.
To what I reported to you at the last meeting I shall now add a detailed explanation of internal loans. Of foreign loans I shall say nothing more, because they have fed us with the national moneys of the goyim, but for our State there will be no foreigners, that is, nothing external.
We have taken advantage of the venality of administrators and the slackness of rulers to get our moneys twice, thrice and more times over by lending to the goy governments moneys which were not all needed by the States. Could anyone do the like in regard to us? .... Therefore, I shall only deal with details of internal loans.
States announce that such a loan is to be concluded and open subscriptions for their own bills of exchange, that is, for their interest-bearing paper. That they may be within the reach of all the price is determined at from a hundred to a thousand; and a discount is made for the earliest subscribers. Next day, by artificial means, the price of them goes up, alleged reason being that everyone is rushing to buy them. In a few days the treasury safes are, as they say, overflowing, and there's more money than they can do with (why then take it?) The subscription, it is alleged, covers many times over the issue total of the loan; in this lies the whole stage effect—look you, they say, what confidence is shown in the government's bills of exchange.
But when the comedy is played out there emerges the fact that a debit, and an exceedingly burdensome debit, has been created. For the payment of interest it becomes necessary to have recourse to new loans, which do not swallow up but only add to the capital debt. And, when this credit is exhausted it becomes necessary by new taxes to cover, not the loan, but only the interest on it. These taxes are a debit employed to cover a debit.
Later comes the time for conversions, but they diminish the payment of interest without covering the debt, and besides they cannot be made without the consent of the lenders; on announcing a conversion a proposal is made to return the money to those who are not willing to convert their paper. If everybody expressed his unwillingness and demanded his money back, the government would be hoisted on their own petard and would be found insolvent and unable to pay the proposed sums. By good luck the subjects of the goy governments, knowing nothing about financial affairs, have always preferred losses on exchange and diminution of interest to the risk of new investments of their moneys, and have thereby many a time enabled these governments to throw off their shoulders a debit of several millions.
Nowadays, with external loans, these tricks cannot be played by the goyim for they know that we shall demand all our moneys back.
In this way an acknowledged bankruptcy will best prove to the various countries the absence of any means between the interests of the peoples and those who rule them.
I beg you to concentrate your particular attention upon this point and upon the following: nowadays all internal loans are consolidated by so-called flying loans, that is, such as have terms of payment more or less near. These debts consist of moneys paid into the savings banks and reserve funds. If left for long at the disposition of a government these funds evaporate in the payment of interest on foreign loans, and are replaced by the deposit of equivalent amount of rents.
And these last it is, which patch up all the leaks in the State treasuries of the goyim.
When we ascend the throne of the world all these financial and similar shifts, as being not in accord with our interests, will be swept away so as not to leave a trace, as also will be destroyed all money markets, since we shall not allow the prestige of our power to be shaken by fluctuations of prices set upon our values, which we shall announce by law at the price which represents their full worth without any possibility of lowering or raising. (Raising gives the pretext for lowering, which indeed was where we made a beginning in relation to the values of the goyim.)
We shall replace the money markets by grandiose government credit institutions, the object of which will be to fix the price of industrial values in accordance with government views. These institutions will be in a position to fling upon the market five hundred millions of industrial paper in one day, or to buy up for the same amount. In this way all industrial undertakings will come into dependence upon us. You may imagine for yourselves what immense power we shall thereby secure for ourselves ....
POWER OF GOLD
The secret of what is coming—Mysticism of the new authority and the reverent fear of the people.
In all that has so far been reported by me to you, I have endeavoured to depict with care the secret of what is coming, of what is past, and what is going on now, rushing into the flood of the great events coming already in the near future, the secret of our relations to the goyim and of financial operations. On this subject there remains still a little for me to add.
In our hands is the greatest power of our day—gold: in two days we can procure from our storehouses any quantity we may please.
Surely there is no need to seek further proof that our rule is predestined by God? Surely we shall not fail with such wealth to prove that all that evil which for so many centuries we have had to commit has served at the end of ends the cause of true well-being—the bringing of everything into order? Though it be even by the exercise of some violence, yet all the same it will be established. We shall contrive to prove that we are benefactors who have restored to the rent and mangled earth the true good and also freedom of the person, and therewith we shall enable it to be enjoyed in peace and quiet, with proper dignity of relations, on the condition, of course, of strict observance of the laws established by us. We shall make plain therewith that freedom does not consist in dissipation and in the right of unbridled licence any more than the dignity and force of a man do not consist in the right for everyone to promulgate destructive principles in the nature of freedom of conscience, equality and the like. The freedom of the person in no wise consists in the right to agitate oneself and others by abominable speeches before disorderly mobs, for true freedom consists in the inviolability of the person who honourably and strictly observes all the laws of life in common, and human dignity is wrapped up in consciousness of the rights and also of the absence of rights of each, and not wholly and solely in fantastic imaginings about the subject of one's ego.
Our authority will be glorious because it will be all-powerful, it will rule and guide, and not muddle along after leaders and orators shrieking themselves hoarse with senseless words which they call great principles and which are nothing else, to speak honestly, but Utopian .... Our authority will be the crown of order, and in that is included the whole happiness of man. The aureole of this authority will inspire a mystical bowing of the knee before it and a reverent fear before it ef all the peoples. True force makes no terms with any right, not even with that of God: none dare come near to it so as to take so much as a span away from it.
Cutting down of luxury goods—The supreme lord to replace all existing rulers.
That the peoples may become accustomed to obedience it is necessary to instil lessons of humility and therefore to reduce the production of articles of luxury. By this we shall improve morals which have been debased by emulation in the sphere of luxury. We shall re-establish small master production which will mean laying a mine under the private capital of manufacturers. This is indispensable also for the reason that manufacturers on the grand scale often move, though not always consciously, the thoughts of the masses in directions against the government. A people of small masters knows nothing of unemployment and this binds them closely with existing order, and consequently with the firmness of authority. Unemployment is a most perilous thing for a government. For us its part will have been played out the moment authority is transferred into our hands. Drunkenness will also be prohibited by law and punishable as a crime against the humanness of man who is turned into a brute under the influence of alcohol. Subjects, I repeat once more, give blind obedience only to the strong hand which is absolutely independent of them, for in it they feel the sword of defence and support against social scourges .... What do they want with an angelic spirit in a king? What they must see in him is the personification of force and power.
The supreme lord who will replace all existing rulers, dragging on their existence among societies demoralised by us, societies that have denied even the authority of God, from whose midst breaks out on all sides the fire of anarchy, must first of all proceed to quench this all-devouring flame. Therefore he will be obliged to kill off those existing societies, though he should drench them with his own blood, that he may resurrect them again in the form of regularly organised troops fighting consciously against every kind of infection that may cover the body of the State with sores.
This Chosen One of God is chosen from above to demolish the senseless forces moved by instinct and not reason, by brutishness and not humanness. These forces now triumph in manifestations of robbery and every kind of violence under the mask of principles of freedom and rights. They have overthrown all forms of social order to erect on the ruins the throne of the King of the Jews; but their part will be played out the moment he enters into his kingdom. Then it will be necessary to sweep them away from his path, on which must be left no knot, no splinter.
Then will it be possible for us to say to the peoples of the world: Give thanks to God and bow the knee before him who bears on his front the seal of the predestination of man to which God himself has led his star that none other but Him might free us from all the before-mentioned forces and evils.
QUALITIES OF THE RULER
Selecting and training the seed of David.
I pass now to the method of confirming the dynastic roots of King David to the last strata of the earth. This confirmation will first and foremost be included in that in which to this day has rested the force of conservatism by our learned elders of the conduct of all the affairs of the world, in the directing of the education of thought of all humanity.
Certain members of the seed of David will prepare the kings and their heirs, sejecting not by right of heritage but by eminent capacities, inducting them into the most secret mysteries of the political, into schemes of government, but providing always that none may come to know the secrets. The object of this mode of action is that all may know that government cannot be entrusted to those who have not been inducted into the secret places of its art ....
To these persons only will be taught the practical application of the aforenamed plans by comparison of the experiences of many centuries, all the observations on the politico-economic moves and social sciences—in a word, all the spirit of laws which have been unshakably established by nature herself for the regulation of the relations of humanity.
Direct heirs will often be set aside from ascending the throne if in their time of training they exhibit frivolity, softness and other qualities that are the ruin of authority, which render them incapable of governing and in themselves dangerous for kingly office.
Only those who are unconditionally capable of firm, even cruel, direct rule will receive the reins of power from our learned elders.
In case of falling sick with weakness of will or other form of incapacity, kings must by law hand over the reins of rule to new and capable hands ....
The king's plans of action for the current moment, and all the more so for the future, will be unknown, even to those who are called his closest counsellors.
Only the king and the three who stood sponsor for him will know what is coming.
In the person of the king who with unbending will is master of himself and of humanity all will discern as it were fate with its mysterious ways. None will know what the king wishes to attain by his dispositions, and therefore none will dare to stand across an unknown path.
It is understood that the brain reservoir of the king must correspond in capacity to the plan of government it has to contain. It is for this reason that he will ascend the throne not otherwise than after examination of his mind by the aforesaid learned elders.
That the people may know and love their king it is indispensable for him to converse in the market-places with his people. This ensures the necessary clinching of the two forces which are now divided one from another by us by the terror.
This terror was indispensable for us till the time comes for both these forces separately to fall under our influence.
The king of the Jews must not be at the mercy of his passions, and especially of sensuality: on no side of his character must he give brute instincts power over his mind. Sensuality worse than all else disorganises the capacities of the mind and clearness of views; distracting the thoughts to the worst and most brutal side of human activity.
The prop of humanity in the person of the supreme lord of all the world of the holy seed of David must sacrifice to his people all personal inclinations.
Our supreme lord must be of an exemplary irreproach-ability.
Signed by the representatives of Zion, of the 33rd degree.
1. See Appendix II, infra, pp. 263-267.
CONCLUDING PASSAGE FROM THE EPILOGUE OF NILUS
(Edition of 1905)
According to the testament of Montefiore, Zion is not sparing, either of money or of any other means, to achieve its ends. In our day, all the governments of the entire world are consciously or unconsciously submissive to the commands of this great Supergovernment of Zion, because all the bonds and securities are in its hands; for all countries are indebted to the Jews for sums which they will never be able to pay. All affairs—industry, commerce, and diplomacy —are in the hands of Zion. It is by means of its capital loans that it has enslaved all nations. By keeping education on purely materialistic lines, the Jews have loaded the Gentiles with heavy chains with which they have harnessed them to their " Supergovernment".
The end of national liberty is near, therefore personal freedom is approaching its close; for true liberty cannot exist where Zion uses the lever of its gold to rule the masses and dominate the most respectable and enlightened class of society.
" He that hath ears to hear, let him hear ".
It is nearly four years since the Protocols of the Elders of Zion came into my possession. Only God knows what efforts I have made to bring them to general notice—in vain—and even to warn those in power, by disclosing the causes of the storm about to break on apathetic Russia who seems, in her misfortune, to have lost all notion of what is going on around her.
And it is only now when I fear it may be too late, that I have succeeded in publishing my work, hoping to put on their guard those who still have ears to hear and eyes to see.
One can no longer doubt it, the triumphant reign of the King of Israel rises over our degenerate world as that of Satan, with his power and his terrors; the King born of the blood of Zion—the Antichrist—is about to mount the throne of universal empire.
Events are precipitated in the world at a terrifying speed: quarrels, wars, rumours, famines, epidemics, earthquakes— everything which even yesterday was impossible, today is an accomplished fact. One would think that the days pass so rapidly to advance the cause of the chosen people. Space does not allow us to enter into the details of world history with regard to the disclosed " mysteries of iniquity," to prove from history the influence which the " Wise Men of Zion " have exercised through universal misfortunes, by foretelling the certain and already near future of humanity, or by raising the curtain for the last act of the world's tragedy.
Only the light of Christ and of his Holy Church Universal can fathom the abyss of Satan and disclose the extent of its wickedness.
I feel in my heart that the hour has already struck when there should urgently be convoked an Eighth Oecumenical Council which would unite the pastors and representatives of all Christendom. Secular quarrels and schisms would all be forgotten in the imminent need of preparing against the coming of the Anti-christ.1
1. This forecast of Sergius Nilus is all the more remarkable, when one considers that it appeared in the Epilogue to his edition of the Protocols of 1905.
V. A FEW ILLUSTRATIVE FACTS
Jacob Brafmann and his Work
About the middle of the last century, Jacob Brafmann, a Jewish rabbi in Russia, became a convert to Christianity and spent the rest of his life endeavouring to throw light on the Jewish questions in general, and on the situation in Russia in particular, both in the interest of gentiles and of the Jews themselves. His two works, The Book of the Kahal,1 and The Jewish Brotherhoods,* were first published at government expense some sixty years ago and are still the best source of information on many points. Brafmann's story, given in his own words in the preface to the Book of the Kahal, is reprinted here :*
"During his majesty's (Alexander II) stay at Minsk in 1858, I submitted to him a report on the social status and organization of the Jews in Russia. Some time after, by order of the holy synod (April 29, 1859), I was called to St. Petersburg in connection with the report, and was subsequently (May 13, 1860) appointed professor of Hebrew at the Minsk seminary. I was also charged with finding a means for overcoming the obstacles to conversion to Christianity set up by the Jews ... Thoroughly familiar with the Jewish question (as I had professed Judaism till the age of thirty-four), I knew where to draw the materials necessary for the work, and the archbishop of Minsk furnished me with the means. My task was facilitated by the co-operation of several enlightened Jews4. I thus obtained valuable material which served not only for the work in hand, but also to throw light on the Jewish question in general, as well as their social and religious organization in Russia.
This material included over a thousand acts of the Jewish Kahal (civil administration), and of the beth-dins (Talmudic law courts), showing the power and extent of their secret government. The Kahal goes so far as to decree what individuals may be invited to, and what dishes served at, a Jewish family feast.
On the important question, whether the law of the land is binding on the Jews, the comments in the Talmud are evasive, but the documents here listed (under Nos. 5, 16, 166) show that the Jews must abide by the instructions of the Kahal and the beth-din, in contradistinction to the law of the land and their own conscience.
Similarly, on the question of the real estate and appurtenances belonging to non-Jews, the Talmud is obscure; but the thirty-seven acts cited in our fifth article prove conclusively that the Kahal may sell to Jews the right (Hasaka and Meropie) to the real estate and appurtenances of any gentile. The documents also prove that the Kahal and the beth-din are not bound to judge according to Jewish law, but may hand down personal decisions as they please-Thus, by secret acts, the Jews circumvent their Christian competitors and acquire a controlling share of the capital and real estate of the country.
I submitted these documents together with my recommendations to Gov. Gen. von Kaufmann, who appointed a commission to examine them, with the result that the official Jewish Kahal was suppressed by the circular of Aug. 34, 1867.
The authenticity of all the documents is thoroughly established; the 290 documents published herewith cover the period from 1794 to 1803. To facilitate their study, they have been arranged in seventeen categories, each preceded by a short explanation on the laws and customs referred to, and indicating their real aim and influence on the Jews and on the gentiles."
As the subject of Brafmann's other work, The Jewish Brotherhoods, has been treated rather fully in chapter II, it is hardly necessary to give an analysis of the book here.
1. First edition (Vilna, 1869), excellent German translation by Siegfried Passarge, Das Such vom Kahal (Hammer Verlag, Leipzig, 1928), 2 vol. French translation by Mgr. Jouin, Les Sources de VimpM- alisme juif: Le Qahal (Paris, 1925).
2. (Vilna, 1868).
3. Our translation, somewhat abbreviated.
4. See Vilna Gazette (1866), 169: " Views of an individual Jew."
The Writing on the Wall
THE CABBALISTIC SIGNIFICANCE OF THE MYSTERIOUS INSCRIPTION FOUND ON THE WALL OF THE ROOM IN WHICH THE IMPERIAL RUSSIAN FAMILY WAS MURDERED.
The three letters N of the inscription are the letter " " repeated three times in three different languages.1 The first letter on the right is a L (lamed) in the cursive handwriting of the ancient Hebrew alphabet. It is the twelfth letter of that alphabet with the numerical value of 30 (cabbalistically reduced to the fundamental number: — 3 + 0 = 3, which explains why the letter " L " is thrice repeated in the inscription).2 The second letter is also the letter lamed but in the Samaritan script.3
The third letter A. is the Greek letter lambda, corresponding to the same letter lamed.
In ancient sacred Hebrew, based on the ancient sacred language of the Egyptian temples, each letter, apart from its vernacular value as sound and number, has, moreover, secret meanings known only to adepts. Fabre d'Olivet thus characterizes the accumulation of the different meanings contained in the ancient Hebrew alphabet:—
" Moses, in his teaching, followed the method of the Egyptian priests who made use of three methods to express their thoughts: the first was the common use; the second was symbolical or figurative; the third was sacred or hieroglyphic. Such was the character of that language. According to their will, the same word had the ordinary, figurative or the allegorical meaning. Heraclitus has expressed this difference in three terms: namely, the spoken word, the symbol, and the hidden meaning."4
Moreover, each letter stood for one of the names of God, and for one of the mysterious keys of the Tarot, the sacred book wherein, under different images, is concentrated all the ancient practice of magical science.5
The name of God, corresponding to the letter lamed, is Shadai, composed of three letters, represented by A (the Greek capital letter D) and it governs the sphere of Saturn. The number of Saturn is also 3. This explains once again why the letter lamed is thrice repeated.6
On the other hand, following cabbalistic teaching, the letter lamed stands for the heart, the king of the body, wherein dwells the soul—Ruach. Cabbalists affirm that man is formed of three main invisible parts: namely, Nesham, the mind, Ruach, the soul, and Nefesh, the lower soul or subconscience which governs directly the material body. Nesham has its seat in the brain; Nefesh, in the liver, and Ruach, in the centre, between liver and brain, namely, in the heart. According to the ancients, the heart is king of the body (Melek = king), and, we repeat again, was situated in the body between brain and liver, that is, in the centre.7 This is clearly shown by the cabbalistic analysis of the word Melek = king.
Three words are fused in one: " brain ", represented by the first letter of the word mem; " heart " by the first letter of the word lamed; and " liver ", by the first letter of the word kaph, which is the same letter as ;J, but in the form used at the end of a word. It is clear, therefore, that the letter L (lamed), symbolising the " heart ", which is found in the centre between " liver " and " brain ", is placed in the word Melek between letters representing these two organs.8
Therefore, according to the ancients, the heart (lamed) is the king (Melek) of the organism and the seat of life. The destruction of the heart causes the death of the organism and, in symbolical language, it also means that the destruction of the king brings about the downfall of the kingdom.
Furthermore, in studying the hidden meaning of the roots, one discovers that the root LL (double lamed), still found in Arabic, means the agony of a man being torn to pieces.9
The addition of a third only strengthens this meaning and indicates the agony bf a desperate situation.
Interpreting the inscription on the wall with the help of the Tarot,10 one finds that the letter L corresponds to the twelfth card of the Great Arcana,l1 and also to the letter Luzain, of the sacred language of the Egyptian Magi. This arcanum represents a man hanging by one foot from a pole whose two ends rest on two trees from each of which six branches have been cut. The man's arms are tied behind his back and folded so as to form the base of a triangle pointing downwards; the apex is formed by the head of the man. It is the sign of violent death, but it can also mean sacrifice.12
Therefore, reading the cabbalistic meaning of the three letters, one gets:— HERE THE KING WAS STRUCK TO THE HEART IN
PUNISHMENT OF HIS CRIMES, or, HERE THE KING WAS SACRIFICED TO BRING
ABOUT THE DESTRUCTION OF HIS KINGDOM.
Finally, the line drawn beneath these three letters (in Magical Science the horizontal line is the symbol of the passive principle) indicates that those who killed the king did not do so of their own will, but in obedience to superior command.
Whoever wrote this inscription was a man well versed in the secrets of the ancient Jewish cabbalism, as contained in the Cabbala and the Talmud. In accomplishing the deed in obedience to superior order, this man performed a rite of Black Magic. It is for this reason that he commemorated his act by a cabbalistic inscription in cipher, which belonged to the rite.
The inscription therefore proves:—
1. That the Tsar was killed.
2. That the murder of the Tsar was committed by men under the command of occult forces; and by an organiza tion which, in its struggle against existing power resorted to the ancient cabbalism in which it was well versed. The Kellogg Palestine Pact Extract from League of Nations—Treaty Series, vol. XLin-1926, No. 1046, pages 41-59.
Convention respecting the Rights of the Governments of the two Countries and their respective Nationals in Palestine, signed at London, December 3, 1924.
English official text communicated by His Britannic Majesty's Foreign Office. The registration of this Convention took place January 6, 1926. This Convention was also transmitted to the Secretariat by the Department of State of the Government of the United States of America, February 17, 1926.
(Preamble followed by the text of the mandate as it was approved by the Council of the League of Nations, 28 articles, signed at London, July 3, 1922.)
Whereas the mandate in the above terms came into force on September 29, 1923; and Whereas the United States of America, by participating in the war against Germany, contributed to her defeat and the defeat of her Allies; and to the renunciation of the rights and titles of her Allies in the territory transferred by them, but has not ratified the Covenant of the League of Nations embodied in the Treaty of Versailles; and Whereas the Government of the United States and the Government of His Britannic Majesty desire to reach a definite agreement independently with respect to the rights of the two Governments and their respective Nationals in Palestine;
His Britannic Majesty and the President of the United States of America have decided to conclude a convention to this effect, and have named as plenipotentiaries:
His Majesty (titles):
The Right Honourable Joseph Austen Chamberlain (titles);
The President of the United States of America:
His Excellency the Honourable Frank B. Kellogg (titles);
Who have agreed as follows:
Subject to the provisions of the present Convention the United States consents to the dominion of Palestine by His Britannic Majesty, pursuant to the mandate recited above.
The United States and its nationals shall have and enjoy all the rights and benefits secured under the terms of the mandate to Members of the League of Nations and their nationals, notwithstanding the fact that the United States is not a Member of the League of Nations.
Vested American property rights in the mandated territory shall be respected and in no way impaired.
A duplicate of the annual report to be made by the Mandatory under Art. 24 of the mandate shall be furnished to the United States.
Subject to the provisions of any local laws for the maintenance of public order and public morals, the nationals of the United States will be permitted freely to establish and
maintain educational, philanthropic, and religious institutions in the mandated territory, and to receive voluntary applicants and to teach in the English language.
The extradition treaties and conventions which are or may be in force between the United States and Great Britain, and the provisions of any treaties which are or may be in force between the two countries which relate to extradition or consular rights shall apply to the mandated territory.
Nothing contained in the present Convention shall be affected by any modification which may be made in the terms of the mandate, as recited above, unless such modification shall have been assented to by the United States.
The present Convention shall be ratified in accordance with etc. Done in duplicate at London this 3rd day of December, 1924.
(L.S.) Austen Chamberlain.
(L.S.) Frank B. Kellogg.
Note an the Kellogg-Briand Pact
This pact was not written by Secretary of State Frank B. Kellogg, but was entirely the work of a Jewish Chicago lawyer, Solomon O. Levinsohn. He first presented it to the late M. Briand and later to Mr. Kellogg, who sponsored it.
It became known as the Kellogg-Briand Pact and was signed in Paris on August 27, 1928. (Cf. The story of this Pact in the Revue Internationale des Societts Secretes, Paris, 1930).
1. The student may be confused by the fact that, in the photograph which is reproduced facing page 192, the characters appear as though reversed, and written from right to left. But this is not the case, and is explained by the position assumed by the writer, who stood with his back to the wall, with his right arm stretched down, and formed the letters from right to left, in the Hebrew manner.
2. The cabbalistic interpretation of letters and words is found in the following books: Kircher, Oedipus Aegyptiacus; Lenain, La Science Cabbalistique; Dee, Monas Hieroglyphica; H. Krumrath, Amphitheatre de Veternel sapience; Franck, La Cabbale.
3. Fabre d'Olivet, La Langue hebralque restitute.
4. Fabre d'Olivet, op. fit.
5. Eliphas Levy, Dogme et Rituel de la haute magie.
6. Cornelius Agrippa, Philosophic Occulle.
7. Cf. The report made by Leinigen to the Munich Psychological Society, March 3, 1887.
8. To cipher the real meaning, cabbalists frequently resort to a special kind of hieroglyphics, one form of which is synthetic, whereby a word is concealed by several others. For instance, the first letters of several words are taken and assembled in one word, as in the present case in the word Melek. See Molitor, Philosophic de la Tradition. The above is a reproduction of the photograph of the inscription found on the wall of the room in Ekaterinburg where the Tsar Nicholas II and his Family were murdered, in 1918, by order of the Bolsheviks. The town was retaken from the Bolsheviks, a tew weeks after the murder, by the forces of General Denikin, at whose command an official inquest was instituted: the bodies of the Imperial Family were exhumed, etc., and a careful record of the proceedings was kept. The photograph is found in this record.
The name of the town has since been changed by the Bolsheviks to Sverdlovsk, after the Jewish President, Sverdlov, of the Court which ordered the murder.
The student must not be confused by the fact that in the above photograph the characters are written upside-down and from right to left. That is explained by the fact that the writer stood with his back to the wall, with his right arm stretched down, and he formed the letters from right to left, in the Hebrew manner.
9. Fabre d'Olivet, op. cit.
10. Eliphas L6vy, op. cit. Papus, Tarot des Bohimiens.
11. The Arcana (arcana= mysterious) are the cards of the Tarot: the Great Arcana, of which there are twenty-two, correspond to the letters of the sacred alphabet which was first of all Egyptian and after wards became Jewish. Their invention is attributed to the founder of the Egyptian secret science, Hermes Tot or Trismegistos. Our playing
cards today originally came from the Lesser Arcana.
12. P. Christian, Histoire de la Magie.
THE SOVIETIZATION OF GREAT BRITAIN AND THE UNITED STATES
The preceding chapters have been devoted to a study of the Jewish world organization, its historical background, its branches, its aims and the methods whereby they are obtained. If the reader has followed the thread thus far patiently and objectively, his mind has doubtless grasped, not only the historical facts and specific Jewish plans for the immediate future, but also something of Jewish character and psychology in general. A full knowledge of the latter—which can be gained only through personal experience—is the greatest safeguard against Jewish snares and pitfalls of everyday life.
In the following pages will be found the names of men and women prominent in political, economic and social circles who, lured by the tempting bait, have become enmeshed in Jewish intrigue. To all the world they appear to play an independent role; but in reality they are merely puppets whose every move is worked by strings from behind the scene.l
The close observer will discover, slavishly serving the Jewish cause under the mask of benevolence, democracy or liberalism, bishops, archbishops, prime ministers and national presidents, government officials of every rank and leading representatives of all other professions (lawyers, economists, scientists and the rest). He will recognize them at once as traitors who have sold themselves and their country for their own personal advantage.
" Every man aims at power, everyone would like to become a dictator if only he could, and rare indeed are the men who would not be willing to sacrifice the welfare of all for the sake of securing their own welfare."2 But these traitors, when the great day comes, like their counterparts in the French and in the recent Russian revolutions, will pay the price of treason with their heads.3
Not less useful to the Jewish cause than those holding official positions, are the rich scions of socially prominent families: their wealth and their prestige are the " force and make-believe " of the Jewish countersign.* A rich young Bostonian, Garland, gave millions of dollars to the foundation which bears his name, and appointed as one of its trustees the notorious " red ", William Zebulon Foster.
" Foster told them that the Garland Foundation could be depended upon whenever anyone got into trouble because of radical political opinions. Several of the organizers of the Communist party and of its ' legal' political branch, the Workers' party, were promised regular monthly salaries by Foster, to be paid from the Garland Foundation"^
Another example is the Philadelphian, William Curtis Bok, who, on the death of his grandfather, Cyrus H. K. Curtis, in 1933, inherited6 a major interest in the huge Curtis Publishing Company, comprising The Ladies Home Journal, Good Housekeeping, The Philadelphia Public Ledger, The New York Evening Post and other journals.7 Bok, now 35, on his return from Soviet Russia, founded a new group to facilitate Bolshevik propaganda in America: " There came into being in Philadelphia last week (July, 1933) a new investigating agency sponsored by the American Foundation. It was called The Committee on Russian-American Relations and its membership included such potent figures as the Morgan partner, Thomas W. Lamont, whose son Corliss is a near Communist; the Harvard economist Frank W. Taussig;8 the lawyer Paul D. Cravath,9 a Russian recognitionist; James D. Mooney, President of General Motors Export Co.; Dean Roscoe Pound, of Harvard Law School, a Liberal of the first water; Hugh L. Cooper, the engineer who built the Dnieprostry Dam for the U.S.S.R. Modestly buried away in the middle of the committee list was the name of its Chairman and sponsor— Curtis Bok."10 Many more examples of rich people of good families, such as Mrs. Elmhirst (nee Dorothy Whitney), Lady Astor, the Dowager Countess of Warwick, come to mind, but space does not allow mention of all here, nor of a discussion of how and why each was inveigled into the Jewish net and into the base r61e of patron and purveyor to criminals.
Suffice it to say that, in general, these people " thirst for the emotion of success and applause, of which we (the Jews) are remarkably generous. And the reason why we give them this success is to make use of their high conceit of themselves, to which it gives birth. For that insensibly disposes them to assimilate our suggestions without being on their guard against them, in the fullness of their confidence that it is their own infallibility which is giving utterance to their own thoughts, and that it is impossible for them to borrow those of others... You cannot imagine to what extent the wisest of the goyim can be brought to a state of unconscious naivete in the presence of this high conceit of themselves; and at the same time how easy it is to take the heart out of them by the slightest ill-success, though it be nothing more than silencing the applause they enjoyed, and reducing them to slavish submission for the sake of winning a renewal of success."11
Much has already been written about Bolshevism being led by Jews;12 the same applies to it in Mexico, China and Spain, where the systematic violence and terrorism, oft alluded to in the Protocols as Jewish means of exercising power, have had full play. War is now waged against civilization in Europe and the United States, but it assumes another aspect. The ascent of the Jew to power in those countries is made on the ladder of Fabianism, of which Socialism, Marxism, Communism, Bolshevism and Internationalism are the chief rungs.
The definition and aims of Fabianism are given by the Fabians themselves as follows:—
Basis of the Fabian Society
The Fabian Society consists of Socialists.
It therefore aims at the reorganization of Society by the emancipation of Land and Industrial Capital from individual ownership and the vesting of them in the community for the general benefit. In this way only can the natural and acquired advantages of the country be equitably shared by the whole people.
The Society accordingly works for the extinction of private property in land, with equitable consideration of established expectations, and due provision as to the tenure of the home and homestead: for the transfer to the community, by constitutional methods, of all such industries as can be conducted socially: and for the establishment, as the governing consideration in the regulation of production, distribution and service, of the common good instead of private profit.
The Society is a constituent of the Labour Party and of the International Socialist Congress: but it takes part freely in all constitutional movements, social, economic and political, which can be guided towards its own objects. Its direct business is: (a) the propaganda of Socialism in its application to current problems; (b) investigation and discovery in social, industrial, political and economic relations; (c) the working out of Socialist principles in legislation and administrative reconstruction; (d) the publication of the results of its investigations and their practical lessons.
The Society, believing in equal citizenship of men and women in the fullest sense, is open to persons irrespective of sex, race or creed, who commit themselves to its aims and purposes as stated above and undertake to promote its work.
The Society took the name of Fabian from the policy of temporizing it adopted, claiming to imitate that of the Roman dictator, Fabius Cunctator, during his fight against Hannibal, whom he eventually defeated at Tarentum, 215 B. C.
Frank Podmore, well-known spiritualist and occultist, one of the founders of the Fabian Society, is quoted as saying to one of its earliest members:—"For the right moment, you must wait, as Fabius did most patiently, when warring against Hannibal, though many censured his delays, but when the time comes, you must strike hard, as Fabius did, or your waiting will be in vain and fruitless."
The Fabian Society waited forty years, striking a continual series of covert blows at the political, economic, social and religious structure of England, and in 1924 it came to power with the advent of the first Labour Government, which can be called the offspring of the Fabian Society.
The period had been fruitful, if long.
There is no gainsaying that the Fabian Society has been first and foremost a gathering of intellectuals—a rebellious Intelligentsia whose accomplishments seem the realisation of Weishaupt's dream of Masonic Illuminism, cleverly combined with Moses Mendelssohn's dream of Jewish Illuminism (Haskalah).
Historically, it was founded in 1883 at the time when in the realm of philosophy and metaphysics, the political economy of John Stuart Mill, in England, and the Positivism of Auguste Comte, in France, had thrown perturbation into the minds of numerous thinkers and given abundant food to the Freethinkers of the epoch. Henry George's book on Socialism, Progress and Poverty, was in great vogue. The direct influence leading to the formation of the Fabian Society was, according to E. R. Pease, its historian, exercised by Thomas Davidson, the founder of The Fellowship of the New Life, which society culminated in The Ethical Society of Culture in New York. Considerable impulse was also given to the budding association by its assimilation of Robert Dale Owen's socialistic principles.
Among the intellectuals who joined The Fabian Society soon after its inception in 1884 was the Irishman, George Bernard Shaw, who was elected a member in that year.
At that time, The Fabian Society had completely seceded from the Fellowship of the New Life and had formulated its own Socialistic programme. The following year, Sidney Webb, now Lord Passfield and ex-Minister of the Colonies, as well as Sydney Olivier, now Lord Olivier, who has held several Government appointments, were elected members of The Fabian Society. Soon afterwards, the late Mrs. Annie Besant, later head of the Theosophical Movement, also was elected a member.
Fabian Socialism, at the outset, groped its way along all the beaten paths of the Social Revolutionists who had preceded them. It also made incursions into Babouvism, Marxism, Bakounist Anarchism and the then existing various Social-Democratic groups. Being, however, mainly composed of intellectuals, bureaucrats, civil servants, journalists, etc., the Fabians, whose fundamental slogan was the righting of the wrongs of the working class, had no keen desire for riotous street manifestations and confined their earliest activities to drawing-room meetings.
It does not enter within the limits of the present sketch to retrace the history of the Fabian Society, but the point which should be regarded as of great importance is that out of the drawing-room meetings alluded to above, there emerged the truly Fabian tactics of temporizing and the decision taken and followed of penetrating into or, as Bernard Shaw himself expressed it, of permeating numerous existing societies with Fabian socialistic ideas and principles.
This method of penetrating into organizations, political and economic, and of boring from within, gave, in time, remarkable results. Fabians, mainly Civil Servants, easily found their affinities in Liberal circles and, moreover, owing to their loudly proclaimed socialistic profession of faith, obtained the confidence of the working classes. They were indeed sitting on both sides of the fence and recruiting the good-will of both Liberal and Labour organizations.
The study of Fabianism is one of almost unparalleled opportunism. Fabians seemed to have formulated no original creed of their own, but were animated by an unswerving resolve to get to the top and govern England. They accepted the creed or tenets of any camp into which they penetrated and, by degrees, converted its adherents to their own views. In this manner Fabian members secured their positions in political, industrial and educational fields. To suit even Anarchism, they formed a special Fabian branch which bore the name of The Fabian Parliamentary League.
No field of exploitation seems to have been overlooked by these socialist intellectual Illuminati:
I. POLITICS.—In Politics, their range of activities has been well defined by one of its leaders, Bernard Shaw, in a paper he read at a conference in 1892, at Essex Hall. The policy of " permeation " of the Fabian Society was clearly outlined and much stress laid upon the enumeration of results already achieved. Within a year of this conference, in January 1893, The Independent Labour Party was formed by the grouping of the local Fabian societies then in existence. These groups, under the leadership of Keir Hardie, Friedrich Engels (co-worker with Karl Marx), and Marx's daughter, E. Aveling, had accepted, as their code, Marxism thus summarised:—To establish a Socialist State where Land and Capital will be held by the Community. On such principles was Russia transformed into Soviet Russia in 1917.
The author of The History of The Fabian Society does not fail to point it out as the Parent Society, emphasizing the fact that the Marxist Independent Labour Party was but its offspring. Thus, leading, on the one hand, Marxist Socialism and having, on the other, so permeated the Liberal party that they also practically ruled it, the Fabians were soon able to take part in local elections, and propose their own candidates for appointments on School Boards, Vestries, County Councils, Women's Liberal Federations, Liberal and Radical Unions, etc. They spared no pains in pushing forward the autonomy of municipalities as well as the various schemes for National Insurance, Old Age Pensions, Tariff Reform, Employers' Liability, Workmen's Compensation, etc.
Politically also, through their offspring, The Independent Labour Party, they asserted their defeatist and anti-patriotic tenets during the Boer War of 1899-1902, when they expressed their wish " to see the Boers successful and the British Army driven into the sea."
By 1903, The Independent Labour Party, after 10 years of indefatigable efforts among the Trade Unionists, gave its parent, The Fabian Society, the opportunity and satisfaction of presenting England with a full-fledged Labour Party. Up to that time, Fabian candidates had contested and won seats in Parliament as Liberals. The practice of the policy of interlocking directorates had never been better evidenced than by the tactics of Fabianism.
The outbreak of the War in 1914 furnished the Illuminati of Socialism with the opportunity of manifesting their anti-patriotic feelings much more openly than they had done during the Boer War. It was then that their policy of interlocking directorates bore abundant fruit. What one might call the " melting " property of The Fabian Society became more evident for, as such, it did not create a record of anti-patriotism. That particular task was entrusted to its members of the Labour Party andthe Independent Labour Party who took a prominent part in the formation of the Union of Democratic Control, which counted the Zionist Jew, Israel Zangwill, amongst its leading band-masters.
The shameful defeatist, pro-German activities of the Prime Minister of England, Ramsay Macdonald, Fabian and Labourite during the World War, and the open support given to Bolshevism by his Labour Party have for ever sullied the political honour of England and are a matter of history.
Yet another aspect of Fabianism is the great part it took in the formation and, later, direction of The League of Nations, which Bernard Shaw calls an incipient international government.
II. ECONOMICS.—In the realm of the Economic, Industrial and Financial life of England, The Fabian Society played no less a part than in politics. With its slogan of " Progressive Policy ",1? it invaded Agriculture, preaching the Nationalisation of land, in other words, the confiscation of landed property.
The first blow to Industry was struck in Lancashire, the stronghold of English industry, in 1890, with the help of the late Mrs. Annie Besant,14 as chief spokesman and agitator. Later, the Cooperative movement was captured and Fabi-anised and subsequently delivered over to the Independent Labour Party and Labour Party. It is due to the Socialists having been so successful in conquering industry that, during the World War, sabotage assumed such appalling proportions in the munition factories in England.
As to the financial " ideas " of The Fabians, whose basic principle is the ruin of Capitalism, they became realities when taxation of the people took undue proportions in the shape of income tax, super-tax, death duties—, and are to be followed by Capital Levy. The promised benefits to the working class to be derived from such schemes as the National Health Insurance and Workmen's Compensation and Dole, Old Age and Widow's Pensions, have proved a myth. Yet they have gone a long way towards furthering the plans exposed in the Protocols, which aim at reducing to bondage the Goyim, rich and poor alike.
III. EDUCATION.—In the matter of Education, the Fabian Illuminati have followed a theory which is none other than that suggested by one of the souls of Bavarian Illumin-ism, Nicolai, in the 18th century. Having secured posts on the School-boards of the country, it became very easy for Fabian socialists to instil their educational de-Christianised principles in the school curriculum. Their attack on religious teaching was subtle but deadly, as seen in the Education Act of 1902. They boasted openly of having in their ranks several Anglican bishops and divines, the list being headed by Bishop Headlam, one of the earliest Fabians. Eventually they won, having, as has always been their wont, resorted to intensive propaganda, generously distributing their tracts and leaflets.
From Our Political Correspondent.
The Government is to be presented with a brand new policy. Certain ministers are to take part in its preparation.
It is called a " long run"
Under Fabian educational schemes come the formation of the Educational Groups and of " The Nursery," the latter designed as a kind of training school for very young prospective Socialists. Women's groups were also formed, the members of which participated in all movements tending to a fuller feminist emancipation. But, by far, one of the most important steps taken by the Fabians along educational lines has been their inauguration in existing Universities of " University Socialist Societies," which in 1912 were finally grouped by Clifford Allen into " the Universities Socialist Federation." Fertile seeds of Fabian Socialism are also sown at the Summer Schools organized annually by the Society, which E. R. Pease rightly terms a " propagandist society ". The culminating triumph of the Fabians, in the realm of education, was the creation of the London School of Economics and Political Science at the London University where, today, one of the chief lecturers is the Jew socialist, Harold J. Laski, Member of the Executive Committee of the Fabian Society and Chairman of its Publishing Committee.
As has been suggested already, and as can be seen from the succinct expose here given, Fabianism left no field unexplored or unexploited. For fifty years, it has treated England to doses of both pure and diluted Marxism, mostly diluted, as the English, by the very nature of their steady and conservative characteristics, are not easily aroused to excesses like those perpetrated by the Paris " Communards " of 1871. But, on the other hand, they have been thoroughly permeated, and their poisoning has been one of long process.
The results are, to the naked eye, the history of England since the War, politically and economically.
Lloyd George's Coalition Government had been kind to Socialism, but the real harvest-time came when the Labour Party won the election In 1924 and its members governed, or rather misgoverned, England. It needed nothing short of the Bolshevist alliance which Macdonald wished to force upon the country to provoke the remaining sound reaction of the English people and prompt them to overthrow the Labour Government. But this show of resistance was ephemeral.
How pitiful it is to know that the return of the Labour Party to power, in May, 1929, is entirely due to the incompetence of a Conservative Government, in which the people trusted for sane administration of the affairs of State. Yet, the Prime Minister, Leader of the Conservative Party, Mr. Baldwin, could not claim ignorance of the Judeo-masonic plans contained in the Protocols of the Wise Men of Zion. He found it easier deliberately to disregard them. Be that as it may, England was once more in the hands of the Labour Party with the inevitable and ubiquitous Ramsay Macdonald and, according to the latest report issued by the Society "eight Fabians are members of the Cabinet and fourteen others hold offices in the Government without seats in the Cabinet.'"
From the Jew-led Fabian Society issue the chaotic words and deeds which are steadily wrecking not only general prosperity, but also combating with international forces drawn from all quarters of the globe any attempt at national readjustment such as the present movement in Germany.
The drawing-room meeting system described by E. R. Pease, and which in America is known as " parlor-bolshe-vism," formed to gain well-to-do adherents, still functions, as witness the following article which appeared in the London Evening Standard of May 28, 1931:—
A 10-YEAR PLAN FOR SOCIALISTS HOUSE PARTY RESULTS IN CALL FOR CLEARER THINKING. policy, and is planned " for ten years ahead." MR. COLE GETS TO WORK OPEN MIND ON EMPIRE BUYING AND PREFERENCE.
To-morrow evening a group of Socialists and Trade Unionists will begin fashioning the new plan at a meeting to be held at Transport House.15 The prime movers are Major C. R. Attlee (Postmaster-General), and Mr. G, D. H. Cole.
Sir Stafford Cripps (the Solicitor-General), Mr. Ernest Bevin, and Mr. Noel Baker, M. P. (Mr. Arthur Henderson's Parliamentary Private-Secretary) are among those expected to accept Society is more intellectual than political.
This ascendancy is, of course, due to the all-powerful influence
list politicians, economists and trades unionists foregathered at week-ends. Out of these meetings grew the new Fabian Research Bureau (of which Major Attlee is chairman and Mr. Cole secretary), which received the official blessing of the Labour movement two months ago and is now established in premises in Abing-don Street.17
the invitation of Major Attlee and Mr. Cole at tomorrow's meeting.
AFTER THE WEEK-END PARTIES.
The new policy—or the plan for a new policy—had its origin in a series of house parties held last year at Easton Lodge (the Labour Chequers),16 when Socialism.
It is with this new policy that we are presently concerned. Outside of England, the Fabians are affiliated with strong Socialist groups professing the same ideas in Denmark, South Africa, Canada and Australia, Japan, United States, Spain and Germany. Lectures by Fabians were also given in Paris at the Comite d'Etudes Nationales, founded and directed by the Jew, Albert Kahn, and also at the Club du Faubourg, organized by the Jew, Leo Poldes, as well as to the French Socialist Party, headed by the Jew Leon Blum.
On November 1, 1930, the Evening Standard, already, quoted, contained the following lines:—
GOVERNMENT BY FABIANS
tion has been made from the membership of the Society, the latest examples of which are the new Air Minister, Lord Amulree, and the new Solicitor-General, Sir Stafford Cripps. I am told that at least 90 per cent of the members of the Government are on the rolls of the Society, and that, contrary to regulations, so are a good many highly placed Civil Servants. The Civil Servants would probably defend themselves by saying that the
Many Labour members are talking about the dominance in the Government of that very academic body, the Fabian Society. I find that many people believed that this organization, through which many intellectuals entered the Socialist movement, had ceased to exist. But it goes on with a membership, small but influential, of some 5,000.
Yet practically every recent appointment, either to high or low office, in the Labour administraon Lord Passfleld and his wife, Mrs. Sidney Webb, with whom the Fabian Society has been the passion of their lives.
If, on the one hand, the British Government is run by avowed Fabians, the present United States Government is in exactly the same position. The " brain trust " of Franklin D. Roosevelt is composed of several Jews, among them Bernard M. Baruch, Herbert Swope, Mordecai Ezekiel, James Warburg, Frank W. Taussig, Others like Swanson, Secretary of the Navy,18 Arthur Bullitt, Louis M. Howe, Raymond Moley, Tugwell, George N. Peek, if not Jews, were closely connected with Jews and such radical organizations as the Conference for Progressive Political Action, the Rand School for Communism, the Friends of Soviet Russia, the League for Industrial Democracy.
The League for Industrial Democracy19 is the American counterpart of British Fabianism. It runs parallel to the Ethical Culture Society, founded by the Jew, Felix Adler, the Conference for Progressive Political Action, the Intercollegiate Socialist League, the Intercollegiate Liberal League, the American Civil Liberties Union, and countless other subversive groups. Under the heading " Other Fabian Organizations ", mentioned in the Fabian Society's annual report for 1932, one reads:—
" Active relations are maintained between the " Fabian Society and the League for Industrial Democracy of America...with the Public Ownership League of the U.S.A."
Is not one forcibly reminded of the following sentence? " We appear on the scene as alleged saviours of the worker from this oppression, when we propose to him to enter the ranks of our fighting forces—Socialists, Anarchists, Communists—to whom we always give support in accordance with an alleged brotherly rule (of the solidarity of all humanity) of our social masonry ".20
Not less than English Universities, have the American colleges been permeated with Fabian theories, and hardly any of them are without a branch of the National Student Forum (long headed by John Rothschild) or of the Intercollegiate Liberal League,21 founded at Harvard in 1921. Particular attention must be drawn to the Rand School of New York, founded in 1905 which, ten years ago, was raided by order of the United States Government on account of its Communist teaching.22
The penetration of Fabianism in the church of America is fully evidenced by the subversive activities of the Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America.23
As President Roosevelt's " brain trust" was recruited from such centres, it is clear that the composition of both the British and American Governments is similar. It is Jewish-radical or, to use plain language, Jewish-bolshevist. Both governments are run by men who are merely puppets in the hands of Jews highly placed in the secret councils of the central Jewish Kahal, the present-day Zionist World organization, whose object is the ultimate destruction of all our religious, social and industrial institutions and the annihilation of our freedom. It is therefore interesting to note that plans, evolved in the numerous bolshevist-socialist centres created by Fabians, Liberals and Socialists, are being executed in both the British Empire and the United States.
It is curious to compare these wonderful socialist economic plans with those which were to have been the basis of the ideal Jewish State in Palestine, after the Balfour Declaration. They were formulated in 1919 by Bernard A. Rosenblatt, a prominent Zionist, in his book Social Zionism. From it we cull only the following lines, not devoid of a certain interest:—
A. The Jew as a social force in history:
(1) The prophets of Israel as the preachers of political, social and economic democracy.
(2) The rabbis as the teachers in a democratic school of Jewish students.
(3) The Jewish figures in political history almost invariably the leaders in Liberalism, Labour and Socialism:
(a) Examples: Karl Marx, Lasalle, Hess, Lasker, Bernstein, Joseph Fels, Brandeis,24 Gompers25
(b) Even unreasonable extremists like Trotzki show only the necessary evil involved in this Jewish tendency toward social justice.26
The press notice of Rosenblatt's book in the American Jewish News is headed Will the Jews again lead the world?"27
The " experiment" of this ideal socialism having originally failed in Palestine, it is to be tried now in both England and America. In England, the centralisation of all the plans for the " new policy " has, for quite some time, been worked under the name of " Political and Economic Planning" or " P. E. P. ", and in America it has taken the name of " N. R. A. " (National Recovery Act). The plans of both are identical, only the method of execution is different. Whereas the English must be dealt with slowly, and as it were taken unawares, the American people, on account of the ignorance and the primitiveness of the masses, can be treated brutally, as is being done by Hugh Johnson28 and other henchmen of President Roosevelt. In America, coercion is the order of the day; "freedom" is now a meaningless word; whereas the Englishman is asked to forego his freedom for the sake of patriotism, the American masses, aliens to the Anglo-Saxon race, are swayed only by cupidity and the promise of material prosperity. Both methods produce the same results: the concentration of all material resources in the hands of the Jews, the lowering of our standard of living, and complete physical and moral degradation.29
1. "Who will ever suspect that all these peoples were stage-managed by us according to a political plan which no one has so much as guessed at in the course of many centuries? " Protocol No. 13, supra, p. 152. See also quotation'from Coningsby, supra, pp. 100-102.
2. Protocol No. 1, supra, pp. 114-120. It must be borne in mind that many of these men have, at one time or another in their lives, been involved in some crooked business or scandal and dread its disclosure: supra, pp. 119-120.
3. The aristocracy who served the Jewish cause in bringing about these revolutions were not even rewarded with life but perished with the innocent under the edifice they had so efficiently undermined.
4. Protocol No. 1, supra, p. 118.
5. Whitney, Reds in America. (Beckwith Press, New York, 1924), pp. 80-81.
6. Together with his mother and younger brother.
7. Curtis's gross receipts from advertising for 1929 amounted to 73 million dollars; and for 1930, to 67 millions.
8. See infra, p. 211.
9. Notorious radical and shadow of Otto H. Kahn. In 1924 Cravath tried to secure the nomination of Otto Kahn as President of the English Speaking Union; and the manoeuvre was defeated only by the timely exposure of Kahn's bolshevist activities. It was proved that Kahn's house was a meeting place for Soviet agents, such as Nina Somorodin, Clare Sheridan, Louise Bryant and Margaret Harrison.
10. See Time (Chicago Weekly) for July 17, 1933.
11. Pw/oco/No. 15, supra, pp. 158-9.
12. Supra, pp. 39-40.
13. Compare the subversive Conference for Political Progressive Action in America.
14. Supra, p. 204.
15. The premises of The Labour Party.
16. Easton Lodge is the seat of Frances, Dowager Countess of Warwick. The Socialism of all " Parlor-Bolsheviks " reminds one of the Jew Isaac McBride's utterance: "We are going to milk the bourgeoisie and they will help us to keep [up] the struggle against
17. No. 23 Abingdon Street is the seat of the S. S. I. P. (Society for Socialist Inquiry and Propaganda) ; the new Fabian Research Bureau: and the Socialist League.
18. See Whitney, Reds in America, pp. 49, 58, 59.
19. Among the members of the Board of Directors of this League in 1926 figured Justine Wise, daughter of Rabbi Stephen Wise.
20. Protocol No. 3, Supra, p. 124.
21. Felix Frankfurter was one of its sponsors.
22. It is noteworthy that the Rand School received important financial support from the former Mrs. Willard Straight, nfe Dorothy P. Whitney, now the wife of Leonard Elmhirst who, according to Mr. Israel Sieff's statement, is Chairman of the agricultural group of the P. E. P. One of the lecturers at the Rand School who has come into recent prominence is Raymond Moley, personal adviser to President Roosevelt, and his special delegate to the London Conference, 1933.
23. See Sanctuary, Tainted Contacts (New York, 1931).
24. Louis D. Brandeis, an active Zionist, formerly close personal adviser to President Wilson during the War, and who, since then, has been sitting as Justice on the Federal Supreme Court at Washington.
25. The late Samuel Gompers, President of The American Federation of Labour.
26. If wholesale murder as practised by Trotzki (Braunstein) is only " the necessary evil involved on this Jewish tendency toward social justice," one hesitates to ask what evil would be necessary in order that the Jews might confer on us some greater social blessing.
27. The introduction to Rosenblatt's book is by Judge Julian W. Mack, U. S. Circuit Judge, on Juvenile Court, 1904-1917; member Board of Inquiry on Conscientious Objectors, 1917-1918; President Zionist Organization of America, 1921.
28. " In 1927, Baruch asked Johnson to join him in his New York office, and ever since, the General has been Baruch's right-hand man... During most of these years (after the War) Johnson was in touch with a man who was in the thick of many contests of finance, battles of Wall Street, and intrigues of international banking. This was Bernard Mannes Baruch, suave and rich New York capitalist, friend and sup porter of the President, who gave Johnson to Roosevelt... Another ace man on the Roosevelt staff here, George N. Peck, Administrator of the Farm Relief Act, was also a War Industries Board member,
friend of Baruch, partner of Johnson in plough-making." Chicago Tribune, August 16, 1933.
29. " All people are chained down to heavy toil by poverty more firmly than ever they were chained by slavery and serfdom; from these, one way or another, they might free themselves, these could be settled with, but from want they will never get away." Protocol No. 3, supra, p. 123.
" The aristocracy which enjoyed by law the labour of the workers was interested in seeing that the workers were well-fed, healthy and strong. We are interested in just the opposite—in the diminution, the killing out of the goyim. Our power is in the chronic shortness of food and physical weakness of the worker because, by all that this implies, he is made the slave of our will and he will not find in his own authorities either strength or energy to set against our will." Supra, p. 124.
" The need for daily bread forces the goyim to keep silence and be our humble servants." Protocol No. 13, supra, p. 152.
FREEDOM AND PLANNING
The following document entitled Freedom andPlanning emanates from the Jew Israel Moses Sieff, Chairman of the Fabian P. E. P. (Political and Economic Plan) in London. Mr. Sieff is, according to The Jewish Year Book, a Zionist worker, Grand Commander of the Order of Ancient Maccabeans, First Honorary Secretary of the Zionist Commission to Palestine and Vice-President of the English Zionist Federation.
He must therefore participate in all the secret councils of Zionism. He is, moreover, Chairman of the chains stores of Marks and Spencer, where the dumping of Russian and other foreign goods has made possible the underselling of other firms dealing with British manufactured goods, paid according to the tariffs of British labour. It is therefore no wonder that the chain store movement, standardising cheap goods and materials, should be advocated by him.
The views which Mr. Sieff expresses in this document are therefore those which must have had the approval of the Elders of Zion. It must be noted also, lest once again the document be proclaimed the forgery of some Russian Tsarist, that on March 29, 1933, at a dinner of the P. E. P., given at The Savoy Hotel in London, and at which a large number of government officials were present, and subscribed funds, Mr. Sieff made use of most of the contents of Freedom and Planning.
He was followed on the platform by Mr. Kenneth Lindsay, his docile secretary of the P. E. P., who among other achievements, was third chairman of the Labour Club of Oxford University1, Labour candidate for Oxford City at the 1929 elections, and one of the moving spirits in the foundation of the Oxford University Labour Federation in 1921, the aims of which were to make " labour opinion definitely socialist." He also spoke in 1926 before twenty-three colleges in New England and the Middle Atlantic States (U. S. A.) under the auspices of The League for Industrial Democracy. We have therefore, in the P. E. P., the plain evidence of Jewish-Fabian alliance.
We shall now quote in full Mr. Sieff's document, which was privately circulated among the members of the very inner circle of the P. E. P., and was marked " Confidential."
This generation is faced with the threat of a World collapse of modern civilization and the advent of a period comparable with the Dark Ages which followed on the collapse of the Roman Empire in the fifth century A. D.
We are apt to regard such statements as pleasantly scarifying, pardonable exaggerations in the mouths of those who are trying to spur us to action against the very real ills of the times, but not meant quite seriously.
The threat is serious.
Chaos will overtake us if we cannot show intelligence enough to extricate ourselves.
For more than a year now nothing has enabled civilization to keep some sort of course and to ride out the storm except the immense momentum of ordinary economic processes and the inertia of habit and custom. It is the resisting powers of these forces and not human intelligence which have thus far staved off the collapse.
They cannot bring us back prosperity, but they may suffice to carry the world through the immediate crisis. If so, we shall for a time be able to live on our capital, the material capital stored up from past generations, the intellectual and moral capital of men and women trained for civilisation and citizenship. But what chance will the next generation have, if half of them find no employment for their youthful energies, and all of them are living under the oppression of hopelessness and decay ?
What forms collapse will assume no one can foresee. It may not come suddenly. More probably there will be a gradual decline with fleeting periods of revival.
Shrinking Credit and Shrinking Trade
Modern life depends on world-wide interchanges of goods and services. These in turn depend on confidence and credit. Confidence and credit are being progressively impaired. Without them it is impossible to maintain for long not merely existing standards of life but even life itself for a large proportion of the world's population.
Imagine the plight of Great Britain if the complex economic and financial machinery which supplies the vast bulk of our population with its food were to cease to function. Such a catastrophe is not, it is true, as yet in sight, but this machinery depends wholly on confidence and credit, and with dwindling world trade and social and political trouble growing in other countries the moment is not far off when we shall be unable in these islands to support either present standards or our present aggregate population.
Applied science puts at man's disposal food-stuffs, raw materials, services of all kinds, in ever growing abundance, enough not alone to maintain existing standards of life but to raise those standards for all far above the highest now enjoyed by any of us.
Only our intelligence and powers of organization and our moral and spiritual capacity to work in mutual co-operation with each other are proving insufficient to meet the growing complexity of the machinery for regulating production, distribution and consumption.
First one, then another vital part of the machine is being thrown out of gear. Increasing friction is being generated in the effort to distribute to the consumer that which man is producing. The quantity of things produced and things consumed declines. The volume of world trade, both of internal trade within each country and still more of international exchanges of goods and services, is progressively lessened. World-Wide Economic Distress
Cracks are appearing everywhere. In China and in India economic distress is both aggravated and concealed by the social and political unrest of which it is the main root.
In South America revolution has become endemic and all but one or two of the most solid countries are financially in default.
In Central and South Eastern Europe financial default is imminent, but that is by itself of little moment, in comparison with the consequent social and political upheaval which will follow. It is open to question whether the populations of Germany and Central Europe can be fed and kept alive next winter and how long any organized Government can control the situation in these countries.
In the U. S. A. loss of confidence is absolute. The strain of material suffering in a population, none too homogeneous, accustomed for generations to rapidly increasing prosperity, may lead to a breakdown of existing institutions and forms of Government. The outcome is unpredictable but the consequences throughout the globe may be catastrophic.
World disorganization, famine, pestilence, and the submergence of our civilization are visible on the horizon.
Not because nature has been niggardly. Not because individual human achievement or capacity have grown less. They have won ever greater and greater triumphs over nature and throughout the material field in the last two generations.
Those triumphs have been won by an ever wider and ever bolder application of the principle of division of labour, till man's powers of-large scale organization have been overstrained. He can control and adapt the forces of nature, but the task which he has now set himself requires more than that. He has still to learn so to control and adapt his own human nature and so to work together with the human nature of his fellows as to fit them and himself into their proper places in the organization without losing for himself and for them all that makes life worth living.
" Mankind is not clever enough to control the machine which he has created."
There is no lack of human goodwill and desire to serve our generation. Yet all of us are acutely conscious of the exasperating frustration of our best efforts. We see the evil plight to which we and the world are being reduced, and we confess that for the moment human intelligence seems bankrupt.
This essay cannot concern itself with remedies for the immediate crisis or with the means by which we may hope to restore for a time some semblance of order in the world's economy. It is necessary to assume here that, whether with or without the help of intelligent human leadership, the economic structure will find within itself enough powers of resistance to secure for us a temporary respite.
The respite will be a short one. We must use it to make a new start or our doom is sealed.
Great Britain and some parts of the British Empire have in some degree improved their own position since last autumn. Absolutely the improvement in Great Britain has been small, though relatively to other countries it is striking.
This achievement is of real value to the world, even though some part of it has been made at the expense of added difficulties for others.
It has been attained thanks to a remarkable demonstration of self-discipline and well-disposed spirit of public service and the sober imperturbability and reasonableness of the British citizen in face of a crisis.
It is in this evidence of British character that the best hope for the future rests.
Britain's Need of a Prosperous World
Britain cannot, however, prosper in a distressed world. Entirely dependent on external trade for her food and raw materials Britain cannot escape world catastrophe by isolating herself.
Moreover that world-wide loss of control of the machinery of civilization is all too visible in Britain and in British institutions.
If Britain is to save herself and give the world that leadership which is urgently demanded, the first need is for complete reconstruction of our national life on lines fitted for the new deeds of the twentieth century.
Here a fundamental difficulty must be faced. Economic nationalism is no solution. On the contrary it is among the main causes of the world's troubles. Recovery depends on building up afresh and extending even more widely than before world-wide exchanges of goods and services which everywhere cross national and political boundaries.
The United Kingdom is far too small in area to form to-day an economic unit commensurate with the vast scale of modern commercial and industrial operations.
The aim must always be the widest possible international co-operation.
To assume however that for this reason the first steps must be international would under present conditions result in mere futility. Action, if it is to be both practicable and advantageous, must be taken within the sphere now open to us. Economic reconstruction within that sphere will moreover, at least in the earlier stages, tend to draw other countries within the orbit of returning prosperity.
Our attention must first be directed to the United Kingdom and to those regions, whether within the British Empire or in countries of complementary trade, where political and economic associations offer promising opportunities of effective co-operation.
Every care must however be taken to secure that, in focusing our gaze on our own sphere of action, we do nothing to exclude the wider vision, and that we work gradually for the extension of complementary planned relations over the widest possible area.
The Need for Planning
" Almost all British constitutional safeguards are safeguards against being governed."
" Communism is a tremendous extension of government and consequently a great encroachment on liberty."
" Mussolini understood that what was keeping the people slaves was their determination to be what they called free."
" No real business that had to do positive work could achieve anything on the British Parliamentary system."
None of these aphorisms of Mr. Bernard Shaw can be rejected as untrue, even though they offer no proof that Communism or Fascism are either necessary or desirable.
Their truth can be illustrated in every branch of our present-day life.
We have allowed the numbers of our feeble-minded to double themselves in the last twenty years.
We have watched the purchasing power of our currency fluctuate wildly and play havoc with our economic life, and have been powerless to help ourselves.
The Road Act of 1910 gave powers both to build motor roads and to prevent riband-building, but we still permit it and spoil our countryside and our motor roads.
Notoriously unsuitable candidates " get themselves elected " (this is our habitual way of speaking of what happens) to Parliament and local Councils.
Prime Ministers get nervously worn out in the mere effort to grapple with the everyday business which faces them.
In the Imperial sphere there is practical unanimity as to the need for organizing the Empire as an Economic Family and yet we have the spectacle of the Imperial Conference of 1930.
In the sphere of foreign affairs the nations sign the Kellogg Peace Pact and arm themselves to the teeth.
Or again we keep alive the pretence that Reparations and Inter-Governmental Debts will continue to be paid; and, because we dare not settle these obligations on terms which seem to involve inequitable distribution of the sacrifices involved, we wait with folded hands for the enforced default which will involve even greater inequity and will strike a further blow at the foundations of the world's economic life. A year ago a broad-minded settlement would have restored economic activity and staved off the financial crisis. To-day, though an essential step on the road to recovery, cancellation of these obligations will by itself be of little avail. Its chief value now would be the evidence it would give of our capacity to reach international agreement.
The Failure of our Political and Economic Machinery.
Our political and economic machinery is breaking down. The great fund of individual and corporate goodwill, greater probably than at any previous period of our history, goes to waste, and all our wills are frustrated for want of a large-scale plan of national re-organization.
Neither in politics nor in economics have we grasped that the first and urgent necessity is planning ahead.
Particular projects often of great potential value are put forward in Parliament or elsewhere without any effort being made to relate them to each other or to a national plan, and they either break down or function imperfectly through needless friction engendered by absence of ordered planning.
Frequently where public opinion has become exasperated at its failure to get something done to remedy a defect which everyone recognises as intolerable, our distracted legislators with desperate unanimity unite to pass into law a compromise which is wanted by no one and merely aggravates the evil.
It is a common occurence for a Government to be pursuing two or more mutually inconsistent policies at one and the same time.
Can we save our Freedom?
Mr. Bernard Shaw's mordant words pose directly the poignant question. Is national reconstruction possible without sacrifice of the essentials of personal and political freedom?
For all their differences Bolshevism and Fascism have two outstanding features in common. Both stress the primary need for conscious forward planning on a national scale. Both repudiate the claims of personal and individual freedom.
In this country we hold fast to the concept of freedom as one of absolute validity.
We know in our hearts that we are in imminent danger of losing both our freedom and our material well-being if we go on drifting.
But if indeed national re-organization has to be bought at the price of losing our freedom, many of us feel that it would be better for humanity to descend once again into the abyss of barbarism and struggle back painfully at some later epoch to a civilization capable of satisfying both its material desires and its spiritual aspirations.
Is the dilemma absolute? Can conscious forward planning of our economic life be reconciled with the essential and over-riding claim of freedom?
Is it true that what we need is more government and a great encroachment on liberty ?
Observe that it is in the sphere of our economic life, in the sphere of material things only, that conscious forward planning is demanded.
May it not be that an unprejudiced re-examination of what we call freedom may reveal unexpected possibilities ?
Our ideal is a nation of free men and women self-disciplined by an active social conscience.
Freedom and the Motorist
The growth of a code of law and of custom for motorists shows what can be done by free co-operation. The law and the custom are dynamic; not static. They are continually developing. At the moment indeed the toll of life and limb on the public roads is evidence of the urgent need for further improvements both in law and in custom. As a rule the law steps in only to interpret the collective will already expressed in a code of behaviour, and to put compulsion not on the motorist in general but only on the road-hog.
Self-discipline and collective action enable the motorist to enjoy a large measure of freedom. Without the help of the code and without the intervention of authority to help him to enforce it, the will of the motorist in general would be everywhere frustrated and he would enjoy far less freedom than is now secured for him.
Is this " more government and a great encroachment on liberty?"
Can we not do for ourselves as a nation what we as motorists have done for ourselves as motorists ?
" The law came in because of sin," but in so far as we are self-disciplined and our social consciences are active, we have won true freedom for ourselves in the particular field of motoring.
We do not rely solely on the enlightened self-interest and unregulated competitiveness of motorists to serve providentially the greatest good of the greatest number, and sternly forbid legislative intervention.
Yet so long as we worship at the altar of laissez-faire as the guiding principle of our economic life, we are trying to conduct our industry and commerce in exactly that spirit which we have wisely rejected in the field of motoring.
Laissez-faire represented a reaction against the doctrines of mercantilism and in its day has served this country and the world admirably, but our free institutions were won long before the principle of laissez-faire was enunciated.
There is no a priori reason for regarding freedom of thought, freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, free institutions, as incompatible with conscious forward planning of our economic life.
A Substitute for Laissez-Faire
The problem then is to find a new economic philosophy to replace the doctrine of Laissez-faire. The great virtue of this doctrine was that it seemed to provide a miraculous self-adjusting system of regulating the flow of production in accordance with demand in a freely competitive individualistic world. Even to-day there are unrepentant individualists whose cry is for a return to unrestricted laissez-faire. Sweep away, they urge, all governmental and bureaucratic interference, abolish unemployment insurance and health insurance and all these new-fangled social services. Reduce taxation correspondingly: and industry will look after itself.
It is not always realised how fortuitous and temporary were many of the conditions on which the successes of laissez-faire depended in the nineteenth century.
In many cases the economic life of the world has become too complex, the scale too large, the marvellous stream of new scientific invention too bewildering, the annihilation of distance and the speed of transport and communication have drawn the nations too closely together, to allow of any return to nineteenth century methods. The mere size of the modern industrial unit is alone enough to destroy the effectiveness of the old methods.
And the social conscience of mankind has rightly revolted against the brutality of the economic adjustments on which in the last analysis depended the self-regulating machinery of the system of laissez-faire.
Moreover, however firm their faith in the doctrine, statesmen and governments always tempered its rigours with pragmatic justice by intervening at this point and at that to enforce factory acts, acts restricting hours of labour and the like. And the rigidity of trade union regulations to-day is part of our evil inheritance from the intolerance of laissez-faire doctrinaires.
With the advent of the twentieth century and particularly after the war, government intervention began rapidly to operate in increasingly wider spheres. And by this date, the nature, form and extent of government intervention tended to be more and more uneconomic and anti-economic in their results, precisely because they were conceived and applied by Local Authorities. Government Departments and Parliaments and Cabinets which still did lip service, without conscious hypocrisy, to the principles of laissez-faire.
It was in principle permissible for the State to levy taxation on industry according to the needs of the Public purse. It was in principle permissible for the State to make laws and regulations restricting the freedom of business activities in the interests of health, sanitation, safety of life and limb, conditions of labour. It was not permissible in principle for the State to recognise responsibility for the efficiency or remunerativeness of business. That was intolerable State interference in a region which it had no right to enter.
The rigidity of the doctrines has indeed been relaxed in many directions and with the advent of a protective tariff we have entered on an entirely new era in the relations between State and business. Yet it remains true that taxation and regulation of industry have been excessively and needlessly hampering in their effects just because our political and economic philosophy forbade the State to " interfere with the free-play of natural economic forces."
It must be left for separate essays to deal in greater detail with suggestions for building up a plan of national reconstruction in the special fields of agricultural and industrial production, finance, marketing, transport, housing, town and country planning and the like.
The purpose of this essay is rather to examine how far it is true that conscious forward planning involves encroachment on freedom.
The Freedom of the Consumer
The basic principle of human economic activities, except in Soviet Russia, is, and has been ever since the first steps in the direction of the division of labour were taken, that the would-be consumer determines for himself which of his competing wants he will satisfy within the range of choice which his available purchasing power (even when he was living under a system of barter before money was invented) and the available supply of goods and services offered.
It is the consumer's choice which settles the relative prices of the various goods and services which the producer (or middle-man) oifers for sale.
The Communist system attempts to fix relative prices and to deny to the consumer the right to exercise this fundamental freedom of choice. The reason for this is that the Communist ideal is a mechanised State which will produce, according to plan, the maximum output of consumable goods and distribute them with maximum efficiency. The State accordingly fixes by decree the quantity and quality of production of all kinds and cannot afford to leave it in the power of the human consumer to cause variations in demand by exercising a free choice among his competing wants.
The consumer in fact is treated not at all as a consumer but as a part of the mechanism of production requiring a given quantity of fuel,_etc. to keep him going as a producer. There is no reason whatever to regard this ultimate denial of freedom to humanity as necessary to conscious forward planning.
Reasonable standardisation of some articles of ordinary consumption and some limits to excessive stimulation of the demand for the satisfaction of mere whims which arises from unbridled competition among those who cater to them may indeed be welcomed. But the economic aim of a free community must always be to give the consumer the widest opportunities for satisfying as many of his wants as possible.
If there is to be a planning authority, its function must be to attempt to forecast demand and to regulate production and distribution accordingly, not to control or dictate consumption.
Control of consumption in special cases, e. g. of alcoholic liquor, may be necessary for reasons arising out of human weakness, but the limits of such control are narrow, and its existence does not invalidate the general argument.
Again rates and taxes levied for such purposes as the provision of free education or for a display of flowers in a public park involve the enforcement of a form of collective consumption, but the individual is not compelled to use the public park or the free education if he has the desire and the means to choose alternatives.
This last example is however a significant illustration of our ready acceptance of collective restraints in our own or the general interests without feeling that our freedom is being filched from us.
A Planning Authority
Conscious planning leaves the consumer free but involves the substitution of some organized control over production and distribution on behalf of the community to take the place of that free play of supposedly automatic economic forces on which laissez-faire relied.
Control implies a controlling authority. To the average man and woman among us there jumps to the mind at once the picture of a large number of new government departments and hordes of new officials attempting to take the place and to do the work of the business man, the manufacturer, the farmer, the banker, the shopkeeper, or at least to tie them all up hand and foot and dictate to them in the management of their daily affairs. And we see further a glimpse of Parliament and Local Bodies finally overwhelmed by the task of fulfilling their new functions.
Few people to-day would deny that the old socialist idea of putting the whole business of the nations into the nands of bureaucratic government departments would prove a hopeless failure in practice and would be no improvement on present conditions.
Is there not a middle way, or better still a new way, of meeting the need for organisation and co-ordination of those economic tasks which the breakdown and laissez-faire is leaving unaccomplished ?
The Public Utility Concern
Without much distinction of party, successive Governments have tended in recent years to try, in various fields, to find a way forward through the setting up of Public Utility Bodies, of which the B. B. C, the Central Electricity Board, and the projected London Passenger Transport Board are outstanding examples. These bodies are not Government Departments and their methods of management and direction and control are modelled rather on those of commercial concerns. Their purpose is to perform collectively for the community certain functions and to provide collectively certain services, in which monopoly rather than competition is, in the general belief, likely to give the best results. For this reason it is felt to be necessary to put the emphasis on the rendering of public service and not on the securing of profits, while insisting that the work ought to be done on a self-supporting basis and not be dependent on a subsidy from the rates or taxes.
In all the instances cited the earning of surplus profits for private shareholders is excluded, and this must no doubt be the usual arrangement where monopoly is involved. It need not, however, be an invariable rule.
One special merit of this form of organization is that it claims to give flexibility of management and avoid the major risks of red-tape, and while maintaining the ultimate control of Parliament and the nation provides for a large degree of self-government and so reduces rather than increases the amount of governmental interference.
It is possible to envisage a considerable extension of this form of organization of the nation's business. A new picture begins to emerge in outline of industry, agriculture, transport, etc., enjoying, if not Dominion Status, at any rate wide powers of local self-government, with the Cabinet, Parliament, and the Local Authorities liberated from duties to which they are not ideally suited and free to perform their essential functions on behalf of the community.
The Analogy of the Electricity Grid System
The analogy of the Grid system of the Central Electricity Board, not itself undertaking the production of power nor the final distribution of electricity services to the consumer, but providing a co-ordinated system of carrying the electricity produced from the big generating stations to local distributing centres all over the country, can be suggestively applied to other services.
Imagine the dairy farmers of the country or of various regional divisions of the country as the milk generating stations, and the retailers of milk as the local distributing centres, with a Central Milk Board conducting the business of bulk marketing of milk as the providers of the Milk Grid of Britain. Already under the Agricultural Marketing Act there are signs of the coming of such a Milk Grid as a natural development to meet the needs of the day. An extension of the system with suitable adaptations to other agricultural products easily suggests itself, and even more directly as a method of dealing with the needs of modern transport by rail, road, water and air.
When we come to the organization of producers, agricultural, industrial and extractive, the Central Electricity model becomes more difficult to follow, Generally speaking, organization on public utility lines seems to be adapted rather to the rendering of services in the sphere of distribution than to the business of production. It may be significant that the Central Electricity Board was excluded from the ownership of generating stations. For reasons which have their roots deep in our human nature, we seem to be much readier to admit the principles of controlled monopoly and the domination of the motive of public service over the motive of private profit in the sphere of distribution than in
the two spheres of original production and final retailing, between which distribution services are intermediate.
Methods of retailing cannot indeed be left entirely unchanged in the face of twentieth century needs. The multiple shop and the chain store are already bringing about notable modifications. The waste involved in the 500,000 or more retail shops, one shop for every twenty households, cannot be allowed to continue to block the flow of goods from producer to consumer. And re-organization of retail methods is necessary to achieve adequate organization of production. In general, however, it will probably be found that there is a large place in the business of retailing for the continued play of individualism and personal enterprise. The individualist consumer and his free choice call for some corresponding individuality of outlook in the retailer who caters to him.
Not so in the sphere of production. The business of production must be planned if it is to possess adequate means of keeping the volume and quality of the goods produced in reasonable relation to demand.
The development of an organized Grid system for the distribution of milk must, it is certain, lead to a profound modification of the traditional individualism of outlook of the Dairy Farmer. And so it will be in other producing industries. Co-operative organization of the business of distribution cannot fail to bring about conditions in which both the need and the will to organize themselves on a co-operative basis will arise amongst the producers whether they be agriculturalists, or producers of coal or of iron from the mines, or manufacturers of steel or of cotton or of wool.
Whether we like it or not—and many will dislike it intensely—the individualist manufacturer and farmer will be forced by events to submit to far-reaching changes in outlook and methods. The danger is that in resisting them because he regards them as encroachments on what he calls his freedom, he will make things worse for himself and for the community. Resistance is likely to play into the hands of those who say that tinkering is useless and that full-blooded socialism or communism are the only cure. Or he may be tempted to flirt with Fascist ideas. In either case he loses his cherished freedom, and it is only too probable that Fascism and Communism alike would be but short stages on the road to barbarism.
The Conditions of Economical Freedom
It is idle to deny that some at least of the changes required when conscious forward planning extends into the field of production are of a revolutionary character.
It is all important therefore that we should appraise them soberly and without prejudice and distinguish clearly between unavoidable alterations of methods of economic organization and fundamental attacks on our personal and political freedom.
Our economic freedom must be and always has been tempered by the conditions of our environment and by our relations with our fellows, without whose mutual aid we could not enjoy the advantages which material well-being brings. Spiritual freedom in a highly organized and complex society of civilised men and women is attainable only by ready co-operation in so arranging our economic life as to provide the best attainable material surroundings.
Planning and the Producer
Without entering more deeply into details than space here allows, the position of the farmer and manufacturer under a system of planned production can only be sketched in broad outline.
He may be conceived of as remaining in full control of all the operations of his farm or factory, but receiving from the duly constituted authority instructions as to the quantity and quality of his production, and as to the markets in which he will sell. He will himself have had a voice in setting up his constituted authority and will have regular means of communicating with it and of influencing its policy. He will be less exposed than at present to interference from above, that is from Government Departments and Local Bodies and their inspectors. He will be less free to make arbitrary decisions as to his own business outside the region of day to day operation of plant or farm.
It must be presumed that the constituted authority will be armed by an enabling Act of Parliament and by a majority decision of its own members, presumably elected by the votes of those with whose affairs they deal, to exercise powers of compulsion over minorities in clearly specified cases.
All this is not very different from what already occurs in particular organized industries, but must be conceived of as applying generally to most if not all of the major fields of production, and as part of a consciously and systematically planned agricultural and industrial organization.
A National Plan in Outline
An outline of the organization contemplated would be somewhat as follows:—
A National Planning Commission, with advisory not executive functions, subordinate to the Cabinet and to Parliament, but with clearly defined powers of initiative and clearly defined responsibilities, its personnel representative of the nation's economic life.
A National Council for Agriculture, a National Council for Industry, a National Council for Coal Mining, a National Council for Transport, and so on, all statutory bodies with considerable powers of self-government, including powers of compulsion within the province with which they are concerned.
A series of statutory or chartered Corporations, e.g. a Cotton Industry Corporation, a Steel Industry Corporation, a Milk Producers Corporation, organized on the lines of Public Utility Concerns, serving at least to federate, and in suitable cases to own, the plants, factories, etc., engaged in production.
A series of Public Utility Corporations dealing with distributive services, e. g. the Central Electricity Board, the National Transport Board (or a number of Regional Transport Boards), the National Milk Marketing Board.
In the constitution of these bodies provision would naturally be made for suitable representation of interests, including organized labour, and for their due co-ordination by means for example of the election by the various corporations of some of their members to serve on the National Councils. To all of them Parliament would delegate considerable powers to regulate the affairs of their particular industries.
Compulsion and Private Ownership of Land
From the standpoint of encroachments upon freedom, apart from the denial of the tenets of individualism, the most obvious targets for attack are perhaps the proposed grant of powers to compel minorities and (point not yet mentioned) the probable necessity for drastic changes in the ownership of land.
Powers of compulsion of minorities are not unknown even under present conditions and will probably not arouse very violent antagonism on grounds of high principle.
The question of private ownership of land is one which never fails to encounter deep-rooted passions. It is also one which arises immediately in almost every aspect of consciously planned reconstruction.
The conclusion seems inescapable that whether in the field of Town and Country Planning or in that of Agricultural (or Rural) Planning or in the organization of Industry it is not possible to make reasonable progress without drastic powers to buy out individual owners of land.
This is not to say that land nationalisation,^ the ordinary sense of the term, is either necessary or desirable. Far from it. Nothing would be gained by substituting the State as landlord. What is required, if only with a view to equitable treatment of individuals, is transfer of ownership of large blocks of land, not necessarily of all the land in the country but certainly of a large proportion of it, into the hands of the proposed Statutory Corporations and Public Utility Bodies, and of Land Trusts.
In many cases all that would be needed would be the conversion of rights of ownership of land into rights of participation as share-holders or stake holders in the new Corporations or in Land Trusts. It would be possible further in a large number of cases to leave management undisturbed, together with the enjoyment of many of the amenities which at present go with ownership, subject to the transfer of title to the Corporations or Trusts.
Here again limits of space preclude fuller treatment of the subject. All that is here relevant is the inevitable conclusion that the planned economy which the nation needs to meet the demands of the twentieth century must clearly involve drastic inroads upon the rights of individual ownership of land as at present understood.
Thus far in this essay Finance has been purposely left aside.
The assumption is that consciously planned reconstruction of the economic life of the nation will increase, and indeed is necessary, to maintain the present national dividend. There is no reason to believe that overhead charges for government and administration will be increased. On the contrary they should be diminished by the elimination of the friction and waste arising from the present lack of planning and disorder.
It should be possible also with industry and production replanned and co-ordinated so to re-arrange taxation as to take from the national dividend that part of it which is required for collective expenditure by the community at an economic cost less burdensome to the nation than is involved by our existing rates and taxes.
From the standpoint of the national and local budgets therefore there is no cause for anticipating financial difficulties.
The question remains what changes are required in the financial machinery of the country. It is in the sphere of Distribution, and especially in that important part in the mechanism of Distribution which belongs to Finance, that the worst disorders of the present economic system have shown themselves.
In no sphere is the evidence of our loss of control of the Machine of Civilization more evident than in that of Finance.
The catastrophic fall of prices has resulted in complete disequilibrium between -the costs of production and the price which the consumer can pay, and in particular between the relative prices of agricultural and manufactured products.
Mismanagement of the standard of value is apparent throughout the world.
It is by no means so clear how recovery is to be brought about. Cheap money is obviously essential but it is only if and when it leads to a revival of activity, to increased demand for goods and services and an increase in the volume of trade, followed by a recovery of prices to a remunerative level that it serves any useful purpose.
Mere manufacture of paper purchasing power is of little avail, more especially if with waning political confidence the basis of credit shrinks faster than the manufactured paper money increases.
This is not the place to examine the problem of escape from the immediate financial crisis.
The same assumption must be made as was made earlier in this essay that the inertia and momentum of the economic structure and of habit and custom will carry us somehow through for the moment and that we shall be given a respite.
One basic need of the new economic organization is the stabilization of the purchasing power of money. Stable money and conscious forward planning are mutually dependent.
The elimination of violent fluctuations of the general price level will immensely facilitate improved organization of production and distribution.
No question arises of fixing the prices of individual commodities.
Once equilibrium between costs of production and prices to the consumer has been re-established, our first efforts must be directed to securing stability of the purchasing power of our money.
This question is dealt with at length in a separate essay and the conclusion must perforce be taken for granted here.
Stable money cannot be secured without considerable extension of control on behalf of the community over the flow of investment and the uses which the individual makes of his capital.
While as consumer he can retain full freedom of choice as to which of his competing wants he will satisfy, there are real difficulties in leaving him entirely free to invest his savings in any way he chooses.
It'is probable that many of these difficulties can be solved on the one hand by extension of the system of insurance, on lines to which recent developments of the motoring law again supply suggestive analogies, and on the other hand by means which, while leaving the small capitalist untrammelled, will so canalise the flow of both long term and short term investment of the large sums which are at the disposal of banks and financial institutions, as well as funds in the hands of large insurance companies, as to ensure that adequate capital is available for the big industrial, agricultural and distributive corporations already envisaged. It is necessary to insist that Finance shall take its proper place as the servant and not the master of industry and commerce. The stabilization of the purchasing power of money will by itself go far to secure this subordination.
The Banks and Planning
The Bank of England has in the course of its history lost practically all of its original profit-making characteristics and become in fact if not in form a leading example of a Public Utility Corporation devoted to rendering public service. It has also many of the features of a self-governing institution, its relations to the Government delicately adjusted so as to combine both due subordination and administrative independence, so as to offer a significant parallel to the new institutions suggested earlier in the spheres of industry and distribution. It would appear to be sufficiently flexible to enable it to adapt itself to filling its place in the new order without requiring any radical changes in its constitution.
The logical completion of the process of amalgamation which has reduced the number of the major Joint Stock Banks to five would clearly be to merge them all in one and to give them some monopolistic privileges in return for converting themselves into a real Public Utility Corporation.
This is a delicate process and it may be unwise to force the pace, seeing that natural developments are tending to bring about much the same results without outside intervention.
Careful study is needed of the relations between planned industry and the Stock Exchange, the Acceptance Houses, the Issuing Houses, and other parts of our financial machinery. It may well be that, with industry, agriculture, transport, etc., organized in the lines suggested, and with the adoption of the steps necessary to stabilise the purchasing power of money, the problems which are, in prospect, somewhat terrifying of bringing about a suitable re-organization of our financial institutions will be found largely to have solved themselves. For Finance as the servant of industry can have no motive to do otherwise than adjust itself to the new needs.
Little has been said hitherto on the subject of organized labour.
Clearly Labour must have effective representation and play an adequate part in the new Statutory Councils and Public Utility Corporations and in all the activities of the re-planned nation.
The most difficult task will perhaps be to reconcile the Trade Unions to the re-modelling of many of their existing regulations and to the change in outlook which conscious planning requires.
Stable money and the discarding of the doctrines of individualism and laissez-faire will between them make obsolete many of the objectives and many of the issues which at present bulk largely in the minds of Trade Unionists. In planned industry the employee takes his true place more clearly than before as a partner in production.
The changes required in the organization of Labour are obviously not such as can rightly be described as encroachments on freedom.
Difficult therefore as the right solution of the knotty problems which arise may prove, they need not detain us further in this examination of the relations of planning to freedom.
The Social Services
Nor need we pause here to examine what planning may mean in other parts of the structure of our economic life, education, health services, housing, provision for leisure.
Each of these subjects and others will need detailed investigation and the methods of organization adopted must be fitted into and form part of a complete whole with the new model for Industry. It is high time that man should make effective use of biological knowledge to improve the human race and make himself more fit for his twentieth century responsibilities. In the health services and the province of medicine it is urgently necessary to shift the emphasis from cure to prevention, from negative to positive health, and this may well call for a big change in the organization of the Medical Profession, which has at present too often a vested interest in disease. But there is no reason for supposing that in order to deal with these various questions any new invasions of freedom will be called for which in degree or in kind go further than what has already been contemplated in the industrial field.
Many of the problems of national reconstruction extend into the imperial and international field. The United Kingdom by itself is far too small to provide an adequate economic unit for planning.
A planned economy for Britain implies as the next step a planned imperial economic family. Considerable interrelations, imperial co-operation from the outset, is essential as a minimum, for success in certain directions.
The stabilization of the purchasing power of money calls for action not only in the Empire but also in such countries as Argentina and Scandinavia, which belong to " Ster-lingaria," the area where British Sterling is indisputably the international medium of exchange. Tariffs and agreements for industrial co-operation with other parts of the British Empire will have to be fitted into the framework of our national industrial system in order to make reasonably possible the successful functioning of such projected bodies as the Steel Industry Council or the Statutory Cotton Corporation. The subject matter with which these bodies will deal includes large questions of export trade, and is not as in the case of the Central Electricity Board confined to the provision of services within our national boundaries.
The inter-relations of National Planning and International problems are peculiarly difficult. An ideal national plan cannot be framed and brought into operation without complete international co-operation. Yet to wait till conditions are propitious for an intelligent international reorganization of our own and the world's economic life will not help us.
And with Russia and Italy embarked on plans which definitely override the claims of freedom, complete worldwide agreement is not within reach.
The better is the enemy of the good. Within the boundaries of the United Kingdom we have ample opportunities, if we set ourselves wholeheartedly to the task, to achieve within the British Empire and even beyond it in countries whose economic ties with Britain are historically close and whose trade is complementary, we have reasonable prospects of securing fruitful results by political and economic co-operation.
We dissipate our strength and over-strain our resources if we attempt more before first putting our own house in order. It is not selfishness or aggressive nationalism or imperialism which puts a limit on our immediate sphere of action, but a sober estimate of our political and economic powers.
The goal of world-wide international co-operation must never be lost from sight, and advantage must be taken of every opportunity for bringing it nearer. The very fact that it extends planning across existing political boundaries is of special value. Nevertheless our first task is to replan Britain, with an economic organization that will fit harmoniously into the planned imperial economic family, and in so doing to give leadership and new hope to a distressed world.
Man's powers of large scale organization and of harmonious co-operation will be further tested by the need for economic planning which transcends national boundaries and in due course demands world-wide co-operation. National and imperial and ultimately international political and economic practices and institutions will doubtless undergo profound modifications in adapting themselves to the twentieth century.
The constitutional development of the British Empire may indeed provide a model more suitable for adaptation to the needs of world co-operation than any at present in existence. The harmonious and free co-operation within a single system of a number of States enjoying sovereignty and independence as equal partners in a commonwealth of nations would appear to offer possibilities of extending itself indefinitely till it covers the whole world. Proof of the ability of the British Commonwealth to provide its citizens with an economic organization that ministers effectually to their well-being will be the surest way of winning world-wide approval.
The only rival world political and economic system which puts forward a comparable claim is that of the Union of Soviet Republics.
If planning and freedom are to be reconciled, the solution must be found along the lines of the British approach.
Planning and Politics
Effective planning on the economic side and even the introduction of desirable reforms in detail has become impossible without a drastic overhauling both of Parliament and the Central Government and of the machinery of Local Government. Political and economic planning are complementary and supplementary to each other and must be carefully inter-related. We need new economic and political institutions to match the new social adjustments which applied science has created, and a new technique both in politics and in industry to enable us to find intelligent methods of surmounting new difficulties and complexities.
It has been suggested more than once in the course of this essay that devolution of powers to statutory bodies will be an important feature of the new order, and that in the result Parliament and the Cabinet will be relieved of some part of their present duties and set free to the great advantage of themselves and of the nation for their proper tasks of directing and guiding public policy.
Big consequent changes will follow in the machinery of government. The British constitution is however accustomed to changes of this sort. It is continually developing and adapting itself to new conditions. The further development now contemplated will be a natural evolution along lines consistent with British traditions.
Here as elsewhere vested interests will doubtless feel themselves challenged, and be inclined to resist. That is inevitable; but the essentials of constitutional freedom will remain unshaken. In some of its aspects the Tariff Advisory Committee already suggests the nucleus of a National Planning Commission. In due course we shall perhaps be astonished not at the magnitude of the changes but at their relative smallness.
Planning and Economic Freedom
One further question remains to be touched upon before the summing up is reached.
Let it be granted, a well-disposed critic may say, that what you propose involves no fundamental attack on freedom : granted that your plan of reconstruction is not open to the charge of encroaching upon spiritual freedom and, if successful, would provide a better material environment for the realization of humanity's higher aspirations : do you not run the risk of so trammelling and shackling man's economic freedom that the result will be less production, not more, less enterprise and initiative, a drying up of the incentive to progress, and final loss, not gain, in material well-being ?
One possible answer is of course to refer our critic to what was said at the outset as to the imminence of catastrophe if we continue to drift. We must regain control of the machinery of civilization if we and it are to survive.
Reluctance to embark on a doubtful adventure deserves a less negative treatment.
The dangers which our critic fears are real dangers. Red-tape is not confined to Government Departments. Our Statutory Corporations and Public Utility Boards may all too easily become unadventurous obstacles to progress, determined enemies to all new ideas.
It may be indeed that one of the lessons we have to learn from our present distresses is that scientific invention itself required some planning in its application to the economic structure of the nation.
The problem of progress is no longer the problem of getting enough change to prevent routine from deadening effort, but the problem of preventing change from destroying both routine and all social stability.
This however is no justification of institutions which deaden effort.
Our proposals must rather be defended by the claim that they will liberate the spirit of initiative and not deaden it, in that they will provide means by which the energetic man of business may escape from the disheartening frustrations and failures which are caused by the complexity of the machine, and will give him scope, for serving his generation in a larger kingdom than the narrow field of competition with rivals in particular industrial or commercial pursuits.
Though organized on public utility lines with monopolistic privileges, the great Chartered Industrial Corporations will find ample room for energy and initiative in performing their primary task of combining maximum output with minimum costs of production. The executive heads of particular factories will not lack the spur of competition.
The Profit-Making Motive
It is no part of our plan to enshrine equalitarian doctrines or to eliminate from business life the desire to better oneself and the motive of personal reward. Subordination of the motive of profit to the motive of service does not imply that the motive of profit has no useful part to play, even within a Public Utility Concern not working for profit. It is not absent in the B.B.C., nor in the Central Electricity Board.
Nor is it suggested that Public Utility Concerns or bodies analogous in character should be set up to deal with any but the major or " Key " business activities of the nation.
For example the specialized steel industries of Sheffield would not, unless by their special desire, find a place within the organization of the Chartered Steel Corporation. They would be ancillary to it and would no doubt co-operate with it in suitable ways, but would remain independent.
In general, specialized production and skilled craftsmanship would continue to be the field of individualistic effort. So also would retail business.
Experience alone can prove the justice of our claim that economic freedom will not be fatally shackled by the effects of conscious forward planning. Experience too will be needed to make clear the boundaries of the province within which individualistic effort can best be relied upon to secure the highest national dividend.
But we do make the claim that national reconstruction along the lines indicated is not only urgent and essential to salvation, but is also rightly calculated to improve the economic environment of our national life.
A Conservative Evolution
Indeed the Socialist or the Communist will condemn our planning as mere tinkering with the outworn machine of capitalism. To him it will appear as a hopelessly conservative and anaemic attempt to stave off the red-blooded revolution which alone can satisfy him.
Our plan is, we claim, conservative in the truest and best sense. It is constructive not destructive and builds solidly upon the present and the past. It faces the issues boldly and is not afraid to challenge vested interests and deeply-cherished habits of thought and action. It does not however propose to expropriate anyone, and in requiring the application of compulsion in a limited sphere it is not doing more than to extend and make explicit and give systematic application to tendencies and practices already at work.
The purpose of this essay is not to put before the reader any complete or fully worked out plan of national reconstruction. That can be done only in a series of separate essays and even then much of the necessary detail would have to be left out.
Such sketch, in the broadest outline of the lines which reconstruction might take (as has been given here), must inevitably raise more questions in the mind of the attentive reader than it answers.
Our purpose has been to vindicate by reasoned presentation our faith that national reconstruction on the basis of conscious forward planning, besides being urgent and necessary, is compatible with the preservation of our freedom.
Vested interests, ingrained prejudices, traditions, customs, and points of view which have proved their value in the past, are challenged by us to give way to the needs of the present.
This generation is called upon to accept modifications in the structure of its economic life, which are profound enough to require an altogether new outlook on the content and meaning of economic freedom. The old spiritual values which belong to personal and political freedom are not challenged. They are accepted in full. It is because they are accepted as absolute, and because there is urgent need to safeguard them in the changed world of the twentieth century, that new methods of economic organization have to be devised.
Economic freedom must always be relative to its environment. Economic freedom demands that form of economic organization of civilized society which will provide men and women with the highest standards of material well-being attainable by the use of their powers of scientific production and co-operative endeavour, in order that the environment thus afforded may present the widest possible opportunities for the exercise of the highest faculties of human nature.
In the haphazard and disorganized economic structure of to-day, men and women are baulked alike of economic and of spiritual freedom.
If by conscious forward planning they can escape present frustrations, they will rightly be judged to be more truly free.
1. See Red Oxford, by M. P. Ashley and C. T. Saunders, published by The Oxford University Labour Club.
THE STATE OF THE WORLD
Reprinted from " The Australian Social Crediter," March and April, 1946.
Conversion of Governments into Dictatorships.
" At the moment (February, 1945), there does not appear to be much likelihood that the German contributions to the general hell will be overlooked, and if there is any truth in the statements that the German atrocities have been largely directed against the Jews, they will not be. But it is obvious that the International-New-Deal-Peppers-and-Planners are counting on using Germany as the scape-goat to which to divert attention from the consolidation of their war gains. That in this country not less than America, the Managerial State—" All Power to the Official "—was decided upon in 1931 if not long before, and organised in the sure and certain hope that a nice big war could be provoked and kept going while its position was buttressed " in war, or under threat of war " is so clear that only wilfulness or unfamiliarity with the facts can obscure it. We do not think we are likely to see a period of crude deflation on the cessation of hostilities, because the dog has learnt that trick. But that both individual purchasing-power and individual freedom of initiative will be curtailed by every possible means, and there are many, is evidenced by the care with which " the threat of war " is being prepared to replace " war." And God wot, the threat of war is not far to seek."
We quote this paragraph from The Social Crediter of a year ago because it provides for those " unfamiliar with the facts " an excellent perspective of the past year's events. The military phase of the war ended with the terroristic demonstration of the atomic bomb; and it is clear in retrospect that hostilities were prolonged, despite the efforts of the Japanese, to enable the dropping of those bombs. On the conclusion of the military phase, the " threat of war " phase was substituted without so much as a day's delay, and the " administrative adjustments " referred to by Lord Rothschild were set in train.
During the war, arrangements were consolidated to ensure a condition of apparent world famine. We are indebted to an editorial from the London Sunday Express, reprinted in the Sydney Daily Telegraph of February 26, 1946, for a demonstration that the appearance is false. This article reports that world stocks of wheat next June will be 2,000,000 tons more than in June, 1938. Elsewhere it has been reported that Argentina is burning grain in locomotives.
Thus the " threat of war," plus artificial famine, provide the necessary background for the conversion of governments into dictatorships. In Eastern Europe the process is crude; totalitarian governments have been installed under the guidance of Soviet Russian-trained Russian agents, and are backed by Russian arms. Thus in Jugoslavia Marshal Tito has been installed. Tito is a Josef Broz, or his double; there is some doubt. The real Broz, after early Communist activities in Jugoslavia, took part in the Spanish civil war, then returned to Moscow, where he received special training. In 1941 he returned to Jugoslavia as head of the Secret International Terrorist Organisation (Tanya Internatsionalna Terroristichka Organizatsiya—i.e. T.I.T.O.). There is a report, however, that the real Broz " disappeared " under Russian auspices, and was replaced by a double, provided from the same larder.
Again, in Poland, a Russian sponsored totalitarian government has been installed under M. Bierut, whose real name is Krasnodebski. This man in 1921 accepted Soviet citizenship. " Attached at once to the Polish section of the Commintern, he spent several years on theoretical training and practical courses in Moscow. In December, 1924, he was sent to Poland for the first time, and almost at once became one of the leading personalities of the Communist Party. For a time he was organising demonstrations and riots to undermine the institutions of the Polish State." (The Tablet, July 14,1945). Later he became head of the Polish section of the OGPU. In 1941 " he was dropped from a Soviet plane into Poland . . . was ordered to take advantage of the German occupation to build a network of Communist organisations, and with their assistance to set up institutions and an administration to rival the Underground Polish authorities acting under the Polish Government in London. In March, 1944, Bierut, accompanied by four other people . . . crossed the frontier into Russia. Upon their arrival at the Soviet capital they introduced themselves as the Polish National Home Council, and the only ' genuine representation of the Polish Nation.''
The Times, and the socialist Press generally, connived at all this, and at the same time prepared the ground for the Socialist victory at the British General Elections. This achieved, the next step was taken. Without warning, American Lend-Lease supplies were cut off, precipitating an era of intensified austerity which could be held to justify the totalitarian measures of the new Government.
A drive for exports took the place of the " period of crude deflation " which followed World War I. This is very important. Industry has grown up from its beginnings to serve the multitudinous needs of individuals. But " export trade," like war, provides an over-riding objective. It provides a reason, an excuse, for the organisation of industry; and the organisation of industry implies the organisation of the community to serve it.
The measures known collectively as Social Security are, in reality, nothing but the administrative arrangements underlying the total organisation of the Community. They were originally developed for that purpose in Germany. The essential principle involved is to prevent the individual accumulating savings, and hence independence, and thus to force him into subjection to the mass of detailed regulations governing every aspect of existence, which are brought into being under special enabling clauses of the main Acts. This is the " Managerial State—' All Power to the Official.' "
Managerial State Legislation—First Section British National Socialist legislation can be seen, in perspective, to fall into two chief divisions. The first comprises Lord Rothschild's " administrative adjustments," and includes the various measures for organisation of industry and community—nationalising of banking and industry, control of investment, and the reduction of all members of the community, except Government officials and bureaucrats (including the managerial class and labour Gauleiters), to a common level, " the managed." Included in this is the equalisation of income through controlled devaluation of money (planned inflation), plus taxation. The inflation—i.e., rise in prices—rapidly reduces the real value of professional and small business incomes; this process is offset by wage increases for the low wage earners. The objective is an approximate equalisation of all non-official incomes at a level which will not permit of individual savings. It is important to observe that this level may include, later on, a moderately high standard of living; but that standard will be compulsory, in order to absorb all income. The contingencies which normally would call for savings will be met by so-called " insurance." This is not genuine insurance. Contributions are simply taxation, and benefits are the provision of a minimum income, or special services (e.g., medical treatment) under narrowly defined and regulated conditions. Thus independence for the individual will be impossible. So long as he does as he is ordered to do—i.e., remains " fully employed " in the various jobs to which he is directed—he will be well-fed, and by degrees adequately housed and amused. If, however, he endeavours to assert his independence, his income will be cut off, and he will have no savings to carry him on, and no free-choice of alternative employment.
The propaganda for " Social Security " is merely an elaborate disguise for the conditions that obtain in the Army, and it is not improbable that once the total organisation of the community, with the abolition of all independence, is achieved, the disguise will be dropped. But this is chiefly a question of administrative convenience.
Managerial State Legislation—Second Section The second division into which legislation falls comprises sanctions—means of enforcing the " administrative adjustments." Under this heading are grouped international commitments, propaganda, and direct coercion.
International commitments (with which the export drive may be classified) provide a justification, a " total " objective. Contributions to UNRRA, maintenance of occupation forces, acquisition of dollars, membership of UNO, etc., etc., are super-national objectives, and hence external to national politics, and hence outside the sphere of the individual. Now quite casual inspection of supernational politics of the present day reveals that it is a mass of lies, murders, corruption, wars and destruction; Satanism. But the reader may call it what he will, so long as he will judge contemporary supernationalism by its fruits. He may find his own interpretation for the expression " Possessed by the Devil."
Propaganda is quite obviously " possessed by the Devil." It is driving Man to destruction. International " News " is derived from international news-agencies; but it is not, for the most part, news, but propaganda, and at times of decisive importance, it carries the policy of international Communism. On the principle of admitting freely what is already known, it is now freely enough admi tted that we made a " mistake " in supporting Tito. It is now clear, in retrospect, that the Press clamour, lead by The Times, in favour of E.L.A.S. in Greece might have been fatal to the British Empire; and it will become clear that the international propaganda campaign against Franco is in order to promote fatal developments.
Under cover of the situation created and maintained by international commitments and propaganda (" the threat of war "), the means of direct coercion are being steadily consolidated. Russia and its satellites are undeniably police-states. In Great Britain, the police forces have been centralised, the Ministry of Social Security—i.e., of central control of the individual—set up, and officials of various departments have been armed with powers of entering private homes on various pretexts, and of securing 'evidence' in connection with industrial accidents. Every day sees an increase in the power of the official to mind the individual's business, with, of course, a reciprocal decrease in the individual's self-determination.
The State of the World is not an Accident. If people are deceived by the ostensible objectives of socialist legislation, they will pay the price. " By their fruits shall ye know them."
By their fruits: not by the advertisements. It is only atural that these things should be put forward in disguise; and if we cannot distinguish between words and things, we shall perish. Judge by the socialism we have; judge by falling production, rising prices, murderous taxation, increasing anarchy, loathsome austerity; that is policy in practice, the proletarianising of the community.
How can the sincere Socialist—the one who merely votes Socialism—believe that the tin-pot mechanism of the Party vote will enable him to overthrow the ultimate possessors of power? Does he seriously think that the ' Capitalist' Press will assist in its own overthrow? On the very premises of the Socialist, Socialism as advocated must be a ' Capitalist' plot for the final enslavement of the worker. But the ' Capitalist' is not the independent business-man; he is the International Capitalist—the Cartelist and the Financier, who control the international news-agencies, and own government debts, and who through those debts hold a lien on the physical assets of every country, and who, under the guise of Socialism, are putting the bailiffs in. It is childish to believe that Socialism has come into power against the will of the ultimate International Power.
The state of the world is no accident; for those who will look, it bears every mark of design. The Mark of the Beast.
And? F. A. Voight, in Nineteenth Century and After writes: " The question What can we do ? has many answers, and whoever gives an answer may do so according to his knowledge, his capacity, and his station (there are many, indeed, who give answer beyond all these). But one answer, at least, is possible to the humblest: To bear witness. It is the duty of all who can do so, whether in print, in their letters, or in talk, to withstand or rectify, in however restricted a manner, the cumulative falsification of history perpetrated by the principal media of-publicity in our time . . ."
One of the functions of the Press is to mislead public opinion, even informed public opinion, as to the timing of the plot. The public is taught to think that if after all they don't like " Socialism," they can simply change the Government in five years time, and revert to freedom. It is not so. Under cover of party politics, the shackles are being bolted. It is intended that when we find we don't like what we've got, it will be too late to do anything about it. And that won't take long.
" In this, the gravest crisis of the world's history, it is essential to realise that the stakes which are being played for are so high that the players on one side, at least, care no more for the immolation of the peoples of a continent than for the death of a sparrow.. . . There is a working coalition between the scum of the underworld and the richest men in the world to murder those from whom alone redemption for the underworld can come, in order that any threat to the power of the financier may be removed. The underworld will be dealt with just as easily as Stalin deals with any opposition, when the underworld has done its job." (The Social Crediter, February 10, 1945). We warn the decent men of the Left as well as of the Right that if they don't wake up now their massacre is certain.
The Great Powers of the World.
On February the 18th, Mr. Churchill was closeted in Miami with Mr. Bernard Baruch and his U.S.A. Branch Manager, Mr. James Byrnes. On March the 5th Mr. Churchill gave the signal we have been expecting. From 1942, when Germany double-crossed Russia, until, virtually, March, 1946, the international news-agencies have systematically concealed the development of the situation. Under cover of the " line " that we must secure Russia's co-operation, and therefore must say nothing which might offend her, we have sacrificed the Poles, and connived at the installation of police-governments run by specially trained Russian agents in every country traversed by the Red Armies. The facts that have not been concealed have been explained by the plea that Russia is " nervous " (poor mighty child), and therefore entitled, at any cost of human slaughter and suffering, to make her boundaries secure by extending those boundaries by the incorporation of her neighbours and the " social-engineering " of their populations.
British foreign policy, in particular, appears senseless. Not content with the outcome of the policy of appeasing Germany, we have adopted the identical policy as regards Russia. To try to reconstruct our foreign policy is like trying to piece together a jig-saw puzzle that has a key piece missing; it won't hang together.
And there is the vital clue. There is a piece missing. The essential fact to grasp is that national foreign policies are the resultant of the natural foreign policy plus an international component. And because in general the nature of the international policy deflecting the national policy is unrecognised, foreign policies are essentially unpredictable, and we are plunged into a series of wars which we do not want, and which could certainly have been avoided by a realistic national foreign policy. Wars are actually outmoded, in the sense that modern industrial development provides potential plenty for every nation. The British Empire, however it came into existence, is not now in any sense an aggressive entity. For some time past it has practised the essential requirements of non-aggressiveness—economic and political decentralisation. Yet the British Empire has been chiefly concerned in the last two wars, and is clearly to be involved in the next—hence Mr. Churchill's speech.
It can be stated quite definitely that our continued existence as an Empire, as a set of Nations, and as a culture—all three or any of them—depends on our recognising, and dealing with, the alien policy which deflects our own. The situation is analogous to a chemical experiment in which the results do not conform to those predicted, because of the unsuspected presence of an impurity in the reagents. Discover and eliminate the impurity, and theory and practice coincide.
This alien policy has been described and analysed by Major C. H. Douglas in his books The Big Idea, Programme for the Third World War, and The Brief for the Prosecution. It has, as its immediate objective, the elimination of the British Empire and its culture.
To describe the situation very briefly: In addition to the recognised Great Powers in the world—let us say, the Big Three—there is a fourth. The fourth Great Power is the Jewish nation, which, because it has no fixed geographical State, is overlooked as such. Nevertheless, it has a Government, which is largely secret, and that Government has a policy. The policy is derived from the mystic philosophy of the Jews—the belief that they are the Chosen People, with a mission to organise and govern the other peoples of the world.
Now, since this Power has no country, and no army, its foreign policy must be pursued by other than the methods of direct armed conquest. Its most important weapon is Finance—money-power. Thus at the centre is Jewish State policy. Outside this, as it were, is the organisation of International Finance, which is predominantly, though not entirely, Jewish. International Finance, as such, has a policy; but that policy is derived from, and furthers, Jewish State policy.
The technique of the policy is really absurdly simple; in essence it consists of mortgaging property, and foreclosing. The foreclosure is, in practice, the dictation of policy. Thus all governments are in debt, and all have to borrow. The conditions on which they can borrow are conditions dictated by the policy of International Finance, and put forward as principles of "sound finance." Now financial policy dictates economic policy, and economic policy, as things are, delimits politics so-called.
Theoretically, virtually the assets of the whole world are mortgaged to the banking system—i.e., the Money Power; legally, there is no reason why the Money Power should not take possession. But practically it is impossible, because public opinion would revolt; so that some form of police force to prevent revolt must be established. So that over and above the purely financial technique by which the Money Power has established its claim to ownership of the world, on behalf of its hidden masters, politics have been controlled so as to lead to a world police-force.
This is being achieved by the elimination of nations through wars, and the subordination of the remaining nations to their bureaucracies through Socialism.
In 1942, Major Douglas wrote: "Socialism, or to give it its correct name, Monopoly, is not a production system, which is exactly what one would expect from its origins."
The idea so skilfully inculcated that confiscation of property will assist in the distribution of wealth is, of course, completely without foundation. Socialism is a restriction system, as any examination of Socialistic practice in the Trades Unions will confirm, and it has two well-defined principles—centralisation of power, both economic and political, and espionage.
" That is to say, every advance towards Socialism is an advance towards the Police State . . ." (The Big Idea.)
Nearly a year after the end of the war, conditions in Great Britain are much worse than during the war. This means, not that Socialism has failed, but that it is succeeding. It is doing what its true authors intended it should do— reduce the people to a condition of penury and slavery. Politics and economics are both predominantly in the service of the secret Fourth Great Power.
Now the operation of this fourth major foreign policy in the world must normally be to call forth a " healthy reaction," both economic and political, to it. But as the policy is a secret policy, the effect is simply a confusion of policies, until the threat is so obvious that a distinct policy does emerge. The British policy towards the threat of Russia can be seen more and more clearly to have been absurd; but equally, the threat is becoming so obvious that only one British policy is becoming possible. But, of course, immense damage has been done.
The main strategy of the Fourth Power is destruction of the national institutions of the other three Powers from within, and the manipulation of the three Powers into conflict with each other. As the fourth Power " owns " each of the others, it will dominate the world when one of the three dominates the world. But, since Russia already has a developed secret-police system, and is militaristic, Russia may be billed to eliminate the other two. But in the meantime the next phase is apparently intended to be the destruction of the British Empire by Russia. To this end, by paralysis of British resistance, the strategic position of Russia has been enormously strengthened, while the economic position of Great Britain has been ruined. Food and coal reserves have gone, industry has been wrecked by interference and the threat of nationalisation, and morale has been virtually destroyed by a combination of Utopian but impossible promises, and austerity. Moreover, Russia has an enormous fifth-column in all countries of the British-Empire, and the integrity of the Armed Forces has been sapped by the propaganda of the Services' " educational " organisations.
We have been manoeuvred into a position where it is too late to do anything about the military situation. That was intended. If anything can be done about the general situation, it can be done only by a direct challenge to the power of the Fourth State. The genuine nationals of the British Empire and the United States will have to eliminate the power and the policy of the International Jew. Once that is done—and only if it is done—Russia may be stayed. But God knows how little time remains.
Only a few weeks ago, there was but an occasional bare whisper in the daily Press that Russia just conceivably, in certain circumstances—if we offended her by saying so, for example—might become a threat. We were told just enough to warn us of the danger of saying more. But that phase has passed. Mr. Baruch has given the " go " signal to Mr. Churchill, and Mr. Churchill has passed it on through all the modern resources of controlled propaganda. Even the fatal words " appeasement " and " Munich " are once more becoming common currency, and with the aid of little daily doses of instruction, the Common Man is rapidly becoming an expert in foreign affairs, and soon should be able to realise that the Third World War is on the way.
Marxist Strategy and Tactics.
The Russian Government is the exponent of a fairly highly elaborated dogma derived from a philosophy known as dialectical and historical materialism. The doctrines involved in this dogma have various origins and histories, but their modern expression began with their formulation as a system by Karl Marx (Mordecai) and Frederick Engels, and their extension by Vladimir Lenin (Ulianov). The current system is generally known as Marxism-Leninism. Marxism-Leninism has, however, been further adapted by Stalin, whose pronouncements are surely authoritative.
Russia is governed through the hierarchy of the Communist Party. Party membership is absolutely conditional on a thorough grounding in Marxism-Leninism, and promotion in the hierarchy requires a high degree of " theoretical" knowledge— i.e., knowledge of the theory of Marxism-Leninism. The over-all policy pursued by Soviet Russia is, of course, derived from the beliefs so thoroughly inculcated.
According to Marxism-Leninism, the real social structure of the world, under Capitalism, consists of its class structure, and nation-States are quite secondary. That is to say, men are united primarily by their classes, so that to belong to the proletarian, or " toiling masses," class, over-rides considerations of nationality. The proletarian class is considered to be a world fact; the class is homogeneous, and opposed in interest and outlook throughout the world to all other classes which it will, " step by step," hurl from power.
The picture is, therefore, that of two forces like two armies, radically opposed throughout the world. Because of the inherent defects in the Capitalist system which gives the Capitalists and their sub-classes their power, sooner or later, and somewhere or other, the proletarian force must " break through" the line of the Capitalist forces. Once this happens, the whole nature of the struggle is changed, for the victorious segment of the proletariat becomes the leader of the rest of the world-proletariat, and strategy alters accordingly.
Stalin describes the strategy of this stage, which was reached with the October Revolution in Russia, quite explicitly:
" Objective: to consolidate the dictatorship of the proletariat in one country, using it as a base for the overthrow of imperialism in all countries. The revolution is spreading beyond the confines of one country; the period of world revolution has commenced.
The main forces of the revolution: the dictatorship of the proletariat in one country, the revolutionary movement of the proletariat in all countries.
Main reserves: the semi-proletarian and small-peasant masses in all developed countries.
Direction of the main blow: isolation of the petty-bourgeois democrats, isolation of the parties of the Second International, which constitute the main support of the policy of compromise with imperialism.
Plan for the disposition of forces: alliance of the proletarian revolution with the liberation movement in the colonies and the dependent countries." (Foundation of Leninism.) (Italics in original. Our paragraphs.)
" The fundamental question of revolution is power." (Lenin). In order to achieve the maximum power, it is necessary for the first country achieving the initial victory of the proletariat to organise itself in such a way as to obtain the greatest power. That is to say, it must organise itself on totalitarian lines under the direction of a General Staff under a Chief of the General Staff; in short, it must become a fully organised army, in order to play its necessary part in the continuation of the world revolution. This is the true and only meaning of the term "dictatorship of the proletariat." Jokes about "dictatorship over the proletariat" are entirely beside the point. "Dictatorship of the proletariat" is purely and simply a technical term in the vocabulary of Marxism-Leninism, and relates to the strategic concept of having a properly organized force available to assist revolution as it occurs elsewhere in the world. "The revolution in the victorious country must regard itself not as a self-sufficient entity but as an aid, as a means of hastening the victory of the proletariat in other countries." (Stalin).
Similarly, the terms "petty-bourgeois democrats" and "parties of the Second International" refer to what we call "Labour" or "Labour-Socialism." The formation of such groups is regarded by the theoreticians as a natural phenomenon in the development of the world revolution. Their role is to demonstrate to the oppressed toiling masses that only revolution can succour them! and one of the first tasks of the victorious revolution must be to liquidate these "compromisers with imperialism" who have committed the crime of betraying the revolution, and who are rivals for the leadership of the proletariat. The appearance of these groups is only a demonstration of the progress of the general revolution, which, according to Lenin, would take some decades to run its course, during which the deepening crisis would be marked by depression, unemployment, and war, as well as by such "petty bourgeois expedients" as Fabianism and Social Democracy. All this would have to be, however; the first country to achieve revolution could do no more than help to intensify the crisis, act as a beacon to the toiling masses, and prepare for the decisive moment by building up its own strength and organisation.
While the strategy of Marxism-Leninism remains steady and consistent through this period (i.e., the period between the Russian Revolution and World Revolution), tactics, which are largely the concern of the Communist Parties in various countries, vary with "the ebb and flow" of the developing situation in those countries. Any criticism of the contradictions of Communist activities therefore misses the point entirely; there is no variation in strategy, which is centred in the General Staff (Politbureau) in Russia, and which is consistently preparing for general revolution; but it is in the very nature of tactics to vary with the fluctuating fortunes of the struggle. For example, the recent Iron Workers' strike is said to have resulted in a defeat for the Communists. That is not so. The objective of the strike was to reduce the reserves of critical materials—iron and coal—in order to hasten on the " nation-wide crisis," and " weaken the Government"; and in that it succeeded. The tactics were designed to lead the workers in and out of the strike, covering both manoeuvres with suitable slogans and propaganda. From the strategical point of view it was essential that the strike should " fail " at a point short of a full crisis. The strategical objective of all such tactics at present is to worsen the lot of the community, and increase the difficulties of the " petty-bourgeois " (compromising) Government. The recent Coal Report is striking evidence of the strategical success of tactics as applied to the coal industry.
It must be admitted that the Marxist-Leninist theory appears to find practically complete confirmation in the state of the world. The end of the " Imperialist war " (into which Russia was, despite her detachment, drawn) finds the " Capitalist crisis " still more intensified, and " petty-bourgeois governments " still less able to cope with it. The changes " demanded " by the oppressed masses are quite clearly not alleviating their condition, and the various factions of " the ruling classes" (including Labour parties) are at loggerheads. A fresh outbreak of revolution is anticipated in Greece, and local tactics are being directed accordingly. France is highly unstable, and would detonate into revolution if fresh civil war could be promoted in Spain. The British Empire is distracted by " liberation movements in colonies and dependent countries " and by threats to Empire security as in Persia and Palestine.
Financial Rules favouring Revolution can be changed.
There is, however, another side to the picture. The vital and fundamental premiss of the Marxist-Leninist theory is the automatic and inevitable nature of the " contradiction " in Capitalist economy. The Capitalist does not oppress and exploit the Worker because he likes it, but because he cannot avoid it. He, like the Worker, is caught up in a System he cannot control. As Lenin emphasised, Revolution would be impossible unless a general crisis arose.
The central aspect of the Capitalist system is money. The Capitalist " produces for profit," and profit is taken in money. That is to say, the vital aspect of Capitalist economy is in its relation to the financial system and the financial system itself consists of certain " principles," or rules, or laws; for example, the principles of " sound finance." Thus the Capitalist conducts his business and makes his profits according to the rules which govern the use of money.
The Marxist-Leninist position therefore rests ultimately on the question of those rules. Are those rules in the nature of things, genuine " laws " like the laws of physics; or are they conventions, man-made ?
On the hypothesis that the rules are laws, and therefore unchangeable, it follows that the Capitalist is helpless, and faultless; the case for his liquidation hardly rests on a very satisfactory moral basis. But it also follows that no improvement is possible, even in Russia's case, unless the use of money is abolished; but Russia has not abolished money, and claims an improvement; in point of fact, Russia has modified the rules. In general, however, it is quite clear that the rules are modified constantly, not only by Russia, but everywhere. Whether or not a country is on the gold standard is a case in point—it is the result of a decision. But the " laws " of a strict gold standard are different from the " laws " of a dollar or sterling standard.
Thus the Marxist-Leninist strategy is applicable to a situation that has its origin in the results of the operation of rules of finance. Who is responsible for those rules ?
Although there is some overlapping of personnel, especially in the case of Big Business and the cartels, through interlocking directorates, it is quite clear that the production and the financial systems are separate entities. It is also clear that the financial system is far more highly centralised than is the production system. In practically every country there is now a Central Bank, which has well-defined functions, including especially the regulation of the volume of money. But these Central Banks in turn come under a super-Central Bank, the Bank of International Settlements, though at the moment there is some indication that this Bank's function will be transferred to the World Bank working in co-operation with the International Fund. However that may be, it is the case that there is a world centralised financial system. In the case of industry—the production system—on the other hand, such world centralisation as there is relates only to specific industries, notably the chemical industry, while the greater part of industry is relatively independent, and unco-ordinated.
Now in the nature of things an unco-ordinated industry cannot impose a consistent policy on centralised world finance; but, by setting up and maintaining the rules of the system, finance can, and does, impose a policy on industry. Broadly, the rules are in the system of accounting, and in the necessity of making a financial profit, according to the accounting conventions.
Marxist-Leninist strategy is derived from and dependent on an intensifying crisis; and that crisis derives from the financial rules under which industry is conducted. If the crisis disappeared, Communism would retrogress.
Now as long as finance and production are lumped together under the term " Capitalism," there appears to be no escape from the necessity for Communism. But finance and production are not identities; they are entirely separate systems. To fail to discriminate, of course, adds to the confusion, for what is required is not any re-organisation of industry, but an alteration in the financial rules which impose a policy on industry.
An alteration in these rules was proposed by the Government of Alberta, and was opposed by financial interests; not only opposed, but prevented.
Further than this, there is documentary evidence that International Financiers financed the Russian Revolution.
Surely, now, the nature of the situation is plain. The greatest power in the world is wielded by International Finance, which directs its policy to produce an intensifying crisis as a result of which World Revolution is promoted, the effect of which would be a world dictatorship through, in the first place, the agency of Russia. The purpose is to disposses every individual of any form of property which could confer independence, and centralise all ownership in institutions themselves centralised under a World State.
Misunderstanding of this situation at this stage only accelerates our progress to disaster. It must be realised that every effort is made to maintain the fiction of class-war on the one hand, and the threat of Russia as a great national power on the other. As a result, perfectly well-meaning, sincere and able politicians constantly make the situation worse.
Russia is not a " Great Power " in the national sense; she does not want war or territorial aggrandisement in the ordinary sense. Russia is a reservoir of strength and highly-trained personnel awaiting, expecting, and promoting revolution which she is prepared to back. Every intensification of the crisis brings the critical moment nearer; the greater the confusion, the easier her task. Therefore the apparent threat of war aids her, and the confusion as to her policy—i.e., whether she just wants to secure her boundaries, or whether she is following Hitler's path of aggression—makes the situation more favourable for revolution.
We can now put the whole jig-saw puzzle together. The responsible agents in the world are the men controlling the international financial system. Through financial power— the indebtedness of governments and institutions to them— they can either dictate or heavily influence policy. Their efforts are directed along two main lines: the maintenance of such financial rules as must lead to a world crisis, and the sponsoring of the Marxist-Leninist theory and its exponents to take advantage of the crisis to institute a World Police State. Financial power has enabled them to secure control of all the main channels of publicity, especially the international news-agencies through which a bias can be imparted to the presentation of world news so as to intensify the crisis. During the war, they secured the setting up of UNRRA whose purpose is to restrict the distribution of food, and lead to famine in Europe. Through such institutions as the London School of Economics and Political and Economic Planning, as well as the more frankly Socialist organisations, they have disseminated doctrines which have gradually resulted in the institution of a system of bureaucratic socialism in Great Britain which has strangled private initiative and paralysed recovery from the ravages of war, and transferred power from Parliament to a junta concealed behind the bureaucracy.
Europe has now been brought to near-detonation point. Its peoples are being driven to desperation by gross food-shortage, and lack of recovery from the desolation of war. Greece and France are in a highly unstable condition, and might be precipitated into revolution at any time. Whenever this happens, Russia is waiting to come to the assistance of the " victorious proletariat" and to set up the Federated States of Soviet Europe. In the commotion, the life-lines of the British empire, already frayed, will be completely severed, leaving Great Britain easy prey for either " liquidation " as " reactionary petty-bourgeois " or its own revolution.
Once this strategic situation is grasped, it becomes clear that the well-meaning words of, say, Mr. Menzies, are like petrol as a fire-extinguisher. It is also clear why Mr. Baruch, the international financier, gave Mr. Churchill the go-ahead signal, providing Russia was misrepresented as a military menace.
The situation is indeed formidable. Now, obviously a strategy opposed to a misconception can do nothing but worsen the situation. That is to say, as long as our policy is based on the assumption that Russia is a potential aggressor in the ordinary sense, every move is likely only to lead to irrevocable disaster. And similarly, every attempted denunciation of, or opposition to, the tactics, as such of the local Communists only furthers their strategy, because it helps to intensify the crisis. The vital necessity is rapid amelioration of the crisis, combined with frank exposure of the real situation.
We most earnestly appeal to those with the potential power to deal with the situation to examine what we say impartially, and to realise that a great deal of what they believe and take for granted is the result of years of the most careful and subtle propaganda; that certain courses of action, unorthodox in appearance, are practicable and urgently necessary.1
1. The full text of this Article can be had from The Australian Social Crediter, Box 3266, Sydney, N.S.W.
THE BERNE TRIALS.1
" A lawyer, who assisted at the two trials, published in the review Hammer of December, 1937, a statement according to which the Judge (of the Lower Court) was in debt to a Jew at the time of the trial. This very serious allegation has never to my knowledge been denied. The Neue Berner Zeitung of October 29, 1937, formulated a not less serious complaint against the same Judge, who was obliged by his superiors to take an action against the paper. At the time of writing the action is not yet over. It would seem that the Judge was hardly the proper man to decide such a delicate question.
" It must be remarked also that, contrary to what appeared in many newspapers, the Court of Appeal found that, in spite of the prescriptions of the law, the reports of certain depositions had been drawn up by the private reporters of the Jewish plaintiffs. ' The proceedings as carried out in the Lower Court were not in accordance with custom and law. .. . The manner of drawing up the reports was in contradiction with the binding prescriptions of the law (Art. 92 and 215 Str. V).'2
" That seems clear and definite. Besides, the reports had not been read to the accused and had not been signed, as the law prescribes. In addition, witnesses for the defence had not been convoked and the Judge (of the Lower Court) had accepted from the plaintiffs, as coming from Moscow, photographs which had been insufficiently legalized as well as faulty translations of Russian documents. Is it astonishing then that the accused were condemned by the Lower Court and that the Jews rejoiced? The proof that the Protocols were a forgery had been furnished at last.
" But they had to change their tune. The Bernese Court of Appeal quashed the judgment of the Lower Court. The Higher Court found fault with the setting-up of a commission of experts to examine the question of the authenticity of the Protocols, since the authenticity or non-authenticity of the Protocols did not concern the Court. Moreover, the Court of Appeal severely criticized the choice of the experts, especially the selection of the third. ' If we leave out of account the completely unnecessary expense of the other judgments, in the circumstances, this would have been satisfactory, provided that the third expert selected had been completely impartial and unprejudiced. C. A. Loosli, however, had already, in 1937, published a pamphlet entitled Die Schlimmen Juden, in which he had characterized the Protocols as a recklessly malevolent fabrication and had heaped scorn on them as a forgery, in a manner that was purely polemical and absolutely unscientific. The form that Loosli's judgment in the matter would take was, therefore, capable of being to a large degree calculated in advance, so that he did not enjoy the requisite confidence of all parties'.3. The Court then drew the obvious conclusion: ' Such a mode of appointing an expert is not up to standard.'
" It will be enough to mention one fact in order to justify this criticism of the expert, Loosli. A few pages back I showed that the testimony of Radziwill was valueless, since it has been proved that the Protocols had already been published in 1903. Loosli wanted, nevertheless, to make use of Radziwill's testimony in his professional report of October, 1934. To get out of the difficulty, he simply changed the date of Radziwill's testimony from 1903 to 1895.
" The result of the second trial was never in doubt. The accused (Fischer and Schnell) were acquitted, and one of them had to pay 100 francs costs out of a total of about 28,000 francs. Here it is interesting to note that the whole Jewish Press took good care not to mention that this slight penalty had nothing to do with the Protocols. You will remember what I said at the beginning, namely, that the Jews had included other publications in their action. The 100 francs costs were imposed on Mr. T. Fischer because of the article entitled Shweizermadchen hiite dich vor schandenden Juden.
" A more disastrous result for the Jews could hardly be imagined. And what made it harder for them to bear was the fact that the Bernese Higher Court alluded to a judgment of the Federal Court, in which it was stated that the Swiss Law does not forbid and ' could not forbid journalists to express even very advanced opinions on the Jewish question, however painful these expressions of opinion might be for the Israelites.'
" The Jews however are already ' putting across ' their own version of the trial. The Jewish Daily Post of April 28, 1935, wrote that the first trial had shown " the success that could be achieved by means of good Jewish organization ". This excellent organization was ready to go into action after the disaster of the second trial, as a couple of examples will show.
" The Jewish Chronicle of November 5, 1937, wrote that the Court of Appeal had declared the Protocols a forgery and had held that they must be regarded as trashy literature. The same review asserted that the Court found that the falsity of the Protocols had been proved. In reality the Court of Appeal had declared that the authenticity of the Protocols had not been proved, which does not mean that their falsity had been proved. The Higher Tribunal added that the Lower Court should not have entered upon that question at all. ' To enter upon an expert examination of that question and carry it out was altogether superfluous '.*. The statement of the Jewish Chronicle must be stigmatized as contrary to the truth.
" The Revue de Geneve (Jewish Review of Geneva), in its issue of November 1937, and the Journal des Nations, in its issue of November 3, 1937, were nearer the truth and sinned only by omission. They wrote that " the proofs of the authenticity of the Protocols had not been furnished," but they left out that the Lower Court had been blamed for having raised the question of authenticity, as that question did not concern it.
" It is a universally admitted principle of historical criticism that when a document has been discovered, that document must be held to be authentic so long as its lack of authenticity, in other words, its falsity, has not been proved. This has always been the rule in regard to historical criticism. When it is stated that proof of the authenticity of the Protocols has not been furnished, the cart is put before the horse. It is for the Jews to prove that the Protocols constitute a forgery, and we know that all the attempts to prove this have been lamentable failures. What is more, it is known that the Provisional [Russian] Government of Prince Lwow, Freemason, handed over to the Jew Winawer, all the documents concerning the Protocols that were to be found in the Russian Home Office or at the Police Headquarters. If a proof or even a shadow of a proof, of the falsity of the Protocols had been found amongst these documents, the Jews would have published it immediately.
" I do not intend to weary my readers with the account of other misrepresentations and skilfully concocted affirmations similar to those I have mentioned. It is a pity that writers, whose good faith cannot be called in question, take their information from such dubious sources. They make the mistake of not subjecting those sources to the severe criticism indispensable in a matter that aroused so much passionate feeling, and they neglect to consult the official documents. They thus contribute to get the false Jewish version accepted. They consider that they are acting charitably in defending unfortunate victims of persecution and calumny, while in reality they are working for the triumph of the Jews.
" A Belgian religious wrote a short time ago that the decision of the Higher Cantonal Court confirmed the judgment of the Lower Court magistrate with regard to the falsity of the Protocols. The same author also asserted that the Court declared the Protocols to be ' a document written in bad faith, a malignant and poisonous forgery'.5 The Reverend Father is wrong. It was not the Court, but the barristers for the Jews who attacked the Protocols as the vilest product of the printing press ever published in Switzerland. I have carefully perused the 53 folio pages of the judgment and I can affirm that the Court nowhere declared the Protocols to be ' a document written in bad faith, a malignant and poisonous forgery.' That statement is absolutely opposed to the truth.
" The Court certainly made use of some very severe epithets, such as ' stupid Jew-baiting,' ' attempt to defame the Jews as a body,' but these were employed with reference to the article Shweizermadchen hiite dich vor schandenden Juden, which had nothing to do with the Protocols, but which the Jews had cleverly included in their case.
" The Court declared that the Protocols were ' shoddy or trashy literature in the aesthetic and literary.. . sense.' With that judgment we are in complete agreement. What remains to be determined is who is the author of this ' trashy literature.' On that point the Court declared itself incompetent."
1. Extract from Les Protocols des Sages de Sion constituent-ils un faux by H. de Vries de Heekelingen (Printed at Lausanne, 1938). In May 1935, the Judge of the Lower Court of the Swiss Canton of Berne, Meyer, gave judgment in the action taken by the Swiss Jewish Association and the Jewish Community of Berne against Theodore Fischer and Silvio Schnell concerning the Protocols and other publications. An appeal was lodged by Fischer and Schnell against the judgment, and the Court of Appeal or Higher Court of Berne gave its decision in October, 1937.
2. M. de Vries de Heekelingen here quotes the German text of the Judgment.
3. M. de Vries de Heekelingen again quotes from the German text of the High Court's decision.
4. M. de Vries de Heekelingen again quotes from the German text of the High Court's decision.
5. Article in La Nouvelle Revue tHeologique (January, 1938, p. 57) by the R. Pere Pierre Charles, S.J.
THE RULERS OF RUSSIA
On the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet the following are all Jews: N. Shvernik, Chairman; A. F. Gorkin, Secretary; A. M. Kirchenstein, Deputy Chairman; Ilya Ehrenberg; S. V. Kaftanov (5 out of 12).
On the Council of Ministers—L. M. Kaganovich, L. P. Beria, while of the remaining 10 three members are married to Jewesses—Stalin, Voroshilov and Molotov.
On the Politbureau of the Central Committee all the above are included with only four others. And there is a Jew at the head of every one of the following Ministries:—Agricultural Stocks, Building Industry, Food and Material Reserves, Heavy Industry Construction. The Information Services are under the control of the Jew S. Lozovsky. The Jewish control of Russia was even more apparent immediately after the Communist Revolution when the Jew content of the Government became close on 90%, from having been none under the Tzardom.
Puppet Governments of Communist Europe.
In Poland the Jew Jacob Bergman exercises most control, supported by six other Jews out of eleven members of the Politbureau, besides a Jew at the head of the Ministry of Education, as Public Prosecutor and Chief of the Youth Movement. In Hungary the Government of five members is all-Jewish. In Czecho-Slovakia the Secretary and Deputy Secretary of the Communist Party are both Jews. In Yugoslavia the man behind Tito is the Jew Moishe Pjade. In Roumania the Jewess Anna Pauker is the real ruler.
Names of the Jews in the above appointments have been published in FREE BRITAIN and will be provided, where asked for, as will the names of the six Jews who led the Dock Strike of last year and the Jews at the head of the Communist Movements in Canada and South Africa. In Britain the most important one is Ivor Montagu, one of the leading members of the " British " Communist Party and son of a Jew Peer.
These are the People you would have to fight for in another
Here are some of the appointments in the United Nations Executive and in its Agencies; they are all Jews:
Department of Economic Affairs
Special Adviser: A. Rosenberg.
Economic Stability Director: D. Weintraub. Department of Public Information
Assistant Secretary General: Ben Cohen.
Films Division Director: J. Benoit-Levy. Legal Department: Chief: A. H. Feller. Director of Interpreters: G. Rabinovitch. Administrative Department
Deputy Director: Max Abramovitz.
Executive (Personnel) : M. Bergmann. International Labour Office
Director General: A. Morse. UNESCO
Educational Reconstruction Director, J. Eisenhart.
International Understanding Director, M. F. Luffman.
Tension Division Director, O. Klineberg.
Public Information Director, H. Kaplan.
Administrative Bureau Director, C. H. Weitz.
Personnel Bureau Director, S. S. Selsky.
Housing Director, M. B. Abramski. International Bank Secretary: M. M. Mendels. International Monetary Fund
Managing Director: C. Gutt assisted by O. L. Altman.
Research Director: E. M. Bernstein; Senior Counsellor: Joseph Gold. World Health Organisation
Technology Director: Z. Deutschmann G. Meyer. International Refugee Organisation
M. Cohen and P. Jacobsen. U.N.O. Observer in Korea Col. Alfred Katzin.
The links of the vast Jewish organisation which controls Communism on both sides of the Iron Curtain extends into every country—not only into openly Communist groups and to the less important members of the Soviet Spy system where most of those so-far convicted have been Jews. The links are such as to show that those who control Soviet policy inside Russia are merely part of a much wider Jewish organization whose central control need not be in Russia at all. There can be no doubt that some of its most influential members are in America and very high up in American politics, that is, when you consider the following:—
Bernard Baruch—80 year old " Elder Statesman," " Key figure in politics," etc. . . . Chairman, War Industries Board from 1918, when he admitted before Congress that he had more power than the President. He was Adviser to Jas. F. Byrnes, War Mobilisation Director, from 1943. " One President after another has made him a confidante " said the paper American Hebrew of 17th June, 1946. He is a great friend of Mr. Churchill. He was Economic Adviser to U.S.A. Peace Commission in 1st World War and Master Mind of the New Deal Policy which has been called " Sovietism by Stealth."
He was often denounced by Senator Huey Long, who was shot dead in 1933. He first made his money in Wall Street and is now credited with owning 50 million dollars. He is generally regarded by Jews throughout the world as their leader and champion, a position previously held by Jacob H. Schiff (died 1920), the head partner in the Jewish Wall St. Bank of Kuhn Loeb and Co., which financed the Communist Revolution in Russia, providing considerable material and moral aid for Trotsky. Schiff personally had taken a close interest in promoting the revolutionary movement in Tzarist Russia from the days of the Russo-Japanese war which he financed for Japan, Baruch then is the successor of this man described by the Jews themselves as their " beloved leader."
Felix Frankfurter—Judge of the Supreme Court; described as the Man behind the Men behind the President. His first big job was assistant Secretary for War under Newton Baker (President Wilson's time); represented the Zionists at Paris Peace Conference, 1919. His influence has made him appointer of all sorts of Reds, Zionists and Pinks in important Government posts. He has been the chief legal expert in the New Deal. He is today the most influential single individual in the U.S.A. The Jew Henry H. Klein says " Frankfurter is the head and front of the Sanhedrin in the U.S.A.", and " Roosevelt was a puppet in his hands." He is responsible for introducing into politics, among many others, Dean Acheson, the traitor Alger Hiss, Benjamin V. Cohen of U.N.O., Sidney Hillman and David Niles.
David Niles (real name Neyhus)—is a Frankfurter appointee who has in turn honeycombed the Government with his own appointees. He is behind the civil rights programme, calculated to reduce the White Man's influence, and is official spokesman for organised labour and racial minorities. He opposes anti-Government measures.
Henry Morgenthau, Jr.—Secretary to the Treasury 1934-45. Responsible for the plan which was to reduce Germany to a pasture. Introduced plan for camouflaged Gold Standard at International Monetary Conference, Bretton Woods, 1944. His wife is Eleanor Roosevelt's closest friend.
David E. Lilienthal—Director and Chairman of Tennessee Valley Authority from 1933 until he was made first Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission which consisted of five members of which at least three were Jews. After the Russians had been handed the secrets by spies, he resigned in 1950.
Others in strategic positions include Herbert H. Lehman, banker, Governor of New York State, 1932-42, then Director-General of UNRRA, to whom the British General Sir Fredk. Morgan was called upon to apologize for expressing the flourishing state of Jews under UNRRA in East Europe; Walter Lippmann, most widely quoted political writer in the world, was Secretary of the organisation directed by the Jew Col. House to prepare data for the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, drafted Wilson's Fourteen Points and invented the League of Nations; Walter Winchell, widely publicised writer and chief character-smearing expert against the leading anti-Communists; Benjamin J. Buttenweiser, member of the Jewish bank which financed Lenin and Trotski (Kuhn Loeb & Co.) and this year became Assistant to the Zinsser-married High Commissioner in West Germany, J. J. McCloy. In this Jewish-Communist conspiracy, there is also Adolf A. Berle Jr.— son of the author of " The World Significance of a Jewish State," which forecast that Zion would rule the world, who became Assistant Secretary of State. It was he who, when warned by Whittaker Chambers about Alger Hiss's treachery in 1939, took no action but allowed Hiss to do his fell work through the war, which made the cold war possible today.
Extract from Social Credit (Canada), November, 1950. Christian Liquidation.
The Zionists' own mouthpiece, The Jewish Standard, October, 1950, published the following revealing figures:
Before the end of the British mandate, Palestine's Christian population (excluding British officials, police and army personnel) totalled 145,000. Of these, roughly 100,000 are estimated to have lived in the area now known as Israel.
At present, Christians in Israel number between 45,000 and 50,000.
Roman Catholics have dropped in number, since 1947, from 30,000 to 5,000; Protestants from 6,000 to 1,500.
It would seem that the Christian population of Israel is faring even worse than the Jews are alleged to have fared under Hitler. But where are our " free " press and radio and C.B.C. ? Imagine the hullabaloo they would be making if America were meting out this treatment to her Zionist population !
Extract from The Tablet (Brooklyn), October 14, 1950.
REPORTS FIGURES ON PERSECUTION. Vatican Radio analyses Effect of Red Tyranny in Europe.
In a country-by-country analysis, a Vatican Radio broadcast gave the following report on the persecution of priests and monks in areas behind the Iron Curtain.
Ukraine: Five thousand priests killed and a thousand churches destroyed or closed.
Baltic Countries: A thousand priests murdered or jailed.
Poland: A thousand priests deported to Siberia.
Czechoslovakia: Three hundred priests and an undetermined number of monks and nuns imprisoned.
Hungary: A thousand priests and monks murdered or deported, and another 589 prevented from carrying out their duties.
Bulgaria: One hundred and twenty priests killed or exiled.
Yugoslavia: A total of 1,954 priests killed, arrested or deported.
Albania: Some 715 priests and monks, including all the Bishops of the country, rendered incapable of performing their ministry.
rense.comThe Protocols And You
The Last Deception
section 14 "The Protocols of the Illuminated Elders of Tzion"
section 16 "The Beast Has Risen"
Daniel's Seventy Weeks
Was Peter a Jew?
The Two Witnesses
"The Whore of Babylon"
Are the " Ael-ians coming"
Wall Street " The Mark" is Here
Wall Street II
Wall Street III
It has happened "War Declared upon and in America"
Declared section Part II
"All you ever need to know about their god and Qabalah"
Qabalah Part II
Qabalah Part III
National Identification Card
A Sincere Request to "Rapture" Teachers
Compulsory Constitutional Cremation
Homeland Security, "The Police State"
"The Fourth Beast"
The Babylonian Talmudic Mystical Qabalah
The Scribes of Baal
How will they do it- " The false-christ"
False Christ Part II
Baal's food Tax
"The Changing of the Guards"
"Summation" The beginning of sorrows has begun
"Moshiach ben Lucifer"
Satan's Tales "Wagging the Global Dog"
"Satan's Plan", Protocols of Zion ( of course they will dispute it's authenticity)
I Witch, New One World Order Seal
Satan's Enforcers of Quaballah
Satan's Enforcers Part 2
Satan's Enforcers Part 3
Satan's Enforcers Part 4
The Seed of God or the Seed of Satan, Your choice by faith
Pledge of Allegiance Part Two
I AM, the Revelation of Jesus Christ
King of the Noachides
"Beware the Mark"
"Beware the Mark" part two
"Beware the Mark" Part 3
"Beware the Mark" Part Four
"Beware the Mark" Part Five
Harvest of Fear
"Harvest of Fear" Part Two
"Harvest of Fear" Part Three
National Organization Against Hasidic International Talmudic Enforcement
Where's Da Plane Boss, wheres da plane?
The Tarot Card Killer of Olam Ha Ba
The "Lessor Jew"
Temporary Coup d' Etat
The Federal Reserve, Fed up with the Fed?
The Protocols Today. Dispute this, Liars !
Protocols Today Part II
Letter to a friend "It's not the Jews Dummy"
Identity of the Illuminati
The "Son's of the Synagogue of Satan"Chabad Lubavitch
Chabad Satan Part 1A
Chabad Satan Part 2
Chabad Satan Part 2A
Chabad Satan Part 2B
Chabad Satan Part 3
Chabad Satan Part 3A
Chabad Satan Part 4
Chabad Satan Part 4A
Chabad Satan Part 4B
Chabad Satan Part 4C
Chabad Satan Part 5
Chabad satan Part 5A
Chabad Satan Part 5B
Chabad Satan Part 5C
Chabad Satan Part 6
Chabad Satan Part 6B
Chabad Satan Part 6C
Chabad Satan Part 6D
Chabad Satan Part 7
Chabad Satan Part 7A
Chabad Satan Part 7B
Chabad Satan Part 7C
Chabad Satan Part 8
Chabad Satan Part 8A
Chabad Satan Part 8B
Chabad Satan Part 8C
Chabad Satan Part 8D
Chabad Satan Part 9
Chabad Satan Part 9A
Chabad Satan Part 9B
Chabad Satan Part 9C
Chabad Satan Part 9D
Chabad Satan Part 10
Chabad Satan Part 10A
Chabad Satan Part 10B
Chabad Satan Part 10C
Chabad Satan Part 10D
The Chabad Satan Wall of Destruction
Chabad Wall Part 2
Chabad Wall Part 3
Chabad Wall Part 4
The Chabad Phoenix is Rising
Columbia "The Queen of Heaven"
Patriot Akt II, Comrad
The Infiltration of the leaven "Jerusalem Council"
Satan's One World Religion
OWR Part 2
OWR Part 3
OWR Part 4
Religion Part 5
World Religion Part 6 One
One World Religion Part 6
One WorldReligion Part 7
Re the god of Talmud Bavli
"The Raiser of Taxes"
Obedient Ishmael Kislev 19, 5764
The Final Nazi
Nazi Part 2
Nazi Part 3
Nazi Part 4
The Lord of the Ring, the Return of the Talmudic king
Changing the Time and the Laws
Who murdered Jesus the Christ
"Replacement Theology" of Judaic Talmudism
Eating Rainbow Stew with a Silver Spoon, underneath a Noahide Sky
"The Two Whores"
Noahide News 2