The world is in the midst of a crisis not less serious than that of the great war. While it was inevitable that the period following the war should be fraught with grave problems for civilization, these problems have been made much more difficult by the presence of a new danger, namely, the destructive force of Bolshevism. Russia was the first victim of what proves to be a movement of an international character, Russia being used as the base of operations. While powerful Bolshevist armies are overrunning Asia and menacing the European countries to the West, an equally dangerous force of Red propagandists, directed from Moscow, is operating on several continents, spreading its social poison throughout the world and threatening the destruction of the social and industrial morale of civilized nations.
With the triumph of the Bolshevist revolution in Russia, a group of internationalists, most of whom were members of the Jewish race, seized the machinery of government and have held it ever since.
The complete destruction of Russian civilization, which for centuries had been essentially a Christian civilization, and the reduction of the great majority of the Russian people to a state of abject misery and ruin, are accomplished facts. The Bolshevist leaders, however, not content with this destruction and the establishment of a cruel despotism in Russia, are making every effort to extend their revolution and their control to other countries.
The Communist revolution in Hungary, under Bela Cohen (alias Kuhn), a confessed ally and agent of Trotzky, was not terminated until it had wrought great havoc in that country. The same is true of the Spartacan revolt in Germany, where recently the struggle broke out anew and assumed the character [2] of a formidable civil war. Holland and Italy are to-day seriously threatened with uprisings inspired by the Bolsheviki, while in France the government has been compelled to expel the Bolshevist agents in large numbers. In the United States revolutionary agitation directly guided and fomented by agents of Lenin and Trotzky and subsidized with ample funds, recently reached such proportions that the Federal Government was forced to take strong measures, including hundreds of arrests and deportations. The enemy is in our midst. In this country, as elsewhere, alien agitators who are either Bolshevists themselves or emissaries of the Bolsheviki have wormed their way into some of the loyal labor organizations or put themselves at the head of the Socialist or other radical political parties artificially stimulating social unrest and seeking to turn industrial strikes into political upheavals, leading to revolution and anarchy.
Shall America be as slow to realize the real danger of international Bolshevism as she was to recognize the menace of German imperialism? Shall America again be unprepared?
We must be ready to meet the danger at our doors and, if necessary, to suppress it in our midst with physical force, just as was necessary in the struggle with Prussian militarism. It has been said, however, and perhaps truly, that Bolshevism cannot be met by force alone. Certainly to meet it effectively its nature must be understood. To this end it is necessary to analyze the movement carefully and to discover its underlying causes—if possible the predominating cause.
From the very beginning there was an element of mystery in the Bolshevist revolution in Russia. Was it, essentially, an attempt to put into effect the principles of international socialism as promulgated by Karl Marx? Was it a disguised form of proletarian imperialism? Did it aim at the complete destruction of Christian civilization? Or, finally, was it a long planned, gigantic revolt of the Jewish race against Christendom and its institutions?
From the very start there was a terrible method in the madness of Trotzky and those in league with him. Many of their moves which at the time seemed inexplicable afterwards appeared logical enough when their objects became apparent.
The world was puzzled by Trotzky’s famous remark at Brest-Litovsk, “No peace, no war.” Later, however, the real [3] meaning became known: “No war on Germany, no peace for Russia or the rest of the world.”
That the Bolshevist revolution was from the beginning almost entirely led and controlled by Jews is a fact which has gradually thrust itself upon the attention of the world. The Jews in many instances have admitted the dominating rôle which members of their race have played in international Bolshevism and have sought to defend it. Some of their recognized leaders have proclaimed their pride in Trotzky.
The fact that the Jewish race has taken such an active part in the Russian Bolshevist movement, with its international ramifications, has been attributed in some quarters to the motive of revenge on the part of the Jews for what they regard as a long era of persecution. If this be so, is it impossible that Jews in various parts of the world imagine that now is their chance not only for revenge but for world domination?
The air of confidence with which Trotzky and other Jewish leaders are proceeding with their drastic program in Russia is significant. Significant, also, is the enthusiastic support which is being given to the Soviet rule by various Jewish elements and groups outside of Russia. Whether this co-related movement of the Jews in support of Bolshevism is not being carried out on some concerted plan is a question of importance which warrants careful study and investigation. No facts which can possibly throw light upon this question should be disregarded. For this reason it is timely to consider the contents and origin of a document of extraordinary interest which, though made public in Russia some fifteen years ago, is generally unknown elsewhere.
The document referred to is entitled, “Protocols of the Meetings of the Zionist Men of Wisdom,” and was published for the first time in 1905 at Tsarskoje Selo in a Russian book entitled “The Great in the Little,” written by Serge Nilus, a well-known Russian author. The Protocols set forth a comprehensive program for the substantial destruction of all Christian states, and propose certain practical methods for achieving world domination by the Jewish nation. So far as is known, the Protocols have never been repudiated publicly by recognized Jewish authorities. Quite recently the well-known firm of Eyre & Spottiswoode, Ltd., printers for the British Government, published a pamphlet under the title, [4] “The Jewish Peril, Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion.” In the preface of this pamphlet it is explained that the Protocols referred to were translated from the Russian into English from Serge Nilus’s book which appeared in Russia in 1905. While the editors do not give the title of Nilus’s book, they say:
“A copy of the original may be seen at the British Museum Library, under No. 3926-d-17, stamped British Museum, 10th August, 1906.”
They state also that the publication of the English pamphlet at present is justified by the growing menace of Bolshevism throughout the world. The pamphlet concludes with the warning:
It seems obvious that the publishers, Eyre & Spottiswoode, Ltd., have used Nilus’s book “The Great in the Little,” published in Russia in 1905.
A specific reference to the Protocols is to be found also in the French weekly magazine La Vieille-France, No. 160, published in February, 1920. In the editorial article entitled “The Jews Have Created Bolshevism” (pages 10-13) the following extract from the Zionist Protocols, as published by Nilus, is given in French:
“A nous, son Peuple d’élection, Dieu a donné le pouvoir d’expansion, et ce qui semble être notre faiblesse a été notre force. Nous sommes au seuil de la domination universelle. Il reste peu à construire sur ces bases,” etc. etc.
The article asserts that Bolshevism is nothing but a phase of Judaism, and also states that the Jewish Bolshevist leaders in Russia were subsidized by Jewish banking houses in the United States and Germany.
In January, 1917, Mr. Nilus published another book under the title “It is Near, At the Door,” and in this book the Protocols were again published in full. A reproduction of the title page of this book is inserted at the beginning of this volume.
While the Protocols are generally unknown here, it is worthy of note that on October 27-28, 1919, the Philadelphia Public Ledger printed long excerpts from them in an article calling the attention of the American people to the document and to the terrible program which it presents. The article [5] in the Ledger was somewhat misleading, however, since it was published under the captions “Red Bible” and “Bolshevist Propaganda.” All words in the text itself indicating that the Protocols were of Jewish origin were omitted. The Hebrew word “Goys,” signifying “Gentiles,” used in the Protocols, nowhere appears in the Ledger article. Furthermore, wherever in the Protocols the expressions “our people” or “we”—meaning the “Jewish people” or the “Jews”—are used, the author of the article makes it appear that the people thus referred to are the “Bolshevists,” and speaks of the Protocols as a “Russian document,” which clearly it is not. Mr. Nilus shows that the Protocols came into his hands in 1901. In 1901 the Bolshevist Party did not exist, for it was founded only in 1903 and was not really organized for work until several years later. Nowhere in the Protocols does the word “Bolshevist” appear, while the word “Jews” is used many times, although the writer more frequently uses the word “we” when speaking of the Jews. There is only one hypothesis upon which the Protocols could possibly be considered “Bolshevist,” namely, that the Bolshevist movement was of Jewish origin, in which case the plan outlined in the Protocols might have become “Bolshevist” by adoption.
The very fact that a document purporting to be written by a Jew for Jews could be so easily described as “Bolshevist Propaganda” is of interest.
Now, for the first time, the document entitled by Mr. Nilus “Protocols of the Meetings of the Zionist Men of Wisdom” is published in full in the United States, correctly translated from the Russian. For this purpose we have used the Russian text as it appears in Mr. Nilus’s book, “It is Near, At the Door,” 1917, published in the printing office of the Sviato-Troitzky Monastery.
Before proceeding to examine the contents of the Protocols, let us briefly give Mr. Nilus’s account of the way in which they came into his possession and of his views in regard to their origin.
Mr. Nilus, at pages 86 to 92 of his book, “It is Near, At the Door,” states that he received the manuscript containing the Protocols of the Meetings of the Zionist Men of Wisdom in 1901 from Mr. Alexis Nikolajevich Souchotin, at one time Marshal of Nobility in the District of Chern, Central Russia, [6] and later Vice Governor of the Government of Stavropol, South Russia, and that when giving the manuscript to Mr. Nilus, Mr. Souchotin said:
“Take it into your full possession. Read it. Become inspired and make out of it something useful to the Christian soul. Otherwise it might remain with me unused. From a political standpoint it is useless, for it is too late to act on it. From a spiritual standpoint, however, it might be otherwise. In your hands, with God’s help, it will bear fruit.”
Mr. Nilus states that Mr. Souchotin told him that the manuscript was originally obtained by a lady whose name is not given and who, he said, obtained it in a mysterious way. Mr. Nilus showed it to several Russians of high standing, one of whom said:
“Slavdom has not yet spoken its last word and, therefore, no matter how cunning and strong the Zionist Men of Wisdom may be, their efforts are doomed to failure, and for this reason there is no need to despair.”
Mr. Nilus states that prior to 1905 he submitted the Protocols to Grand Duke Serge Alexandrovitch, who, having examined them, sent him a message of two words only: “Too late.”
Subsequently, Mr. Nilus made several attempts to call the attention of the proper officials to the contents of this document but without result. In 1905 he published the second edition of his book, “The Great in the Little.” In this edition the Protocols were for the first time incorporated.
In his last book Mr. Nilus writes:
“These Protocols produced a scarcely noticeable impression upon the world outside of the Christian church. The periodical press, which in the main is in Jewish hands, or under the guidance and influence of the Jews, sought to conceal their publication, scarcely mentioning them or referring to them as a fallacious invention or a fairy tale. Among loyal Christians, however, the Protocols bore fruit and created a success for my book far greater than could have been anticipated, for they spread the knowledge of the hidden mysteries of our time in a wide circle of those belonging to the Christian family. Since then my book, with all the Protocols, has appeared in its fourth edition; but only now I learn authoritatively from Jewish sources that these Protocols are nothing else than a strategic plan for the conquest of the world, putting it under the yoke of Israel, the struggler-against-God, a plan worked out by the leaders of the Jewish people during the many centuries of their [7] dispersion, and finally presented to the Council of Elders by “The Prince of Exile,” Theodor Hertzl, at the time of the first Zionist Congress, summoned by him at Basle in August, 1897.”
Again he writes:
“In what way these documents, constituting the Holy of Holies of the hopes of Israel, the century-old mystery of its leaders, reached the general mass of the uninitiated has not been ascertained. As already mentioned, they were given to me in 1901. In that year, in circular No. 18, as well as in others dispatched to the Zionists on behalf of the Zionist ‘Actions Committee,’[1] Theodor Hertzl stated that certain confidential information, notwithstanding the admonition, has not been kept secret, and has been given undesirable publicity.”
Finally Mr. Nilus declares:
“The Protocols are signed by the Zionist Representatives of the 33rd (highest) Degree of Initiation. These Protocols were secretly removed from the complete file of Protocols which, as we now know, pertained to the first Zionist Congress, held in Basle in August, 1897. All this was taken from the secret vaults at the main Zionist office which, at present, is located in French territory.”
In 1918 the “Protocols” were again published in Russian by a book publishing firm, “The Sentinel” at Novocherkassk, South Russia. The pamphlet referred to bears the title “Zionist Protocols. The plans for the Conquest of the Universe by the Judo-Masons.” In the introduction to the pamphlet it is stated: “The ‘Protocols’ are a program carefully worked out in all its details for the conquest of the universe by the Jews. The greater part of this program has already been realized, and if we will not come back to our senses, we are inevitably doomed.” In the concluding part of this introduction the publishers state as follows: “The ‘Protocols,’ indeed, are not only the key to our first unsuccessful revolution, but they are also the key to the second, in which Jewry played such a sinister rôle for Russia. For us, who are witnesses of the self-destruction of Russia, for us who hope for her regeneration, this document is all the more significant as it discloses the means of the enemies of Christendom for our enslavement. Only after having obtained the knowledge of the means it may become possible to successfully combat the enemies of Christ and of Christian culture.”
There is not, and in the nature of the case there hardly can [8] be, any direct evidence as to the authenticity of the Protocols. There is, however, a considerable body of facts having a bearing upon this question which the publishers of this book put before the reader, leaving him to draw his own conclusions.
The facts to which we refer may be roughly grouped under three heads:
(a) There is a remarkable similarity between the policies of destruction outlined in the Protocols and the actual measures of destruction put into effect by the Bolshevist régime in Russia, and there is evidence that this régime is under the control of Jewish leaders.
(b) There is also a striking parallelism between certain passages in the Protocols and the statements of recognized Jewish leaders, both religious and political, appearing in their published writings and speeches.
(c) Finally, certain Jewish activities outside of Russia coincide in a remarkable degree with certain parts of the Protocols.
In Part Two of this volume evidence under these various heads is set forth. This evidence, however, can be intelligently considered only after a careful study of the Protocols themselves, a translation of which appears in the following pages, preceded by a short summary prepared for the convenience of the reader.
The title under which the Protocols are presented in Mr. Nilus’s text, according to the literal translation from the Russian, is:
“ Protocols of the Meetings of the Zionist Men of Wisdom ”
The word “Protocols” can be used in several senses, but in the present case the context would indicate that the word means simply the written minutes of certain meetings—i.e. meetings of the Zionist Men of Wisdom. The arrangement is in twenty-four separate Protocols, each Protocol apparently recording the contents of an address to the meeting by one of its members. The context would also indicate that all the addresses were delivered by the same person, and it should also be noted that each Protocol deals with a more or less distinct part of one complete subject, like the chapter of a book.
In the first Protocol it is stated that the speaker undertakes to formulate “our system both from our point of view and from that of the Goys.” The word “Goys” or “Goyims” is an old Hebrew word signifying Gentiles, or persons who are not Jews. All of the following Protocols, whether they are the utterances of the same person who speaks in the first Protocol or not, are a continuation of the same general subject.
Taking the set of documents as a whole, they clearly purport to formulate a strategic plan for united action of the Jews as a nation, or a people, to obtain certain ends. These ends are nothing less than complete political and religious domination of the world. The means by which this universal domination is to be achieved are set forth with great clearness and considerable elaboration.
The document as a whole is of the most extraordinary character, and while to some readers it may seem fanatical or visionary, others will be more impressed with its profound cleverness, with the cold logic of the reasoning, and with the general orderliness of statement and argument, indicating that the work, whatever the underlying motive may be, is the result of careful thought and mature deliberation.
The strategic plan of action is Machiavellian and ruthless in the extreme, and is expressly founded on the propositions that “might is right” and that “politics have nothing in common with morals.” It is also explicitly stated that the end in view is to “subjugate all government to our super-government,” and the Jewish super-government is to be an autocracy with a Jewish Sovereign at its head.
Briefly summarized, the means by which this world domination is to be achieved are as follows:
1. The national power of non-Jewish states is to be broken down by the fomenting of internal revolutions through appeals to class hatred, and by pretended efforts to obtain greater freedom and privileges for certain classes of the people, using the words “liberty, equality, and fraternity” merely as catchwords to gain recruits for the Jewish cause. Autocratic governments, which alone are strong, must be weakened in the first instance by the introduction of liberalism, which will pave the way to anarchy.
2. All wars must be “shifted to an economic basis,” allowing no territorial advantages to result from war, and thus [10] tending to make the Jewish control of wealth the determining factor in war.
3. The Jewish international rights are to be strengthened at the expense of the national rights of the several Gentile nations.
4. The non-Jewish states are to be further weakened by promoting false and conflicting political policies; by obtaining secret control over the actions of public officials; by manipulation of the press, and by the gradual elimination of free speech.
5. The authority of governments where liberalism prevails is to be weakened by the destruction of religion (other than the Jewish religion), since it is the conservative and moral force which makes liberal governments possible.
6. In order to overcome the resistance of those states which are unwilling to make submission to the new Jewish power, there must be no hesitation in resorting to violence, cunning, hypocrisy, bribery, fraud, and treason, or to the seizure of the property of others.
7. The destruction of the social and economic structure of Christian states will also be brought about by the destruction of industrial prosperity, through speculation and constant strikes, “throwing masses of workmen out of employment,” artificially raising wages, thus increasing the cost of the necessaries of life, and finally by bringing about a general economic crisis and the disorganization of financial systems. The financial strength of the various non-Jewish states will also be undermined by causing them to overburden themselves with foreign and national loans on an ever increasing scale, which will ultimately lead to bankruptcy.
8. Upon the social and political chaos created by these various means a Jewish dictatorship is to be gradually built up, principally through the “terrible” Jewish power of the purse and through the other great Jewish powers of control over the press and over the revolutionary labor movement.
9. During the period of transition from Gentile to Jewish political control in every state there will be a secret government by the Jews, brought about through the manipulation of the press, misleading public opinion, mass terror, weakening the initiative of the Gentiles, misdirecting their education, and sowing discord among them.
Let us put aside phraseology and discuss the inner meaning of every thought; by comparisons and deductions let us illuminate the situation. In this way I will describe our system, both from our own point of view and from that of the Goys .[2]
It must be remembered that people with base instincts 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.
What has restrained the wild beasts we call men?
What has influenced them heretofore?
In the early stages of social life they submitted to brute and blind force; afterwards—to the Law, which is the same force but disguised. I deduce from this that according to the laws of nature, right lies in might.
Political freedom is not a fact but an idea. One must know how to employ this idea when it becomes necessary to attract popular forces to one’s party by mental allurement if it plans to crush the party in power. The task is made easier if the opponent himself has contradicted the idea of freedom, the so-called liberalism, and for the sake of the idea yields his power. It is precisely here that the triumph of our theory becomes apparent: the relinquished reins of power are, according to the laws of nature, immediately seized by a new hand because the [12] blind force of the people cannot remain without a leader even for one day, and the new power merely replaces the old, weakened by liberalism.
In our day the power of gold has replaced liberal rulers. There was a time when faith ruled. The idea of freedom cannot be realized because no one knows how to make reasonable use of it. Give the people self-government for a short time and it will become corrupted. From that very moment strife begins and soon develops into social struggles, as a result of which states are set aflame and their authority is reduced to ashes.
Whether the state is exhausted by internal convulsions, or whether civil wars deliver it into the hands of external enemies, in either case it can be regarded as hopelessly lost: it is in our power. The despotism of capital, which is entirely in our hands, holds out to it a straw which the state must grasp, although against its will, or otherwise fall into the abyss.
To him who, because of his liberal inclinations, would contend that arguments of this kind are immoral, I would propound the question: If a state has two enemies, and if against the external enemy it is permitted and it is not considered immoral to use all methods of warfare, and as a protective measure not to acquaint the enemy with the plans of attack, such as night attacks or attacks with superior forces, then why should the same methods be regarded as immoral when applied to a worse foe, a transgressor against social order and prosperity?
How can a sound and logical mind hope successfully to guide the masses by means of reasonable persuasion or by arguments if there is a possibility of contradiction, even though unreasonable, but which may appear more attractive to the superficially thinking masses? Guided entirely by shallow passions, superstitions, customs, traditions, and sentimental theories, the people in and of the mob become embroiled in party dissensions which prevent all possibility of an agreement, even though it be on a basis of perfectly sound reasoning. Every decision of the mob depends upon the accidental or prearranged majority, which, owing to its ignorance of political secrets, pronounces absurd decisions, thus introducing the seeds of anarchy into the government.
Politics have nothing in common with morals. The ruler guided by morality is not a skilled politician, and consequently he is not firm on his throne. He who desires to rule must resort to cunning and hypocrisy. The great popular qualities—honesty and frankness—become vices in politics, as they dethrone more surely and more certainly than the most powerful enemy. These qualities must be the attributes of Goy countries; but we by no means should be guided by them.
Our right lies in might. The word “right” is an abstract idea, unsusceptible of proof. This word means nothing more than: Give me what I desire so that I may have evidence that I am stronger than you.
Where does right begin? Where does it end?
In a state with a poorly organized government and where the laws are insignificant, and the ruler has lost his dignity as the result of the accumulation of liberal rights, I find a new right, namely, the right of might to destroy all existing order and institutions, to lay hands on the law, to alter all institutions, and to become the ruler of those who have voluntarily, liberally renounced for our benefit the rights to their own power.
With the present instability of all authority our power will be more unassailable than any other, because it will be invisible until it is so well rooted that no cunning can undermine it.
From temporary evil to which we are now obliged to have recourse will emerge the good of an unshakable government, which will reinstate the orderly functioning of the mechanism of popular existence now interrupted by liberalism. The end justifies the means. In laying our plans we must turn our attention not so much to the good and moral as to the necessary and useful. Before us lies a plan in which a strategic line is shown, from which we must not deviate on pain of risking the collapse of many centuries of work.
In working out an expedient plan of action it is necessary to take into consideration the meanness, vacillation, changeability of the mob, its inability to appreciate and respect the conditions of its own existence and of its own well-being. It is necessary to realize that the power of the masses is blind, unreasoning, and void of discrimination, prone to listen to right and left. The blind man cannot guide the blind without bringing them to the abyss; consequently, members of the crowd, upstarts from the people, even were they men of [14] genius but incompetent in politics, cannot step forward as leaders of the mob without ruining the entire nation.
Only the person prepared from childhood to autocracy can understand the words which are formed by political letters.
The people left to themselves, that is to upstarts from among them, are ruined by party dissensions created by greed for power and honors, and by the disorders resulting therefrom. Is it possible for the masses of the people to direct the affairs of the state without rivalry, and without interjecting personal interests? Are they capable of protecting themselves against external enemies?—This is impossible, since a plan divided into as many parts as there are minds in a mob loses its unity, and consequently, becomes incomprehensible and unworkable.
Only an autocrat can outline great and clear plans which allocate in an orderly manner all the parts of the mechanism of the government machinery. From this it is concluded that the government which is the most efficient for the benefit of a country must be concentrated in the hands of one responsible person. Civilization cannot exist without absolute despotism, for government is carried on not by the masses, but by their leader, whoever he may be. A barbarous crowd shows its barbarism on every occasion. The moment the mob grasps liberty in its hands it is speedily changed to anarchy, which is in itself the height of barbarism.
Look at those beasts, steeped in alcohol, stupefied by wine, the unlimited use of which is granted by liberty.
Surely you cannot allow our own people to come to this. The people of the Goys are stupefied by spirituous liquors; their youth is driven insane through excessive study of the classics, and vice to which they have been instigated by our agents—tutors, valets, governesses—in rich houses, by clerks, and so forth, and by our women in the pleasure places of the Goys . Among the latter I include the so-called “society women,” their volunteer followers in vice and luxury.
Our motto is Power and Hypocrisy. Only power can conquer in politics, especially if it is concealed in talents which are necessary to statesmen. Violence must be the principle; hypocrisy and cunning the rule of those governments which do not wish to lay down their crowns at the feet of the agents of some new power. This evil is the sole means of attaining [15] the goal of good. For this reason we must not hesitate at bribery, fraud, and treason when these can help us to reach our end. In politics it is necessary to seize the property of others without hesitation if in so doing we attain submission and power.
Our government, following the line of peaceful conquest, has the right to substitute for the horrors of war less noticeable and more efficient executions, these being necessary to keep up terror, which induces blind submission. A just but inexorable strictness is the greatest factor of governmental power. We must follow a program of violence and hypocrisy, not only for the sake of profit, but also as a duty and for the sake of victory.
A doctrine based on calculation is as potent as the means employed by it. That is why not only by these very means, but by the severity of our doctrines, we shall triumph and shall enslave all governments under our super-government.
Even in olden times we shouted among the people the words “Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity.” These words have been repeated so many times since by unconscious parrots, which, flocking from all sides to the bait, have ruined the prosperity of the world and true individual freedom, formerly so well protected from the pressure of the mob. The would-be clever and intelligent Goys did not discern the symbolism of the uttered words; did not notice the contradiction in the meaning and the connection between them; did not notice that there is no equality in nature; that there can be no liberty, since nature herself has established inequality of mind, character, and ability, as well as subjection to her laws. They did not reason that the power of the mob is blind; that the upstarts selected for government are just as blind in politics as is the mob itself, whereas the initiated man, even though a fool, is capable of ruling, while the uninitiated, although a genius, will understand nothing of politics. All this has been overlooked by the Goys .
Meanwhile dynastic government has been based upon this, that the father passed to his son the knowledge of the course of political evolution, so that nobody except the members of the dynasty could possess this knowledge, and no one could disclose the secrets to the governed people. In the course of time the meaning of the dynastic transmission of the true [16] understanding of politics has been lost, thus contributing to the success of our cause.
In all parts of the world the words “Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity” have brought whole legions into our ranks through our blind agents, carrying our banners with delight. Meanwhile these words were worms which ruined the prosperity of the Goys , everywhere destroying peace, quiet, and solidarity, undermining all the foundations of their states. You will see subsequently that this aided our triumph, for it also gave us, among other things, the opportunity to grasp the trump card, the abolition of privileges; in other words, the very essence of the aristocracy of the Goys , which was the only protection of peoples and countries against us.
On the ruins of natural and hereditary aristocracy we built an aristocracy of our intellectual class—the money aristocracy. We have established this new aristocracy on the qualification of wealth, which is dependent upon us, and also upon science, which is promoted by our wise men.
Our triumph was also made easier because, through our connections with people who were indispensable to us, we always played upon the most sensitive chords of the human mind, namely, greed, and the insatiable selfish desires of man. Each of these human weaknesses taken separately is capable of killing initiative and of placing the will of the people at the disposal of the buyer of their activities.
Abstract liberty offered the opportunity for convincing the masses that government is nothing but the manager representing the owner of the country, namely, the people, and that this manager can be discarded like a pair of worn-out gloves.
The fact that the representatives of the nation can be deposed, delivers them into our power and practically places their appointment in our hands.
It is necessary for us that wars, whenever possible, should bring no territorial advantages; this will shift war to an economic basis and force nations to realize the strength of our predominance; such a situation will put both sides at the mercy of our million-eyed international agency, which will be [17] unhampered by any frontiers. Then our international rights will do away with national rights, in a limited sense, and will rule the peoples in the same way as the civil power of each state regulates the relation of its subjects among themselves.
The administrators chosen by us from among the people in accordance with their capacity for servility will not be experienced in the art of government, and consequently they will easily become pawns in our game, in the hands of our scientists and wise counselors, specialists trained from early childhood for governing the world. As you are aware, these specialists have obtained the knowledge necessary for government from our political plans, from the study of history, and from the observation of every passing event. The Goys are not guided by the practice of impartial historical observation, but by theoretical routine without any critical regard for its results. Therefore, we need give them no consideration. Until the time comes let them amuse themselves, or live in the hope of new amusements or in the memories of those past. Let that play the most important part for them which we have induced them to regard as the laws of science (theory). For this purpose, by means of our press, we increase their blind faith in these laws. Intelligent Goys will boast of their knowledge, and verifying it logically they will put into practice all scientific information compiled by our agents for the purpose of educating their minds in the direction which we require.
Do not think that our assertions are without foundation: note the successes of Darwinism, Marxism, and Nietzscheism, engineered by us. The demoralizing effects of these doctrines upon the minds of the Goys should be already obvious to us.
It is essential that we take into consideration the modern ideas, temperaments, and tendencies of peoples in order that no mistakes in politics and in guiding administrative affairs may be made. The triumph of our system, parts of whose mechanism must be adapted in accordance with the temperament of the peoples with whom we come in contact, cannot be realized unless its practical application is based upon a résumé of the past as related to the present.
There is one great force in the hands of modern states which arouses thought movements among the people. That is the press. The rôle of the press is to indicate necessary demands, [18] to register complaints of the people, and to express and foment dissatisfaction. The triumph of free babbling is incarnated in the press; but governments were unable to profit by this power and it has fallen into our hands. Through it we have attained influence, while remaining in the background. Thanks to the press, we have gathered gold in our hands, although we had to take it from rivers of blood and tears.
But it cost us the sacrifice of many of our own people. Every sacrifice on our part is worth a thousand Goys before God.
To-day I can tell you that our goal is close at hand. Only a small distance remains, and the cycle of the Symbolic Serpent—the symbol of our people—will be complete. When this circle is completed, then all the European states will be enclosed in it as in strong claws.
The modern constitutional scales will soon tip over, for we have set them inaccurately, thus insuring an unsteady balance for the purpose of wearing out their holder. The Goys thought it had been sufficiently strongly made and hoped that the scales would regain their equilibrium, but the holder—the ruler—is screened from the people by his representatives, who fritter away their time, carried away by their uncontrolled and irresponsible authority. Their power, moreover, has been built up on terrorism spread through the palaces. Unable to reach the hearts of their people, the rulers cannot unite with them to gain strength against the usurpers of power. The visible power of royalty and the blind power of the masses, separated by us, have both lost significance, for separated, they are as helpless as the blind man without a stick.
To induce the lovers of authority to abuse their power, we have placed all the forces in opposition to each other, having developed their liberal tendencies towards independence. We have excited different forms of initiative in that direction; we have armed all the parties; we have made authority the target of all ambitions. We have opened the arenas in different states, where revolts are now occurring, and disorders and bankruptcy will shortly appear everywhere.
Unrestrained babblers have converted parliamentary sessions and administrative meetings into oratorical contests. Daring journalists, impudent pamphleteers, make daily attacks on the administrative personnel. The abuse of power is definitely preparing the downfall of all institutions and everything will be overturned by the blows of the infuriated mobs.
The people are shackled by poverty to heavy labor more surely than they were by slavery and serfdom. They could liberate themselves from those in one way or another, whereas they cannot free themselves from misery. We have included in constitutions rights which for the people are fictitious and are not actual rights. All the so-called “rights of the people” can exist only in the abstract and can never be realized in practice. What difference does it make to the toiling proletarian, bent double by heavy toil, oppressed by his fate, that the babblers receive the right to talk, journalists the right to mix nonsense with reason in their writings, if the proletariat has no other gain from the constitution than the miserable crumbs which we throw from our table in return for his vote to elect our agents. Republican rights are bitter irony to the poor man, for the necessity of almost daily labor prevents him from using them, and at the same time deprives him of his guarantee of a permanent and certain livelihood by making him dependent upon strikes, organized either by his masters or by his comrades.
Under our guidance the people have exterminated aristocracy, which was their natural protector and guardian, for its own interests are inseparably connected with the well-being of the people. Now, however, with the destruction of this aristocracy the masses have fallen under the power of the profiteers and cunning upstarts, who have settled on the workers as a merciless burden.
We will present ourselves in the guise of saviors of the workers from this oppression when we suggest that they enter our army of Socialists, Anarchists, Communists, to whom we always extend our help, under the guise of the rule of brotherhood demanded by the human solidarity of our social masonry. The aristocracy which benefited by the labor of the people by right was interested that the workers should be well fed, healthy, and strong.
We, on the contrary, are concerned in the opposite—in the [20] degeneration of the Goys . Our power lies in the chronic malnutrition and in the weakness of the worker, because through this he falls under our power and is unable to find either strength or energy to combat it.
Hunger gives to capital greater power over the worker than the legal authority of the sovereign ever gave to the aristocracy. Through misery and the resulting jealous hatred we manipulate the mob and crush those who stand in our way.
When the time comes for our universal ruler to be crowned, the same hands will sweep away everything which may be an obstacle in our way.
The Goys are no longer accustomed to think without our scientific advice. Consequently, they do not see the imperative need of upholding that which we will sustain by all means when our kingdom is established, namely, the teaching in the schools of the only true science, the first of all sciences—the science of the construction of human life, of social existence, which requires the division of labor and, consequently, the separation of people into classes and castes. It is necessary that all should know that equality cannot exist, owing to the different nature of various kinds of work; that there cannot be the same responsibility before the law in the case of an individual who by his actions compromises an entire caste and another who does not affect anything but his own honor.
The correct science of the social structure, to the secrets of which we do not admit the Goys , would demonstrate to all that occupation and labor must be differentiated so as not to cause human suffering by the discrepancy between education and work. The study of this science will lead the masses to a voluntary submission to the authorities and to the governmental system organized by them. Whereas, under the present state of science, and due to the direction of our guidance therein, the people, in their ignorance, blindly believing the printed word, and owing to the misconceptions which have been fostered by us, feel a hatred towards all classes whom they consider superior to themselves, since they do not understand the importance of each caste.
This hatred will be still more accentuated by the economic crisis, which will stop financial transactions and all industrial life. Having organized a general economic crisis by all possible underhand means, and with the help of gold which is all [21] in our hands, we will throw great crowds of workmen into the street, simultaneously, in all countries of Europe. These crowds will gladly shed the blood of those of whom they, in the simplicity of their ignorance, have been jealous since childhood and whose property they will then be able to loot.
They will not harm our people because we will know of the time of the attack and we will take measures to protect them.
We have persuaded others that progress will lead the Goys into a realm of reason. Our despotism will be of such a nature that it will be in a position to pacify all revolts by wise restrictions and to eliminate liberalism from all institutions.
When the people saw that they obtained concessions and license in the name of liberty, they imagined that they were the masters, and rushed into power; but like every blind person, they encountered innumerable obstacles; they rushed to seek a leader, with no thought of returning to the old one, and laid power at our feet. Remember the French Revolution, which we have called “great”; the secrets of its preparation are well known to us, for it was the work of our hands.
Since then we have carried the masses from one disappointment to another, so that they will renounce even us in favor of a despot sovereign of Zionist blood, whom we are preparing for the world.
At present, as an international force, we are invulnerable, because if we are attacked by one state we are supported by other states. The unlimited baseness of the Goy peoples, who grovel before force, who are pitiless towards weakness, who are merciless to misdemeanors and lenient to crimes, who are unwilling to tolerate the contradictions of a free social structure; patient unto martyrdom in bearing with the violence of daring despotism—this is what helps our independence. They tolerate and permit such abuses from their modern premiers—dictators—for the least of which they would behead twenty kings.
How can such a phenomenon be explained, such an illogical conception on the part of the mass of the people towards events of seemingly the same nature? This phenomenon can be explained by the fact that these dictators through their agents whisper to their people that by these abuses they injure the states for a supreme purpose, namely, for the attainment of the happiness of the people, their universal fraternity, solidarity, [22] and equality. Of course, they are not told that this unification will be achieved only under our rule. Thus, the people condemn the just and acquit the unjust, more and more convinced that they can do what they please. Owing to this, the people destroy all stability and create disorder on every occasion.
The word “Liberty” brings all society into conflict with all authority, be it that of God or Nature. This is why, at the moment of our enthronement, we shall strike this word from the dictionary as being the symbol of brute power, which turns the masses into bloodthirsty beasts. It is true, however, that these beasts go to sleep as soon as they have drunk blood, and then it is easy to shackle them; but if the blood is not given to them they will not sleep and will struggle.
Every republic passes through several stages. The first stage is like the early period of insane ravings of a blind man throwing himself right and left. The second is the demagogy which breeds anarchy, which inevitably leads to despotism, not of a legal and open character and, consequently, responsible, but an unseen and unknown despotism, no less effective because exercised by some secret organization, acting even less ceremoniously because it is hidden under the cover and behind the backs of different agents. The change of these agents will even help the secret organizations, as it will thus be able to rid itself of the necessity of spending money to reward employees of long terms of service.
Who and what can overthrow an unseen power? For such is the character of our power. External Masonry[3] acts as a screen for it and its aims, but the plan of action of this power, and its very headquarters, will always remain unknown to the people.
Liberty could also be harmless and remain on the state program without detriment to the well-being of the people [23] if it were to retain the ideas of the belief in God and human fraternity, free from the conception of equality for such a conception is in contradiction to the laws of nature which establish subordination. With such a faith the people would be governed by the guardians of the parish and would thrive quietly and obediently under the guidance of their spiritual leader, accepting God’s dispensation on earth. It is for this reason that we must undermine faith, tearing from the minds of the Goys the very principal of God and Soul, and substituting mathematical formulas and material needs.
In order that the minds of the Goys may have no time to think and notice things, it is necessary to divert them in the direction of industry and commerce. Thus all nations will seek their own profit, and while engaged in the struggle they will not notice their common enemy. But in order that liberty should finally undermine and ruin the Goy’s society, it is necessary to put industry on a basis of speculation. The result of this will be that everything, absorbed by industry from the land, will not remain in the hands of the Goys , but will be directed towards speculation; that is, it will come into our coffers.
The intense struggle for supremacy, the shocks to economic life, will create, moreover have already created, disappointed, cold, and heartless societies. These societies will have complete disgust for high politics and religion. Their only guide will be calculation, i.e., gold, for which they will have a real cult because of the material delights which it can supply. It will be at that stage that the lower classes of the Goys , not for the sake of doing good, nor even for the sake of wealth, but solely because of their hatred towards the privileged, will follow us against our competitors for power, the intelligent Goys .
What form of government can be given to societies in which bribery has penetrated everywhere, where riches are obtained only by clever tricks and semi-fraudulent means, where corruption reigns, where morality is sustained by punitive measures and strict laws and not by voluntary acceptance of moral principles, where cosmopolitan convictions have eliminated [24] patriotic feelings and religion? What form of government can be given to such societies other than a despotism such as I shall describe?
We will create a strong centralized government, so as to gather the social forces into our power. We will mechanically regulate all the functions of political life of our subjects by new laws. These laws will gradually eliminate all the concessions and liberties permitted by the Goys . Our kingdom will be crowned by such a majestic despotism that it will be able, at all times and in all places, to crush both antagonistic and discontented Goys .
We may be told that the despotism outlined by me is inconsistent with modern progress, but I will prove to you that the contrary is the case.
At the time when people considered rulers as an incarnation of the will of God, they subjected themselves without murmur to the autocracy of the sovereigns; but as soon as we inspired them with the thought of their personal rights, they began to regard the rulers as ordinary mortals. The holy anointment fell from the heads of sovereigns in the opinion of the people; and when we deprived them of their belief in God, then authority was thrown into the street, where it became public property and was seized by us. Moreover, the art of governing the masses and individuals by means of cunningly constructed theories and phraseology, by rulers of social life, and other devices not understood by the Goys , belongs, among other faculties, to our administrative mind, which is educated in analysis and observation, and is also based upon skillful reasoning in which we have no competitors, just as we have none in the preparation of plans for political action and solidarity. Only the Jesuits could be compared to us in this; but we were able to discredit them in the mind of the senseless mob as a visible organization, whereas we, with our secret organization, remained in the dark. After all, is it not the same to the world who will be its master—whether it be the head of Catholicism or our despot of Zionist blood? To us, however, the Chosen People, it is by no means a matter of indifference.
Temporarily, a world coalition of the Goys would be able to hold us in check, but we are insured against this by roots of dissension so deep among them that they cannot now be extracted. We have set at variance the personal and national [25] interests of the Goys ; we have incited religious and race hatred, nurtured by us in their hearts for twenty centuries. Owing to all this, no state will obtain the help it asks for from any side because each of them will think that a coalition against us will be disadvantageous to it. We are too powerful—we must be taken into consideration. No country can reach even an insignificant private understanding without our being secret parties to it.
Per me reges regnant—“Through me the sovereigns reign.” The prophets have told us that we were chosen by God himself to reign over the world. God endowed us with genius to enable us to cope with the problem. Were there a genius in the opposing camp, he would struggle against us, but a newcomer is not equal to an old inhabitant. The struggle between us would be of such a merciless nature as the world has never seen before; moreover their genius would be too late.
All the wheels of government mechanism move by the action of the motor which is in our hands, and that motor is gold. The science of political economy, invented by our wise men, has long ago demonstrated the royal prestige of capital.
To attain freedom of action, capital must obtain freedom to monopolize industry and trade; this is already being done by an unseen hand in all parts of the world. Such liberty will give political power to traders, and will aid in subjugating the people. At present it is more important to disarm peoples than to lead them to war; it is more important to utilize flaming passions for our purposes than to extinguish them; more important to grasp and interpret the thoughts of others in our own way than to discard them.
The most important problem of our government is to weaken the popular mind by criticism; to disaccustom it to thought, which creates opposition; to deflect the power of thought into mere empty eloquence.
At all times both peoples and individuals have mistaken words for deeds, as they are satisfied with the visible, rarely noticing whether the promise is performed in the fields of social life.
Therefore, we will organize ostensible institutions which will prove eloquently their good work in the direction of “progress.”
We will appropriate to ourselves the liberal aspect of all parties, of all shades of opinion, and we will provide our orators with the same aspect, and they will talk so much that they will exhaust the people by their speeches and cause them to turn away from orators in disgust.
To control public opinion it is necessary to perplex it by the expression of numerous contradictory opinions until the Goys get lost in the labyrinth, and come to understand that it is best to have no opinion on political questions.
Such questions are not intended to be understood by the people, since only he who rules knows them. This is the first secret.
The second secret necessary for the success of governing consists in so multiplying popular failings, habits, passions, and conventional laws that no one will be able to disentangle himself in the chaos, and consequently, people will cease to understand each other. This measure would help us to sow dissension within all parties, to disintegrate all those collective forces which still do not wish to subjugate themselves to us; to discourage all individual initiative which might in any degree hamper our work.
There is nothing more dangerous than individual initiative; if it has a touch of genius it can accomplish more than a million people among whom we have sown dissensions. We must direct the education of the Goy societies so that their arms will drop hopelessly when they face every task where initiative is required. The intensity of action resulting from individual freedom of action dissipates its force when it encounters another person’s freedom. This results in heavy blows at morale, disappointments and failures.
We will so tire the Goys by all this that we will force them to offer us an international power, which by its position will enable us conveniently to absorb, without destroying, all governmental forces of the world and thus to form a super-government. In lieu of modern rulers, we will place a monster which will be called the Super-Governmental Administration. Its hands will be stretched out like pincers in every direction so that this colossal organization cannot fail to conquer all the peoples.
We will soon begin to establish great monopolies—reservoirs of huge wealth, upon which even the large fortunes of the Goys will depend to such an extent that they will be drowned, together with the governmental credits, on the day following the political catastrophe.
You economists, here present, will please carefully weigh the significance of this scheme.
We must develop, by all means, the importance of our super-government by representing it as the protector and reward-giver of all those who willingly submit to us.
The aristocracy of the Goys as a political force is dead. We do not need to take it into consideration; but as land-owners they are harmful to us because they can be independent in their resources of life. For this reason we must deprive them of their land at any cost.
To attain this object, the best method is to increase land taxes—the indebtedness of the land. These measures will keep land ownership in subjection.
The aristocracy of the Goys , which as a matter of heredity is unable to be satisfied with small things, will soon be ruined.
At the same time it is necessary to patronize trade and industry vigorously, and more important, to encourage speculation, whose function is to act as a counterbalance to industry. Without speculation, industry will increase private capital and tend to the amelioration of land ownership by freeing it from indebtedness created by the loans granted by agricultural banks. It is necessary that industry should suck out of the land both labor and capital and through speculation deliver into our hands all the money of the world, thus throwing all the Goys into the ranks of the proletarians. Then the Goys will bow before us in order to obtain the mere right of existence.
To destroy Goy industry we will create among the Goys as an aid to speculation the strong demand for boundless luxury which we have already developed.
Let us raise wages, which, however, will be of no benefit to the workers, for we will simultaneously cause the rise in [28] prices of objects of first necessity under the pretext that this is due to the decadence of agriculture, and of the cattle industry.
We will also artfully and deeply undermine the sources of production by teaching the workmen anarchy and the use of alcohol, at the same time taking measures to expel all the intelligent Goys from the land.
That the true situation should not be noticed by the Goys until the proper time, we will mask it by a pretended desire to help the working classes and great economic principles, an active propaganda of which principles is being carried on through the dissemination of our economic theories.
The intensification of armament and the increase of the police force are essential to the realization of the above-mentioned plans. It is necessary that there should be besides ourselves in all countries only the mass of the proletariat, a few millionaires devoted to us, policemen, and soldiers.
We must create unrest, dissensions, and hatred throughout Europe and through European affiliations, also on other continents. In this there is a twofold advantage: First, we will hold all countries under our influence, since they will realize that we have the power to create disorders or to restore order whenever we wish. All countries have come to regard us as a necessary burden. Second, we will entangle by intrigues all the threads stretched by us into all the governmental bodies by means of politics, economic treaties, or financial obligations. To attain these ends we will worm our way into parleys and negotiations, armed with cunning, but in so-called “official language” we will assume the opposite tactics of seeming honest and reasonable. In this way the peoples and the governments of the Goys , taught by us to regard only the surface of that which we show them, will look upon us as benefactors and saviors of mankind.
We must be able to overcome all opposition by provoking a war by the neighbors of that country which dares to oppose us. Should, however, those neighbors, in their turn, decide to unite against us we must respond by a world war.
Chief success in politics lies in the secrecy of its undertakings. There must be inconsistency between the words and actions of diplomats.
We must influence the Goy governments to action beneficial to our broadly conceived plan, now approaching its triumphant goal, creating the impression that such action is demanded by public opinion which in reality is secretly organized by us with the help of the so-called “great power,” namely, the press; the latter, however, with few exceptions that need not be considered, is already entirely in our hands.
In short, to sum up our system of shackling the Goy governments of Europe, we will show our power to one of them by assassination and terrorism, and should there be a possibility of all of them rising against us, we will answer them with American, Chinese, or Japanese guns.
We must provide ourselves with the same arms our enemies can employ against us. We must seek the most subtle expressions and evasions of the legal dictionary to justify those cases in which we will be forced to announce decisions which may seem unnecessarily bold and unjust, for it is important that these decisions should be expressed in terms so forcible that they will appear as the highest moral rules of a legal character.
Our government must be surrounded by all the forces of civilization, in the midst of which it will have to function. It will surround itself with publicists, experienced lawyers, administrators, diplomats, and, finally, people educated along special lines in our special advanced schools.
These people will know all the secrets of social existence; they will know all languages composed of political letters and words; they will be familiar with the reverse side of human nature, with all its sensitive chords, upon which they must know how to play. These chords are the structure of the intellects of the Goys , their tendencies, their failings, their vices, and their virtues, the peculiarities of classes and castes. It is evident that the highly talented members of our government, to which I refer, will be recruited not from the ranks [30] of the Goys , accustomed to performing their administrative duties without questioning their aim, and without thinking why they are necessary. The Goy administrators sign papers without reading them and work for profit or for pride.
We will surround our government by a whole world of economists. It is for this reason that economics is the chief science taught to the Jews. We will be surrounded by a crowd of bankers, traders, capitalists, and most important of all, by millionaires, because in essence everything will be decided by a question of figures.
Meanwhile, as it is not yet safe to give the responsible government posts to our brother Jews, we will give them to people whose record and whose character are such that there is an abyss between them and the people; also to people for whom, in case of disobedience to our orders, there will remain nothing but condemnation or exile—thus forcing them to protect our interests to their last breath.
In applying our principles, turn your attention to the character of the people in whose countries you will be resident and among whom you will act, for a general similar application of them before the reëducation of a people according to our plan cannot be successful. But by advancing carefully in their application you will see that before ten years have passed the most obstinate character will have changed, and we can then count another people among those who already have submitted to us.
When we are enthroned we will substitute for the liberal words of our Masonic catchword, “Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity,” another group of words expressing simply ideas, namely, “the right of Liberty, the duty of Equality, the ideal of Fraternity.” Thus we will speak and . we shall have the goat by the horns. De facto, we have already destroyed all governments except our own, although de jure there are still many left. At present, if any of the governments raises a protest against us, it is done only as a matter of form, and at our desire, and by our order, because their anti-Semitism is necessary to enable us to control our smaller [31] brothers. I will not further explain this, as it has already been the object of numerous discussions.
In reality there are no obstacles before us. Our super-government exists under such extra-legal conditions that it is common to designate it by an energetic and strong word—a Dictatorship.
I can honestly state that at the present time we are law-makers; we are the judges and inflict punishment; we execute and pardon; we, as the chief of all our armies, ride the leader’s horse. We rule by indomitable will because we hold in our hands the fragments of a once strong party now subject to us. We possess boundless ambition, burning greed for merciless revenge, and bitter hatred.
From us emanates an all-embracing terror. People of all opinions and of all doctrines are in our service; people who desire to restore monarchies, demagogues, socialists, communists, and other utopians. We have had to put all of them to work; every one of them is undermining the last remnant of authority, is trying to overthrow all existing order. All the governments have been tortured by this procedure; they beg for peace, and for the sake of peace are prepared to make any sacrifice, but we will not give them peace until they recognize our international super-government openly and with submission.
The masses have begun to demand the solution of the social problem by means of an international agreement. The division into parties has delivered all of them to us, because in order to conduct a party struggle money is required, and we have it all.
We might fear the union of the intelligent power of the Goys ’ rulers with the blind power of the masses, but we have taken all measures against such a possibility. Between the two powers we have raised a wall in the form of mutual terror; thus the blind power of the people continues to be our support, and we alone will act as its leader and, naturally, we will direct it towards our goal.
To prevent the hand of the blind from freeing itself from our guidance, we must from time to time keep in close touch with the masses, if not through personal contact then through our most devoted brethren. When we become a recognized power we will personally address the masses in open places, and we will expound political problems in the desired direction.
How verify what is taught in village schools? But whatever the representative of the government or the ruler himself states will be immediately known to the entire nation, for it will rapidly spread by the voice of the people.
In order not prematurely to destroy Goy institutions, we have touched them with our efficient hands and grasped the ends of the springs of their mechanism. Formerly these springs were in rigid but just order; we have changed it to liberal, disorderly, and arbitrary lawlessness.
We have affected legal procedure, electoral law, the press, personal freedom, and, most important, education, the corner-stone of free existence.
We have misled, corrupted, fooled, and demoralised the youth of the Goys by education along principles and theories known by us to be false but which we ourselves have inspired.
Without changing substantially the existing law we have created stupendous results by distorting the laws through contradictory interpretations. These results first manifested themselves by the fact that interpretation has concealed the law itself, and thereafter has completely hidden it from the eyes of the governments by the impossibility of understanding such complicated jurisprudence.
Hence the theory of the court of conscience.[4]
You may say that there will be an armed rising against us if our plans are discovered prematurely; but in anticipation of this we have such a terrorizing manoeuver in the West that even the bravest soul will shudder.
Underground passages will be established by that time in all capitals, from where they can be exploded, together with all their institutions and national documents.
To-day I will begin by reiterating what has already been stated. I beg you to remember that the government and the masses are satisfied with visible results in politics. How can they examine the inner meaning of things when their representatives [33] consider that pleasure is above everything? It is important to know one detail in our policy. It will help us in discussing division of authority, freedom of speech, of the press, of religion (faith), the right of assembly, equality before the law, inviolability of property and of the home, indirect taxes and the retrospective force of law. All such questions should never be directly and openly discussed before the masses. When it becomes necessary for us to discuss them, they should not be elaborated but merely mentioned, without going into details, pointing out that modern legal principles are being accepted by us. The significance of this reticence lies in the fact that a principle which has not been openly declared gives us freedom of action to exclude unnoticed one point or another, whereas if elaborated the principle becomes as good as established.
The people feel an especial love and admiration towards the political genius, and they always react to their acts of violence as follows:
“Yes, of course it is villainy, but how clever!—It is a trick but cleverly done! So majestically! so impudently. ”
We count upon attracting all nations to the construction of the foundations of the new edifice which has been planned by us. It is for this reason that it is necessary for us first of all to acquire that spirit of daring, enterprise, and force which, through our agents, will enable us to overcome all obstacles in our path.
When we accomplish our coup d’état, we will say to the peoples: “Everything went badly; all of you have suffered. We will abolish the cause of your sufferings, that is to say, nationalities, frontiers, and national currencies. Of course you are free to condemn us, but would your judgment be just if you were to pronounce it before giving a trial to what we will give you?” Thereafter they will exalt us with a sentiment of unanimous delight and hope. The voting system which we have used as a tool for our enthronement, and to which we have accustomed even the most humble members of humanity by organizing meetings and prearranged agreements, will have performed its last service and will make its last appearance in the expression of a unanimous desire to become more [34] closely acquainted with us before having pronounced a judgment.
To attain this we must force all to vote, without class discrimination, to establish the autocracy of the majority, which cannot be obtained from the intellectual classes alone. Through this method of accustoming every one to the idea of self-determination, we will shatter the Goy family and its educational importance. We will not allow the formation of individual minds, because the mob, under our guidance, will prevent them from distinguishing themselves or even expressing themselves. The mob has become accustomed to listen only to us who pay it for obedience and attention. We will thus create such a blind power that it will be unable to move without the guidance of our agents, sent by us to replace their leaders.
The masses will submit to this régime because they will know that their earnings, perquisites, and other benefits depend upon these leaders.
The plan of government must emanate already formed from one head, as it would be impossible to put it together if disintegration by many minds into small pieces is allowed. That is why we only are allowed to know the plan of action; but we must not discuss it in order not to affect its ingenuity, the correlation between its component parts, the practical force of the secret meaning of its every clause. Were such a plan to be submitted to and altered by frequent voting, it would reflect the stamp of the misconceptions of every one who has not penetrated its depth and the correlation of its aims. For this reason our plans must be strongly and clearly conceived. Consequently, the inspired work of our leader must not be thrown to the mercy of the mob or even of a limited group.
These plans will not immediately upset contemporary institutions. They will only alter their organization, and consequently the entire combination of their development, which will thus be directed according to the plans laid down by us.
More or less the same institutions exist in different countries under different names, such as representative bodies, ministries, senate, state council, legislative and executive bodies. It is not necessary for me to explain to you the connecting mechanism of these different institutions, as it is well known to you. I only call to your attention that every one of [35] the aforesaid institutions fulfills some important governmental function, and, moreover, I beg you to notice that the word “important” refers not to the institution but to the function. Consequently, it is not the institutions that are important but their functions. Such institutions have divided among themselves all the functions of government, namely, administrative, legislative, and executive powers; therefore, their functions in the state organism have become similar to those in a human body. If one part of the governmental machine is injured, the state itself falls ill, in the same way as the human body, and then it dies.
When we injected the poison of liberalism into the state organism, its entire political complexion changed; the states became infected with a mortal disease, namely, the decomposition of the blood. It is only necessary to await the end of their agony.
Constitutional governments were born of liberalism, which replaced the autocracy that was the salvation of the Goys , for the constitution, as you well know, is nothing more than a school for dispute, discussion, disagreement, fruitless party agitation, dissension, party tendencies—in other words, a school for everything which weakens the efficiency of government. The platform no less than the press condemned the authorities to inaction and impotency and thereby rendered them useless and superfluous, for which reason they were overthrown in many countries. The rise of the republican era then became possible, and then we substituted for the ruler a caricature of government—a president chosen from the mob, from among our creatures, our slaves. This was the kind of mine we laid under the Goys , or, more correctly, under the Goy nations.
In the near future we will make the president a responsible officer, whereupon we will no longer stand on ceremony in carrying out the things for which our dummy will be responsible. What difference does it make to us that the ranks of those aiming at authority will thin out, that confusion will result from inability to find presidents, confusion which will definitely disorganize the country?
To accomplish our plan, we will engineer the election of presidents whose past record contains some hidden scandal, some “Panama”—then they will be faithful executors of our orders from fear of exposure, and from the natural desire [36] of every man who has reached authority to retain the privileges, advantages, and dignity connected with the position of president. The Chamber of Deputies will elect, protect, and screen presidents, but we will deprive it of the right of initiating laws or of amending them, for this right will be granted by us to the responsible president, a puppet in our hands. Of course then the power of the president will become the target of numerous attacks, but we will give him the means of self-protection by giving him the right of directly applying to the people, for their decision, over the heads of their representatives. In other words, he will turn to the same blind slave—to the majority of the mob. Moreover, we will empower the president to proclaim martial law. We will justify this prerogative under the pretext that the president, as chief of the national army, must control it in order to protect the new republican constitution, which he, as a responsible representative of this constitution, is bound to defend.
It is obvious that under such conditions the keys to the shrine will be in our hands, and nobody except ourselves will be able to guide the legislative power.
We will also take away from the Chamber, with the introduction of the new republican constitution, the right of interpellation in regard to governmental measures, under the pretext that political secrets must be preserved. With the aid of this new constitution we will reduce the number of representatives to the minimum, thus also reducing to the same extent political passions and passion for politics. If, in spite of this, those remaining are recalcitrant, we will abolish them completely by appealing to the majority of the people.
The appointment of the president and vice presidents of the Chamber and Senate will be the prerogative of the president. Instead of continuous parliamentary sessions, we will shorten them to a few months. Moreover, the president, as chief executive, will have the right to convene or dissolve parliament, and in the case of dissolution, defer the appointment of a new parliament. But to prevent the president from being held responsible before our plans are matured for the results of all these essentially illegal actions inaugurated by us, we will give the ministers and other high administrative officials surrounding the president the idea of circumventing his orders by issuing instructions of their own. Consequently, they will [37] be made responsible instead of him. We recommend that the execution of this plan be given especially to the Senate, State Council, or Council of Ministers, and not to individuals. Under our guidance the president will interpret in ambiguous ways such existing laws as it is possible so to interpret. Moreover, he will annul them when the need is pointed out to him by us: he will also have the right to propose temporary laws and even modifications in the constitutional work of government, alleging as the motive for so doing the exigencies of the welfare of the country.
By such measures we will be able to destroy gradually, step by step, everything that, upon entering into our rights, we were obliged to introduce into government constitutions as a transition to the imperceptible abolition of all constitutions, when the time comes to convert all government into our autocracy.
The recognition of our autocrat may come even before the abolition of the constitution; the moment for this recognition will come when the people, tormented by dissension and the incompetency of their rulers, incited by us, will exclaim: Depose them, and give us one universal sovereign who will unite us and abolish the causes of dissension—national frontiers, religion, state indebtedness—and who will give us the peace and quiet which we cannot find with our rulers and representatives.
But you know well that to render such a universal expression of desire possible, it is necessary continuously to disturb the relationship between the people and the government in all countries, and so to exhaust everybody by the dissension, hostility, struggle, hatred, and even martyrdom, hunger, inoculation of diseases, and misery, as to make the Goys see no other solution than an appeal to our money and complete rule.
Should we give the people a rest, however, the longed for moment will probably never arrive.
The Council of State will tend to accentuate the power of the ruler; in the capacity of an ostensible legislative body, it will act as a committee for the drawing up of laws and statutes on behalf of the ruler.
The following is the program of the new constitution which we are preparing. We will make laws and control the courts in the following manner:
1. By suggestions to the legislative body.
2. By means of orders issued by the president as general statutes, decrees of the Senate, and decisions of the Council of State, as regulations passed by the ministries.
3. And when the opportune moment arrives—in the form of a coup d’état.
Having thus roughly outlined the modus agendi, we will now take up in detail those measures by which we will complete the development of the governmental mechanism in the above direction. By these measures, I mean the freedom of the press, the right of assembly, religious freedom, electoral rights, and many other things which must disappear from the human repertoire, or must be fundamentally altered on the day following the declaration of the new constitution. It is only at this moment that it will become possible for us to announce all our decrees, for at any time in the future every perceptible change would be dangerous, and this for the following reasons: If these changes should be introduced and rigidly enforced, it might cause despair by creating the fear of further changes in a similar direction; if, however, they are made with a tendency to subsequent leniency, then it might be said that we have recognized our mistakes, which would undermine the faith in the infallibility of the new authority; it might also be said that we were frightened, and that we were forced to make concessions for which nobody would be thankful since they would be considered as legitimately due.
Any of these impressions would be detrimental to the prestige of the new constitution. It is necessary for us that, from the first moment of its proclamation, when the people are still dumbfounded by the accomplished revolution and are in a state of terror and surprise, they should realize we are so strong, so invulnerable, and so mighty that we shall in no case pay attention to them, and not only will we ignore their opinions and desires, but be ready to and capable of suppressing at any moment or place any sign of opposition with indisputable authority. We shall want the people to realize that we have taken at once everything we wanted, and that we shall under no circumstances share our power with them. Then [39] they will close their eyes to everything out of fear and will await further developments.
The Goys are like a flock of sheep—we are wolves.
Do you know what happens to sheep when wolves get into the fold?
They will also close their eyes to everything because we will promise to return to them all their liberties after the enemies of peace have been subjugated and all the parties pacified.
Is it necessary to say how long they would have to wait for the return of their liberties?
Why have we conceived and inspired this policy for the Goys without giving them an opportunity to examine its inner meaning if not for the purpose of attaining by a circuitous method what is unattainable for our scattered race by a direct road?
This constituted a base for our organization of secret masonry which is not known to and whose aims are not even suspected by these cattle, the Goys . They have been decoyed by us into our numerous ostensible organisations, which appear to be Masonic lodges, so as to divert the attention of their co-religionists.
God has given us, his chosen people, the power to scatter, and what to all appears to be our weakness, has proved to be our strength, and has now brought us to the threshold of universal rule.
Little remains to be built on these foundations.
The word “Liberty” can be differently interpreted. We will define it as follows:
Liberty is the right to do that which is permitted by law. Such a definition of this word will eventually serve us, because liberty will be in our power; and also because the laws will either destroy or construct only what we desire in accordance with the above mentioned program.
We will deal with the press in the following manner: What is the present rôle of the press? It serves to arouse furious passions or egotistic party dissensions which may be necessary [40] for our purpose. It is empty, unjust, inaccurate, and most people do not understand what end it serves. We will shackle it and keep a tight rein on it. We will also do the same with other printed matter, for what use would it be for us to rid ourselves of attacks on the part of the periodical press if we remain open to criticism through pamphlets and books? We will convert the products of publicity, now so expensive, owing to the need of censorship, into a source of income for our state. We will impose a special stamp tax. When a newspaper printing shop is started, bonds will have to be deposited, which will guarantee our government from all attacks on the part of the press. In case of an attack, we will mercilessly impose fines. Such measures as stamps, bonds, and fines, the payment of which is guaranteed by the bonds, will bring a huge income to the government. It is true that party papers might not fear the loss of money, so we will suppress these after the second attack on us. No one shall touch the prestige of our political infallibility and remain unpunished. The pretext for stopping a publication will be that the publication in question excites public opinion without cause or reason. I ask you to bear in mind that among those who attack us there will be also organs established by us, but they will attack exclusively those points which we plan to change.
Not one notice will be made public without our control. This is already being done by us, since the news from all parts of the world is received through several agencies in which it is centralized.
These agencies will then be completely in our power and they will publish only such news as we will permit.
If we have already managed to subjugate the minds of the Goys to such an extent that almost all of them see world events through colored glasses which we put over their eyes; if, even at present, there is not one state which bars our access to state secrets, so termed by the stupid Goys , then what will it be when we, in the person of our universal sovereign, are the recognized rulers of the world?
Let us return to the future of the press. Anybody who wishes to become an editor, a librarian, or a printer, will be obliged to obtain a diploma, which in case of disobedience will be immediately revoked.
With such measures, thought will become an educational instrument [41] in the hands of our government, which will not allow the people to be led astray into realms of fancy and dreams about beneficent progress. Who of us does not know that these fantastic blessings are the direct road to baseless hopes which lead to anarchistic relations between the people and the government? Progress, or better still the idea of progress, has led to the creation of different modes of emancipation without setting any limit to it. All so-called liberals are essentially anarchists in thought if not in action. Each one of them pursues the phantom of liberty, becoming self-willed, that is to say, falling into a state of anarchy by protesting for the mere sake of protesting.
We will now again refer to the question of the press. We will place stamp taxes secured by bonds on each page of all printed matter, while on books containing less than four hundred and eighty pages we will place a double tax. We will classify them as pamphlets, so as to lessen the number of magazines, which represent the worst printed poison—and on the other hand, to force writers to prepare such long works that they will be little read, especially as they will be expensive. Our own publications, guiding public opinion in the direction we desire, will be cheap and rapidly bought. The tax will discourage the writing of mere leisure literature, whereas punishment will make the writers dependent upon us. Even if there were writers who would like to attack us, they would find no publishers for their works. Before printing any work, the editor or printer will have to apply to the authorities for permission. We will then know beforehand of the attacks that are being prepared against us, and we will destroy them by coming out with advance statements on the subject.
Literature and journalism are the two most important educational forces; for this reason our government will become the owner of most of the periodicals. This will neutralize the injurious influence of the private press and have great influence on the people. If we permit ten periodicals, we ourselves will print thirty, and so forth. This, however, must not be suspected by the public. All the periodicals published by us will seem to be of contradictory views and opinions, inviting trust in us, thus attracting to us unsuspecting enemies, and in this way they will be caught in our trap and made harmless.
The predominant place will be held by periodicals of an official character. They will always stand guard over our interests and consequently their influence will be comparatively limited.
In the second category we will place semi-official organs, whose aim will be to attract the indifferent and little interested.
The third category will be our ostensible opposition, which at least in one of its publications will represent the opposition to us. Our real enemies will mistake this seeming opposition as belonging to their own group and will thus show us their cards.
All our newspapers will represent different tendencies, namely, aristocratic, republican, revolutionary, even anarchistic, so long of course as the constitution lasts. Like the Indian God Vishnu , these periodicals will have one hundred arms, each of which will reach the pulse of every group of public opinion. When the pulse beats faster, these arms will guide opinion toward our aims, since the excited person loses the power of reasoning and is easily led. Those fools who believe that they repeat the opinions expressed by the newspapers of their party will be repeating our opinions or those which we desire them to have. Imagining that they are following the press of their party, they will follow the flag which we will fly for them.
In order that our newspaper militia may carry out our program, we must organize the press with great care. Under the title of the Central Department of the press, we will organize literary meetings at which our agents unnoticed will give the passwords and countersigns. Discussing and contradicting our policies, although always superficially, without touching their essence, our press will conduct an empty fire against official newspapers so as to give us only an opportunity to express ourselves in greater detail than we were able to in our preliminary declarations. This, of course, will be done when it is useful to us.
These attacks against us will also seem to convince the people that complete liberty of the press still exists, and it will give our agents the opportunity to declare that the papers opposing us are mere wind-bags, since they are unable to find any real ground to refute our orders.
Such measures, which will escape the notice of public attention, [43] will be the most successful means of guiding the public mind and of inspiring confidence in our government. Thanks to them, we will as the need arises excite or pacify the public mind on political questions. We will be able to persuade or confuse them, sometimes printing the truth, sometimes lies, referring to facts or contradicting them according to the way they are received by the public, always carefully sounding the ground before stepping on it. We will surely conquer our enemies, because they will not have the press at their disposal in which to express themselves in full. Moreover, with the above mentioned plans against the press, we will not even need to refute them seriously.
The trial balloons thrown out by us in the third category of our press, we will deny energetically, in case of need, in our semi-official organs.
In French journalism there already exists the Masonic solidarity of a password; all organs of the press are bound by professional secrecy; like the ancient augurs, not one member will disclose his secret if he is not ordered to do so. Not one journalist will dare to disclose this secret, for not one of them is admitted to literary headquarters unless he has a disgraceful action in his past record. The fact would immediately be made public. While these disgraceful actions are known only to a few, the prestige of the journalist attracts opinion throughout the country—he is admired.
Our plans must extend chiefly to the provincial districts. There we must excite hopes and ambitions opposed to those of the capitals, by means of which we may always attack them, presenting such ambitions to the capitals as the inspired views and aims of provincial districts. It is obvious that their source will be ours. It is necessary for us that while we are not yet in full power, the capital should be under the influence of provincial public opinion; that is under the influence of the majority prearranged by our agents. It is necessary for us that at the critical psychological moment the capitals should not discuss an accomplished fact, for the mere reason that it had been accepted by the provincial majority.
When we reach the phase of the new régime, which is transitory to our accession to power, we must not allow the press to expose social corruption. It must be thought that the new régime has satisfied everybody to such an extent that even [44] criminality has stopped. Cases of criminal activity must only be known to their victims or their accidental witnesses, and to these alone.
The need of daily bread forces the Goys to silence and compels them to remain our obedient servants. The agents taken from among them for our press will discuss the facts they are ordered to publish, when it is inconvenient for us to publish statements openly in official documents. While discussion and dispute are taking place, we will simply pass the measures we desire and present them to the public as an accomplished fact. Nobody will dare to demand the rejection of measures thus passed, and the more so as they will be interpreted as an improvement. At this point the press will divert the thoughts of the people to new problems (we having accustomed the people always to seek new emotions). Those brainless creators of destiny, who heretofore have been unable to understand and do not now understand that they are ignorant of matters which they undertake to discuss, will also hasten to discuss these new problems. Political questions are meant to be understood only by those who have created them and have been directing them for many centuries.
From all this you will realize that by aiming to control the opinion of the mob we will only facilitate the functioning of our mechanism, and you will also notice that we seek approbation, not for actions but for words uttered by us on various occasions. We always declare that we are guided in all our policies by the hope and certainty of serving the general good.
To divert the over-restless people from discussing political problems, we now make it appear that we provide them with new problems, namely, those pertaining to industry. Let them become excited over this subject as much as they like. The masses will consent to remain inactive, to rest from so-called political activity (to which we ourselves accustomed them for the purpose of helping us in our struggle against the Goy government), only on condition of a new occupation in which we can show them supposedly the same political background.
To prevent them from reaching any independent decisions, we will divert their minds by amusements, games, pastimes, [45] passions, and cultural centers for the people. We will soon begin to offer prize contests, through the press, in the field of art, and sports of all kinds. Such attractions will definitely deflect the mind from problems over which we would otherwise have to fight with the people. By losing more and more the custom of independent thought, they will begin to talk in unison with us, because we alone will provide new lines of thought through persons with whom of course we will presumably have no connection.
The rôle of liberal Utopians will be definitely terminated when our government is recognized. Until that time, they will do us good service. For this reason we will still direct thought towards different fantastic theories which will appear to be progressive. For it was by the word “progress” that we have successfully turned the brains of the stupid Goys . There are no brains among the Goys to realize that this word is but a cover for digression from the truth, unless it is applied to material inventions, since there is but one truth and there is no room for progress. Progress, being a false conception, serves to conceal the truth so that nobody may know it except ourselves, God’s elect, who are its guardians.
When our kingdom is established, our orators will discuss the great problems which have stirred humanity for the purpose of bringing it finally under our blessed rule.
Who will then suspect that all these problems were instigated by us, according to a political plan which has not been disclosed by any one during so many centuries.
When we become rulers we will not tolerate the existence of any other religion except our own, which proclaims one God, with whom our fate is bound up because we are the Chosen People, and our fate has determined the fate of the world. For this reason we must destroy all other religions. If the result of this produces modern atheists, as a transitory step, this will not interfere with our plans but will act as an example to those generations which will listen to our teaching of the religion of Moses, which, owing to its solid and thoughtful system, will eventually lead to the domination of [46] all nations by us. We will also lay stress on the mystical truth of Masonic teaching which, we will assert, is the foundation of its whole educative power.
On every possible occasion we will then publish articles in which we will compare our beneficial rule with that of the past. The benefits of peace, although attained through centuries of unrest, will serve to demonstrate the beneficial character of our rule. The mistakes made by the Goys during their administration will be pictured by us in the most vivid colors. We will cause such disgust towards the administration of the Goys that the masses will prefer the peace of serfdom to the rights of the much lauded liberty which has so cruelly tortured them and drained from them the very source of human existence, and by which they were exploited by a mass of adventurers, ignorant of what they were doing. The useless changes of government, to which we ourselves prompted the Goys , when we were undermining their governmental apparatus, will become such a nuisance to the people by that time, that they will prefer to endure anything from us rather than risk a repetition of former unrest and hardships. We will, moreover, lay particular stress on the historical mistakes made by the Goy governments, which caused humanity to suffer for many centuries for lack of understanding of all matters pertaining to its true welfare, and because of their search for fantastic schemes of social welfare. The Goys did not notice that such schemes instead of improving mutual relationship, which is the basis of human existence, have only made it worse.
The whole force of our principles and measures will lie in the fact that they are put forward and interpreted by us as being in sharp contrast to the decayed social order of former times.
Our philosophers will discuss all the shortcomings of the Goy religion, but nobody will ever discuss our religion in the light of its true aspect, and nobody will ever thoroughly understand it, except our own people, who will never dare to disclose its secrets.
In countries so-called advanced we have created insane, dirty, and disgusting literature. For a short time after our entrance into power we will encourage its publication in order that the contrast between it and the speeches and programs which will be heard from our heights should be more pointedly [47] marked. Our wise men, trained as guides to the Goys , will prepare speeches, plans, memoranda, and articles, by which we will influence the minds and direct them towards the conceptions and the knowledge which we wish them to have.
When we finally become rulers by means of revolutions, which will be arranged so that they shall take place simultaneously in all countries and immediately after all existing governments shall have been officially pronounced as incapable (which may not happen soon, perhaps not before a whole century), we will see to it that no plots are hatched against us. To effect this, we will kill heartlessly all who take up arms against the establishment of our rule.
The establishment of any new secret society will be met by the death penalty, and those societies which now exist and are known to us and either work or have worked for us, will be disbanded and their members exiled to continents far removed from Europe.
We will deal in the same manner with those Masons among the Goys who know too much. The Masons whom we may pardon for any reason will be kept under continual fear of exile. We will pass a law whereby all members of secret organizations will be exiled from Europe, that being the center of our government. The decisions of our government will be final and there will be no right of appeal.
In the Goy society, where we have planted such deep roots of dissension and protest, order can only be restored by merciless measures which will serve as evidence that our power cannot be infringed. There is no necessity for regard towards the victims sacrificed for the future good. To attain good, even though by the sacrifice of life, is the duty of every government which realizes that its existence depends not upon privileges alone, but upon the exercise of its duties as well.
The most important means for erecting a stable government is to strengthen the prestige of authority. This is only obtained by its majestic and unshakable power, which will convey the impression that it is inviolable because of its mystical nature, namely, because chosen by God. Such until recently [48] has been the Russian Autocracy—our only dangerous enemy throughout the world, with the exception of the Pope. Remember Italy drowning in blood; she did not touch a hair on the head of Sulla who had shed that blood. Sulla had become powerful in the eyes of the people, although they were tortured by him; his manly return to Italy placed him beyond persecution. The people do not touch those who hypnotize them by bravery and steadfastness of spirit.
Meanwhile, until our rule is established, we, on the contrary, will organize and multiply free masonic lodges in all the countries of the world. We will attract to them all those who are and who may become public-spirited, because in these lodges will be the chief source of information and from them will emanate our influence.
All these lodges will be centralized under one management, known only to us and unknown to all others; these lodges will be administered by our wise men. The lodges will have their own representative in this management in order to screen the above mentioned Masonic government; he will give the password and elaborate the program. We will tie the knot of all revolutionary liberal elements in these lodges. Their membership will consist of all strata of society. The most secret political plans will be known to us and will fall under our leadership on the very day of their origination. Among the members of these lodges will be almost all the agents of the international and national police, whose work is indispensable for us, inasmuch as the police not only are able to take independent measures against the rebellious, but may also serve to mask our actions, provoke discontent, and so forth.
Most people who become members of secret societies are adventurers, career makers, and irresponsible persons in general, with whom we will have no difficulty in dealing and who will help us to set in motion the mechanism of the machine planned by us. If this world becomes perturbed, it will only prove that it was necessary for us to disorganize it so as to destroy its too great solidarity. If a plot is laid, it must be headed by one of our most trustworthy servants. It is only natural that we want nobody but ourselves to guide the work of the Masons,[5] for we know where we are trending, we know [49] the final aim of every action. The Goys , however, understand nothing, not even the immediate results. They are usually concerned about the momentary satisfaction of their ambitions in achieving their intentions. They do not notice, however, that the intention itself was not initiated by them, but that it was we who gave them the idea.
The Goys become members of the lodges out of pure curiosity, or hoping to receive their share in the public funds. There are others who come for the purpose of seizing the opportunity of putting before the public their impossible and baseless hopes. They long for the emotion of success and for the applause which we grant them lavishly. We create their success in order to utilize the self-deception that is born with it and by which people, without noticing, begin to follow our suggestions without suspecting them, and being fully convinced that their infallibility originates its own ideas and, therefore, does not need those of others. You have no idea how easy it is to bring even the most intelligent Goys to a state of unconscious credulity, and, on the other hand, how easy it is to discourage them by the smallest failure, or merely by ceasing to applaud them, thus bringing them into servitude for the sake of achieving new success. To the same extent as our people ignore success for the sake of carrying out their plans, so are the Goys ready to sacrifice all their plans for the sake of success. Their psychology makes the problem of direction easier for us. Those tigers in appearance have the souls of sheep and nonsense filters through their heads. As a hobby we have given them the dream of submerging human individualism through the symbolic idea of collectivism.
They have not yet discovered and will not discover that this hobby is a clear infringement on the principal law of nature, which, from the beginning of the world, created a being unlike all others, precisely for the sake of expressing his individuality.
If we were able to lead them to such insane and blind [50] beliefs, does it not obviously prove the low level of development of the Goy mind as compared to our mind? It is precisely the thing which guarantees our success.
How far sighted were our wise men of old when they said that to attain a serious object one must not stop at the means, nor should one count the victims sacrificed to the cause. We have not counted the victims from among the Goys , those seeds of cattle. Although we have sacrificed many of our own peoples, we have already given them in return a formerly undreamed-of position on earth. The comparatively few victims from among our own people have saved our race from destruction.
Death is the unavoidable end of all. It would be better to accelerate this end for those who interfere with our cause than for our people or for us, ourselves, the creators of this cause to die. We kill Masons in such a way that none but the brothers suspect, not even the victims; they all die when it is necessary, apparently from a natural death. Knowing this, even the brethren, in their turn, dare not protest. It is through such measures that we have uprooted the heart of protest against our orders from among the Masons. Preaching liberalism to the Goys , at the same time we hold our people and our agents under iron discipline.
Through our influence the enforcement of the Goy laws has been reduced to a minimum. The prestige of the law has been undermined by the liberal interpretations introduced by us. The courts decide as we dictate the most important principles, both political and moral, viewing the cases in the light presented by us for the Goy administration. This we accomplished naturally through agents, with whom we have ostensibly no connection, namely, through the press or otherwise. Even senators and high officials blindly follow our advice. The purely animal mind of the Goys is incapable of analysis and observation, and even less so of foreseeing to what results the development of the principle involved in a case may lead.
It is through this difference in the process of reasoning between us and the Goys that it becomes possible clearly to demonstrate the stamp of God’s elect as compared to the instinctive and bestial mentality of the Goys . They see, but they cannot foresee, and they cannot invent anything except material [51] things. It is clear, therefore, that nature herself intended us to rule and guide the world.
When the time comes for our open rule, then will be the time to show its benefits, and we will change all the laws. Our laws will be short, clear, irrevocable, and requiring no interpretation, so that everybody will be able to know them thoroughly. The chief point emphasized in them will be a highly developed obedience to authority, which will eliminate all abuses, for all without exception will be responsible before the supreme power vested in the highest authority.
Abuse of power by minor officials will then disappear, because it will be punished so mercilessly that they will lose the desire to experiment with their power. We will closely watch every action of the administration, upon which depends the action of the government machinery, for corruption there creates corruption everywhere; not a single violation of law or act of corruption will remain unpunished. Acts of concealment and willful neglect on the part of governmental officials will disappear after they have seen the first example of severe punishment. The prestige of power necessitates that appropriate, that is to say severe, punishments should be inflicted even for the smallest violations of the sanctity of the supreme authority, committed for the sake of personal gain. The guilty, if punished severely, will be like a soldier who falls on the battlefield of administration for the sake of Authority, Principle, and Law; these principles do not allow any digression from their social function for a personal motive, even on the part of those who rule. For instance: Our judges will know that by attempting to show stupid mercy, they overstep the law of justice, which was created solely for exemplary punishment of crimes and not for the manifestation of moral qualities on the part of the judge. Such qualities are commendable in private, but not in public life, which constitutes the educational forum of human life.
The personnel of our judges will not remain in office after the age of fifty-five. First, because old people adhere more persistently to prejudiced opinions and are less capable of submitting to new commands; and secondly, because that enables us to achieve a certain flexibility of change in the personnel, which will bend more easily under our pressure. He who wishes to retain his position will have to obey blindly.
In general, our judges will be selected only from among those who will clearly understand that they must punish people and enforce the laws, and not indulge in dreams of liberalism at the expense of the educational plan of the government, as is now imagined by the Goys . The method of changing the personnel will also serve to undermine the collective solidarity of the governmental officials and will attach them to the cause of the government, which decides their fate. The younger generation of judges will be so educated as to prevent any criminal activity which might interfere with the inter-relationship which we have established for our subjects.
At present the Goy judges, lacking a clear conception of the nature of their duties, make exceptions to all kinds of crimes. This occurs because the present rulers, when appointing judges, do not take the trouble to encourage the sense of duty and conscientiousness in the work to be performed by them. As the animal sends out its young in search of prey, so the Goys are giving their subjects responsible offices without taking the time to explain their functions. Owing to this, their rule is undermined by their own efforts and through the actions of their own administration. Let us use the result of such actions as one more example of the advantage of our own rule.
We will eliminate liberalism from all the important strategic positions in our administration upon which depend the training of our subjects for our social order. These positions will be given only to those who have been trained by us for governmental work.
In answer to a possible remark, that the putting of old officials on the retired list may prove expensive for the treasury, I can state first, that, prior to their dismissal, some private work will be found for them to replace what they are losing, and secondly, I may also remark, that all the world’s money will be concentrated in our hands; consequently, our government need not fear expense.
Our autocracy will be consistent in every respect, and consequently every manifestation of our great power will be respected and unconditionally obeyed. We will ignore grumbling and discontent, and all active manifestations of either will be suppressed by punishment, which will serve as an example to the rest of the people.
We will abolish the right of appellate courts to annul judicial [53] decisions, which will become the exclusive prerogative of the sovereign, for we cannot permit the people to think that an incorrect decision may possibly be rendered by the judges appointed by us. Should, however, such an error happen, we ourselves will annul the decision; but the punishment which we will impose upon the judge for misconception of his duties and of his responsibility will be so severe that it will eliminate the very possibility of a recurrence. I repeat that we will watch every step taken by our administration in order to enable us to satisfy the people, for they have a right to demand a good appointee from a good administration.
In the person of our sovereign, our government will bear the appearance of a patriarchal or fatherly tutelage. The people, our subjects, will see in him a father who takes care of every need, every action, and who is concerned with every relationship, both among the subjects themselves and between them and the sovereign.
Thus, they will become imbued with the idea that it is impossible for them to do without this guardian and guide if they wish to live in a world of peace and quiet. They will recognize the autocracy of our sovereign, whom they will respect and almost deify, especially when they realize that our agents do not usurp his power, but merely execute his orders blindly. They will be glad that everything is regulated in their lives, as is done by wise parents who wish to educate their children to a sense of duty and obedience. With regard to the secrets of our political plans, both the masses and their administration are like little children.
As you can see for yourselves, I base our despotism upon right and duty; the right of forcing the performance of duty is the direct function of government, acting as the father to its subjects. It is the right of the strong to utilize his power in order to lead humanity towards a social order established by the law of nature, namely, obedience. Everything in the world is subject, if not to some other persons, then to circumstances, or to its own nature; but in any case, to something stronger than itself. Consequently, let us be the strongest for the common good.
We must sacrifice without hesitation those individuals who violate the existing order, for in exemplary punishment of evil there lies a great educational problem.
When the King of Israel places the crown offered to him by Europe on his sacred head, he will become the Patriarch of the World. The necessary sacrifices made by him will never equal the number of victims sacrificed to the mania of greatness during the centuries of rivalry between the Goy governments.
Our sovereign will be in constant communication with the people, delivering from tribunes addresses which will be spread to all parts of the world.
For the purpose of destroying all collective forces except our own, we will nullify the universities, the first stage of collectivism, by reconstructing them along new lines. Their directors and professors will be trained for their work through detailed secret programs of action, from which they will not be able to deviate in the least with impunity. They will be appointed with special care and will be so placed as to be completely dependent upon the government.
We will exclude from the curriculum civic law, as well as all that touches upon political questions. These subjects will be taught only to a few dozen selected for their striking ability from among the initiated. The universities must not allow the callow youths to graduate who concoct plans of constitutions as they do comedies or tragedies, or who meddle with political matters which even their fathers do not understand.
Poorly directed study of political questions by a great number of people creates Utopians and poor citizens, as you can judge by the universal education as conducted by the Goys along those lines. It was necessary for us to infiltrate into their educational system such principles as have successfully broken down their social order. When we are in power, we will eliminate all disturbing subjects from educational systems and will make young people obedient children of their superiors, loving the sovereign as their assurance of hope, peace, and quiet.
For the study of the classics and ancient history, which contain more bad than good examples, we will substitute a program dealing with the future. We will obliterate from [55] the memory of the people all those facts pertaining to former centuries which are not to our advantage, leaving only those which emphasize the mistakes of the Goy governments. The study of practical life, of obligatory social order, of the inter-relationship of human beings, the avoidance of evil, egotistical examples that plant the seed of evil, and other questions of a pedagogical nature, will head the educational program. This program will differ for each caste, never allowing education to be of a uniform character. Such a system is of special importance.
Each caste must be educated with strict limitations, according to its particular occupation and the nature of the work. Accidental genius has always been able and always will be able to rise to a higher caste; but, for the sake of this rare exception, to open the door to the inefficient, and to admit them to higher castes or ranks, enabling them to occupy positions of others born and trained to fill them—is absolute insanity. You, yourself, know what happened to the Goys when they yielded to this nonsense.
In order to implant the sovereign firmly in the minds and hearts of his subjects, it is necessary to acquaint the people, during his term of office, both in schools and in public places, with the importance of his activity and the benevolence of his enterprises.
We will abolish all unlicensed teaching. Students will have the right to gather, with their relatives, in their colleges as if in clubs. During these gatherings, on holidays, the teachers will read supposedly unbiased lectures on problems of human relationship, on the law of imitation, on the cruelty of unrestricted competition, and finally, on new philosophical theories which have not yet been disclosed to the world.
We will promote these theories into dogmatic beliefs, using them as stepping-stones to our faith. After having presented our program of action for the present and for the future, I will read to you the principles of these theories.
In short, knowing from the experience of many centuries that men live and are guided by ideas, that these ideas are imbued only by means of education given to persons of all ages, of course by different methods but meeting with equal success, we will absorb and appropriate to our own advantage the last traces of independent thought, which for a long time [56] have been directed to the goal and to the ideas necessary to us. The system of enslaving thought is already in action through so-called visual education.
This system tends to turn the Goys into thoughtless, obedient animals, expecting to see in order to understand. In France one of our best agents, Bourgeois, has already announced a new program of visual education.
The lawyer’s profession makes people grow cold, cruel, stubborn and unprincipled, and compels them to take an abstract or purely legal viewpoint in all matters. They have learned to consider solely the personal gain derived from every case they handle and not the possibility of the social benefit of its results. They rarely refuse to take a case and always strive for acquittal at all cost, clinging to minor technical points of a legal nature. In this way they demoralize the courts. Therefore we will limit this profession, converting it into an executive public office. Lawyers will be deprived of the right of contact with their clients on the same basis as are the judges. They will receive their cases only from the court, preparing them on the strength of written reports and documents and defending their clients after they have been examined in court on the basis of the facts obtained during the trial. They will receive a salary, regardless of whether the defense has been successful or not. They will act as simple exponents of the case on behalf of the defense in counterbalance to the public prosecutor, who will act as exponent on behalf of the prosecution. This will shorten legal procedure and establish an honest and impartial defense, conducted not for the sake of personal gain, but based on the personal conviction of the lawyer. This will also eliminate the existing bribery among fellow lawyers and prevent their allowing the side to win which pays.
We have already taken care to discredit the clergy of the Goys and thus to undermine their function, which at the present time could have been very much in our way. Their influence over the people diminishes daily.
To-day freedom of religion has been proclaimed everywhere; [57] consequently, it is only a question of a few years before the complete collapse of Christendom. It will be still easier to deal with other religions, but it is too early to discuss this problem. We will confine clericalism and clericals within such a narrow field that their influence will have an effect opposite to what it used to have.
When the moment comes to annihilate the Vatican completely, an invisible hand, pointing towards this court, will guide the masses in their assault. When, however, the masses attack, we will come forward as defenders to prevent too much bloodshed. By this method we will penetrate its very heart and will not leave it until we have undermined its power.
The King of Israel will become the real Pope of the Universe, the Patriarch of the International Church.
But until we have accomplished the re-education of the youth to new transitional religions and finally to our own, we will not openly attack the existing churches, but will fight them by means of criticism, thus creating dissension.
In general, our press will denounce governmental activities and religion, and will expose the inefficiency of the Goys in the most unscrupulous terms, so as to humiliate them to such an extent as only our ingenious race is capable of doing. Our rule will simulate the God Vishnu, who resembles us physically; each of our hundred hands will hold one of the springs of the social machine. We will see everything without the aid of the official police; in its present organization, however, which we have worked out for the Goys , the police prevent the government from seeing anything. According to our program, one-third of our subjects will watch the others from a pure sense of duty, as volunteers for the government. Then it will not be considered disgraceful to be a spy and an informer; on the contrary, it will be regarded as praiseworthy. Unfounded reports, however, will be severely punished to prevent abuse of this privilege.
Our agents will be recruited both from among the highest and the lowest ranks of society; they will be selected from among the pleasure-loving governmental officials, editors, printers, booksellers, salesmen, workmen, drivers, butlers, etc. This police force will have no official rights or credentials, which give opportunity for the abuse of power, and consequently [58] it will be powerless; it will merely act as observer and will make reports. The verification of such reports and the issue of warrants for arrests will rest with a responsible group of police controllers. The actual arrests, however, will be made by a gendarme corps or the municipal police. In case of failure to report any political matter which has been observed or rumored, the person who should have reported it may be brought to trial for concealment of crime, if it is proven that he is guilty.
In the same way that our brethren are now under obligation to report on their own initiative on all apostates, or on any person marked as being opposed to the Kehillah, so in our Universal Kingdom it will be obligatory for all subjects to serve the state in that direction.
Such an organization will eliminate all abuse of power and various kinds of coercion and corruption, in fact, the very things which have been introduced into the customs of the Goys by our councils and by the theories of the rights of supermen. But how otherwise could we foment the increasing causes for disorder in the midst of their administration? What other means could we use? Among these means, one of the most important is the employment of such agents for the preservation of order as are in a position to manifest their own evil inclinations in the course of their destructive work, namely, their self-will, abuse of authority, and, most important of all, bribery.
When the time comes for us to strengthen the measures of police protection (the most terrible poison for the prestige of authority), we will artificially organize disorder or simulate the expression of discontent with the aid of experienced orators. These orators will be joined by sympathizers. This will give us the pretext for searches and special restrictions which will be put in force by our servants among the Goy police.
As most conspirators work as amateurs for the sake of chattering, we will not disturb them until we see that they are about to take action; but we will introduce in their midst [59] secret service agents. It must be remembered that the prestige of authority diminishes if conspiracies against it are often discovered, for that leads to the presumption of the weakness of the authority, or, what is worse, to the admission of its own mistakes. You are aware that we have destroyed the prestige of the ruling Goys by frequent attempts made on their lives through our agents, who were but blind sheep of our flock, easily moved, by a few liberal phrases, to crimes, so long as they were of a political nature. We have forced the rulers to admit their own weakness by adopting open measures of police protection, and thereby we have ruined the prestige of their authority.
Our sovereign will be protected only by the most invisible guard, because we will never allow any one to think that conspiracy might exist against him which he is unable to combat and from which he has to hide himself. If we were to allow this thought to prevail, as it prevails among the Goys , we would thereby sign the death warrant, if not of the sovereign himself, then of his dynasty in the near future.
Observing strict decorum, our sovereign will use his power only for the benefit of the people, but never for his own good or for that of his dynasty. By strictly adhering to this decorum, his authority will be respected and protected by his subjects; moreover, he will be worshiped, because it will be known that upon his authority depends the well-being of every citizen of the kingdom, and the stability of the social order itself.
To guard the sovereign openly is equivalent to an admission of the weakness of his governmental organization.
Our sovereign, when amidst his people, will always appear to be surrounded by a crowd of curious men and women, who will stand beside him as though accidentally and will hold back the other people as though through respect for order. This example will implant an idea of self-restraint in others. If there be a person in the crowd trying to present a petition, and working his way through the ranks, the person nearest to him must take the petition and present it to the sovereign in sight of the petitioner himself, so that all may know that the petition presented has reached its destination and consequently that there exists a control of affairs on the part of the sovereign himself. The prestige of authority demands that the people [60] should be able to say, “If only the king could know it,” or, “The king will know about this.”
With the establishment of an official police guard the mystical prestige of authority vanishes at once; with a certain amount of audacity, every one considers himself superior to authority; the assassin realizes his strength and only has to watch his opportunity to make an attempt against an official. We preached differently for the Goys , but we can see the results to which open methods of protection have led them.
We will arrest criminals upon the first more or less well-founded suspicion. Because of the fear of a possible mistake political criminals should not be given the opportunity to escape; indeed towards political crime we will show no mercy. If, in exceptional cases, it may seem possible to allow the investigation of motives which have led to ordinary criminal offences, there is no excuse for those who attempt to deal with matters which no one can understand except the government. Moreover, not even all governments are capable of understanding the right policy.
Though we will not allow individuals to become involved in politics, we will, on the other hand, encourage the submission for the approval of the government of all petitions and reports containing suggestions and plans for bettering the condition of the people. This will bring to our knowledge the shortcomings or merely the fantastic aspirations of our subjects. These suggestions we will answer either by favorable action or by refusals proving the lack of intelligence and the errors of those who have submitted such suggestions.
Sedition is nothing but the barking of a lap dog at an elephant. From the point of view of a government which is well organized, not from the police standpoint but with regard to its social basis, the lap dog barks at the elephant because he does not realize his strength. It is only necessary for the elephant to show his strength once and the dog barks no more; he begins to wag his tail the moment he sees the elephant.
In order to eliminate the prestige of martyrdom from political crime, we will seat the political criminal on the same bench [61] with thieves, murderers, and other disgusting and dirty criminals. Then public opinion will regard that class of criminals as quite as disgraceful as any other, and will brand them with equal contempt.
We have endeavored to prevent, and I hope have succeeded in preventing, the Goys from using such methods of dealing with seditious activities. In order to attain this end, we have made use of the press and public speeches; indirectly, through cleverly compiled historical textbooks, we have given publicity to martyrdom as though revolutionists had undergone it for the sake of human welfare. Such an advertisement has increased the contingent of liberals and forced thousands of Goys into the herds of our cattle.
To-day we shall deal with the financial program, the discussion of which I have postponed until the end of my report because it is the most difficult, conclusive, and decisive point in our plans. In approaching it, I will remind you that I have already intimated that the result of our actions is measured in figures.
When we become rulers, our autocratic government, for the sake of self-defense, will avoid burdening the people with heavy taxes, and it will not forget the rôle it has to play, namely, that of Father and Protector. But as government organization is costly, it is necessary to raise the means for its maintenance. Consequently, we must carefully work out the plan of a fair distribution of taxation.
In our government the sovereign will have the legal fiction of owning everything in his kingdom (which is easily put into practice), and can resort to legal confiscation of all money in order to regulate its circulation throughout the country. Consequently, the best method of taxation is the levying of a progressive tax on property. Taxes will thus be paid without difficulty or ruin in respective proportion to the amount of property owned. The rich must realize that it is their duty to give a part of their surplus wealth for the benefit of the country as a whole, because the government guarantees inviolability of the remaining part of their property and the right of [62] honest gain. I say honest because the control of property will prevent legal theft.
This social reform must come from above, for the time is ripe and it is becoming necessary as a guarantee of peace.
The tax on the poor is the seed of revolution, and it acts detrimentally to the government, which loses the great in its pursuit of the little. Moreover, the taxation of capital will lessen the increase of wealth in private hands, in which at present we have concentrated it as a counterweight to the governmental power of the Goys , namely, to the state treasury.
Progressive taxation, assessed according to the amount of capital, will produce a much greater revenue than the present system of taxing every one at an equal rate, which is useful to us now only as a means of exciting revolt and discontent among the Goys . The power of our sovereign will rest mainly in equilibrium and in guarantees of peace. For these, the capitalists must cede a part of their income so as to protect the action of the government machine. Public needs must be met by those who can best afford to do so and by those from whom there is something to take.
Such a measure will eliminate the hatred of the poor towards the rich, as they will be regarded as the financial supporters of the state and the upholders of peace and prosperity. The poor will also see that the rich are providing the necessary means to insure this end.
To prevent intelligent taxpayers from being too discontented with the new system of taxation, they will be furnished with detailed reports of the disbursement of public funds, exclusive of such as are appropriated for the needs of the throne and administrative institutions.
The sovereign will not own property, since everything in the state will seem to belong to him and these two conceptions would contradict each other. Private means would eliminate his right to own everything.
The relatives of the sovereign, aside from his descendants who will also be supported by the state, must join the ranks of government officials, or otherwise work for the right of holding property. The privilege of being of royal blood must not entitle them to rob the state treasury.
Sales, profits, or inheritances will be taxed by a progressive [63] stamp tax. The transfer of property, whether in cash or otherwise, without the required stamp, will place the payment of the tax on the original owner, dating from the time of the transfer until the time of the reported failure to record the transaction. Transfer vouchers must be shown weekly at the local branch of the state treasury, together with a statement of the names, surnames, and the permanent addresses both of the original and of the new owner. The recording of the names of those participating in a transaction will be necessary in all transactions involving more than a certain amount for ordinary expenditure. The sale of prime necessities will be taxed only by a stamp tax, which will represent a certain small per cent of the cost of the particular article.
Just calculate how many times the amount received from such taxes will exceed the income of the Goy governments.
The state bank must keep a definite reserve fund, and all sums in excess must be put back into circulation. The cost of public works will be met out of this surplus fund. The initiative of such works emanating from the government will also tie the working class to the interests of the government and the rulers. Some of this money will be allotted to prizes for inventions and for the purposes of production.
Even small sums in excess of a certain definite and broadly calculated fund, should not be allowed to be kept in the state treasury, because money is intended to circulate, and every impediment to circulation is detrimental to the governmental mechanism, which the money lubricates; the congestion of lubricating substances can stop the proper functioning of the mechanism.
The substitution of bonds for a part of the currency has created just such an impediment. The result of this has already become sufficiently evident.
We will also establish an auditing office, so as to enable the sovereign to find at all times a full account of state revenues and expenses, except for the current month not yet made up, and that of the previous month not yet presented.
The only person who will not be interested in robbing the state treasury will be the sovereign, its owner. This is the reason why his control will prevent the possibility of loss or misappropriation.
Receptions for the purpose of etiquette, which waste the [64] valuable time of the sovereign, will be abolished, because the ruler needs time for control and thought. Then his power will not be frittered away on the people surrounding the throne for the sake of appearance and brilliance, and who have only their own and not the public interest in mind.
The economic crises were created by us for the Goys only by the withdrawal of money from circulation. Huge amounts of capital were kept idle and were taken away from the nations, which were thus compelled to apply to us for loans. Payment of interest on these loans burdened the state finances and made the states subservient to capital. The concentration of industry having taken production out of the hands of the artisan and put it into the hands of capitalists, sucked all the power out of the people and also out of the state.
The present issue of money generally does not coincide with the need per capita, and consequently it cannot satisfy all the needs of the working classes. The issue of currency must correspond with the increase in population, and children must be reckoned as consumers from the day of their birth. The revision of the issue of currency is an essential problem for the whole world.
You know that gold currency was detrimental to the governments that accepted it, for it could not satisfy the requirements for money, since we took as much gold as possible out of circulation.
We must issue a currency based on the value of the working power, whether it be of paper or wood. We will issue money in proportion to the normal demands of every subject, adding a certain amount at every birth and decreasing it with every death.
Every department (the French administrative divisions),[6] every district, will be in charge of its own accounts.
To avoid any delay in paying government expenses, the terms of such payments will be decreed by order of the sovereign; this will eliminate any favoritism of the ministry (of finance)[7] over any other department to the detriment of the others.
The budget of revenues and the budget of expenditure will be placed side by side, in order that they may always be compared with each other.
We will present plans for the reform of the Goy financial institutions and of their principles, as planned by us, in such a manner that nobody will be frightened. We will demonstrate the need of reform by the disorderly twaddle produced by the financial disorganization of the Goys . We will show that the first reason for this confusion lies in the drafting of rough estimates for the budget, which increases from year to year. This annual budget is with great difficulty made to last during the first half of the year; then a revised budget is demanded and the funds thus allotted are spent in the next three months, after which a supplementary budget is called for and all this is wound up by a liquidation budget. As the budget of the following year is based on the total expenditure of the preceding year, the divergence from the normal reaches fifty per cent annually, so that the annual budget trebles every ten years. Owing to such a procedure, resulting from the carelessness of the Goy governments, their treasuries became empty. The period of loans followed and used up the remainder and brought all the Goy states to bankruptcy.
You can well understand that such a management of financial affairs as we induced the Goys to pursue cannot be adopted by us.
Every loan proves the impotency of the government and its failure to understand its own rights. Loans, like the sword of Damocles, hang above the heads of the rulers, who instead of placing temporary taxes on their subjects, stretch forth their hands and beg the charity of our bankers. Foreign loans are leeches, which can never be removed from the governmental body until they either fall off themselves or the government itself manages to get rid of them. But the Goy governments instead of throwing them off increase their number, so that these governments must inevitably perish through self-inflicted loss of blood.
Indeed, what is a loan, especially a foreign loan, if not a leech? A loan is the issuance of government obligations which involve the liability to pay interest in proportion to the sum borrowed. If the loan pays five per cent, then in twenty years the government has unnecessarily paid in interest an amount equal to the principal sum borrowed. In forty years it has paid twice; in sixty years it has trebled the sum, while the loan still remains an unpaid debt.
From this calculation it is evident that under the system of universal taxation the government takes the last penny from the poor taxpayers in the form of taxes in order to pay interest to foreign capitalists, from whom the money was borrowed, instead of collecting these same pennies for its needs free from all interest.
So long as the loans were domestic, the Goys only shifted the money from the pockets of the poor into those of the rich; but when we bribed the proper persons to make the loans foreign, then national riches poured into our hands and all the Goys began to pay us the tribute of subjects.
The carelessness of the reigning Goys in statemanship, the corruption of their ministers, the ignorance of other officials of financial problems, has forced their countries into debt to our banks to such an extent that they can never pay off their debts. It should be realized, however, that we have gone to great pains in order to bring about such a state of affairs.
Impediments to the circulation of money will not be allowed by us, and therefore there will be no government bonds, except one per cent bonds, so that the payment of interest should not deliver the power of the state to the sucking of leeches. The right of issuing bonds will be exclusively granted to industrial corporations, which will easily pay the interest out of their profits. The government, however, does not derive profit on borrowed money as these corporations do, since the state borrows money for expenditure and not for production.
Industrial bonds will also be bought by the government, which instead of being, as at present, the payer of tribute on loans, will become a sound creditor. Such a measure will prevent stagnation in the circulation of money, as well as indolence and laziness, which were useful to us so long as the Goys remained independent, but are not wanted by us in our government.
How apparent is the shortsightedness of the purely bestial brains of the Goys ! It manifested itself when they borrowed money for at interest. It did not occur to the Goys that, at any rate, this money, with the additional interest on it, would have to be taken from the resources of the country and paid to us. Would it not have been more simple to take the needed money from their own people?
This proves the genius of our distinguished mind, for we were able to present the question of loans to them in such a light that they saw in loans an advantage for themselves.
Our estimates, which we will produce when the time comes, will be based on the experience of centuries, on all those experiments which were conducted by us at the expense of the Goy governments; our estimates will prove to be clear and definite, and will obviously demonstrate the advantage of our new system. They will end all those abuses which made it possible for us to master the Goys , but which cannot be permitted in our reign.
We will so organize the accounting system that neither the sovereign himself nor the most humble clerk will be able to deflect the smallest sum from its destination or direct it into a different channel from that indicated in our original financial plan.
It is impossible to govern without a definite plan. Traveling along a definite road with an indefinite supply of provisions destroys heroes and knights.
The Goy rulers, to whom we once gave advice to neglect governmental duties for grandiose receptions, etiquette, and pleasures, only concealed our rule. The accounts of the powerful favorites who replaced the sovereign were drawn up by our agents, and they always satisfied the shallow minds by promises that in the future there would be savings and improvements. Savings from what? From new taxes? This might have been asked but was not asked by those who read our reports and plans. You know to what their carelessness has led them, what financial disorganization they have reached in spite of the wonderful diligence of their people.
I will add one more detail regarding domestic loans in addition to the report which I made at the last meeting. I will not speak any more of foreign loans, for they filled our coffers with the national money of the Goys . There will be no foreigners in our government, nobody outside.
We profited by the corruption of the administrators and by the negligence of the rulers in receiving sums that were [68] doubled, trebled, and even more, loaning the Goy governments money which in reality was not needed by the states at all. Who could do the same with regard to us? Therefore, I will only set forth details in regard to domestic loans.
In announcing such a loan, the governments open a subscription to their bonds. To make them accessible to all, they vary the denomination from one hundred to thousands, and the first subscribers are allowed to buy below face value. The following day the price is artificially raised on the pretext that everybody hurried to buy the bonds. In a few more days there is a pretense that the treasury is filled and that it is not known what to do with the money, which has been oversubscribed. (What was the use of taking it?) The subscription is evidently considerably in excess of the amount asked for. Therein lies the effect, for it is thus demonstrated that the public has confidence in the government obligations.
But after the comedy has been played the fact of the debt appears, and it is usually a heavy one. In order to pay the interest, new loans have to be issued, which do not liquidate but increase the original debt. Then when the borrowing capacity of the government has been exhausted, it becomes necessary to meet the interest on the loan—not the loan itself—by new taxes. These taxes are nothing but a debit used to cover a debit.
Then comes the period of conversions, but these only decrease the payment of interest while they do not annul the debts. Moreover, they cannot be made without the consent of the bondholders. When a conversion is advertised, an offer is made to return the money to those who are not willing to convert their bonds. If everybody were to demand his money, the government would be caught in its own net and would be unable to return all the money. Fortunately, the Goy subjects, ignorant of financial affairs, always preferred to suffer a fall in the value of their securities and a reduction of interest to the risk of new investments; thus, they have given these governments more than one opportunity of throwing off a deficit of several millions. At present, with the existence of foreign loans, the Goys cannot play such tricks, for they know that we would demand all the money back.
Thus, an avowed bankruptcy will be the best proof of the lack of common interest between the people and their government.
I direct your express attention to the above circumstance, as also to the following: At present all domestic loans are consolidated into so-called floating debts; in other words, into those whose terms of payment are more or less close at hand. Such debts consist of money placed in savings banks. Being at the disposal of the government, for a considerable length of time, these funds vanish in the payment of interest on foreign loans, and they are replaced by an equal amount of government securities. The latter cover all the deficits in the government treasuries of the Goys .
When we mount the throne of the universe, such financial expedients, being detrimental to our interests, will vanish. We will also destroy all stock exchanges, for we will not allow the prestige of our authority to be shaken by the shifting of the prices of our securities. We will fix the full price of their value legally without any possibility of its fluctuation. (A rise leads to a fall, and this was precisely what we did to the Goy stocks and bonds at the beginning.)
We will replace the stock exchanges by great government credit institutions, whose functions will be to tax commercial values according to governmental plans. These institutions will be in a position to throw daily on the market 500,000,000 shares of industrial stocks, or to buy up a like amount. Thus all industrial enterprises will become dependent upon us. You can well imagine what power that will give us.
In all that I have hitherto reported to you I have carefully tried to show you a true picture of the mystery of present events, as also of those of the past, which all flow into the stream of great events, the results of which will be seen in the near future. I have exposed our secret plans which govern our relations with the Goys , as well as our financial policy. There remains but little to add.
We hold in our hands the greatest modern power—gold. In the course of two days we can get it from our treasuries in any desired quantity.
Is there any more need for us to prove that our rule is decreed by God? Do we not prove by such wealth that all the [70] evil which we were forced to do during so many centuries has served in the end to true happiness—to the restoration of order? Although by means of violence, order will nevertheless be established. We will be able to prove that we are benefactors, who have brought true welfare and individual freedom to the tortured world, insuring at the same time the possibility of enjoying peace, quiet, and dignity of relationships, upon the sole condition, of course, that obedience to the laws established by us is practiced. We will also make it clear that freedom does not mean license and in doing whatever people please, no more than dignity and power imply the right to propound destructive doctrines, like freedom of conscience, equality, and similar things. Individual freedom by no means imports the right of disturbing oneself and others, disgracing oneself by making ridiculous speeches in disorderly gatherings, and implies that true liberty means individual inviolability through an honest and strict obedience to social laws; that moreover, human dignity implies the conception of one’s rights as well as the idea of legal inhibitions which prohibit fantastic dreams about the Ego.
Our power will be glorious because it will be mighty; it will rule and guide, and not helplessly crawl after leaders and orators, shouting insane words which they call great principles, and which in reality are simply Utopian. Our power will lead to order, which, in turn, brings happiness to the people. The prestige of this power will excite mystical adoration, and the peoples will bow before it. True power does not yield to any right, even be it that of God. None will dare approach it in order to deprive it even of an atom of its might.
To teach the people obedience they must be taught modesty, and to accomplish this the production of luxuries must be limited. We will thus improve customs, demoralized by rivalry, resulting from luxury.
We will restore handicraft, which will undermine the private capital of manufacturers. This is necessary, because big manufacturers often influence, although not always consciously, the thoughts of the people against the government.
A people, practicing handicraft, does not know what unemployment means, and this makes them cling to existing conditions and consequently to the power of authority. Unemployment is most dangerous for a government. It will have finished its work for us as soon as authority falls into our hands.
Drunkenness will also be forbidden by law and will be punishable as a crime against human decency, for man becomes bestial under the influence of alcohol.
Once more I state, that people obey blindly only the hand that is strong and entirely independent of them, in which they see a sword of defense and a stronghold against the blows of social misfortune. Why should the sovereign have an angel’s heart? They want to see in him the personification of might and power.
The sovereign who will replace the present existing governments, dragging along their existence in the midst of a society demoralized by us, which denies even the power of God and from whose midst rises on all sides the flames of anarchy, must primarily undertake to extinguish this all-consuming fire. Therefore, he must destroy such a society, if necessary drown it in its own blood, in order to resurrect it as a well-organized army, which consciously struggles against the infection of any anarchy affecting the state organism.
He, God’s elect, is chosen from above for the purpose of crushing the insane forces that are moved by instinct and not by intellect, by bestiality and not by humanitarianism. These forces are now triumphant, and assume the form of robberies and all kinds of violence exercised in the name of liberty and of right. They have destroyed all social order, so as to establish the throne of the King of Israel; but their rôle will be ended with his coming into power. Then it will be necessary to sweep them from his path, on which not a twig or an impediment shall remain.
Then we will say to the peoples: Pray to God and bow before him who bears the mark of predestination, to whom God Himself showed His Star, so that none but He Himself should free you from all sinful forces and from evil.
Now I shall refer to the manner in which we will strengthen the dynastic roots of King David so as to cause this dynasty to endure until the last day. This method will consist chiefly of the same principles which enabled our Wise Men to conserve their power to cope with universal problems and to guide the education of the thoughts of humanity at large.
A few members of the seed of David will train the sovereigns and their successors, who will be selected not by right of inheritance, but according to their personal ability. To them the deep political mysteries and the plan of our rule will be confided, but in such a wise manner that nobody will know these secrets. The aim of this method is to prove to all that power will not be given to the uninitiated in the mysteries of political art.
Only such people will be taught how to apply the above mentioned plans in practice, by comparing them with the experiences of many centuries, and only they will be initiated in the conclusions drawn from all the observations of political, economic, and social movements and sciences; in short, only they will know the true spirit of the laws, irrevocably established by nature for the purpose of regulating human relationship.
Direct descendants of the sovereign will often be prevented from inheriting the throne if, during the period of their study, they show signs of frivolity, lenience, or other tendencies detrimental to authority, which would make them incapable of government and dangerous to the prestige of the Crown.
Only those of an undoubtedly able and firm, even cruel character, will receive the reins of government from our Wise Men.
In case of illness, loss of will-power, or any other form of inefficiency, the sovereigns will be compelled to hand over the reins of government to new and able hands.
The sovereign’s immediate plan of action and its application in the future will be unknown even to the so-called closest advisers.
Only the sovereign and his three sponsors will know the future.
In the person of the sovereign, with his immovable will over [73] himself and humanity, all will recognize Fate itself with her mysterious paths. Nobody will know the aims of the sovereign when he issues his orders, and thus nobody will dare oppose him.
Naturally the mental capacity of the sovereign must be equal to the plan of rule herein contained. For this reason he will not mount the throne before a test of his mind is made by the above mentioned Wise Men.
To make people know and love their sovereign, it is necessary that he should address the people in public places, thus establishing harmony between the two forces, now separated from each other by mutual terror. This terror was necessary for us until the time came to make both forces fall under our influence.
The King of Israel must not be influenced by his passions, especially by sensuality. No particular element of his nature must have the upper hand and rule over his mind. Sensuality, more than anything else, upsets mental ability and clearness of vision by deflecting thought to the worst and most bestial side of human nature.
The Pillar of the Universe in the person of the World Ruler, sprung from the sacred seed of David, must sacrifice all personal desires for the benefit of his people.
Our sovereign must be irreproachable.
The most striking fact in connection with the Protocols is the close resemblance which their ruthless program bears in many respects to the policies actually put into effect by the Bolsheviki in Russia. Indeed, without this fact before us, the necessity for a serious consideration of the Protocols would be much less apparent. If the evidence shows that the Bolshevist movement is a movement conducted under Jewish leadership and principally controlled by Jews, and, furthermore, that it closely corresponds with the political program outlined in the Protocols, then, indeed, we have facts of grave significance supporting the authenticity of the Protocols.
With regard to the question as to how far the Bolshevist movement is a Jewish movement in the sense that it is under Jewish control, there is some disagreement. Certain prominent Jews in this country, while admitting that most of the Bolshevist leaders in Russia are Jews, claim that this is a mere coincidence, and claim further that the Bolshevist leaders are only apostate Jews who do not adhere to the Jewish religion.[8] The evidence, however, is not very convincing on either point, for on the one hand the proportion of Jews among the Bolshevist leaders in Russia is so large that it [75] strongly tends to show that it is not accidental but must be otherwise explained, while on the other hand, as to the allegation of apostasy, this seems to be principally based upon evidence that the Jewish leaders in Russia are denouncing religion in general on the ground that it is the bulwark of the capitalistic system and the enemy of the Socialistic State, in accordance with the teachings of Karl Marx and his followers. Such evidence, however, does not prove very much if in practice only the Christian church is actually attacked.
It is important to note in this connection that Karl Marx himself was a Jew, as are also practically all of the best known leaders of radical socialism, such as Bebel, Bernstein, Lassalle, Hillquit, the brothers Adler (in Austria), etc. The legend now prominently displayed by the Bolsheviki in Russia, that “religion is the opium of the people,” was the saying of Karl Marx himself, while it was Bebel who said: “Christianity and Socialism stand towards each other as fire and water.”
Moreover, there is evidence that there has been a marked persecution of Christian priests and their congregations by the Bolsheviki, and that the Jewish rabbis have not been molested. Generally speaking, we believe that the preponderance of evidence strongly tends to show that Bolshevism is Jewish in character in the sense that it is under the control principally of Jews who occupy, either openly or secretly, almost all of the positions of importance in the Soviet government in Russia. This was equally true in regard to the recent Spartacan and Bolshevist revolutions in Germany and Hungary. The one important exception is Lenin himself, Trotzky and almost all the other important Bolshevist leaders to-day being members of the Jewish race.
Evidence that the Bolsheviki in Russia have conducted a campaign of persecution against the Christian religion, while protecting the Jewish religion, will be considered below under the heading, “The Destruction of Religion and Christianity.” For the present we shall confine ourselves to other evidence which tends to show that the Bolshevik movement in Russia is under Jewish leadership and may be regarded as primarily a Jewish movement.
The testimony of a number of reliable witnesses before the Overman Committee is to the effect that from the very beginning the leadership of the Bolshevist revolution in Russia has been principally Jewish and that the movement had powerful support from Jews returning to Russia in the spring of 1917.
This testimony was taken early in the year 1919 and is contained in the printed Senate Report (a public document) entitled, “Bolshevik Propaganda—Hearings before a Subcommittee of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, Sixty-fifth Congress, pursuant to S. Res. 439 and 469.”
Among the witnesses who testified as to the Jewish character of the Bolshevist movement before the Senate Committee was Dr. George A. Simons, a Methodist clergyman who had been for many years in charge of a church and other property belonging to the American Methodists in Petrograd. He was there during the Kerensky régime and during the Bolshevist régime until October 6, 1918.
Dr. Simons testified that “at the beginning of the so-called new régime [Kerensky’s] there was a disposition to glorify the Allies and to make a great deal of what the French Revolution had stood for; within from six to eight weeks there was an undercurrent just the opposite, and things began to loom up in a pro-German way.”[9]
He then told of the arrival of Lenin from Switzerland via Germany, and of Bronstein (alias Trotzky) from New York, and how they conducted a vigorous agitation in Russia while Kerensky was “running up and down the front.” He then goes on to testify as follows:
Mr. Simons. “Kerensky was spending a good deal of his time running up and down the front, trying to hearten the Russian soldiers in their warfare, and he was generally accredited with being a fine orator and doing splendid work, and I do not doubt but what he did manage to keep the men longer than they otherwise would have stayed in, but we were told there were hundreds of agitators who had followed in the trail of Trotzky-Bronstein, these men having come over from the [77] lower East Side of New York. I was surprised to find scores of such men walking up and down Nevsky. Some of them, when they learned that I was the American pastor in Petrograd, stepped up to me and seemed very much pleased that there was somebody who could speak English, and their broken English showed that they had not qualified as being real Americans; and a number of these men called on me, and a number of us were impressed with the strange Yiddish element in this thing right from the start, and it soon became evident that more than half of the agitators in the so-called Bolshevik movement were Yiddish.”
Senator Nelson. “Hebrews?”
Mr. Simons. “They were Hebrews, apostate Jews. I do not want to say anything against the Jews, as such. I am not in sympathy with the anti-Semitic movement, never have been, and do not ever expect to be. I am against it. I abhor all pogroms of whatever kind. But I have a firm conviction that this thing is Yiddish, and that one of its bases is found in the East Side of New York.”
Senator Nelson. “Trotzky came over from New York during that summer, did he not?”
Mr. Simons. “He did.”
Senator Overman. “You think he brought these people with him?”
Mr. Simons. “I am not able to say that he brought them with him. I think that most of them came after him, but that he was responsible for their coming.”
Mr. Simons further states (Senate Report, p. 114):
“The latest startling information, given me by some one who says that there is good authority for it—and I am to be given the exact figures later on and have them checked up properly by the proper authorities—is this, that in December, 1918, in the northern community of Petrograd, so-called—that is what they call that section of the Soviet régime under the presidency of the man known as Mr. Apfelbaum—out of 388 members, only 16 happened to be real Russians, and all the rest Jews, with the exception possibly of one man, who is a negro from America, who calls himself Prof. Gordon, and 265 of the members of this northern commune government, that is sitting in the old Smolny Institute, came from the lower East Side of New York—265 of them. In fact, I am very much impressed with this, that moving around here I find that certain Bolsheviki propagandists are nearly all Jews—apostate Jews. I have been in the so-called People’s House, at 7 East Fifteenth Street, New York, which calls itself also the Rand School of Social Science, and I have visited that at least six times during the last eleven weeks or so, buying their [78] literature, and some of the most seditious stuff I have ever found against our own Government, and 19 out of every 20 people I have seen there have been Jews.”
On the same page, referring to a pamphlet written by one Albert Rhys Williams, Dr. Simons states:
“I have analyzed certain questions and answers, especially with regard to this paragraph on religion, and I have no doubt in my mind that the predominant element in this Bolsheviki movement in America is, you may call it, the Yiddish of the East Side.”
On page 116 the witness further states:
“I was impressed with this, Senator, that shortly after the great revolution of the winter of 1917 there were scores of Jews standing on the benches and soap boxes, and what not, talking until their mouths frothed, and I often remarked to my sister, ‘Well, what are we coming to, anyway? This all looks so Yiddish.’ Up to that time we had very few Jews, because there was, as you may know, a restriction against having Jews in Petrograd; but after the revolution they swarmed in there, and most of the agitators happened to be Jews. I do not want to be unfair to them, but I usually know a Jew when I see one.”
In a subsequent part of his testimony, he says:
“I had occasion to speak with people who were working and people who were not bourgeois, I interviewed hundreds, and I asked them, ‘Well, what do you think of this thing?’ ‘Well, we know that it is first of all German, and second, we know that it is Jewish. It is not a Russian proposition at all.’ That became so popular that as you moved through the streets in Petrograd in July and August and September and the beginning of October, openly they would tell you this, ‘This is not a Russian Government; this a German and Hebrew Government.’ And then others would come out and say, ‘And very soon there is going to be a big pogrom.’ As a result of that, hundreds of Bolshevik officials who happened to be Jews were sending their wives and their children out of Petrograd and Moscow, afraid that the pogrom would really come.” (p. 132).
On page 142 of his testimony Dr. Simons introduced a list of names, which he said was widely circulated in Petrograd in August, 1917, giving the real names and the Jewish names of the most important Bolshevist leaders. This list is as follows:
| Real name | ||
|---|---|---|
| “1. | Chernoff | Von Gutmann |
| 2. | Trotzky | Bronstein |
| 3. | Martoff | Zederbaum |
| 4. | Kamkoff | Katz |
| 5. | Meshkoff | Goldenberg |
| 6. | Zagorsky | Krochmal |
| 7. | Suchanoff | Gimmer |
| 8. | Dan | Gurvitch |
| 9. | Parvuss | Geldfand |
| 10. | Kradek | Sabelson |
| 11. | Zinovyeff | Apfelbaum |
| 12. | Stekloff | Nachamkes |
| 13. | Larin | Lurye |
| 14. | Ryazanoff | Goldenbach |
| 15. | Bogdanoff | Josse |
| 16. | Goryeff | Goldmann |
| 17. | Zwezdin | Wanstein |
| 18. | Lieber | Goldman |
| 19. | Ganezky | Fürstenberg |
| 20. | Roshal | Solomon” |
Dr. Simons also testified that when the Bolsheviki came into power the Yiddish language at once became predominant in official proclamations and posters. He says:
“I might mention this, that when the Bolsheviki came into power, all over Petrograd we at once had a predominance of Yiddish proclamations, big posters, and everything in Yiddish. It became very evident that now that was to be one of the great languages of Russia; and the real Russians, of course, did not take very kindly to it.”
On page 135 Dr. Simons states:
“Trotzky is a Jew. His real name is Leon Bronstein.”[10]
Mr. Huntington was Commercial Attaché of the United States Embassy at Petrograd from June, 1916, until September, 1918. He was in Petrograd at the outbreak of the Bolshevist coup d’état in November, 1917, and remained there until February, 1918, when he was sent on a mission to Siberia by [80] Ambassador Francis. When he returned to Russia he remained in Moscow from May, 1918, until August 26, 1918. He states on page 47:
“The Bolsheviks are internationalists, and they were not interested in the particular national ideals of Russia.”
On page 69 he testified:
“The leaders of the movement, I should say, are about two-thirds Russian Jews and perhaps one-sixth or more of some of the other nationalities, like the Letts, or the Armenians.”
Mr. Welsh was employed by the National City Bank and was in Russia from October, 1916, until September, 1918. He states on page 269:
“In Russia it is well known that three-fourths of the Bolshevik leaders are Jewish.”
In regard to the men who went to Russia from the East Side of New York, at the outbreak of the revolution, he stated:
“There were some—not many, but there were some—real Russians; and what I mean by real Russians is Russian-born, and not Russian Jews.”
The witness also stated that he knew “several cases” in which well-to-do Jews had been persecuted in the same way as other Russian bourgeois. On page 270 he states:
“Bolshevism cannot be explained along racial lines alone. The Bolsheviks are made up of the very worst elements of many races. It is important, however, that Jews in this country should not favor Bolshevism because of any liberties or privileges which they may think are being accorded to the Jews in Russia by the Bolsheviks. They should study the facts carefully and not be prejudiced by any racial feeling, or they are sure to bring the odium of Bolshevism unjustly to the door of the Jew. The best Jews in this country would do well to brand the Jewish Bolsheviks in Russia as anti-Jews, which they really are, for they bring nothing but discredit to the Jewish race.”
Mr. Simmons was Trade Commissioner, connected with the United States Department of Commerce, who was in Siberia and Russia from July, 1917, until November, 1918. He was in Vologda in July, 1918, and gives a graphic account of his imprisonment there by the assistant of the commissar of that community, a man named Iduke. He says:
“Iduke is a Lettish Jew, a man of a very irascible nature, and, on account of his experience in the uprising in Yaroslav, where the protest against the Bolshevik régime had become formidable, he had the reputation of being the cruelest and the most bloodthirsty Bolshevik leader of the revolution.”
Mr. Simmons then narrates how he himself escaped execution only because he succeeded in bribing a Lettish soldier who had been in America to deliver a letter to the Swedish Consul General. An English subject who was imprisoned with him in the same cell was actually executed. Shortly before his death this Englishman said to Simmons:
“I do not like the situation. I don’t understand these people. They are not Russians. I don’t know why they accuse me, nor what they are going to do with me.”[11]
Another witness, who was allowed to withhold his name, testified before the Senate Committee that he left Petrograd November 6, 1917, the night the Bolshevist uprising took place. His testimony on page 321 of the Senate Report is as follows:
“With regard to the industrial conditions before the Bolsheviki rising started, with the revolution of March, 1917, we found that there were quite a number of so-called Americans who had returned to Russia almost immediately after the revolution, commencing, probably, to arrive in April of 1917.”
Senator Nelson. “What sort of people were they? They were people who had been here, were they not?”
Mr. ⸺. “People who had been in this country.”
Senator Nelson. “Were they Hebrews?”
Mr. ⸺. “A large number of them were—that is Hebrew by race, non-Slavs—and we were continually meeting [82] these men on all sorts of labor conditions, (committees?) to regulate the hours of labor and the rates of remuneration, and quite a number of them spoke English.”
This witness testified that he left Petrograd on December 15, 1918, and that he had been there continuously for the three years previous to that date; that he belonged to no political party in Russia, but had lived among the peasants and workmen, teaching them agriculture. He at one time had been employed by the Russian Department of Agriculture, as an agent, in the United States.
On page 424 he testified in regard to the Jewish aspect of the movement as follows:
“And, besides these refugees, most of the people that are governing Russia now are Jews. I am not against Jews in general. They are a very capable and energetic people, but, as you Americans say, the right man must be in the right place. Their place is in the commission houses, in banks, in the offices, but not in the government of a fine agricultural country. They do not understand anything about agriculture, about production, about keeping materials, and about distribution. They do not know anything about those things at all.”
Senator Wolcott. “You mean those that are in charge of the Bolsheviki, do you not?”
Mr. Kryshtofovich. “I am talking about the Bolsheviki; because if you take out Bolshevik government, Lenine is a Russian and all these constellations that are turning around this sun are Jews. They have changed their names. For instance, Trotzky is not Trotzky, but Bronstein. We have Apfelbaum, and so on, and so on.”
It is important that other official documents pertaining to the Bolshevist activities in Russia also refer to the question which we are now discussing, namely, the Jewish character of the Bolshevist régime. In this connection we quote from the British White Book, Russia No. 1 (1919), entitled “A Collection of Reports on Bolshevism in Russia, presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty. April, 1919.”
This document was published in London at the government printing office in 1919. In exhibit No. 33, a cablegram dispatched [83] by Mr. Alston to Earl Curzon, from Vladivostok to London, February 8, 1919 (“telegraphic—following from consul at Ekaterinburg, 6th February”), the following is stated:
“From examination of several labourer and peasant witnesses, I have evidence to the effect that very smallest percentage of this district were pro-Bolshevik, majority of labourers sympathising with summoning of Constituent Assembly. Witnesses further stated that Bolshevik leaders did not represent Russian working classes, most of them being Jews” (page 33).
In a cable dispatch from General Knox to the British War Office on February 5, 1919, from Omsk, Siberia, details are given as to the murder of the Imperial Russian family. This cable reads in part as follows:
“With regard to the murder of the Imperial family at Ekaterinburg, there is further evidence to show that there were two parties in the local Soviet, one which was anxious to save Imperial family, and the latter, headed by five Jews, two of whom were determined to have them murdered. These two Jews, by name Vainen and Safarof, went with Lenine when he made a journey across Germany” (page 41).
Again, in a report made by Rev. B. S. Lombard to Earl Curzon on March 23, 1919, referring to the results of the Bolshevist régime in Russia, among other things, the following is stated:
“All business became paralyzed, shops were closed, Jews became possessors of most of the business houses, and horrible scenes of starvation became common in the country districts. The peasants put their children to death rather than see them starve. In a village on the Dvina, not far from Schlusselburg, a mother hanged three of her children” (page 57).
Mr. Henry C. Emery, formerly Chairman of the United States Tariff Board, recently wrote a treatise on Bolshevism, of which Lord Bryce has said:
“It seems to me the sanest and clearest exposition of Bolshevist theory and practice that I have seen and confirms my view that between them and us there can be no peace.”
Mr. Emery comes to the conclusion that Bolshevism is the promotion of a relentless and universal class war, and that “a Bolshevik is a man who believes in the overthrow of the [84] institution of private property by force of arms.” While this is the definition which he gives of Bolshevism as a movement, and his argument in support of it is certainly a very able one, it is interesting to note what he says in regard to the Jewish support of the movement:
“In the minds of some people, especially in Russia, Bolshevism takes on the color of a revolt of the Jews against the Russians, who have so long kept them in subjection. Lenin is of course a pure Russian, and it is a mistake to say that all the other leaders of importance are Jews. On the other hand, the Jews have been active in the movement out of all proportion to their relative numbers. No one who ever made a visit to Smolny Institute, when that was the headquarters of the Bolshevik government at Petrograd, could fail to understand how easy it was to get the impression that the Jews had at last seized the power.”
Mr. Robert Wilton, a well-known Englishman, who was the Petrograd correspondent of the London Times, and a Knight of St. George, in his book entitled “Russia’s Agony,” refers to the part which the Jews played in undermining the Kerensky government and establishing the Bolshevist rule:
“Subversion had been carried out by a handful of pseudo-Jew Extremists in the Soviet, but the Soviet was a party to the traitorous business. Most of the leaders—especially the pseudo-Jews—were a truculent pack, cowering behind the soldiery, intent upon realizing their revolutionary ‘ideals,’ but terrified by a possibility of failure and eventual reprisals.”
The author also states:
“Afterwards their numbers [referring to the Jew Extremists in the Soviet] increased largely, and although they studiously concealed their identity under assumed Russian or Polish names, it became known that the principal ones were: Nahamkez—Steklov, Apfelbaum—Zinoviev, Rosenfeldt—Kamenev, Goldmann—Gorev, Goldberg—Mekowski, Zederbaum—Martov, Himmer—Sukhanov, Krachman—Zagorski, Hollander—Mieshkowski, Lourier—Larim, Seffer—Bogdanov. Among the leaders of this gang—under Lenin—were: Trotzky, whose real name was Bronstein, and Feldmann, alias Chernov.”[12]
In the well-known French periodical L’Illustration, issued September 14, 1918, an article appeared under the title “Petrograd [85] under the Commune,” from which we reproduce the following extract:
“The Masters of the Hour.
“The Bolshevist Movement and the Jews of Russia
“When one lives in contact with the functionaries who are serving the Bolshevist government, one feature strikes the attention, which is that almost all of them are Jews.
“I am not at all anti-Semitic but I must state what strikes the eyes: everywhere in Petrograd, in Moscow, in Provincial Districts, in all commissariats, in district offices, in Smolny, in the former ministries, in the Soviets, I have met nothing but Jews and again Jews.
“A Jew is this District Commissary, former stock broker, with a double bourgeois chin. A Jew is this commissary of the bank, very elegant, with a cravat of the latest style, and a fancy waistcoat. Again a Jew, this inspector of taxes, with his hooked nose: he understands perfectly how to squeeze the bourgeois in order to cover the deficit in the Bolshevist budget which amounts for the first half year, 1918, to 14,000,000,000 rubles! Jewish are these little stenographers, these secretaries: the same hooked noses, the same jet black hair.
“The more one studies the second revolution the more one is convinced that Bolshevism is a Jewish movement which can be explained by the special conditions in which the Jewish people were placed in Russia.”
In the London Times of March 29, 1919, the following article appeared, entitled “Bolshevist Portraits III. Some Commissaries”:
“One of the most curious features of the Bolshevist movement is the high percentage of non-Russian elements amongst its leaders. Of the twenty or thirty commissaries or leaders who provide the central machinery of the Bolshevist movement not less than 75% are Jews.
“If Lenin is the brains of the movement, the Jews provide the executive officers. Of the leading commissaries, Trotzky, Zinoviev, Kameneff, Stekloff, Sverdloff, Uritsky, Joffe, Rakovsky, Radek, Menjinsky, Larin, Bronski, Zaalkind, Volodarsky, Petroff, Litvinoff, Smirdovitch, and Vovrovsky are all of the Jewish race, while amongst the minor Soviet officials the number is legion. Of all the Bolshevist leaders Petrovsky, the Commissary for the Interior, and a former member of the Duma, is practically the only one who in any way could be described as a working man. The rest are all intellectuals of bourgeois or paid bourgeois origin.”
In the issue of “ASIA” February-March, 1920, there is an article entitled “Inside Soviet Russia.” The author of the said article, Mr. V. Anichkoff, is a well-known Russian scientist. Among other things, he states as follows:
“In all the Bolshevist institutions the heads are Jews. The Assistant Commissar for Elementary Education, Grunberg, can hardly speak Russian. The Jews are successful in everything and obtain their ends. They know how to command and get complete submission. But they are proud and contemptuous to everyone, which strongly excites the people against them. Anti-Semitism in a strong degree has spread in all grades of the people. The people are inclined to see in the Jews the culprits of all their woes. They look on Bolshevism as a Jewish affair, and Anti-Semitism is widely spread in the Red army. The Red soldiers openly and strongly express their hatred of the Jews. One Red soldier related before me that he was discharged, and that at all the hospitals and halting stages the doctors and their assistants and nurses were Jews; that a Jewish doctor snatched the cross from one of his comrades and said: ‘That is not wanted now, it has been done away with,’ but that he did not let the doctor do the same to him. At the present time there is a great national religious fervor among the Jews. They believe that the promised time of the rule of God’s elect on earth is coming. They have connected Judaism with a universal revolution. They see in the spread of revolution the fulfilling of the Scriptures: ‘Though I make an end of all the nations, whether I have scattered thee, yet will I not make an end of thee.’ Bound up with the overwhelming part taken by Jews in the Revolution, an interest in masonry, Zionism and the mission of the Jews have spread among educated Russians.”
(“ASIA,” February-March, 1920, p. 223).
We also refer the reader to the testimony of a well-known Jewish periodical published in London, The Jewish Chronicle, as to the identity of Bolshevism and Judaism. In part the article states as follows:
“There is much in the fact of Bolshevism itself, in the fact that so many Jews are Bolsheviks, in the fact that the ideals of Bolshevism at many points are consonant with the finest ideals of Judaism.” (See Jewish Chronicle, No. 2609, April 4, 1919, p. 7, article entitled “Peace, War, and Bolshevism.”)
It is significant that one of the well-known Jewish leaders, Israel Zangwill, addressing a recent conference of the Poale Zion Congregation in London, glorified “the race which has [87] produced a Beaconsfield, a Reading, a Montagu, a Klotz, a Kurt Eisner, a Trotzky” (quoted from The Jewish Chronicle, February 27, 1920, No. 2656, p. 28). Referring to this statement, La Vieille-France says, “Thus, Trotzky is, in fact, the hero of Judaism” (No. 164, March 18-24, 1920).
It is important to note that the Jewish character of the Bolshevist movement which is so accentuated in Soviet Russia was equally apparent in Soviet Hungary when that country was under the Red rule of Bela Cohen (Kuhn). Mr. Edward Dillon in his book “The Inside Story of the Peace Conference,” devotes much attention to this subject. Referring to the situation in Hungary, Mr. Dillon states as follows, at page 224.
“By the first of August the lawless band that was ruling the country relinquished the reins of power which were taken over at first by a Socialist Cabinet of which an influential French press organ wrote: ‘The names of the new . commissaries of the people tell us nothing, because their bearers are unknown. But the endings of their names tell us that most of them are, like those of the preceding government, of Jewish origin. Never since the inauguration of official Communism did Budapest better deserve the appellation of Judapest, which was assigned to it by the late M. Lueger, chief of the Christian Socialists of Vienna. That is an additional trait in common with the Russian Soviets.’”
In this same connection the weekly magazine The New Witness, published in London, in its issue of April 11, 1919, remarked as follows:
“It is not only among the Allies that the Jewish influence is making itself felt. We know what a tight grip they have on the governments at Petrograd and Berlin. It now appears that the new government of Hungary is dominated by Jews. Ninety-five per cent of Hungarians are Christians and eighty per cent of the ministers are Hebrew. This fact becomes the more remarkable when we are told that the ministers are nearly all mediocrities.”
The Jewish character of the Bolshevist movement in Russia has been explicitly referred to in the Bolshevist press itself. In substantiation of this we present the following evidence:
In No. 1 of the Russian weekly newspaper, On to Moscow, published on September 23, 1919, in Rostov on the Don, an article was published, entitled “Not one Drop of Innocent Blood.” The article reads as follows:
“In the newspaper ‘Communist,’ issued on April 12, 1919, No. 72, which paper was published in the City of Kharkoff, 13 Karl Liebnecht Street, telephone No. 8-40, Mr. M. Cohan, in his article ‘Services of the Jewry to the working class,’ wrote as follows:
“‘Various kinds of reactionary regimental organizations and radas are working out agrarian “laws,” are giving away the land to the workmen, are establishing an eight-hour day, and throwing out other crumbs to the working masses with the sole object to remain in power. But let us unmask them and let us see what there is behind this servile mask. Let us, for instance, analyze their attitude towards the Jews. On all the territory which is occupied by the Don, Kuban and Voluntary gangs, the Jews are being annihilated and oppressed. One is unable to trace a Jew holding any office, be it important or unimportant, and this is called “equality and fraternity.” The Voluntary executioners scream about their humanitarianism and at the same time they oppress a whole nation which always had the esteem of the whole world. It should not be forgotten that the Jewish people, who for centuries were oppressed by kings and czars, are the real proletariat, the real internationale, which has no country.
“‘Without exaggeration, it may be said that the great Russian social revolution was indeed accomplished by the hands of the Jews. Would the dark oppressed masses of the Russian workmen and peasants have been able to throw off the yoke of the bourgeoisie by themselves? No, it was precisely the Jews who led the Russian proletariat to the dawn of the Internationale, and not only have led, but are also now leading the Soviet cause which remains in their safe hands. We may be quiet as long as the chief command of the Red Army is in the hands of comrade Leon Trotzky. It is true that there are no Jews in the ranks of the Red Army as far as privates are concerned, but in the committees and in Soviet organizations, as commissars, the Jews are gallantly leading the masses of the Russian proletariat to victory. It is not without reason that during the elections to all Soviet institutions the Jews are winning by an overwhelming majority. It is not without reason, let us repeat, that the Russian proletariat has elected as its head and leader the Jew comrade Bronstein-Trotzky. The symbol of Jewry, which for centuries has struggled against capitalism, has become also the symbol of the Russian proletariat, which can be seen even in the fact of the adoption of the Red five-pointed star, which in former times, as it is well-known, was the symbol of Zionism and Jewry. With this sign comes victory, with this sign comes the death of the parasites of the bourgeoisie, and let the supporters of Denikine, Krasnov and Kolchak tremble, these oppressors and executioners of the advance guard of Socialism—of the [89] gallant Jewish people. Their servility before the working masses will not help them, and Jewish tears will come out of them in sweat of drops of blood.’”
The publishers of the newspaper “On to Moscow” print a footnote to the article of Mr. Cohan which reads:
“The issue of the newspaper ‘Communist’ is kept at the office and everybody is invited to ascertain its authenticity.”
It will be recalled that the Protocols advocate a mass terror, a “program of violence.” In this connection also the actual Bolshevist policies are in complete harmony with the program of the Protocols. With reference to this point it becomes important to quote the Krasnaya Gazeta (Red Gazette), the official organ of the Petrograd Soviet of Workers’, Red Army, and Peasants’ Deputies, which body is presided over by Zinovieff, alias Apfelbaum, a Jew. On August 31, 1918, in an editorial article, the following is stated:
“The interests of the revolution require the physical annihilation of the bourgeois class. It is time for us to start.”
More explicitly the program of violence is defined by the same paper on September 1, 1918, in an article entitled “Blood for Blood.” Therein it is stated:
“We will turn our hearts into steel, which we will temper in the fire of suffering and the blood of fighters for freedom. We will make our hearts cruel, hard, and immovable, so that no mercy will enter them, and so that they will not quiver at the sight of a sea of enemy blood. We will let loose the floodgates of that sea. Without mercy, without sparing, we will kill our enemies in scores of hundreds. Let them be thousands; let them drown themselves in their own blood. For the blood of Lenin and Uritzki, Zinovieff and Volodarski, let there be floods of blood of the bourgeois—more blood, as much as possible.”
Mr. Zinovieff—Apfelbaum went into further details as to the number of Russians whom he proposed to kill for the sake of Mr. Trotzky’s régime. In a speech of Zinovieff’s, reported in the Northern Commune, published in Petrograd [90] on September 19, 1918, No. 109, the following plain statement is quoted:
“To overcome our enemies we must have our own socialist militarism. We must win over to our side 90,000,000 of the 100,000,000 of population of Russia under the Soviets. As for the rest, we have nothing to say to them; they must be annihilated.”
To be sure that the Jewish Bolsheviks were not boasting, the following report of the American Consul General at Moscow, dated September 3, 1918, is of the utmost significance. This report, which was published in the “Memorandum on Certain Aspects of the Bolshevist Movement in Russia,” Washington, Government Printing Office, 1919, reads in part as follows:
“Since May the so-called Extraordinary Commission to Combat Counter-revolution has conducted an openly avowed campaign of terror. Thousands of persons have been summarily shot without even the form of trial. Many of them have no doubt been innocent of even the political views which were supposed to supply the motive of their execution.”
The American Consul General concludes his report by stating:
“The situation cries aloud to all who will act for the sake of humanity.”[13]
Trotzky made an attempt to justify “mass terror” in an article signed by him in the official daily newspaper Izvestia on January 10, 1919, under the title “Military Specialists and the Red Army.” In this article Trotzky states among other things as follows:
“Terror as the demonstration of the will and strength of the working class, is historically justified, precisely because the proletariat was able thereby to break the political will of the Intelligentsia, pacify the professional men of various categories and work, and gradually subordinate them to its own aims within the fields of their specialties.”[14]
The London Times of November 14, 1919, printed a letter “sent by a British Officer in South Russia to his wife” stating that “the letter is published exactly as sent, except that names [91] and dates have been altered so that the writer and his wife will not be embarrassed.” The officer appeals to his wife to do all she can to put before the British public the information which he gives her as to the atrocities committed by the Bolsheviki which he had himself witnessed while fighting with the army of General Denikin.
“The Bolshevists are devils. I hope to send you copies of 64 official photos taken by British officers at Odessa when the town was retaken from the Bolshevists. As no paper will print them I suggest that you should have copies done. If we’re too hard up you could pay for them by sending me no parcels, or selling my Caucasian dagger, or Persian book, or something. And I suggest that you should then do with them as you think fit, to make them most widely known. Their horror may make people realize. They must realize. By God, they shall realize! They show men who’ve been crucified with the torture of the ‘human glove.’ The victim gets crucified, nails through his elbows. The hands are treated with a solution which shrivels the skin. The skin is cut out with a razor, round the wrist, and peeled off, till it hangs by the finger nails—the ‘human glove.’ I’m not sparing you. I hope you’ll show and send them to everybody we know. People at home, apathetic fools they are, do not deserve to be spared. They must be woken up. John and Katie ought to see them. Most of the photos are of women. Women with their breasts cut off to the bone. Two little bits, ref. Bolshevist atrocities, you might type in as many copies as you can. If you and several others left them in different tea-shops every afternoon, it might touch quite a lot of people. I shall send you chapter and verse if I can. If I haven’t sent chapter and verse in a month, do your best without. Papers are no good, because papers would put it more delicately. We have here at H. Q. passes issued to Bolshevists by commissaries on occupying Ekaterinodar. These passes authorize their holders to arrest any girl they fancy for the use of the soldiery. Sixty-two girls of all classes were arrested like this and thrown to the Bolshevist troops. Those who struggled were killed quite early on. The rest, when used and finished, were mutilated and thrown, dead and dying, into the two small rivers flowing through Ekaterinodar. In all towns occupied by Bolshevists and reoccupied by us ‘slaughter-houses’ are found choked with corpses. Hundreds of ‘suspects,’ men, women, and children, were herded in these—doors and windows manned and the struggling mass fired into until most of them were dead or dying. The doors were then locked and they were left. The stench in these places, I am told, is hair-raising. These ‘slaughter-houses’ are veritable [92] plague spots and have caused widespread epidemics. I want you to proselytize Robinson and galvanize the Colonel and everybody else you can get hold of. I’d like James to see this and No. 47 and Dorothy. Above all the Mater. For I feel sure, that whatever happens, she and you will be glad that I’ve come out.”
(“The Horrors of Bolshevism,” reprinted from The Times, November 14, 1919, pp. 5 and 6.)
In the same letter the writer refers to the Bolshevist plans of extending their power to Asia and Africa, and discusses the part played by the Jews in the Bolshevist régime in Russia.
“. Bolshevist Russia is a channel of communication to the Committee of Union and Progress, to Egypt, India, and Afghanistan. Unless beaten by us, the Bolshies will beat us. It’s a side issue for the present, but the danger of their rousing and letting loose the Chinese is not so very remote. They have declared war on Christianity. The Bible to them is a ‘counter-revolutionary’ book, and to be stamped out. They are aiming at raising all non-Christian races against the Christian countries. The Bolshevists form about 5 per cent. of the population of Russia—JEWS (80 to 90 per cent. of the commissaries are Jews), Chinese, Letts, Germans, and certain of the ‘skilled labor’ artisans. The conscribed peasantry, originally captured by the catchwords mentioned in the pamphlets, now often goaded beyond endurance, is rising against them over wide districts. Still conscribed and put up to fight, under severe penalties, they form most of the ‘cannon fodder’ used by the Bolshies. They desert, often en masse, and many a peasant who marched for the Bolshevists last week is fighting for Denikin in the Volunteer Army to-day. Ref. Jews—In towns captured by Bolshevists the only unviolated sacred buildings are the synagogues, while churches are used for anything, from movie-shows to ‘slaughter-houses.’ The Poles, Galicians, and Petlura have committed ‘pogroms’ (massacres of Jews). Not the Russian Volunteer Armies under Denikin. Denikin has, in fact, been so strict in protecting the Jews that he has been accused by his sympathizers of favoring them. If, however, a Commissary, steeped in murder, with torture and rape, with mutilation, happens to be a Jew, as most of them are, should he receive exceptional treatment?”
(“The Horrors of Bolshevism,” p. 5.)
The London Times of December 3, 1919, published the statement of an eye witness of the “reign of torture” under the Bolsheviki at the time of the first capture of Odessa. The [93] witness is the Rev. R. Courtier-Forster, late British Chaplain at Odessa and the Russian Ports of the Black Sea. Space permits the reprint here of only the following passages from this important testimony as to one chapter of the Bolshevist terror:
“While I was still British chaplain of Odessa the city was deluged with blood. When the Bolshevist elements, grafting on to their main support the 4,000 criminals released from the city gaols, attempted to seize the town, people of education, regardless of social position, offered what armed resistance was in their power. Workmen, shop assistants, soldiers, professional men, and a handful of officers fought for freedom and liberty through the streets of the great port for three days and nights against the bloody despotism of the Bolshevists. Tramcars were overturned to make barricades, trenches dug in the streets, machine-guns placed in the upper windows of houses to move the thoroughfare with fire. The place became an inferno. The Bolshevists were victorious. On capturing Odessa Railway Station, which had been defended by a few officers and a number of anti-Bolshevist soldiers, the Bolshevists bayoneted to death the 19 wounded and helpless men laid on the waiting-room floor to await Red Cross succour.
“Scores of other men who fell wounded in the streets also became victims to the triumphant Bolshevist criminals. The majority of these wretched and unhappy sufferers completely disappeared. Inquiries at the hospitals and prisons revealed the fact that they were not there, and no trace of them was to be found. A fortnight later there was a terrible storm on the Black Sea, and the bodies of the missing men were washed up on the rocks of Odessa breakwater and along the shore; they had been taken out to sea in small boats, stones tied to their feet, and then been dropped over alive into deep water. Hundreds of others were captured and taken on board the Almaz and the Sinope, the largest cruiser of the Black Sea Fleet. Here they became victims of unthinkable tortures.
“On the Sinope General Chormichoff and some other personal friends of my own were fastened one by one with iron chains to planks of wood and pushed slowly, inch by inch, into the ship’s furnaces and roasted alive. Others were tied to winches, the winches turned until the men were torn in two alive. Others were taken to the boilers and scalded with boiling steam; they were then moved to another part of the ship and ventilating fans set revolving that currents of cold air might blow on the scalds and increase the agony of the torture. The full names of 17 of the Sinope victims were given me in writing by members of their families or their [94] personal friends. These were lost later when my rooms were raided, my papers seized, and I myself arrested and thrown into prison.
“The house in the Catherine Square in which I was first in captivity afterwards became the Bolshevists’ House of Torture in which hundreds of victims were done to death. The shrieks of the people being tortured to death or having splinters of wood driven under the quick of their nails were so agonizing and appalling that personal friends of my own living more than a hundred yards away in the Vorontsoffsky Pereulok were obliged to fasten their double windows to prevent the cries of anguish penetrating into the house. The horror and fear of the surviving citizens was so great that the Bolshevists kept motor lorries thundering up and down the street to drown the awful screams of agony wrung from their dying victims.
“This House of Torture remains as much as possible in the condition in which the Bolshevists left it and is now shown to those who care to inspect its gruesome and blood-bespattered rooms.
“Week by week the newspapers published articles for and against the nationalization of women. In South Russia the proposal did not become a legal measure, but in Odessa bands of Bolshevists seized women and girls and carried them off to the Port, the timber yards, and the Alexandrovsky Park for their own purposes. Women used in this way were found in the mornings either dead or mad or in a dying condition. Those found still alive were shot. One of the most awful of my own personal experiences of the New Civilization was hearing at night from my bedroom windows the frantic shrieks of women being raped to death in the park opposite. Screams of shrill terror and despair repeated at intervals until they became nothing but hoarse cries of agony like the death calls of a dying animal. This happened not once, or twice, but many times. Never to the day of my death shall I forget the horror of those dreadful shrieks of tortured women, and one’s own utter powerlessness to aid the victims or punish the Bolshevist devils in their bestial orgies.”
(“Bolshevism, Reign of Torture at Odessa,” by the Rev. R. Courtier-Forster, late British Chaplain at Odessa and the Russian Ports of the Black Sea. Reprinted from The Times, December 3, 1919, pp. 2, 3 and 4.)
The Protocols speak of concealed executions as well as of open violence when making use of the weapon of terrorism to secure political domination. The Bolsheviki closely paralleled the Protocols in this respect.
While it is true that the number of victims of outright execution [95] by shooting, drowning, etc., have run into very large figures, they are undoubtedly few in comparison with the number who have been deliberately starved by the Bolsheviki. In pursuance of their avowed policy of exterminating the bourgeois class the Soviet government divided the people into four categories with respect to the receipt of food, the bourgeoisie being placed in the last two categories as to which the allowance of food was insufficient to support life. A report by “Mr. E.” found in the British White Book, “Russia No. 1” (1919), relating to the conditions in February, 1919, shows that the last two categories have been done away with altogether. The report states that the Bolsheviki have published statistics “showing that the fourth category was not necessary, as there were so few members.” “This proves,” he says, “that the 4th category people have either been exterminated or have been forced to work under the Bolsheviks in order to live.” The same witness states that the amount of food given to the first category was constantly varying according to the supplies. The rations allowed the four categories in October, 1918, are shown by the Bolshevist paper Vooruzheny Narod (The Armed People):
“The Commissary of Food of the Petrograd Labor Commune states that on Friday, Saturday, Sunday and Monday, for four days, the following products will be given on the presentation of the bread cards, according to category:
| 1st category | — | 1 lb. (Russian) of bread and 3 lb. of potatoes |
| 2nd category | — | ½ lb. of bread and 2 lb. of potatoes |
| 3rd category | — | ¼ lb. of bread and 1 lb. of potatoes |
| 4th category | — | ½ lb. of potatoes.”[15] |
Many witnesses, have referred to the cruelty of this category system. Of course, these rations for the 3rd and 4th categories are quite insufficient to support life, and as the bourgeois classes were not only placed in these categories, but were also persecuted and prevented from getting employment in many cases, it is not surprising that hundreds of thousands of them were exterminated by these measures.
As to the question of how the Jewish element in the population came out on the question of food as compared with the [96] Christian element there is little evidence at hand, but we may refer to one statement in a memorandum of a Mr. B. contained in the British White Book, “Russia No. 1 (1919),” as follows:
“At the Putilof Works anti-Semitism is growing, probably because the food supply committees are entirely in the hands of Jews—and voices can be heard sometimes calling for a ‘pogrom.’”[16]
Wholesale starvation in Russian cities is one of the most striking features of Russia’s tragedy. The bourgeoisie, and especially the intellectual classes of the Russian people, are systematically underfed by the treacherous rationing system of the Jewish Soviet officials. Manual labor as well as the intellectual workers are subjected to a most villainous tyranny, namely, to the tyranny of starvation. It is proper to propound the question: Is this policy carried out in accordance with the stipulation of the Protocols which reads as follows:
“Our power lies in the chronic malnutrition and in the weakness of the worker, because through this he falls under our power and is unable to find either strength or energy to counteract it.” (Protocol No. III.)
As already seen, the Protocols call for a program of hypocrisy as well as terror. The nature of the Bolshevist régime viewed from this angle is graphically described by Mr. Roger E. Simmons in his testimony before the Overman Committee. On pages 298 and 299 of the Senate Report he states:
“Along the trans-Siberian line, proceeding slowly, I had a chance of reading the literature that the Bolsheviki were distributing in connection with their active propaganda; also the decrees, proclamations, and the public formal announcements of all kinds of the local and national authorities. Many of these sounded plausible, aimed to be constructive, ostensibly, and in their idealism and promises were golden. I could see how people would be attracted, and for the first 8 to 10 weeks understood their sanguine hopes. But after this time disintegration was rapid and I saw the awful results. The modus operandi was not in line with theories. They talked ideals but did not act ideals. Practices showed there was decided immorality; decidedly, the game was not being played squarely, [97] the people being deceived by the leaders. I suspected it from the very beginning from what I saw in Siberia. If you will let me, I will read to you a significant admission in that connection.
“This statement was written to me, at my request, by an American that it could be given to the American Consul General. It reads as follows:
“‘Bonch Bruevitch, the executor of the acts of all the People’s Commissars, not a strong man, but a close friend of Lenine’s, who, working in the same office, is able to influence Lenine strongly. A power in the government as long as Lenine lives. He states that the Bolsheviki have not worked out a code of morals yet, and until they do, the end justifies the means. Any lies or dictatorial methods are worth using as long as they are in the interests of the working classes. A close friend of his says he has no compunctions, lying whenever there is an advantage to be gained from it for the Soviets.’
“The movement is immoral, absolutely.”
In this connection it is of the utmost importance to call the attention of the reader to the statement of one of the best known Jewish Soviet officials, Zinovieff—Apfelbaum, President of the Petrograd Soviet, regarding the means of spreading world-wide propaganda. The passage as quoted before proves how closely the policies advocated in the Protocols resemble the Jewish policies as carried out by the Soviet officials in Russia. This is what Zinovieff stated on February 2, 1919:
“We are willing to sign an unfavorable peace with the allies. It would only mean that we should put no trust whatever in the bit of paper we would sign. We should use the breathing space so obtained in order to gather our strength in order that the mere continued existence of our government would keep up the world-wide propaganda which Soviet Russia has been carrying on for more than a year.”[17]
Here again the actual policies of the Bolsheviki fully coincide with the Protocols.
The most important passage in the Protocols as to the policy advocated in regard to religion is the following:
“Liberty could also be harmless and remain on the state program without detriment to the well-being of the people if it were to retain the ideas of the belief in God and human [98] fraternity, free from the conception of equality which is in contradiction to the laws of nature which establish subordination. With such a faith the people would be governed by the guardians of the parish and would thrive quietly and obediently under the guidance of their spiritual leader, accepting God’s dispensation on earth. It is for this reason that we must undermine faith, tearing from the minds of the Goys the very principle of God and Soul, and substituting mathematical formulas and material needs.”
It appears from the above excerpt that the Protocols advocate the destruction of religion and the religious spirit among the Gentiles on the ground that they are the political as well as the moral bulwarks of the Gentile states. In another place the Protocols state that the most formidable antagonist of the Jews in the past has been Rome, i.e., the Roman Catholic Church.
The Bolsheviki, whatever their real motives may be, have from the moment they came into power in Russia conducted a campaign of violence and persecution against the Christian religion, in the guise of a campaign against religion in general. While they have not attacked the Jewish religion or the Jewish rabbis, they have murdered and persecuted Christian priests and harassed their congregations in the churches. While professing to be merely following the Socialist teachings of Karl Marx (himself a Jew), who attacked religion in general as the creature of capitalism, the Bolshevist campaign against religion is in fact directed against Christianity.
Evidence of the above is found in the sworn testimony of several witnesses before the Overman Committee and in official reports of the British government and elsewhere.
An English clergyman, the Rev. B. S. Lombard, in a report to Earl Curzon, dated March 23, 1919, referring to the conditions in Soviet Russia, stated as follows:
“The treatment of the priests was brutal beyond everything. Eight of them were incarcerated in a cell in our corridor. Some of us saw an aged man knocked down twice one morning for apparently no reason whatever, and they were employed to perform the most degrading work and made to clean out the filthy prison hospital.”[18]
Mr. George A. Simons testified before the Overman Committee, in answer to a question of Senator King, as follows:
Senator King. “Did you find, then, that atheism permeates the ranks of the Bolsheviki?”
Mr. Simons. “Yes, sir. And the anti-Christ spirit as well.”
The testimony of Mr. Simons on this subject was as follows:
Senator King. “What I am trying to get at is, for my information, why Bolshevism is bitterly opposed to all sorts of religion or sacraments of the church—Christianity; because I suppose that they recognize that Christianity is the basis of law and order and of orderly government. I was wondering if you had discovered why they were so bitter against Christianity, and if you found that all the Bolsheviks were atheistic or rationalistic or anti-Christian?”
Mr. Simons. “My experience over there under the Bolsheviki régime has led me to come to the conclusion that the Bolsheviki religion is not only absolutely anti-religious, atheistic, but has it in mind to make all real religious work impossible as soon as they can achieve that end which they are pressing. There was a meeting—I cannot give you the date offhand; it must have been in August, 1918—held in a large hall that had once been used by the Young Men’s Christian Association in Petrograd for their work among the Russian soldiers. The Bolsheviki confiscated it; put out the Y. M. C. A. In that large hall there was a meeting held which was to be a sort of religious dispute. Lunacharsky, the Commissar of the People’s Enlightenment, as he was called, and Mr. Spitzberg, who was the Commissar of Propaganda for Bolshevism, were the two main speakers. Both of those men spoke in very much the same way as Emma Goldman has been speaking. I have been getting some of her literature, and recently I have been very much amazed at the same line of argumentation with regard to the attack on religion and Christianity and so-called religious organizations.”
Senator King. “She is the Bolshevik who has been in jail in this country and who will be deported as soon as her sentence is over?”
Mr. Simons. “I do not know as she will be deported.”
Senator King. “I think she will be.”
Mr. Simons. “She ought to be put somewhere where she cannot issue any more of that literature. Lunacharsky and Spitzberg came out with pretty much the same things that she has been saying and printing. This is one of these theses: ‘All that is bad in the world, misery and suffering that we have had, is largely due to the superstition that there is a God.’”
Senator King. “I noticed in yesterday’s paper that in [100] their schools the children are being taught, wherever they have schools at all, positive atheism. Did you verify that?”
Mr. Simons. “Lunacharsky, as the official head of the department of education, Commissar of the People’s Enlightenment, said: ‘We now propose to enlighten our boys and our girls and we are using as a textbook a catechism of atheism which will be used in our public schools.’ Yet he had the audacity to say: ‘We are going to give all churches the same chance.’ And a priest replied to him, saying: ‘Then you ought not to put your catechism of atheism into the schools.’”[19]
Referring further to the meeting at the Y. M. C. A., Mr. Simons said a little later in his testimony:
“Lunacharsky and Spitzberg said in that meeting, and they sent it out in their proclamations: ‘The greatest enemy to our proletarian cause is religion. The so-called church is simply a camouflage of capitalistic control and they are hiding behind it, and in order to have success in our movement we must get rid of the church.’ Now a frank statement like that seems to me to indicate their anti-religious and anti-Christian animus.”[20]
Mr. Simons further testified as follows:
Senator King. “Has there been a confiscation of church property and buildings?”
Mr. Simons. “Yes, sir; and in quite a number of instances monasteries, with their wealth, have been taken, and all kinds of indecent things have been done by certain Bolshevik officials.
“I have some data showing that they have turned certain churches and monasteries into dancing halls, and one instance has been reported to me where a certain Bolshevik official went into a church while the people were there waiting for the sacrament, and threw the priest out, so I am told, and himself put on the clerical garb, and then went on the altar and made a comedy of the ritual, which stirred up the religious sense of the people to that extent that they threatened—of course, among themselves—that they would yet kill that man. He happened to be an apostate Jew.”
Mr. Roger E. Simmons testified as follows in regard to the Russian priest who was put in the same prison with him by the Bolsheviki:
“A high priest of the church was there. He had been preaching sermons publicly denouncing the immorality of the Bolsheviki. They imprisoned him and shot him. This priest told me that he was a great admirer of Dr. Mott of America.”
Senator Nelson. “Do you not think that the church in the end will prove the rallying center for the anti-Bolshevik forces?”
Mr. Simmons. “I think it certainly will be one of the principal factors; no doubt of it. That priest took the occasion, knowing that I was an official of the American Government, thinking that it was the last duty he could perhaps perform for Russia, to beg me to go back and tell the American people, ‘For God’s sake, send us help.’ He was speaking, gentlemen, not for himself, but for the large class of people that he represented.”[21]
“As you know, gentlemen, the Russians are a very religious people. Like here in the United States, there are very many denominations there, but most of the people belong to the Greek Church. Of course, the priests and religious people are not very pleasant to the Bolsheviki, because the Bolsheviki deny any religion or any religious sentiment. They oppose the Russian clergy and the Russian clergy oppose the Bolsheviki, and the Russian priests are treated very badly. For instance, they are set to do streetwork, cleaning the streets, paving streets, digging ditches, and so on. The workmen told me several times, ‘The Bolsheviki are sending out priests to work in the streets. Why do they not send their rabbis?’ And that is true. The Jewish Rabbis are not sent to work on the streets. The Bolsheviki are opposing religion to such an extent that lately when I was going to Petrograd they raised a question of teaching atheism in the schools. They boast that they have opened so many schools, but they do not say that they closed as many schools as they opened. We had schools in connection with the churches, in connection with every church there was a school, and all these schools are closed now.”[22]
Further evidence that the Bolsheviki, although attacking Christianity, protect the Jewish religion, is found in the following article, which appeared on the 5th of July, 1919, in the weekly publication Soviet Russia, page 15. The article is entitled “Soviet Tolerance.” It reads as follows:
“The New York Jewish Daily, ‘The Day,’ in its issue of June 24th has the following cablegram from its European correspondent, N. Shiffrin: ‘Glad Tidings from Russia.’ ‘The Zionists have organized throughout Russia Food Co-operative Societies which are united in every city into Central Co-operative [102] Associations united in the All-Russian Federation of Jewish Food Co-operative Associations. The Federation is in part subsidized by the Moscow Soviet Government. All schools of the Zionists in which the language of instruction is ancient Hebrew, as well as the Hebrew High School in Minsk, have been taken over by the government. They have been incorporated in the Public School System which is maintained by the Commissariat of Public Education.’”
The significant part of this article consists in the fact that the old Hebrew is a religious language in which the Talmud is written. The old Hebrew can serve only for the study of the Talmud as well as of other Jewish religious writings. Thus, while combating the Christian religion, the Bolsheviki are extending protection to the Jewish religion and to the synagogues.
In a pamphlet entitled “The Russian Church under the Bolsheviks,” recently published in England, is printed the appeal of Father Serge Orlov, “who played an important part in the Reform movement in the Russian church,” and who is now in Switzerland, where the National Consistory has expressed its sympathy for the Russian people by composing a special prayer for the liberation of Russia from the Bolsheviks. We quote the following passages from this appeal of Father Orlov:
“Owing to Bolshevism the Orthodox Russian Church is passing through so acute a crisis that there is serious danger to the fundamental idea of the whole of Christianity.
“Bolshevism is essentially hostile to Christ, and manifests even greater hatred towards Christianity than did the pagan power of the first centuries.
“Bolshevism and the Christian Church cannot exist side by side.
“The persecution of the Church began in January, 1918, and has been increasing since then. The Bolsheviks issued a decree on the disestablishment of the Church, although never had the Russian Church been so firmly in the grip of the secular authorities as in Soviet Russia. The Church has not only been robbed but treated with contumely. Every commissary has the right of prohibiting a service if he suspects the priest or his congregation of counter-revolutionary tendencies. Practically whenever he chooses he can close a church, turn it into a cinema, mock at the ancient sacred relics, and in general insult people’s religious feelings.
“But it is strange that the greater the persecution of the Russian Church the nearer and dearer does it become to the tortured Russian people. Indeed, the priests of the Russian Church boldly denounce the Bolsheviks. Not one of the secular rulers has accused them so openly as Tikhon, the All-Russian Patriarch, over whom the Damocles sword of the Bolsheviks is always hanging. But the sword can only kill the body, and not the spirit.
“As early as last February, Patriarch Tikhon excommunicated the Bolsheviks, the excommunication being read in the churches. At that time the persecution of the clergy had already commenced, but the Patriarch had not been arrested. It was only later, in the autumn of 1918, during the universal Terror, that he was placed under domiciliary arrest in his apartments in the Kremlin, with a guard of Chinese, Letts and Red Army men, and deprived of his rations. But even as a prisoner the Patriarch issued declarations against the Bolsheviks, in which he severely denounced them.
“It is not enough,” writes the Patriarch, “that you have stained the hands of the Russian people with the blood of their brethren. You have instigated the people to open, shameless robbery. You have befogged their consciences and stifled their conviction of sin, but under whatever name you disguise an evil deed, murder, violence and robbery will always remain crimes and deeds of evil that clamor to Heaven for vengeance. Yes, we are going through a dreadful time under your dominion, and it will be long before it fades from the hearts of the nation, where it has dimmed the image of God and impressed that of the beast.
“But as yet the Bolsheviks have not dared to raise their hand against the aged Patriarch. Apparently he is alive.”
A faint idea of what the Bolsheviks are doing to the Russian Church may be gathered from the following:
“According to information received from A. Kartashov, former Minister of Cults, by December, 1918, the Bolsheviks had killed ten archbishops and bishops; it is difficult to ascertain the number of priests killed. It reaches several hundreds. The Patriarch is a prisoner in his own house. According to the (later) message from the Archbishop of Omsk, President of the Supreme Administration of the Orthodox Church, to the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Metropolitan of Kiev, twenty bishops and hundreds of priests have been assassinated. Some were buried alive. ‘Wherever the Bolsheviks are in power,’ says the Archbishop of Omsk, ‘the Christian Church is persecuted with even greater ferocity than in the first three centuries of the Christian era.’
“When, in January, 1919, the town of Yuriev (Dorpat) [104] was taken by the Bolsheviks, Bishop Platon was arrested. The Reval papers thus describe the Bishop’s last moments. The Bolsheviks burst into his house at night, dragged him from his bed. Barefoot and clad only in his under-linen, the Bishop, with 17 other persons, was dragged down to the cellars of the house they had been arrested in. Here the Red executioners rushed at them with their axes and killed them.
“Near Kotlas, all the ten monks of the monastery, with the prior at their head, were shot for agitation against the Soviet authorities.”
Information has come from Omsk that as a result of a judicial investigation of the Bolshevik terror in Perm, the following has been discovered:—
“Archbishop Andronik was buried alive; Vassili, Archbishop of Chernigov, who had come to Moscow to inquire about the fate of Archbishop Andronik, was cut down and killed with his two companions. Bishop Feofan was first tortured, then dipped several times into the river through a hole in the ice, and finally drowned in the River Kama. Besides this, it was discovered that 50 priests had been executed. Before being killed they were horribly tortured.
“At the evacuation of Cherdyn the Bolsheviks took with them among other hostages a highly respected priest, Nicolas Koniurov, whom they subjected to atrocious torments.
“During a severe frost they stripped the old man naked and poured water over him until he was transformed into a statue of ice.”
(“The Russian Church under the Bolsheviks,” pages 1, 2, 3.)
The statement of the Rev. R. Courtier-Forster, British Chaplain at Odessa, already cited under the head of “Terror,” contains the following passage as to the martyrdom of Christians under the Bolsheviki:
“It was the martyrdom of the two Metropolitans and the assassination of so many Bishops and the killing of hundreds of various Christian ministers of religion, regardless of denomination or school of thought, that proved the undoing of the Scourge. Russian Orthodox clergy, Protestant Lutheran pastors, Roman Catholic priests, were tortured and done to death with the same light-hearted indiscrimination in the name of Toleration and Freedom. Then it was that the Scourge, seeing the last remnants of Liberty ground under the heel of a tyranny more brutal in its methods than a mediaeval torture chamber, published another full-page cartoon representing Moses descending from the Burning Mount, bringing in his [105] arms the Tables of Ten Commandments to Humanity, and being stoned to death by a mob of workmen’s and soldiers’ delegates.
“The following Sunday afternoon I was passing through the Town Gardens, when I saw a group of Bolshevist soldiers insulting an Ikon of the Thorn-crowned Face of Christ. The owner of the Ikon was spitting in the pictured Face, while the others were standing around watching with loud guffaws of laughter. Presently they tore the sacred picture into fragments, danced on it, and trampled and stamped the pieces into the mud.”
(“Bolshevism, Reign of Torture at Odessa,” by Rev. R. Courtier-Forster, reprinted from The Times, Dec. 3, 1919, page 4.)
It will be recalled that the Protocols specifically refer to the incitement of class hatred as one of the most effective means of bringing about the destruction of Christian, that is, “ Goy ” states. The concluding sentence of Protocol No. IV reads as follows:
“It will be at that stage that the lower classes of the Goys , not for the sake of doing good, nor even for the sake of wealth, but solely because of their hatred towards the privileged, will follow us against the intelligent Goys , our competitors for power.”
This remarkable stipulation of the Protocols is literally followed by the Jewish Soviet officials in Russia. This is how Mr. Roger E. Simmons, in his testimony before the Overman Committee, describes the policy of inciting class hatred by the Bolsheviki in Russia:
Mr. Simmons. “Being a social revolution, of course the worst parts about it are the results of the awful class hatred the Bolsheviki leaders are inciting. They are inciting it in every part of the country by their publications and in all their efficient propaganda. It has not been any more disastrous in any parts of Russia, I believe, than it has been in many villages among the peasantry.
“Their policy has as an underlying motive the arousing of class antagonism, the proletariat hating the bourgeoisie. In practice it means that the less fortunate in every industry and institution bear animus against those qualified to hold better positions. This has been indirectly the cause of most of the incidents of terrorism witnesses have spoken of, more of which I will tell you about later.
“When it was seen that the peasantry did not rally to the [106] support of the Bolshevik cause and that they refused to sell grain for rubles without value, the Bolsheviki took the class issue to the villages. Lenine calls this movement awakening class consciousness of the peasantry. He organized for this work ‘poor committees,’ as they are called in translation. These committees of soldiers go out to the villages to inflame the dissatisfied elements and to extract by force food from the peasants. But Lenine sends the poor committees, agitators, to incite peasants who have no land to conspire against those who have, and to take the guns he gives them for fighting, robbing, and plundering neighbors in their own and neighboring villages who have land. When you come later to read, gentlemen, the history of the Russian revolution, some of the bloodiest fights, you will find, and worst horrors, have occurred in villages. Those simple, peace-loving people have been living among themselves for centuries in more or less harmony under their communistic system. But all of a sudden Lenine, by his nefarious policies, sets the passions of the demoralized class aflame and turns them against the other two classes. Instead of promoting brotherly love and helping to make the sentiment of the nation one for the good of all, as we are striving to do in America, the Bolsheviki are trying by jealousy and animosity to disintegrate the population of various localities into classes with a view of the honest toiler being overcome and subjected. Now this is a serious matter. The peasantry represent 85 per cent of the 160,000,000 Russians.
“In Russia class hatred is seen manifested everywhere. I will mention one illustration which I saw in Petrograd—the undressing of a woman. I had heard about it before. It was about 6:30, growing dark, as I was walking down the Nevsky Prospect on my way home. I heard a yell of distress from a woman up a street running perpendicularly to the Nevsky. There two soldiers were removing the cloak—a very good substantial cloth coat—from a woman. And when protests were made by the standers-by, the answer was, ‘We have blacked your boots and washed your clothes for many years. Now you bourgeoisie have got to bow to us and wash our clothes and black our boots.’ Undressing to steal clothes went on to a considerable extent in Moscow, Petrograd and Kiev, according to reports. It went as far as taking off besides cloaks the very dresses of women, and where they could handle it, taking also the clothes and overcoats off men.
“Now, you can see that all their practices aimed to invite people to do acts of that kind showing intense hatred—I wish I could think of another word, it is more than hatred—detestation—against people that they thought were a little higher up. Now, remember, as I pointed out in the first place this hatred is against a good many of these people in the cities, [107] and people like the peasants who had land, who belonged to the proletariat. But because they did not agree, they call them bourgeoisie. You can see that they are fighting parts of the very class for whom they say they are trying to establish a dictatorship. They are not trying to put the proletariat in power, but the most demoralized elements of that class, which represents, gentlemen, a very small per cent.
“Now, this class hatred is a matter we have got to consider, I think, with a great deal of interest and a great deal of seriousness, because it is the basis of their international movement.”[23]
The Protocols call for a world autocracy and state that liberalism in government is a source of weakness which should be encouraged by the Jews only for the temporary object of destroying Christian states with the ultimate purpose of establishing a Jewish despotism over the whole world.
“Only an autocrat can outline great and clear plans which allocate in an orderly manner all the parts of the mechanism of the government machinery.”
On the other hand, the Protocols state as follows:
“In all parts of the world the words ‘Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity’ have brought whole legions into our ranks through our blind agents, carrying our banners with delight. Meanwhile these words were worms which ruined the prosperity of the Goys , everywhere destroying peace, quiet, and solidarity, undermining all the foundations of their states.”
Ambassador Francis, when asked by Senator King whether Lenin and Trotzky and those who are in control of the Bolshevik government were there as the result of a general election, testified:[24]
Mr. Francis. “No, no. They are there as usurpers.”
Senator King. “By force and terror?”
Mr. Francis. “I do not think they represent more than ten per cent of the Russians.”
Senator Overman. “Of the whole 180,000,000?”
Mr. Francis. “Of the whole 180,000,000.”
Mr. Roger E. Simmons also describes the Bolshevik government as it existed when he left Russia in November, 1918, as follows:
“The Soviet government, composed solely of Bolsheviks, of a portion only of the ‘manual proletariat’ is a government in name only. Rightly stated, it is a well-organized institution functioning to further the social revolution, the overthrow of all recognized standards of morality and civilization.”[25]
That gradual despotism shown by the testimony of these witnesses to exist in 1918 has tended to become more and more complete is shown by evidence of a recent date. The British White Book, “Russia No. 1 (1919), Collection of Reports on Bolshevism in Russia,” contains a report of a Mr. C. who was formerly connected with a commercial company which had a branch in Moscow. This document bears the date of January 21, 1919. Among other information therein contained is the following:
“All factories nationalized; only about half of them working. Men all anti-Bolshevik. Very discontented with conditions of life, and with the working of the factories. Conditions getting worse and worse every day. A great many of the men have gone to the country, as it is practically impossible to live in the towns. In Petrograd more attempts to strike than in Moscow; this is because in Moscow the workmen are more under the power of the government, and they do not dare to strike. Even if they did there is nothing to gain by it, for the government would simply stop their wages, discharge a good many, and probably cancel their bread cards.”
As recently as in the fall of 1919 conditions in the factories were reported to be intolerable. The Soviet officials have gone far beyond that part of the program of Karl Marx in his “Communist Manifesto,” which prescribes “Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.” The Soviet government’s Code of Labor Laws, translated into English and published in New York in Soviet Russia, the organ of the Russian Soviet Bureau, in its issue of February 21, 1920, imposes compulsory labor upon every one, male or female, between the ages of sixteen and sixty, unless physically disqualified, and enforces iron discipline of the most tyrannical nature.
Moreover, the New York World of Friday, April 9, 1920, published an article entitled “Mobilize Russian Labor,” in which it was stated that Trotzky, addressing the ninth convention of the Communist Party at Moscow on March 27, 1920, [109] directed his address chiefly to defining the relation between the mobilization of industry to the industrial rehabilitation of Russia, and stated:
“Mobilization is more necessary now than it was formerly, because we have to deal with the peasant population and masses of unskilled labor which cannot be utilized to the fullest extent by any other means than military discipline. Trades unions are capable of organizing great masses of qualified workers, but 30 per cent of the people cannot be reached by this means.”
An elaborate system among the workmen had been gradually established and at present the communist spy reporting directly to the Soviets has almost mediaeval powers of executing a man merely for the reason that he is opposed to the tyranny of the Soviets. Moreover, by the weapon of starvation, the workman is compelled to work more hours than under any preceding form of government. The very right to strike is entirely denied the workmen. Every strike is called sabotage against the Soviets and every act of sabotage is forbidden under pain of capital punishment. Supplementary Decree No. 27 deals specifically with incitements to strike. Persons violating such decree are brought before the Extraordinary Committees to Combat Counter-revolution.
This situation strikingly recalls a passage in the Protocols where it is stated:
“Civilization cannot exist without absolute despotism, for government is carried on not by the masses, but by their leader whoever he may be.”
Is Trotzky this leader?
Immediately before his departure from the United States for Russia in order to join his brethren who were engaged in the destruction of the Russian state, Trotzky made the following boast:
“I stand forth the world’s greatest internationalist. I shall rule Russia.”
Then he made this appeal to the audience:
“On with our world civil war! On with the world revolution! Down with the governments!”
Unfortunately, the wise step taken by the British Government in arresting Trotzky at Halifax while on his way to Russia was countermanded, and Lieut.-Colonel J. B. Maclean, proprietor of Maclean’s Magazine, published at Toronto, in [110] an article entitled “Why Did We Let Trotzky Go?”, printed in the issue of June, 1919 (Vol. XXXII, No. 6), referring to various explanations for his release, says, “Finally it is said it was done at the request of the British Embassy at Washington over the head of the British and American Intelligence Department; and that the Embassy acted on the request of the U. S. State Department, who were acting for some one else.”
There are many passages in the writings and speeches of well-known Jewish leaders at various times during the last hundred years which show a remarkable parallelism with some of the important ideas set forth in the Protocols. The following instances may be cited as a result of a search which is by no means exhaustive. In each case we cite a passage taken verbatim from the Protocols, followed under the title of “Substantiations” by parallel quotations from well-known Jews.
(a) “The prophets have told us that we were chosen by God himself to reign over the world. God endowed us with genius to enable us to cope with the problem.” (Protocol No. V.)
(b) “God has given us, his chosen people, the power to scatter, and what to all appears to be our weakness has proved to be our strength, and has now brought us to the threshold of universal rule.” (Protocol No. XI.)
(c) “When the King of Israel places the crown on his sacred head, offered him by Europe, he will be the Patriarch of the World.” (Protocol No. XV.)
(a) “The men of all nations shall be subject to Israel, but those who have ruled over you shall be destroyed with the sword.”
(Apocalypse of Baruch (LXXII), a well-known Jewish work of the first century A.D. )
(b) “Our task is great and holy and its success is guaranteed. Catholicism, our greatest foe, lay wounded in its brains. The net which is being spread by Israel all over the surface of the earth will spread day by day, and the glorious prophecies of our holy rights will be finally realized. The time is approaching when Jerusalem will become the home of worship [112] of all peoples and the banner of the Jewish monotheism will be flying on the most distant coast. Our strength is enormous, we must learn how to apply it in practice. What have we to be afraid of? The day is approaching when all the wealth of the world will become the property of the Sons of Israel.”
(Isaac-Adolphe Crémieux, founder of the Alliance Israélite Universelle, quoted by Serge Nilus, in a footnote which appears on page 172 in 1917 edition of his book, “It is near! At the door!” A reference to the same document of the Alliance Israélite Universelle can be found in issue No. 24, December 15, 1909, of the Arabic paper “Al Kalemat” (“The World”), which was published in New York. See article entitled, “A Chapter Concerning Moral Discussions. Concerning the Destroyers of the Foundation of the Christian Faith,” pp. 461-464.)
(c) “It has always been a unique feature of Judaism that its traits of particularism—essential to its self-preservation—have been blended with the highest aspirations of universalism.”
(Paul Goodman, “Zionism and Liberal Judaism,” Zionist Review, Nov. 1917.)
(d) “When we read in the Book of Isaiah that the prophet of the exile declared that the Jews were God’s witnesses, chosen for a religious purpose and charged with a religious mission, we believe that he was speaking words which were inspired by God.”
(Cl. G. Montefiore, “Outlines of Liberal Judaism,” p. 166. London: Macmillan and Co., Limited. 1912.)
(e) “The Jews energetically reject the idea of fusion with the other nationalities and cling firmly to their historical hope, i.e., of world empire.”
(From speech of Dr. Mandelstam, Professor in the University of Kiev, Russia, delivered at the Basel Zionist Congress of 1898. See H. S. Chamberlain’s “The Foundations of the Nineteenth Century,” Vol. I, p. 335. London: John Lane. 1913.)
(f) “The Jew will never be able to assimilate himself; he will never adopt the customs and ways of other peoples. The Jew remains a Jew under all circumstances. Every assimilation is purely exterior.”
(From speech of Rabbi Dr. Leopold Kahn on Zionism, delivered in July, 1901, in the orthodox Jewish school in Pressburg, Idem.)
(g) “The governments of all countries, scourged by anti-Semitism, will serve their own interests in assisting us to obtain the sovereignty we want.”
(Theo. Hertzl, “The Jewish State,” p. 11. Published by the Federation of American Zionists, New York, 1917.)
(h) “Christianity itself seems to Jews only a stage in the [113] preparation of the world for a purified, developed and universalized Judaism.”
(Cl. G. Montefiore, “Outlines of Liberal Judaism,” p. 163. London. 1912.)
(i) “Liberal Judaism has higher ambitions for the Jewish people. Above all, it seeks to preserve the Jewish religion in full beauty and power, and to extend its workings to a sphere co-extensive with the universe of men.”[26]
(Rabbi Mattuck, quoted by Paul Goodman in his article on “Zionism and Liberal Judaism,” in the Zionist Review, November, 1911. Reprinted by Petty & Sons, Ltd., Whitehall Printeries, Leeds, pp. 2 and 3.)
(j) “It is not given to every one to understand that which is not yet finished. Yes! The likelihood of realizing our demands and proposals grows with our numbers and with the increase in our strength. For the present we have reason to be satisfied with the spirit in which our aspirations were regarded by the mighty ones of the earth. Do not demand more than this intimation from your Action Committee. In this respect you must have implicit confidence in it. You may freely question it regarding all other matters.”
(Theo. Hertzl, “Congress Addresses,” delivered at London, August 13, 1900, at the Zionist Congress. Published by the Federation of American Zionists, New York, 1917.)
(k) “Let the sovereignty be granted us over a portion of the globe large enough to satisfy the reasonable requirements of the nation: the rest we shall manage for ourselves.”
(Theo. Hertzl, “The Jewish State,” p. 11.)
(a) “We must follow a program of violence and hypocrisy, not only for the sake of profit, but also as a duty and for the sake of victory.” (Protocol No. I.)
(b) “When we finally become rulers . we will see to it that no plots are hatched against us. To effect this we will kill heartlessly all who take up arms against the establishment of our rule.” (Protocol No. XV.)
(a) “Our people who are receiving the new country from the Society will also thankfully accept the new constitution it offers them. Should they, however, show signs of rebellion, they will be promptly crushed.” (Theo. Hertzl, “The Jewish State,” p. 38.)
(b) “The interests of the revolution require the physical annihilation of the bourgeois class. It is time for us to start.” (Red Gazette, Aug. 31, 1918, No. 159. Published by the Petrograd Soviet of the Workmens’ & Soldiers’ Deputies, presided over by the Jew, Apfelbaum—Zinoviev.)
(c) “Blood and mercilessness must be our slogans.” (Leon Trotzky, International Communist Congress, Moscow, March, 1919. Quoted, New York Evening Sun, March 18, 1919.)
(a) “We will also artfully and deeply undermine the sources of production by teaching the workmen Anarchy and the use of alcohol, at the same time taking measures to expel all the intelligent Goys from the land.
“That the true situation should not be noticed by the Goys until the proper time, we will mask it by a pretended desire to help the working classes and great economic principles, an active propaganda of which principles is being carried on through the dissemination of our economic theories.” (Protocol VI.)
(b) “We will present ourselves in the guise of saviors of the workers from this oppression, when we suggest that they enter our army of Socialists, Anarchists, Communists, to whom we always extend our help under the guise of the rule of brotherhood demanded by the human solidarity of our social masonry.” (Protocol III.)
(a) “When the Jew gives his thought, his devotion, to the cause of the workers and of the dispossessed, of the disinherited of the world, the radical quality within him there, too, goes to the roots of things, and in Germany he becomes a Marx and a Lassalle, a Haas and an Edward Bernstein; in Austria he becomes a Victor Adler and a Friedrich Adler; in Russia, a Trotzky. Just take for a moment the present situation in Russia and in Germany. The revolution set creative forces free, and see what a large company of Jews was available for immediate service. Socialist Revolutionaries and Mensheviki, and Bolsheviki, Majority and Minority Socialists—whatever they be called . Jews are to be found among the trusted leaders and the routine workers of all those revolutionary parties.”
(Rabbi J. L. Magnes in his address delivered at the opening session of the first Jewish Labor Congress, January 16, 1919, New York City. See the Jewish Forum, February, 1919, P. 722.)
(b) “The Jew, therefore, does take an active part in revolutions; [115] and he participates in them in so far as he is a Jew, or more correctly in so far as he remains Jewish.”
(Bernard Lazare, “Anti-Semitism: Its History and Causes,” p. 312. Published by International Library Publishing Co., New York, 1903.)
(c) “We must not, however, leave these problems (social) and this reform (social) outside of our Jewish thought, our Jewish activities. We must not let them be taken by active Christians and stamped as specifically Christian.”
(Rabbi Montefiore, “Outlines of Liberal Judaism,” pp. 266 and 267. London, 1912.)
(d) “Das Volk, a Jewish periodical published in America, writes in 1905:
“‘One cannot blame us that people with different mentalities and views as Social Democrats, Anarchists, and so on, are filled with our socialist territorial ideas, and enter in our ranks in order to struggle for a better future of the Jewish people. On the contrary, it shows that life itself has raised our ideal and drives all under our banner.’”
(The Jewish Life, March, 1906, p. 173. Jewish newspaper published in Russian, found in New York Public Library.)
(e) The following quotation is an estimate by Bernard Lazare, Jewish writer, of the part which was and is played by the Jews in the revolutionary movement throughout the world:
“Their [i.e., the Jews’] contribution to present-day Socialism was, as is well known, and still is, very great. The Jews, it may be said, are situated at the poles of contemporary society. They are found among the representatives of industrial and financial capitalism, and among those who have vehemently protested against capital. Rothschild is the antithesis of Marx and Lassalle; the struggle for money finds its counterpart in the struggle against money, and the world-wide outlook of the stock-speculator finds its answer in the international proletarian and revolutionary movement. It was Marx who gave the first impulse to the founding of the Internationale through the manifesto of 1847, drawn up by himself and Engels. Not that it can be said that he ‘founded’ the Internationale, as is maintained by those who persist in regarding the Internationale as a secret society controlled by the Jews. Many causes led to the organization of the Internationale, but from Marx proceeded the idea of a Labor Congress, which was held at London in 1864, and resulted in the founding of that society. The Jews constituted a very large proportion of its members, and in the General Council of the society, we find Karl Marx, Secretary for Germany and Russia, and James Cohen, Secretary for Denmark. Many of the Jewish members of the Internationale took part subsequently in the Commune, [116] where they found others of their faith. In the organization of the socialist party, the Jews participated to the greatest extent. Marx and Lassalle in Germany, Aaron Libermann and Adler in Austria, Dobrojan Gherea in Roumania, are, or were at one time, its creators and its leaders. The Jews of Russia deserve special notice in this brief résumé. Young Jewish students, scarcely escaped from the Ghetto, have played an important part in the Nihilistic propaganda; some, among them women, have given up their lives for the cause of Liberation, and to these young Jewish physicians and lawyers, we must add the large number of exiled workingmen who have founded in London and New York important labor societies, which serve as centers of socialistic and even of anarchistic propaganda.”
(Bernard Lazare, “Anti-Semitism,” pp. 312, 313, and 314.)
(f) “When we sink, we become a revolutionary proletariat, the subordinate officers of the revolutionary party; when we rise, there rises also our terrible power of the purse.”
(Theo. Hertzl, “The Jewish State,” p. 10.)
(g) “Thus it would seem as if the grievance of the anti-Semite were well founded; the Jewish spirit is essentially a revolutionary spirit, and consciously or otherwise, the Jew is a revolutionist.”
(Bernard Lazare, “Anti-Semitism,” p. 298.)
“At present as an international force we are invulnerable.” (Protocol III.)
(a) “Nothing effectual can really be done to our injury.”
(Theo. Hertzl, “The Jewish State,” p. 9.)
(b) “The very impossibility of getting at the Jews nourishes and embitters hatred of them.”
(Theo. Hertzl, “The Jewish State,” p. 10.)
(c) “It is of course possible to get at shares and debentures in railways, banks and industrial concerns of all descriptions, by taxation, and where the progressive income tax is in force, all our realized property can eventually be laid hold of. But all these efforts cannot be directed against Jews alone, and where they have nevertheless been made, severe economic crises with far-reaching effects have been their immediate consequences.”
(Theo. Hertzl, “The Jewish State,” p. 10.)
(d) “A distracted and divided people have been so well instructed in thought that the unity of Israel is greater than all the differing religions, social, economic and political views of the individuals who make up a nation, that the Rabbis of Eastern [117] Europe have entered in full force into the vanguard of the movement.”
(Jacob de Haas. See his preface to Hertzl’s “The Jewish State,” p. 8.)
(e) “. There is such a thing as a Kol (All) Israel policy to be pursued by all Jews together, regardless of their political, their economic, their spiritual outlook.”
(Rabbi Judas L. Magnes, Speech delivered at the Jewish Labor Congress, Jan. 16, 1919, at Yorkville Casino, New York City; quoted in the Jewish Forum, February, 1919, p. 720.)
(f) “The Jewish people, traditionally and through its experience, knows the meaning of internationalism, and it must apply the method of internationalism to its own national life as well, sharing the destiny of every people, free and oppressed, in freeing the world in order that it itself may be freed.”
(Rabbi Judas L. Magnes, Ibid., p. 721.)
(g) “But, in order that the Jewish people may do its work in the world, it must be organized—organized for its specific purposes as well as for participation in all of the cultural and spiritual movements of humanity.”
(Rabbi Judas L. Magnes, Ibid., p. 724.)
(h) “Here we are, just Jews and nothing else, a nation among nations. Take it or leave it.”
(From speech of Dr. Weizman, delivered in Manchester, England, Dec. 9, 1917, partially quoted in a pamphlet entitled “Great Britain, Palestine and the Jews,” p. 73. Published by Geo. H. Doran Co., New York.)
(i) “Our union is not a French one, nor English, nor Swiss, nor German. Nay, our union is Jewish and it is universal. The other peoples are split into nationalities. We, however, are the only ones who have no co-citizens, but exclusively co-religionists. The Jew will not sooner become the friend of a Christian or a Mohammedan than at the time when the light of the Jewish faith—the only religion of reason—will spread throughout the world. Scattered among peoples who are hostile to our rights, to our interests, we wish above all to be and always to remain Jews. Our nationality is the religion of our fathers and we do not recognize any other. Living in lands of dispersion we cannot be concerned about the changing aims of those lands which are strange to us until the time when our own aims both moral and material are in danger. The Jewish teachings must spread all over the world. Sons of Israel! however much the faith would disperse you all over the earth, always consider yourselves as members of a chosen people. If you realize and if you understand that the faith of our ancestors is our sole patriotism, if you realize that in spite of your cover nationalities you form only one and the same people, if you believe that only Judaism constitutes the religious and [118] political truth, if you are convinced in the above, you universal sons of Israel, you will come to us, you will listen to our appeal and you will prove that you accept it.”
(In 1860, Isaac Adolphe Crémieux, the well-known Jewish leader in France, founded the Universal Jewish Alliance (Alliance Israélite Universelle). On this occasion he issued a circular appeal to the Jewish organizations throughout the world. The above quotation is from this circular appeal. Quoted by A. Shmakoff, “Jewish Speeches,” p. 131.)
(j) “It is our opinion that the Jewish question can be solved only by the Jews themselves. We no longer want to wear the mask of any other nationality.”
(Theo. Hertzl, in Congress Addresses delivered at Basle, December 26, 1901, p. 28. Published by the Federation of American Zionists, 1917, New York.)
(k) “Furthermore, it is well understood in Germany and in Austria that the Jews of Russia have never had real citizenship in Russia, and although a Jew may have been born in Russia, that does not necessarily imply that he has been a citizen of Russia. Realizing that, and for other apparent reasons, the German and Austrian Governments are making every effort to secure the coöperation and good-will of the large Jewish population, now under their control.”
(Rabbi Judas L. Magnes. See his letter to Mr. Byrlavski, June, 1916. Published in the Report of the Commission of the American Jewish Relief Fund. New York City, March, 1917.)
(l) “Let us forget whence we spring. No more talk of ‘German’ or of ‘Portuguese’ Jews. Though scattered over the earth we are nevertheless a single people.”
(Rabbi Salomon Lipmann-Cerfberr in his opening speech delivered on July 26, 1806, at the meeting preparatory to the Synedrion. Quoted by H. S. Chamberlain in his “Foundations of the Nineteenth Century” Vol. I, p. 329.)
(m) “Israel is a nationality. We are born Jews, ‘natu’ because we are born Jews. A child born from Jewish parents is Jewish. The very birth casts on him all the duties of an Israelite. It is not through circumcision that we obtain our Israelan quality. Nay, circumcision is in no way analogous to Christian baptism. We are not Israelites because we are circumcised, but, on the contrary, we circumcise our children because we are Israelites. We acquire the Jewish character through our birth, and we can never lose it nor get rid of it. Even if a Jew denies his religion, even if he is baptized, he does not cease to be an Israelite. All Israelite duties continue to remain with him.”
(Archives Israélites, 1864. Quotation from Ed. Drumont, “La France Juive,” Vol. I, p. 14, 12th ed. Paris: C. Marpont E. Flammarion.)
(a) “The economic crises were created by us for the Goys only by the withdrawal of money from circulation.” (Protocol XX.)
(b) “We hold in our hands the greatest modern power—Gold.” (Protocol XXII.)
(a) “The first official violation of Jewish liberties invariably brings about an economic crisis. Therefore, no weapons can be effectually used against us, because these cut the hands that wield them.”
(Theo. Hertzl, “The Jewish State,” p. 43.)
(b) “When we rise, there rises also our terrible power of the purse,”
(Theo. Hertzl, “The Jewish State,” p. 10.)
(c) “The day is approaching when all the wealth of the world will become the property of the Sons of Israel.”
(Isaac Adolphe Crémieux, quoted by A. Shmakoff, “Jewish Speeches,” p. 131.)
(d) “The Government of Palestine (in the hands of Jews), composed of men of wisdom and of intellectuals will guide the economic movement not only of the Orient and of Anatolia, but probably also of the whole world.”
(The Inkilab, a Jewish paper published in Constantinople. Quoted in La Vieille France, No. 108, February 13, 1919, p. 21.)
“At present, if any of the governments raises a protest against us, it is done only as a matter of form and at our desire and by our order, because their anti-Semitism is necessary to us to govern our smaller brothers.” (Protocol IX.)
(a) “The governments of all countries, scourged by anti-Semitism, will serve their own interests in assisting us to obtain the sovereignty we want.”
(Theo. Hertzl, “The Jewish State,” p. 11.)
(b) “Disaster binds us together, and, thus united, we suddenly discover our strength. Yes, we are strong enough to form a State, and a model State.”
(Theo. Hertzl, “The Jewish State,” p. 10.)
There are a number of important policies in the Protocols which find a striking parallel in certain activities and movements among Jews in various parts of the world outside of Russia. Among these policies of the Protocols are: the control of the press for political purposes, securing international or so-called “minority” rights for the Jews, the stirring up of class hatred and social disorder, and the promotion of revolutions and internationalism.
1. The boast is made in the Protocols that in Europe the press, with unimportant exceptions, is under Jewish control. It is indeed true that the Jewish influence in the press in many parts of the world is very powerful. Just how powerful it is in America it is difficult to state. It is certainly a great and growing power in New York City. A Jewish magazine, The American Jewish News, recently pointed with pride to the great number of newspapers in New York which are either controlled by the Jews or in which Jews occupy important strategic positions. In the article referred to, which was published in the issue of March 28, 1919, under the title “Men Who Make Our Newspapers,” the following statement is made:
“While it is an accepted fact that certain of our industries to-day are almost entirely directed and supported by Jewish minds and labor, there are nevertheless just as many which are not generally conceded to come within the same classification which have at their head men of Jewish descent. Most important among these latter is the greatest of all public institutions—the press.
“Hardly a newspaper of importance thrives in this city but it has at its head or in some position of paramount influence a [121] man in whose fibre there is Jewish energy. And with one exception the achievements of these men who mould and interpret American public opinion could provide material for books of incalculable inspiration.”
The article proceeds to refer to several large dailies in New York which are owned or controlled by Jews, with biographical sketches of these men and their subordinates. At the end of the article it is stated that the men mentioned are “but a few of a great number.”
That there is nothing new in the Jewish policy of controlling the press is shown by the following statement of Isaac-Adolphe Crémieux, who in 1860 founded the Alliance Israélite Universelle.
“Consider the governmental and public offices as nothing. Look upon all honors as upon nonsense. Do not pay any attention for the time being to money itself. Capture the press! Through it everything will come to you in the natural course of events.”[27]
The complete dictatorship over the press exercised by the Jewish Bolshevist leaders in Soviet Russia is such a generally accepted fact that it needs no extended comment. All newspapers that have attempted in any way to criticize the Bolshevist government have been ruthlessly suppressed, and many writers who have dared to criticize Trotzky have been executed.
The policy of the Bolsheviks is well expressed by one of the Soviet officials, N. Bukharin, in “The Communist Program,” published by the Soviet printing office, called “The Communist,” Moscow, 1918, Chapter VII, pp. 20-23:
“The Communist (Bolshevist) party receives from all sides accusations and even threats like the following: ‘You close newspapers, you arrest people, you forbid meetings, you trample under foot freedom of speech and of the press, you reconstruct autocracy, you are oppressors and murderers.’ It is necessary to discuss in detail this question of the ‘liberties’ in a Soviet Republic.
“At present the following is clear for the workingmen and the peasants. The Communist party not only does not demand any liberty of the press, of speech, meetings, unions, etc., for [122] the bourgeois enemies of the people, but, on the contrary, it demands that the government should be always in readiness to close the bourgeois press; to disperse the meetings of the enemies of the people, to forbid them to lie, slander, and spread panic; to crush ruthlessly all attempts at a restoration of the bourgeois régime. This is precisely the meaning of the dictatorship of the proletariat.”
2. From a practical point of view it is of the utmost importance to Christian countries to ascertain whether the Jews are to be treated as citizens who enjoy equal rights and equal duties with the rest of the community, or whether they are to have, in addition, special privileges uniform in every country because they are Jews.
The American Constitution grants equal rights to all citizens of the United States, without distinction as to race or religion. The same conception of citizenship prevails in a majority of the western European countries (Great Britain, Netherlands, France, Italy, Switzerland, Norway, and Sweden).
During the last two years, however, the Jews in various countries have adopted a peculiar policy, threatening the fundamental principles of equal citizenship, by demanding special national or minority rights in central and eastern European states. During the Peace Conference the Jews maintained an influential delegation at Paris which insisted that such rights be granted to the Jews in Poland, Austria, Roumania, Jugoslavia, Czechoslovakia and Ukrainia. A special Bill of Jewish Rights was presented by the Jewish delegation to the Peace Conference. This bill contained the following stipulations:
“First—New guarantees of citizenship for those born in the territories affected, or resident therein since August, 1909.
“Second—All citizens to enjoy equal civil, religious, national and political rights, without distinction of birth, race, nationality or religion.
“Third—The right to use the language of any national minority in business, private intercourse, public meetings or the press shall be guaranteed; nor shall there be any restriction of such language in the schools or other institutions, nor shall the validity of any transaction or document be affected by the use of any language whatsoever.
“Fourth—The state shall recognize the several national [123] minorities as constituting distinct autonomous organizations, having the right to establish, manage and control schools and religious, educational, charitable and social institutions.
“Fifth—Each national minority shall be allotted its proportion of state, departmental and municipal funds, based on the ratio of its numbers in the respective areas, as well as in the entire population.
“Sixth—Proportional representation of national minorities in elected bodies.
“Seventh—Those observing any other day except Sunday as Sabbath shall not be required to perform on such days acts they regard as desecrations, and shall be permitted to conduct business on Sunday if they so desire.
“Eighth—The signatories to the treaty, or any minority which may be affected by failure to observe its provisions, shall be entitled to submit complaints for adjudication to the League of Nations, which will assume jurisdiction.” (New York Tribune, June 12, 1919.)
This Bill of Rights was strongly endorsed by the American Jewish Congress held in Philadelphia in December, 1918. We quote an article in the New York Tribune of May 14, 1919, on this subject:
“NATIONS MUST GUARANTEE RACIAL RIGHTS, SAYS MACK.
“CHAIRMAN OF JEWISH DELEGATION TO PARIS CABLES RESULTS OF ITS EFFORTS.
“According to a cable received by the Zionist Organization of America from its president, Judge Julian W. Mack, who is now in Paris, heading the American Jewish Congress delegation to the peace conference, and chairman of the Jewish delegations from every part of Europe, the treaty offered to Germany requires Poland and other nations to accept separate provisions guaranteeing rights to racial, religious and linguistic minorities within their boundaries.
“Judge Mack says the word ‘national’ is not included in the treaty as now formulated, but that a decision on this point is expected in a few days.
“He expresses himself as sanguine that the substance of the demands adopted by the American Jewish Congress, held in Philadelphia last December, will be obtained.”
Moreover, the Bill of Rights was endorsed by most of the recognized Jewish organizations throughout the world.
“ NINE MILLION JEWS PRESENT BILL OF RIGHTS AT PARIS ,” is the title under which the universal support of Hebrew national rights within the boundaries of other nations was recorded by the New York Tribune on June 12, 1919.
Mr. Edward Dillon, in his book “The Inside Story of the Peace Conference,” referring to these national rights and to the support which was extended to the Jewish demands, stated that the Allied policy was “looked upon as anything but disinterested.” Mr. Dillon further said:
“Unhappily this conviction was subsequently strengthened by certain of the measures decreed by the Supreme Council between April and the close of the Conference. The misgivings of other delegates turned upon a matter which at first sight may appear so far removed from any of the pressing issues of the twentieth century as to seem wholly imaginary. They feared that a religious—some would call it racial—bias lay at the root of Mr. Wilson’s policy. It may seem amazing to some readers, but it is none the less a fact, that a considerable number of delegates believed that the real influences behind the Anglo-Saxon peoples were Semitic.
“They confronted the President’s proposal on the subject of religious inequality, and, in particular, the odd motive alleged for it, with the measures for the protection of minorities which he subsequently imposed on the lesser states, and which had for their keynote to satisfy the Jewish elements in eastern Europe. And they concluded that the sequence of expedients framed and enforced in this direction were inspired by the Jews, assembled in Paris for the purpose of realizing their carefully thought-out program, which they succeeded in having substantially executed. However right or wrong these delegates may have been, it would be a dangerous mistake to ignore their views, seeing that they have since become one of the permanent elements of the situation. The formula into which this policy was thrown by the members of the Conference, whose countries it affected, and who regarded it as fatal to the peace of eastern Europe, was this: ‘Henceforth the world will be governed by the Anglo-Saxon peoples, who, in turn, are swayed by their Jewish elements.’” (Pages 496, 497.)
Mr. Dillon emphasizes that the Jewish demands for special national privileges were largely fomented by western Jews, including those of the United States. He even states that among the many Jews who were present at the Paris Peace Conference “the largest and most brilliant contingent was sent by the United States.” (Page 12.) According to this author, “Their principal mission, with which every fair-minded man sympathized heartily, was to secure for their kindred in Eastern Europe rights equal to those of the populations in whose midst they reside. And to the credit of the Poles, Rumanians, and Russians, who were to be constrained [125] to remove all the existing disabilities, they enfranchised the Hebrew elements spontaneously. But the western Jews who championed their eastern brothers, proceeded to demand a further concession which many of their own co-religionists hastened to disclaim as dangerous—a kind of autonomy which Roumanian, Polish and Russian statesmen, as well as many of their Jewish fellow-subjects, regarded as tantamount to the creation of a state within a state.” (Page 13.)
The treaties imposed by the Allies upon Poland, Rumania, Czecho-Slovakia, Jugo-Slavia and Greece granted all, or nearly all the demands of the Jews contained in the above “Bill of Rights,” while Austria and Hungary gave pledges in their treaties with the Allied and Associated Powers, that they would protect “minority rights” in the same general way defined in the treaties with the other five powers.
These treaties, as Mr. Dillon correctly points out, go much further than to guarantee to the Jews residing in these several countries full political equality with other citizens, and freedom from persecution or discrimination on account of race or religion. Not only did the treaties contain such guarantees,—which, Mr. Dillon states, the small powers in question were quite willing to give,—but they contained a principle new to international law, viz. that a racial minority should be treated in various relations as a separate entity within the State, with separate rights of its own, which it is permitted to enforce against the national government. An illustration of this new principle is found in certain articles of the treaty with Poland relating to educational matters. By these articles the Polish State is actually compelled to permit the Jews, in towns and districts where they constitute “a considerable proportion” of the population, to administer primary education in their own language in the Jewish schools, supported by an allocated part of the state funds. The articles of the treaty which create this extraordinary “minority right” are quoted verbatim below. The two articles must be read together and compared with each other to bring out their full meaning.
“Poland will provide in the public educational system in towns and districts in which a considerable proportion of Polish nationals of other than Polish speech are residents [126] adequate facilities for ensuring that in the primary schools the instruction shall be given to the children of such nationals through the medium of their own language. This provision shall not prevent the Polish Government from making the teaching of the Polish language obligatory in the said schools.
“In towns and districts where there is a considerable proportion of Polish nationals belonging to racial, religious or linguistic minorities, these minorities shall be assured an equitable share in the enjoyment and application of the sums which may be provided out of the public funds under the State, municipal or other budget, for educational, religious or charitable purposes.
“The provision of this article shall apply to Polish citizens of German speech only in that part of Poland which was German territory on August 1, 1914.
“Educational Committees appointed locally by the Jewish Committees of Poland will, subject to the general control of the State, provide for the distribution of the proportional share of the public funds allocated to the Jewish schools in accordance with Article 9, and for the organization and management of these schools.
“The provisions of Article 9 concerning the use of languages in schools shall apply to these schools.”
In some central European countries the Jews took prompt advantage of the favorable feeling created in Paris by the Jewish leaders towards the Jewish national demands. Thus, for instance, in Ukrainia a special ministry for Jewish affairs was established, headed by Krasny Pinhoos, a Jew. According to information contained in an editorial article in the New Witness of April 11, 1919, the new minister of the Jews “told a press representative that the Jews take part in the spiritual and social life of the Ukraine under conditions of equality with those of the rest of the population, but that in affairs appertaining to the Jewish community they would govern themselves.”
The New Witness made a rather peculiar deduction from the above statement of Mr. Pinhoos:
“But it is anyhow a good thing that in one country at least the Jewish race should be regarded and should consent to be [127] regarded as something different and separate. We presume that as soon as the Jewish State in Palestine is established, Mr. Pinhoos will change his title to that of Jewish Ambassador. Mr. Pinhoos hopes that before long there will be many other such ministries established, but while Isaacs and Mond can govern England and dictate to the Peace Conference, there is not much hope that they will desire to rule the affairs of Whitechapel.”
Mr. Israel Zangwill, in a recent address at the Poale Zion Conference in London, went a step further when he stated that the race which produced “a Beaconsfield, a Reading, a Montagu, a Klotz, a Kurt Eisner, a Trotzky” should be represented as an independent member of the League of Nations. (See Mr. Zangwill’s statement in The Jewish Chronicle, February 27, 1920, No. 2656, p. 28.)
In view of the adoption of this policy by the Jews in Paris, Americans are justified in ascertaining just what is the position of the American Jewry with respect to enforcing such a program here. Our Constitution knows no such thing as foreign national rights enjoyed by persons who at the same time enjoy the privileges of American citizens. A subject of a foreign nationality when he becomes an American citizen renounces his former allegiance, and it is upon this condition only that he becomes a member of our body politic.
Nevertheless in the United States itself, where the Jews enjoy an absolute equality of rights with all other citizens, they have recently endeavored to build up an institution which is entirely opposed to the spirit of the American Constitution, namely, a special Jewish court which tries cases pertaining only to the Jews. This institution is known as “The Jewish Court of Arbitration” and holds its sessions in one of the Municipal Court rooms in New York City. This fact was briefly recorded by the New York Times in its issue of February 19, 1920, in an article under the title, “Jews Here Start Modern Sanhedrin.” While this significant fact may have passed almost unnoticed by the American public, nevertheless it has already attracted attention in France.
It is unthinkable to any American brought up under a system of government which has provided a check against the oppression of minorities by the majority, that special rights should be granted to any of the ethnic elements of our population, such as the Jews, the Chinese, the Negroes, or any other [128] racial group, or that any of these groups should by virtue of such special rights diminish our sovereignty by a treaty provision similar to Article XII of the special treaty with Poland. By this article Poland agreed that any member of the Council of the League of Nations should have the right to bring to the attention of the Council any infraction or any danger of infraction of any of these obligations (the national rights of the Jews), and that the Council may thereupon take such action and give such directions as it may deem proper and effective in the circumstances.[28]
The whole question of Jewish double national rights is of the utmost importance, since the recognized Zionist leaders and the international Zionist organizations have on various occasions strongly urged the adoption of such double rights. Such rights and privileges for the Jews indeed are more than “national rights”; they are in one sense international rights common to Jews living in different countries. In other words, under such a system they would enjoy both the rights of citizenship of the particular country in which they live, and in addition, special privileges granted to them alone. The granting of such privileges to the Jews would constitute a series of international rights conferred exclusively upon the Jewish [129] race. The Protocols of the Zionist Men of Wisdom contemplate this very thing in the following language:
“Then our international rights will sweep away the national rights in a limited sense and will rule countries in the same manner as the civil power of each state regulates the relationship of its subjects among themselves.” (Protocol No. II.)
It is a question to what extent the demands for Jewish minority rights in eastern European states may be a part of the general Zionist movement. To this movement little attention can be given in this volume. It is sufficient to quote a portion of an article published in the New York Globe on January 25, 1919, under the title “Want Brandeis to Govern Judea.” The staff correspondent of the New York Globe and Chicago Daily News in London, under date of December 31, 1918, refers to the Zionist movement and the exposition of its objects and purposes by one of its leaders, Ittimar Ben Avi:
“If the plans and ambitions of the recently proclaimed nation of Judea are fulfilled, Louis Brandeis, now Justice of the United States Supreme Court, will be the first of the new rulers of Israel. The dream of the renationalization of Palestine which has lived for 2,000 years in the hearts of the Jews is fast entering the realm of reality. Judea is sending its delegates to the peace conference. Its existence as a nation has been recognized by the allies, its declaration of independence has been signed and its diplomats and politicians are already busy moulding the future of its institutions.
“Ittimar Ben Avi is the first of its peace delegates to reach London. An impassioned idealist who already visions Judea enrolled among the great powers of the world, is Ben Avi. But his idealism and his oratorical agitations on behalf of Judea have not impaired his worth as a diplomat.
UNDER BRITISH TRUSTEESHIP
“‘Israel cannot leap to its feet, full grown and capable,’ he explained. ‘It has been scattered and dormant too long. As delegate to the peace conference, I am to outline the demands of the new Judea. The first and most important of these is the political desire of the new Hebrew nation. We desire a British trusteeship for a period of twenty-five years. We do not want to establish a parliament or congress in Judea for at least twenty-five years. The British have emancipated us from the Turk. Great Britain is more capable of governing or overseeing Palestine as a colony than any one other country.
“‘If the English will agree to this our plan then includes the appointment by England of a Zionist as governor-general [130] of Judea. It is more or less known among Zionists that Mr. Justice Brandeis is the most logical man now living for the position of governor-general. Under him there should be two sub-governors—one a Christian and the other a Moslem. Both should be appointed by England. We also intend to have attorney generals for the various provinces and mayors for the various communities in Palestine. These are to be elected by the people.
“‘After twenty-five years Judea may be in position to govern herself. As a totally independent nation and part of an entente including Armenia and Arabia, Judea would be a powerful asset to the western world not only as a producer of culture and a contributor to the world’s markets, but as a military barrier against any power seeking to control the Suez Canal.’
“OUTNUMBERED BY OTHERS
“Ben Avi’s desire for a British over-lordship is inspired by the fact that were Palestine to proclaim a complete independence to-day and seek by popular vote to elect its own ruler, the Moslem and Christian peoples living there would outnumber and outvote the Hebrew population. The result would be a nation in which the Jews were in the minority. By England’s recognition of Judea as a Jewish nation and giving its Moslems and Christians representation through sub-governor generals, the Zionists are confident that their dreams will be most practically fulfilled.
“The history of Palestine’s struggle towards renationalizing of the Jewish race is comparatively recent. Beginning some forty years ago with the agitation of a handful of idealists, the movement expanded slowly. Great effort to repopulate Palestine with Jews drawn from Russia for the most part met with indifferent success. In the face of ridicule and protest from their own race, the Jews of England, the United States, France, Russia and Germany, acting as an intensive minority, pursued their dream.”
3. The strategy of stirring up class hatred in Christian nations, and the encouragement of revolutionary radicalism to that end, which has such a prominent place in the Protocols, finds corroboration in the very prominent part which, in recent times, the Jews have been taking in the radical and revolutionary movement in many parts of the world, including Hungary, Germany, Holland, Poland, the United States, and certain South American states.
The predominant influence of the Jews in the Bolshevist movement throughout the world is a question which is publicly discussed in the European press. The Budapest correspondent of the London Times some time ago stated:
“Hungary is being terrorized by Jewish agitators.” (American Jewish News, May 2, 1919.)
Charges of this kind have appeared in the press in many European countries. In this connection we call the attention of the reader to an article of the Morning Post, entitled “An Insult to Poland,” August 30, 1919. In this article, among other things, the following is stated:
“It is unfortunately true that Bolshevism is very largely a Jewish movement. In Russia the Jewish Bolsheviks have taken a terrible revenge upon all whom they regarded as enemies, and also upon all who protected the Russian peasantry against the exactions of the Jewish usurers.”
This article closes with the following sentence:
“And we warn Jews also, not for the first time. They are showing themselves not Englishmen of the Jewish faith, as we used to consider them, but a nation with a foreign policy of their own—and that policy hostile to the friends of England. And that is what in the end Englishmen will not stand.”
The three following documents are also of importance:
(a) An editorial article which appeared in the London Morning Post on April 8, 1919, entitled “Bolstering the Bolshevik.”
(b) A letter signed by Lionel Rothschild and nine other well-known British Jews to the editor of the London Morning Post, which practically justifies the stand that was taken by that paper.
(c) Comment on the two above-mentioned documents published in the American Jewish News on May 2, 1919.
We set forth in full these three documents.
“The news from Russia fluctuates from day to day. It is now reported that the situation on the Murmansk Coast has somewhat improved; but the situation in Archangel is obviously critical. Our soldiers have driven off formidable attacks; but the fighting is close and desperate. From South Russia the Bolsheviks reported that Odessa had been captured, and although we may hope that if this is true the Allied forces [132] were safely evacuated, there remains a terrible anxiety as to the fate which may have overtaken our devoted friends in South Russia. For these critical situations we do not blame the War Office; but we do blame Allied policy which has trifled with the whole situation and has alternated between large promises to our Allies and obsequious approaches to our enemies. We are informed that although the anti-Bolshevist Armies in Russia have been promised arms and supplies in abundance, what they have actually received has been contemptible. The result is that they are fighting almost naked and in many cases without arms. We may be certain both our soldiers and our allies in Russia are putting up a brave and desperate fight for their lives and their cause, but in these circumstances they must feel that they have been forgotten, if not betrayed, by those upon whom they looked for support. And so it is in Poland. We hear from trustworthy sources that the spirit of the Poles is magnificent. They are ready to become a strong and trusty support of the Allies upon the eastern borders of Germany; but they ask in vain for munitions, supplies and raw materials, and they see their vital communications with the Baltic left in the hands of their enemy and ours.
“Poland and Russia are one problem in this sense. We must support our friends if we are to defeat the Bolsheviks, and their secret abettors the Germans. For it is certain in that while Germany consistently suppresses Bolshevism in Germany she encourages it in Poland and Russia. But we are not supporting our friends. We promised them supplies which did not arrive, and political support which breaks down before German opposition. What is the reason of it? We notice that the Daily Herald and the Daily News are persistently telling the people of this country that we are fighting Bolshevism in obedience to the pressure of the capitalists. Now that is a lie. We are fighting Bolshevism in opposition to a very strong group of German-Jewish and Russian-Jewish capitalists, who are secretly working for the Bolshevist cause. Mr. Lansing may or may not be aware of the fact, but he is helping as corrupt a group of international financiers as ever lived. And the object of that group is to support Bolshevism in Russia in order to make a deal with the Bolsheviks. We have mentioned several times the disagreeable fact that the Russian Bolsheviks were Russian Jews. These Jews are at the present moment in control of the Russian Government and they have powerful friends in all the Allied countries who are helping them. We have appealed to the British Jews, but appealed so far in vain, to dissociate themselves formally from a cause which is doing the Jewish people terrible harm in all parts of the world. In reply the Jewish press shower upon us not only abuse but threats. Thus, for example, the Jewish World threatens us with the fate of Mordecai: ‘ . we wish it no harm, but we [133] would beg it to recollect,’ so it says, ‘while yet it has its feet upon the earth, the fate of its anti-Jewish forbear in that narrative, in the hope that it may mend its ways betimes.’
“We are aware of the significance of that threat. We fully understand what it means, and the secret Allies upon whom the Jewish World reckons when it makes it. We saw them at work in Glasgow and Belfast. We see them at work now in Budapest, where, it is reported, out of thirty members of the Bolshevik Soviet, twenty-six are Jews. We understand the threat, but we do not propose to be deterred in our duty to the British public by the terrorist methods of the Bolsheviks. And we suggest to the British Jewish community—most of whom, we believe, are by no means in sympathy with this crusade—that they are being served very badly in their newspapers, which openly threaten Bolshevik methods and scoff at advice which is tendered in a friendly spirit. In secret, we feel certain, the majority of the British, Jews distrust and dislike the fanatics who are now leading Jewry astray in the cause of a spurious Jewish Imperialism. But they are afraid to dissociate themselves publicly from the dervishes of Judaism. In the meantime these powerful influences are at work in every country, and chiefly in Paris, where they are working powerfully against the cause of Poland. An unseen hand is at this present time stifling the infant Poland in its cradle, and this is being done in the interests of German-Jewish Capitalism. It is a conspiracy which is assisted by so-called Liberal newspapers like the Daily News, and so-called Labor newspapers like the Daily World; but it is a conspiracy, nevertheless, which is directed against the cause of liberty in Poland and in the interests of alien Capitalism. For it remains true that our labor agitators, while they are the enemies of British Capital, contrive to be the friends of the Capitalism of the enemies of England. Mr. Lloyd George and President Wilson—those champions of liberty—also appear to be more susceptible to the influence of an alien capitalism than to the cry for freedom of long enchained Poland. We ask our readers, who remember the traditional friendship of England with the Polish cause, to mark the note of anguish in Mr. Paderewski’s statement which we publish this morning. He speaks—and he speaks truly—of ‘the bitterness of the disappointment of the Polish population,’ but it is not only the Polish population that is disappointed by the great Danzig betrayal. Every student of Allied interests must see that, whereas a strong Poland might be a bulwark against both German militarism and Russian Bolshevism, a weak Poland must be the vassal of one and the victim of the other. As to the economic side of the question, British commerce may bid farewell to all hope of a connection in Poland if it leaves Poland in such a situation as to be the enforced dependent of Germany.”
London Morning Post ,
April 23rd, 1919.
“ To the Editor of the Morning Post :—
We have read with deepest concern and with sincere regret certain articles which have recently appeared in two closely associated Jewish newspapers in this country on the topic of Bolshevism and its ideals. In our opinion, the publication of these articles can have no other effect than to encourage the adoption of the theoretic principles of Russian Bolsheviks among foreign Jews who have sought and found refuge in England. We welcome, accordingly, your suggestion that British Jews should ‘dissociate themselves from a cause which is doing the Jewish people harm in all parts of the world.’ This is profoundly true, and we, on our behalf and on behalf of numbers of British Jews with whom we have conferred, desire to dissociate ourselves absolutely and unreservedly from the mischievous and misleading doctrines which those articles are calculated to disseminate. We repudiate them as dangerous in themselves and as false to the tenets and teachings of Judaism.
Partly in order to counteract the mistaken policy of the newspapers referred to, the League of British Jews was founded in November, 1917. The proceedings and views of the League are published in a monthly bulletin, entitled Jewish Opinion, which can be obtained at the office of the League, 708-709 Salisbury House, E.C. 2, and which may eventually be merged in a larger journal appearing at more frequent intervals. For we thoroughly concur with your criticism that ‘the British Jewish community, most of whom,’ as you rightly say, ‘are by no means in sympathy with this (Nationalist) crusade, are being served very badly by their newspapers.’ Meantime we take this opportunity of repudiating in public the particular statements in those newspapers to which you have felt it your duty to call attention.
“General Monash, Rothschild, and Montefiore Figure in Agitation.
“In reply to a recent article in the London Morning Post, in which the editor accused the Jews as being Bolsheviks, a letter justifying the stand of the Post in the matter was sent to that paper and signed by Baron Lionel Rothschild, Lord Swaythling, Sir Magnus, Sir Marcus Samuel, Sir Harry Samuel, General Monash, Sir Isidore Spielmann, Claude Montefiore, Leonard Cohen and Professor Galantz.
“As a result of this letter, a self-sanctifying leading editorial appeared in the Post, which cried out in virtuous indignation against all those who had previously questioned that the majority of the Jews are Bolsheviks. The letter, coming as it has, at a time when the anti-Semitic pot is boiling in London, has a peculiarly unfortunate effect. The opinion of London Jewry towards these ten men they consider have betrayed them, may best be left to the imagination.”
It is significant that the feeling that the Jews are largely instrumental in promoting Bolshevism and radicalism in general is by no means confined to England. The New York World published on January 26, 1919, a cable, from Buenos Aires entitled “Argentina Deports Fourteen Hundred Bolshevists.” The cable reads as follows:
“Buenos Aires, January 25.—Fourteen hundred prisoners, charged with Bolshevist activities, are on board a cruiser here awaiting deportation, according to Secret Service Men. The majority of them are Russian Jews. Some Spaniards are among the number.”
In the same connection the New York Tribune, on January 24, 1919, reported that in Buenos Aires posters were put up in which the Russian Jews were blamed “for the recent outbreaks, as well as the anarchistic outbreak in 1910,” and it was demanded that “the government rid the nation of this Jewish pest.”
In the issue of The Review of March 13, 1920, an article was published entitled “Bolshevism in Holland.” The article gives a brief description of the Bolshevist movement in Holland. It also gives the names of the most prominent leaders of the Bolshevist movement in that country. In part the article reads as follows:
“First among these is Mr. David Wijnkoop, an Amsterdam Jew, of a fiery, impetuous temperament, a great orator with [136] a strong hold on the masses. He is the Dutch counterpart of his Russian comrade Trotzky, whom he resembles even in outward appearance, and a faithful henchman of his Moscow alter ego in the spreading of the latter’s international propaganda.”
It is a well-known fact that in Hungary, during the Bolshevist revolution of 1919, Bela Kun, whose real name is Cohen, a Jew, became the dictator. It was often reported in various papers that out of the thirty-one Soviet officials in Hungary twenty-six were Jews.
In Austria revolutionary attempts were made to set up a Bolshevist government, and the two brothers Alder, as well as Friedrich Adler, all of whom are Jews, were the leading spirits of the Bolshevist revolutionary propaganda in that country.
In Germany the first Spartacan revolt was almost exclusively under the control of Jews. Among others were: Rosa Luxemburg, Clara Zetkin, Radek (whose real name is Sobelsohn), Eugene Levine, Muscham.
In the recent attempt to overthrow the Ebert Government and set up a Bolshevist Republic, almost all of the leaders in Berlin were Jews. The New York Sun, under date of March 18, 1920, gives the names of the Communist leaders who attempted to overthrow the government as follows: Cohn, Daumig, Newmann, Dr. von Kahn, Kurt Bever, Levy.
As to the United States the following should be stated:
While it is a generally recognized fact that the Socialist, Communist, Radical, I. W. W., and Bolshevist movements are largely recruited from the foreign-born population of various nationalities, nevertheless it can scarcely be denied that the moving spirit of the destructive revolutionary propaganda is largely Jewish and fomented by Jews. Thus, for instance, the notorious “Russian” Soviet Bureau, headed by Ludwig C. A. K. Martens, a German, was almost exclusively composed of Jews. Those who were in charge of responsible departments in the Bureau were as follows:
| Abraham Heller | Manager of the Commercial Department | |
| Nuorteva | Whose real name is said to be Neuberger, Manager of the Propaganda Department [137] | |
| Gregory Weinstein | General Office Manager | |
| Morris Hillquit | > | Counselors at law for the Soviet Bureau |
| Charles Recht | > |
All of the five Socialists who were recently ousted from the Assembly of the state of New York by an overwhelming vote were Jews. Their names are: Louis Waldman, August Classens, Samuel A. de Witt, Samuel Orr, and Charles Solomon. During the trial of these men one of the most sensational pieces of evidence introduced by the state to show that the Socialist Party advocated the overthrow of the government by violence and revolution, was a book published in Yiddish by the Jewish Socialist Federation of America. This federation is a part of the Socialist Party. The official report of the Judiciary Committee of the Assembly of the State of New York remarks that in the book published in Yiddish, the principles of Socialism, “were not camouflaged, as they frequently are in English” (page 31). The book in question typifies the extreme of revolutionary Socialism in the United States. We quote some of the more striking passages:
“Workingmen cannot depend on ‘peaceful evolution’; they must prepare for a revolution, and class-dictatorship” (page 207).
“The Socialist movement rouses the workingmen to revolution; it preaches to them class-struggle, awakens within them class-consciousness, makes all necessary preparations for a Socialistic order. When society is ready for the overturn, when the Socialist organization feels that the moment has come, it will make the revolution. To predict when and how this should be done is impossible. This is a thing which must be determined separately in every country, because the circumstances in every country are different. No sooner than the revolution is made, however, the first aim of the Socialists must be to seize the government, the state, by whatever means they can succeed in doing this with and then their rule must establish the dictatorship of the Proletariat.
“This dictatorship will be employed for one thing, to eliminate capitalism by force, take away by force the capital from private owners and transfer it to the ownership of the community.”
“Socialists seek to be elected into the government principally for the sake of propaganda.”
“To the Socialist at present, the meaning of class struggle, Internationale, and dictatorship of the Proletariat must be clear. He must understand that Socialism is not a reform [138] movement. He must know that Socialism is a Revolutionary world-perspective, and that the Socialist movement is a Revolutionary movement.”
The radical periodicals published in this country in Russian are almost entirely managed and completely controlled by Jews. For instance, the Russki Golos has an editorial staff composed of four men, all of whom are Jews, namely, Weinbaum, Zvesdichiy, Sokolov, Gisenkin. The official organ of the Russian Communist Branch of the American Communist Party, the Novy Mir, is edited by two Jews, namely, N. Hourwitch, and Stoklitzky. The Bolshevist weekly, Pravda, is edited by two Jews, namely, Finkelstein and Weinstein. The Ukrainian Bolshevist tri-weekly publication, Robitnik, is published by a Jew, K. Pitlar. At the same time, even leaving out the well-known Yiddish publication The Jewish Daily Forward, with pronounced pro-Bolshevist tendencies, the new Anarchistic periodical, The Communist World, published in English, has the following men on its editorial staff, all of whom are Jews:
| Maximilian Cohen | Editor |
| B. D. Wolfe | Associate Editor |
| George Ashkenouzi | Business Manager |
| H. Winitsky | Executive Secretary |
Winitsky was recently convicted of criminal anarchy in the New York Courts.
Again, with the recently founded Communist Party of America, the rôle of the Jew is very important, inasmuch as its founder is Louis Fraina, an Italian Jew. Examples of this kind could be multiplied almost indefinitely. For this reason we must content ourselves with a reference to an article published in the New York Call. This is the official organ of the Socialist Party of America, which is issued under the motto:
“Workers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains, and a world to gain.”
The president of this publication is S. Block, a Jew. The article in question, entitled “Chicago Workers Plan Big May Day Demonstrations,” deals with the arrangements for the May Day Parade of the Chicago radical labor organizations in 1919. It enumerates some of the organizations [139] which were represented in the conference which planned the demonstrations:
Indeed, it can scarcely be denied that the Jewish labor organizations as enumerated by this Socialist publication itself were in complete control of the whole May Day parade in one of the biggest cities in the United States.
One more fact of importance which should be mentioned is that four Anarchists, who were convicted and sentenced to terms of twenty years by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, were Jews. Their names are: Jacob Abrams, Samuel Lippman, Hyman Lachowsky, Mollie Stimer.
Finally, we refer to the well-known activities of Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman, both of whom are Jews, and who were deported on the Soviet Ark “Buford.”
Of course, it is significant that the radical labor movement is largely controlled by Jewish internationalists, but still more significant appears the fact that recently several rabbis have taken a definite stand in support of the Red movement. We shall refer here to two instances. On October 25, 1919, the [140] New York Tribune stated that Rabbi Judah L. Magnes had publicly announced that “he was a Bolshevik and in full sympathy with their doctrines and ideals.” The article referred to is entitled “Bolshevik Talk Forces Magnes Out.” Therein it is revealed that on account of his public announcement that he was in full sympathy with Trotzky, Rabbi Magnes was forced to resign from the American Jewish Committee. It is important to bear in mind that at that time Rabbi Magnes was one of the most honored members of the Jewish community. Rabbi Magnes was deputed in 1916 to represent in Europe the American Jewish Relief organization, The Joint Distribution Committee, which, among other activities, solicited and distributed money and supplies to the Jews in territories occupied by the Central Powers. Whenever there is a great mass meeting Rabbi Magnes appears as the chief spokesman on behalf of the Jews in New York City, as has happened several times since his expulsion from the American Jewish Committee. Rabbi Magnes was one of the founders of the People’s Council, which was dissolved by the United States Government during the war. Here is a tentative enumeration of Rabbi Magnes’s activities as stated in the Tribune article above referred to:
“Dr. Magnes was one of the organizers of the American-Jewish Committee which has been engaged in philanthropic work among the Jews for the last fifteen years. Most of the work of the committee was confined to countries where the people were oppressed. Dr. Magnes has held many important posts and at one time was Rabbi of the Temple Emanu-El. Shortly after we entered the war he became a strong pacifist and was active in the People’s Council.
“There was a movement started on the East Side early in the summer to make Dr. Magnes the Socialist candidate for Congress. The persons who attempted this move are now supporting Congressman London for reëlection. Dr. Magnes is chairman of the American Jewish Kehillah.”
The other instance is that of Rabbi Maxwell Silver of Temple Shaari Zedek, Brooklyn, who, on January 8, 1920, was ousted by his congregation early in January, 1920, because of alleged radical utterances. “It was charged that he drew class lines and spoke of the rich as oppressors.” (See New York Times, January 8, 1920.) This fact alone might not be of great importance, but the action of the New York Association [141] of Reformed Rabbis, as reported in the New York daily press, is significant:
“After the dismissal of Rabbi Maxwell Silver, of Congregation Shaari Zedek, of Brooklyn, the New York Association of Reformed Rabbis undertook the mediation of the trouble between the congregation and the Rabbi, and as a result pointed out that the whole difficulty was due to an unfortunate misunderstanding. Thereupon the trustees decided to recommend the reinstatement of Rabbi Silver, and we are happy to state that such reinstatement was ratified by the congregation after a special meeting last night. By a special resolution the New York Association of Reformed Rabbis expresses its confidence in the worthiness of Rabbi Silver and also in the good intentions of the Congregation Shaari Zedek to serve the cause of Israel.”
It is also a peculiar fact to consider that certain powerful Jewish bankers were instrumental and active in spreading Bolshevism, which now threatens the whole world. In this connection we refer the reader to one of the “Sisson Documents,” published by the United States Government in 1917 under the title “German Bolshevist Conspiracy”:
On September 21, 1917, one of the leading German Spartacan leaders, a Jew, by name of Furstenberg, wrote a letter to a Bolshevist by the name of Raphael Scholan, who became later one of the Bolshevist commissaries in Soviet Russia, as follows:
Stockholm , Sept. 21, 1917.
“ To Mr. Raphael Scholan ,
Haparanda.
The banking house, M. Warburg, opened an account for the enterprise of Comrade Trotzky, upon receipt of a telegram from the Chairman of the ‘Rhein-Westphalian Syndicate.’ A lawyer, probably Mr. Kestroff, obtained ammunition and organized the transportation of same, together with that of the money, to Lulea and Vardo, the firm of Essen & Son, Lulea, as to the consignee and the confidential persons to whom the sum demanded by Comrade Trotzky is to be handed. Fraternal greetings!
Rumors that international Jewish financiers have been supporting the Bolsheviki in Russia are persistent.
Who are the international financiers? Perhaps the answer is to be found in the following cable dispatch of the Wolff Agency on the German situation in 1919, published by La Vieille France in the issue of February 13, 1919:
“The deputy Hyemann has revealed the curious fact: The Bolshevist movement is supported by financiers. The banker, Bleichroeder, has contributed two millions to the Extremist Journal.”
It is of course known that Bleichroeder is one of the most powerful Jewish financiers in Germany.
It will be remembered that the Protocols bring out very distinctly two ideas, namely, economic and social dissensions of all kinds, including anarchism and communism and also a world war.
In a recently published book which has created much interest, entitled “The Inside Story of Austro-German Intrigue,” by Joseph Goriĉar and Lyman Beecher Stowe, the authors advanced the theory that Jewish bankers have during the last century played an important rôle in European war conspiracies. Mr. Goriĉar was, during the early part of the late war, Austro-Hungarian Consul in Berlin. We refer to one of the most important passages in the book bearing upon the subject:
“The pro-war bankers of 1854 as well as those of 1914 originated in the Semitic banking center of Frankfort-on-the-Main in Germany, the birthplace of the Bethmann-Hollwegs, the Goldschmidts, the Seligmans, Jacob Schiff,[29] and the Rothschilds.
“All the vast wealth of the banking house of the Rothschilds, amounting at the beginning of the war to some twenty billion francs, was made chiefly in war operations, war financing. The Rothschild brothers of the Central Empires have in fact sometimes financed simultaneously rival groups of belligerents.
“Frankfort-on-the-Main is, and has been for more than a hundred years, the chief source of financial backing for wars. Kings, emperors, and war ministers have had to await the pleasure of these bankers before issuing their ultimata. To that centre have been added Vienna, Berlin, and Budapest, the other important centres of Jewish world finance. In Vienna the Rothschilds’ word is law; in Berlin, the Hahnemans, Bleichroeders, Mendelssohns, especially the last named, who of late years have controlled Russia’s finances. To these same sources may be traced the origin of the World War.” (Pages 56 and 57.)
The “Protocols” have already attracted public attention in various countries. The attitude which the Jewish leaders will take in regard to them is a matter of great interest and deep concern. Until now they have kept silent. Only on rare occasions have the Jews referred, though very indirectly, to the question of the existence of a Jewish world conspiracy. The most explicit utterance on the subject in the United States is that of Rabbi Stephen Wise, in his address to the Congregation of Free Synagogues in Carnegie Hall, on March 1, 1920. The reports of the address in the daily press are rather meager. We set forth in full the report which appeared in the New York Tribune on the following day:
“‘JEWISH PLOT’ ONLY AMONG APOSTATES, SAYS DR. WISE
“BELIEVES MEN WHO FORSWEAR ANCIENT FAITH WOULD SEIZE POWER FOR OWN ENDS
“Speaking to the congregation of the Free Synagogue in Carnegie Hall yesterday on the subject of ‘The Jewish Conspiracy,’ which has had its most recent revival in a story published [144] in the London Morning Post, charging that Jews were in a plot to seize control of the world, Dr. Stephen S. Wise said that the only serious ‘conspiracy’ among the Jews to-day emanated from the young men who foreswore their ancient faith.
“Saying that oppression and injustice have attended the followers of the Jewish faith for centuries, Dr. Wise added that they had a right to be vindictive, but that it was not in their nature to be so.
“‘It is the Jew who has been reduced to such a state of degradation by oppression that he lies when he swears allegiance to another faith which has not even touched his heart, who becomes a dangerous element in the life of the world,’ said Dr. Wise.
“‘The conspiracy,’ if there is one, is among those of Jewish birth who are or seem ashamed of their origin. They follow false gods or none at all, and among them will be those who may seize power for their own ends.”
In conclusion it must be stated that the motives which have actuated the publication of this book are not anti-Semitic. The object—already indicated in the introduction—is to call the attention of the American people to a document which may throw important light upon the international Bolshevist movement which menaces directly the vital interests of the United States.
That this attention is amply justified appears from a review of the recent publication of the Protocols in England, which appeared in the London Times on May 8, 1920. The article is so significant that it is reprinted in its entirety.
“THE JEWISH PERIL.”[30]
A Disturbing Pamphlet
Call for Inquiry
(From a correspondent)
The Times has not as yet noticed this singular little book. Its diffusion is, however, increasing, and its reading is likely to perturb the thinking public. Never before have a race and a [145] creed been accused of a more sinister conspiracy. We in this country, who live in good fellowship with numerous representatives of Jewry, may well ask that some authoritative criticism should deal with it, and either destroy the ugly “Semitic” bogy or assign their proper place to the insidious allegations of this kind of literature.
In spite of the urgency of impartial and exhaustive criticism, the pamphlet has been allowed, so far, to pass almost unchallenged. The Jewish Press announced, it is true, that the anti-Semitism of the “Jewish Peril” was going to be exposed. But save for an unsatisfactory article in the March 5 issue of the Jewish Guardian, and for an almost equally unsatisfactory contribution to the Nation of March 27, this exposure is yet to come. The article of the Jewish Guardian is unsatisfactory, because it deals mainly with the personality of the author of the book in which the pamphlet is embodied, with Russian reactionary propaganda, and the Russian secret police. It does not touch the substance of the “Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion.” The purely Russian side of the book and its fervid “Orthodoxy” is not its most interesting feature. Its author, Professor S. Nilus, who was a minor official in the Department of Foreign Religions at Moscow, had, in all likelihood, opportunities of access to many archives and unpublished documents. On the other hand, the world-wide issue raised by the “Protocols” which he incorporated in his book and are now translated into English as “The Jewish Peril,” cannot fail not only to interest, but to preoccupy. What are the theses of the “Protocols” with which, in the absence of public criticism, British readers have to grapple alone and unaided? They are, roughly:—
(1) There is, and has been for centuries, a secret international political organization of the Jews.
(2) The spirit of this organization appears to be an undying traditional hatred of the Christian world, and a titanic ambition for world domination.
(3) The goal relentlessly pursued through centuries is the destruction of the Christian national States, and the substitution for them of an international Jewish dominion.
(4) The method adopted for first weakening and then destroying existing bodies politic is the infusion of disintegrating political ideas of carefully measured progressive disruptive force, from liberalism to radicalism, and socialism to communism, culminating in anarchy as a reductio ad absurdum of egalitarian principles. Meanwhile Jewry remains immune from these corrosive doctrines. “We preach Liberalism to the Gentiles, but on the other hand we keep our own nation in entire subjection” (page 55). Out of the welter of world anarchy, in response to the desperate clamour of distraught [146] humanity, the stern, logical, wise, pitiless rule of “the King of the Seed of David” is to arise.
(5) Political dogmas evolved by Christian Europe, democratic statesmanship and politics, are all equally contemptible to the Elders of Zion. To them statesmanship is an exalted secret art, acquired only by traditional training, and imparted to a select few in the secrecy of some occult sanctuary. “Political problems are not meant to be understood by ordinary people; they can only be comprehended, as I have said before, by rulers who have been directing affairs for many centuries.”
(6) To this conception of statesmanship the masses are contemptible cattle, and the political leaders of the Gentiles, “upstarts from its midst as rulers, are likewise blind in politics.” They are puppets, pulled by the hidden hand of the “Elders,” puppets mostly corrupt, always inefficient; easily coaxed, or bullied, or blackmailed into submission, unconsciously furthering the advent of Jewish dominion.
(7) The Press, the theatre, stock exchange speculations, science, law itself, are, in the hands that hold all the gold, so many means of procuring a deliberate confusion and bewilderment of public opinion, demoralization of the young, and encouragement of the vices of the adult, eventually substituting, in the minds of the Gentiles, for the idealistic aspiration of Christian culture the “cash basis” and a neutrality of materialistic scepticism, or cynical lust for pleasure.
Such are the main theses of the “Protocols.” They are not altogether new, and can be found scattered throughout anti-Semitic literature. The condensed form in which they are now presented lends them a new and weird force.
Incidentally, some of the features of the would-be Jewish programme bear an uncanny resemblance to situations and events now developing under our eyes. Professor Nilus’s book was, undoubtedly, published in Russia in 1905. The copy of the original at the British Museum bears the stamp of August 10, 1906. This being so, some of the passages assume the aspect of fulfilled prophecies, unless one is inclined to attribute the prescience of the “Elders of Zion” to the fact that they really are the hidden instigators of these events. When one reads (page 8) that “it is indispensable for our plans that wars should not produce any territorial alterations,” one is most forcibly reminded of the cry, “peace without annexations” raised by all the radical parties of the world, and especially in revolutionary Russia. And again:—
We will create a universal economic crisis, by all possible underhand means and with the help of gold, which is all in our hands. Simultaneously we will throw on to the streets [147] huge crowds of workmen throughout Europe. We will increase the wages, which will not help the workmen as, at the same time, we will raise the price of prime necessities . it is essential for us at all costs to deprive the aristocracy of their lands. To attain this purpose, the best method is to force up rates and taxes. These methods will keep the landed interests at their lowest possible ebb.
Nor can one fail to recognize Soviet Russia in the following:—
“. in governing the world the best results are obtained by means of violence and intimidation. In politics, we must know how to confiscate property without any hesitation, if by so doing we can obtain subjection and power. Our State, following the way of peaceful conquest, has the right of substituting for the terrors of war, executions less apparent and more expedient, which are necessary to uphold terror, producing blind submission. By new laws we will regulate the political life of our subjects as though they were so many parts of a machine. Such laws will gradually restrict all freedom and liberties allowed by the Gentiles. It is essential for us to arrange that, besides ourselves, there should be in all countries nothing but a huge proletariat, so many soldiers and police loyal to our cause; . in order to demonstrate our enslavement of the Gentile Governments of Europe, we will show our power to one of them by means of crime and violence, that is to say, a reign of terror; . our programme will induce a third part of the populace to watch the remainder from a pure sense of duty or from the principle of voluntary service.”
Bearing in mind when this was published, we see, fifteen years later, a government established in Russia of which a high percentage of the leaders are Jews, whose modus operandi follows the principles quoted, and whose mainstay is a Communist Party, which answers to the last quotation. We see this, and it seems uncanny. The trouble is that all this fosters indiscriminate anti-Semitism. That the latter is rampant in Eastern Europe is a fact. That its propaganda in France, England, and America is growing is a fact also. Do we want, and can we afford to add exacerbated race-hatred to all our political, social, and economic troubles? If not, the question of the “Jewish Peril” should be taken up and dealt with. It is far too interesting, the hypothesis it presents is far too ingenious, attractive, and sensational not to attract the attention of our none too happy and none too contented public. The average man thinks that there is something very fundamentally wrong with the world he lives in. He will eagerly grasp at a plausible “working hypothesis.”
What are these “Protocols”? Are they authentic? If so, what malevolent assembly concocted these plans, and gloated [148] over their exposition? Are they forgery? If so, whence comes the uncanny note of prophecy, prophecy in parts fulfilled, in parts far gone in the way of fulfilment? Have we been struggling these tragic years to blow up and extirpate the secret organization of German world dominion only to find beneath it another more dangerous because more secret? Have we, by straining every fibre of our national body, escaped a “Pax Germanica” only to fall into a “Pax Judaeica”? The “Elders of Zion,” as represented in their “Protocols,” are by no means kinder taskmasters than William II and his henchmen would have been.
All these questions, which are likely to obtrude themselves on the reader of the “Jewish Peril,” cannot be dismissed by a shrug of the shoulders unless one wants to strengthen the hand of the typical anti-Semite and call forth his favourite accusation of the “conspiracy of silence.” An impartial investigation of these would-be documents and of their history is most desirable. That history is by no means clear from the English translation. They would appear, from internal evidence, to have been written by Jews for Jews, or to be cast in the form of lectures, and notes for lectures, by Jews to Jews. If so, in what circumstances were they produced and to cope with what inter-Jewish emergency? Or are we to dismiss the whole matter without inquiry and to let the influence of such a book as this work unchecked?
The publishers believe that the vast majority of the Jews in this country have never heard of the Protocols, and would denounce the plan which they set forth. The Jews here, constituting about three per cent of the population, enjoy the same rights and privileges as other citizens. All are equal before the law and all are free from persecution on religious grounds. American Jews are regarded by their fellow citizens, and for the most part doubtless regard themselves, as Americans of Jewish faith. They have indeed a special ground for gratitude to the country of their adoption, for they have found here opportunities which they did not enjoy in many other countries. They have shared in all the activities leading to prosperity and they have prospered. That they do, in fact, recognize their favorable situation is shown by the statements two of them are reported by the New York Times, in its issue of May 4, 1920, to have made at a mass meeting held on the preceding evening at Cooper Union under the auspices of the Independent Order of Brith Abraham, to express the gratitude of the Jewish people to Great Britain for taking the mandate [149] for Palestine. Judge Gustave Hartman, Grand Master of the order, is reported to have said in part:
“We didn’t know what a home was until we reached this greatest of all republics, the United States of America. Here we are given free and equal opportunity under the free institutions of this country. In this country the Jews have lived and prospered, and in all this country there are no better citizens than the Jewish people.”
Judge Otto A. Rosalsky said “that it became the duty of the Jewish citizens of America to cherish the ideals of this country and keep them intact, so that they might be handed down to their children’s children.”
Doubtless American Jews will recognize the menace to American institutions and American prosperity of any such political conspiracy as is outlined in the Protocols. But the situation demands more than tacit disapproval on their part. Bearing in mind the close parallelism shown to exist between the “Protocols” and the actual policies of Bolshevism as practiced in Russia, the dominant position occupied by the Jews in the Soviet Government, and the open sympathy and approval given to international Bolshevism by prominent Jews outside of Russia, it is vitally necessary that the American Jews should by word and deed express their condemnation not only of Bolshevism, but of any plan or program for world domination similar to that contained in the Protocols. Aside from their position on these matters, there is no likelihood of any change in the favorable situation of the Jews in this country unless by their own conduct they convince the American people that they are hostile to our institutions or to our system of government, or that they desire to constitute within the borders of the United States a race apart,—to be treated as members of a foreign nation, enjoying special rights, privileges, or immunities.
[1] “Actions Committee” has the same meaning as Executive Committee.
