- Israel Shamir is an Israeli journalist based in Jaffa.
His articles can be found on the site www.israelshamir.net
-
- The troublesome concept of the Hidden Hand or the Elders
of Zion is superfluous and unnecessary.
-
- "The latest controversy to involve the Arab World
concerns a TV program A Rider without a Horse that started airing on Wednesday,
Nov. 5th, the first day of the holy month of Ramadan on several Arab satellite
channels. The source of the controversy is that the program is partly based
on "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion", the old forgery originating
in Tsarist Russia", writes Qais S. Saleh, a business consultant from
Ramallah on the excellent website CounterPunch[1]. Expectedly, Saleh condemns
the broadcast and warns the Palestinians and the Arabs to stay away from
the bad old wolf of anti-Semitism, or, as he put it, "the trend of
importation of anti-Semitic bigotry".
-
- Saleh's view coincides with that of Michael Hoffman,
on whose site the Protocols can be found. Hoffman thinks Arabs have no
need to import anti-Semitic arguments from the old and far-away sources,
provided they have a fresh round-the-clock local source: actual behaviour
of the Jewish state and its Jewish citizens. It is much more convincing
than old tales.
-
- However, the Protocols are still with us and still entertain
minds. Recently, the leading Italian novelist and thinker Umberto Eco contributed
his opinion on the subject to the Guardian[2]. Eco "explains"
the popular feelings towards the Jews: "They engaged in trade and
lent money - hence the resentment towards them as "intellectuals".
-
-
- In my limited knowledge, it is not the intellectuals
who lend money, but bankers and loan sharks, while true intellectuals find
their behaviour repulsive. Probably Eco has a different definition of 'intellectual'
up his sleeve. "The ill-famed Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion
were a rehash of serialised fictional material, and prove their own unreliability,
since it is hardly credible that "the baddies" would reveal their
fell purposes so blatantly" - concludes Eco.
-
- One can forgive a business consultant from Ramallah,
but Umberto Eco could notice that his definition would fit some other books,
for instance, Gargantua and Pantagruel, an even older forgery, pretending
to be a real chronicle of the Giants family, and built on 'serialised fictional
material'. Don Quixote, Pickwick's Club, 1984 of Orwell - all these books
"pretend" to describe real events to the same extent. They are
'forgeries', as they are ascribed to somebody else: Don Quixote to Sid
Ahmed Benengeli[3], and Gargantua to Maitre Alcofribas Nasier[4].
-
- The Protocols of the Elders of Zion are best described
as 'pseudo-epigrapha', rather than 'fake'. They belong to the same category
as Tomas Friedman's Letter of President Clinton to Mubarak. After all,
pseudo-epigraphic genre is an old and venerable one. It is even better
to consider the Protocols, 'a political pamphlet'.
-
- In this essay, we shall attempt to find out why the Protocols
refuse to lie down and die. We shall stay clear from the usual question,
"who wrote it". Its real author remains unknown, and it is difficult
to imagine this person, for the Protocols are a literary palimpsest. In
the days of yore, a scribe would write his composition on a piece of old
parchment, previously removing an older text. The erasure was rarely total,
and a reader was treated to an integrated version of the Golden Ass and
Fioretti of St Francis. In the Protocols, there are layers of old and even
older stories, and it precludes meaningful quest for ultimate creator.
Every text should be treated on its own merits, disregarding the question
of authorship. Although, Jorge Luis Borges wrote that the author is an
important part of a text. Indeed, if we would know the Protocols contain
real blueprint of some Jewish elites, we would have our answer ready in
minutes. But Protocols were published in the end of 19th-beginning of 20th
century "as found", as apocrypha. They became a great bestseller
and still stay there, though in some countries (notably the Soviet Union),
mere possession of the text was punishable by death.
-
- The Anonymous author of the Protocols describes a master-plan
for vast restructuring of society, creation of a new oligarchy and subjugation
of millions. The final product is not too different from the one described
in a contemporary piece of writing, The Iron Heel by Jack London, the great
radical from Oakland, California. However, London expected harsh cracking
down, while Anonym's way to subjugation leads through Machiavellian manipulations
and mind control a la Orwell's 1984. (Orwell's homage to the Protocols
is even more striking as it is rarely noticed).
-
- The difficulty of the Protocols is in an uncanny dissonance
between its uncouth language and deep social and religious thought. It
is a rude parody-like rendering of a satanic, subtle and well-thought out
plan, wrote the Nobel Prise winning novelist Alexander Solzhenitsyn[5]
in his (written in 1966 and published in 2001) analysis of the Protocols.
-
- "The Protocols . show a blueprint of a social system.
Its design is well above abilities of an ordinary mind, including that
of its publisher. It is a dynamic process of two stages, of destabilization,
increasing freedom and liberalism, which is terminated in social cataclysm,
and on the second stage, new hierarchical restructuring of society takes
place. It is more complicated than a nuclear bomb. It could be a stolen
and distorted plan designed by a mind of genius. Its putrid style of an
anti-Semitic grubby brochure [intentionally] obscures the great strength
of thought and insight" .
-
- Solzhenitsyn is aware of faults of the Protocols. "Its
style is that of a filthy leaflet, the powerful line of thought is broken
and fragmented, mixed up with ill-smelling incantations and psychological
blunders. The system described is not necessarily connected with the Jews;
it could be purely Masonic or whatever; while its strongly anti-Semitic
current is not an organic part of the design".
-
- Solzhenitsyn makes a textual experiment, removes words
"Jews", "Goyim" and "conspiracy" and finds
many disturbing ideas. He concludes: "The text demonstrates impressive
foresight on the two systems of society, the Western and the Soviet one.
While a strong thinker could possibly predict the development of the West
in 1901, how could he grasp the Soviet future?"
-
- Solzhenitsyn braved the Soviet regime, dared to write
and publish the mammoth Archipelago Gulag, an indictment of the Soviet
repression, but even he stalled and did not publish his research of the
Protocols. He asked it to be published after his death only, and it was
printed against his will in a very small number of copies in 2001. Let
us follow Solzhenitsyn's line of thought and gaze into the crystal ball
of the Protocols, while temporarily discounting its "Jewish line"
and paying heed to the idea of creating a new system, not necessarily a
Jewish-dominated one. The master-plan begins with reshaping of human mind:
-
- "People's minds should be diverted (away from contemplation)
towards industry and trade, and then they will have no time to think. The
people will be consumed by the pursuit of gain. It will be vain pursuit,
for we shall put industry on a speculative basis: what is withdrawn from
the land by industry will slip through the hands of workers and industrialists
and pass into the hands of financiers.
-
- The intensified struggle for survival and superiority,
accompanied by crises and shocks will create cold and heartless communities
with strong aversion towards religion. Their only guide is gain that is
Mammon, which they will erect into a veritable cult".
-
- Foresight of Anonym is amazing: in the days of the Protocols'
publication, Man was still the measure of things, and full eighty years
would pass, until Milton Friedman and Chicago School would proclaim Market
and Profit as the only guiding light.
-
- The tool for enslavement of minds is the media, writes
Anonym. "There is a great force that creates the movement of thought
in the people, and that is the media. It is in the media that the triumph
of freedom of speech finds its incarnation. Through the Press we have gained
the power to influence minds while remaining unobserved. We shall erase
from the memory of men the historical facts we do not want them to know,
and leave only those we wish".
-
- Years will pass since the publication until a small group
of people who control our discourse while remaining unobserved, the media
lords, would rise. The free discussion of the media barons, Berlusconi
and Black, Maxwell and Sulzberger, Gusinsky and Zuckerman is banned from
the media they own, while their cooperative affinity remains impressive.
The freedom of discourse survives wherever independent (from media barons)
media still exists. Hundred years ago, this force was much weaker than
it is now, and it is amazing the Anonym recognised its potential.
-
- Century before the rise of World Bank and IMF, the Protocols
noticed the foreign loans are the best tools to rob countries of their
wealth. "While the loans were internal, money remained in the land,
but with externalisation of loans, all nations pay tribute of their subjects
to the oligarchy". Indeed, the bigger loans poor countries get, the
poorer they become.
-
- Concentration of capital in the hands of financiers,
concentration of media in few hands, extra-judicial killings of unyielding
leaders, stock market with its derivatives sucks out wealth and it accumulates
in the hands of the priesthood of Mammon, gain (or "market forces")
as the only measure of successful strategy. Yes, the interest to the Protocols
does not disappear because the described plan of creating oligarchic (not
necessarily Jewish) rule is being implemented in real time and it is called
the New World Order.
-
- Sometimes, the Protocols are described as extreme-right-wing
anti-utopian piece of writing. However, it spans both left and right-wing
discourse. A right-wing writer would bless strengthening of Law and Order,
but the following prediction of Anonym could be written today by a leftist
libertarian, say, Noam Chomsky, witnessing the present transition to the
New World Order: "The race of armaments and the increase of police
force will bring forth society where are only the masses of the proletariat,
a few millionaires, police and soldiers".
-
- However, the deepest thought of Anonym remains in the
spiritual sphere:
-
- "Freedom might be harmless and have its place in
the State economy without injury to the well-being of the people if it
rested upon the foundation of faith in God, upon the Brotherhood of humanity.
This is the reason why it is indispensable for us to undermine all faith,
to tear out of the people's mind the very principle of God and the Spirit,
and to put in its place arithmetical calculations and material needs".
-
- Anonym connects the Faith and the idea of Brotherhood
of humanity. Undermining of Faith ruins the Brotherhood. Freedom, instead
of desirable and beautiful state of mind, turns into destructive drive
when unhinged from the Faith. Instead of Faith, the Enemy offers pursuit
of Mammon.
-
- While reading in today's (16.11.02) IH Tribune philippics
against gay priests and nuns, one notes the following lines in the Protocols:
"We have taken care to discredit the Christian priesthood and ruin
their mission which might still hinder our plans. Day by day, their influence
on the people is falling lower. Collapse of Christianity is nigh".
-
- We witness implementation of this plan: religion is removed
from consideration, neo-liberalism or Mammon worship takes its place, while
with disestablishment of socialism, this brave attempt of a non-faith-based
brotherhood collapsed, leaving ideological vacuum. This observation caused
some reviewers to exclaim, "The true designer of the Master-plan is
our old foe, the Prince of the World, whose ultimate aim is elimination
of Divine Presence and ruination of Man". True, but the Prince of
the World can't act directly. He needs free agents that choose to accept
his plan. These chief agents and possible allies, according to the pamphlet,
are financial capitalists and Masters of Discourse, 'the Mind'.
-
- They promote to the highest positions "politicians
who, in case of disobedience to our instructions, must face criminal charges
or disappear. We shall arrange elections in favour of candidates with some
dark, undiscovered stain in their past. They will be our trustworthy agents
out of fear of revelations" For us, contemporaries of Watergate and
Lewinsky, it sounds familiar.
-
- The shift from Stage One (liberalism and freedom) to
Stage Two (tyranny) took place in our lifetime. If in 1968 the NY Times
promoted the Freedom Riders, in 2002 it supports Patriot Act. An important
American lawyer, Alan Dershovitz of Harvard made a U-turn from Human rights
to Right to torture. This U-turn was predicted by the Protocols, as the
purpose beyond the struggle against the old elites.
-
- "The aristocracy enjoyed the labour of the workers,
and it was interested in seeing that the workers were well fed, healthy,
and strong. The people have annihilated the aristocracy, and have fallen
into the grips of merciless money-grinding scoundrels".
-
- In less emotional terms, the new bourgeoisie removed
the old elites with support of people, while promising freedom and objecting
to their privilege. After its victory, it took the privilege to itself,
and turned out to be as bad (or worse) as the feudal lord. Marx referred
to this complaint of aristocracy in one of the numerous additions to the
Communist Manifesto, and considered it futile if partly justified. However,
he did not live to witness a similar process which took place in the last
days of the Soviet Union. The rising new bourgeoisie took control over
the discourse, convinced people to fight the privilege of Nomenclature
for the sake of equality and freedom, and after their victory, it assumed
and multiplied the privilege, and rejected equality and freedom.
-
- The Protocols predict rise of New Bourgeoisie, globalist
Mammon-worshippers,
-
-
- who are inherently hostile to Old Elites, to spirit,
to religion, to the ordinary people. For a long while, they were the engine
of the left, democracy-seeking movements, until their purpose was completed,
and then they made the U-turn towards oligarchy.
-
- This U-turn can be quantified by the inheritance and
land tax rate in England: while the financial bourgeoisie and Masters of
Discourse fought against the old ruling classes, the rates were high and
eventually dismantled their power base; after their victory, the rate decreased
allowing consolidation of the new ruling classes. It is possible that the
Old Order had had some advantages. It is almost certain that a transition
from the Old Order could be different if the people would understand the
intentions of the enemy. But history can't be reversed, and it is quite
futile to dream of return of the good lords and benevolent Party bosses.
-
- Thus, the Protocols (purified of references to the Jews
and conspiracies) are useful as they describe a blueprint of the New World
Order, and help its adversaries to form a defensive strategy against the
designs of Enemy. But the references to the Jews constitute large and important
part of the text.
-
- The Jews and the Protocols
-
- The Protocols identify the moving force of the New World
Order with a powerful group of extremely chauvinist, manipulative and domination-obsessed
Jewish leaders. The leaders, according to the Protocols, despise ordinary
community members; they utilise and support anti-Semitism as the means
to keep their "lesser brethren", innocent ordinary folk of Jewish
origin, in thrall to their rule. The leaders are described as pathological
goy haters, bent on destroying culture and traditions of other nations
while preserving their own. Their goal is to create world government and
rule the homogenised and globalised world.
-
- Their aims and intentions are stated in extremely contrarian
and obnoxious way. Solzhenitsyn concluded that no sane person would deliver
his favourite ideas in such self-demeaning and self-defeating way. "We
extract gold from their blood and tears", "our power is based
on workers' hunger", "revolutionaries are our human tools",
"brutish minds of Goyim" are, in his opinion, words ascribed
to the Jews by their enemies. A Jew would rather put such ideas in an oblique
way, he felt.
-
- It is not a water-tight argument. Some people speak in
oblique way, others prefer a direct one. An Armenian from the Azeri capital,
Baku told me in long gone 1988, "The Azeris are our cattle, without
our Armenian mind their country would collapse in course of days, as they
are silly donkeys". (A few months later, an explosion of native violence
expelled the clever Armenians from Azerbaijan, and since then the Azeris
manage their own land quite all right.) David Ben Gurion, the first ruler
of the Jewish state, coined an equally arrogant maxim: "Who cares
what Goyim say? What matters is what the Jews do!" This sentence is
an almost direct quote from the Protocols.
-
- The Protocols ascribe to the Elders a saying, "Each
Jewish victim is worth in the sight of God a thousand goyim". This
line, a pinnacle of arrogance, is not a vain invention of an anti-Semite.
Two ministers of Sharon's government, Uri Landau and Ivet Lieberman demanded
to kill one thousand Palestinian goyim for each Jewish victim. A Jewish
extremist at a demo for the Jewish Temple Mount (18.11.02) called each
Jew to kill one thousand Palestinian goyim. Apparently, some ideas of the
Protocols are not foreign to some Jews.
-
- The late Israeli scholar Israel Shahak and an American
Jewish writer Norton Mezvinsky present in their Jewish Fundamentalism in
Israel[6] a plethora of sayings by Jewish Rabbis that wouldn't be out of
place in the Protocols. "The difference between a Jewish soul and
souls of non-Jews is greater and deeper than the difference between a human
soul and the souls of cattle" (p. ix). Shahak and Mezvinsky proved
the rage of the Jewish chauvinists does not differentiate between Palestinians,
Arabs and Goyim in general. In other words, whatever happened to Palestinians
could happen to any Gentile community standing on the way of the Jews.
-
- Indeed, if the Protocols would have no relation to reality,
they probably wouldn't be as popular as they are. The Jews are sufficiently
powerful to dream of domination, and some do. Apparently some Jewish ideas
found their way into the text. Other thoughts are ascribed to the Jews
on the basis of "qui bono".
-
- The least acceptable idea of the Protocols is the presumption
of an extremely ancient conspiracy of the Jews aiming to take over the
world. The extreme philo-Semitic view denies the Jews their ability to
act together and presents them as separate individuals united by prayer
only. This view is not accepted by the Jews, and it does not agree with
the common sense.
-
- Solzhenitsyn does not believe in existence of the Elders
of Zion, though "the togetherness and coordination of Jewish activity
for the sake of their advancement caused many writers (beginning from Cicero)
to imagine there is a single commanding centre to direct their attacks".
"Without such a world centre, without conspiring, the Jews understand
each other and are able to coordinate their actions".
-
- The Jews are perfectly able to coordinate their actions,
but I doubt human beings, Jews or English, Russians or Chinese are able
to form long-standing plans spanning centuries and continents. Nobody was
able to prove such a plot exists. Usually, 'anti-Semites' (the people who
doubt or deny inherent benevolence of the Jews to Gentile society) argue
for its authenticity as Henry Ford did. The car king said[7]: "the
only statement I care to make about the Protocols is that they fit in with
what is going on." Indeed they do, exclaims Victor Marsden, the English
translator of the Protocols.
-
- However, it is not a proof of Jewish plot. We can reach
similar results rejecting the conspiracy line altogether, by applying the
concept of self-interest to the real Jewish community as it was aptly described
by Shahak-Mezvinsky. We shall prove that the troublesome concept of the
Hidden Hand or the Elders of Zion is superfluous and unnecessary.
-
- Traditional Jewish community had a structure of "upturned
pyramid", in words of Zionist theoreticians: it contained many persons
of wealth, learning and management, and very few workers. It appears an
odd thing, until one understands that the Zionists artificially view the
Jews in divorce of the society they live in. The Jewish 'upturned pyramid'
couldn't exist without a real down-turned pyramid of Gentile low classes.
The Jews compete with the native elites of the Gentile society for the
right to exploit the Gentile worker and peasant. The modus operandi of
the two competitors differs. While native elites shared some values with
their lower classes and usually provided for some upward mobility, the
Jewish community had its own structure and values.
-
- Economically it stood for capitalist or quasi-capitalist
exploitation of the natives, while ideologically the community declared
loyalty to its leaders, rejection of common humanity with the natives,
extreme ethnocentrism, feeling of racial and religious superiority towards
the natives. It was a marginal community, forming no bonds of marriage
and friendship with the natives. As a marginal community, it was free of
long-standing considerations the native elites had had.
-
- For instance, the Jewish community of 17th century Ukraine
has been a collective tax-farmer and leaseholder, extracting from the natives
SIX times more taxes and dues per person than a gentile landlord did, wrote
a prominent Jewish Ukrainian historian Saul Borovoy in a recently published
in Jerusalem book. The Jewish communities of Maghreb supported the colonial
power against their gentile neighbours, etc. Their traditions forbade normal
relations with the natives.
-
- Let us presume that such a community acts in its egoistic
interests. Forget conspiracy; forget the Elders of Zion, learned or otherwise.
The community's only aim is to promote its own well-being. For a marginal
group it means to make the social gap between its members and the native
population as broad as possible, while minimising the backlash potential.
-
- The group would naturally, for its self-interest, support
every movement against native elites, whether initiated by the King (as
the Jews did before the French Revolution) or by the rebelling low classes.
It would not be done for the Jewish love of democracy or rebellious nature,
but for improvement of their own positions. Ideal situation would be created
by massacre or expulsion of the native elites, as the group members would
be able to appropriate their positions. Indeed, it happened in Soviet Russia
and Soviet Hungary in the aftermath of World War One. Massacre and exile
of the native elites made the positions of power and influence available
to the competing Jews.
-
- Self-interest explains the Jewish involvement with the
dreaded Cheka, the Soviet security services. Until 1937, the Jews occupied
the top echelon of the KGB predecessor body, while millions of Russians
lost their life or liberty. Objectively, these executioners made jobs and
houses available for their fellow Jews. After the massacre and exile of
Russian elites, the Jews were ready for equality, as a son of a Rabbi could
easily compete with a son of Russian worker or peasant, though he wouldn't
be able to compete with a son of Russian noble.
-
- In a similar way, the Jews in Israel granted limited
equality to the Palestinians in 1966, after confiscation of 90% of native
lands and expulsion of 90% of natives. Now, the settlers promise to extend
equality to the rest of Palestinians, after they will expel the majority
of them elsewhere. In the light of great Jewish support for Israel, there
is no reason to presume that the Jewish modus operandi in Palestine is
intrinsically different from the Jewish intentions abroad.
-
- Solzhenitsyn writes: "Executed <during the revolution
army officers were Russians, the noblemen, priests, monks, deputies were
Russians. In 1920s, the pre-revolutionary engineers and scientists were
exiled or killed. They were Russians, while their place was taken by Jews.
The best Russian Psychiatric institute in Moscow, its Russian members were
arrested or exiled, while their place was taken by the Jews. Important
Jewish doctors blocked the advancement of Russian medical scientists. The
best intellectual and artistic elites of Russian people were killed, while
the Jews grew and flourished in these (deadly for Russians) years".
-
- The new Jewish elite did not fully identify with Russia
but carried out separate policy. It had a fateful effect in 1991, when
over 50 p.c. of Jews (as opposed to 13 p.c. of Russians) supported pro-Western
coup of President Yeltsin. In 1995, 81% of Jews voted for pro-Western parties,
and only 3% for the Communists (as opposed to 46% of Russians), according
to the publication by the Jewish sociologist Dr Ryvkina in her book Jews
in Post-Soviet Russia (1996).
-
- In ever-expanding America, the Jews did not have to kill
or remove the native elites; they became its important part, controlling
discourse and wielding considerable financial clout. They still do not
identify with the goyish America: every year, they force the Congress and
the Administration to send five billion dollars to their Israeli offshoot
and now try to let America fight their war in Iraq. They do discriminate
other Americans, otherwise 60% of the leading positions in the media would
not become Jewish[8].
-
- Jews of France do not identify with France, either. "Their
identification with Israel is so strong; it overshadows their ties to the
country they live in". - writes Daniel Ben Simon in Haaretz. - "This
dual loyalty was made very clear to me by a Jewish doctor in Nice."If
the choice is between Israel and France, there's no question I feel closer
to Israel," he said, without a moment's hesitation. He was born and
bred in France; he went to medical school in France; his patients are French;
he speaks French with his wife and children. But in the depths of his heart,
he feels a greater affinity with the Jewish state".
-
- In Palestine, the Jews have no compassion for the natives.
They travel by segregated roads, study in segregated schools, while a Jew
consumes ten times more water resources than a goy, and has seven times
higher income. Thus, the Jewish separateness remains a fact of life for
many Jewish communities.
-
- For their own well-being the Jews have to obscure their
unique position, wealth and power by the following means:
-
- - Holocaust discourse helps to fight envy.
-
- - In a mono-ethnic society, the Jews as the only foreign
body do stick out and attract attention, while in multicultural society
they are hardly seen. For this purpose, the Jews support immigration from
non-European countries, as their presence would remove the stamp of Jewish
exclusiveness.
-
- - The Political Correctness is another device forbidding
the discussion of Jewish influence.
-
- - Fight against Christianity and the Church makes sense
for a non-Christian community: if the Church would be strong, the Christians
would prefer their own, Christian elite.
-
- - Globalisation is a natural development for the people
spread all over the globe, if they attach but little importance to the
local ways.
-
- - Impoverishment of the natives is but another side of
growing wealth of the Jewish community.
-
- Summing it up, a big share (though not all) of the ideas
ascribed to the Jews by the Protocols are indeed the ideas useful or necessary
for the Jewish communal well-being, without any need for great hatred towards
Gentiles and/or the guidance of mythic Elders of Zion. That is the reason
of the Protocols' long life. Paradoxically, without Israeli apartheid these
facts would remain invisible for the host communities.
-
-
-
- --------------------------------------------
-
- [1] A HORSELESS RIDER, THE PROTOCOLS OF THE ELDERS OF
ZION & IMPORTED BIGOTRY By Qais S. Saleh, CounterPunch November 13,
2002 http://www.counterpunch.com/saleh1112.html see more on http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/DailyNews/egypt021121_TV.html
-
- [2] http://books.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,12084,775668,00.html
The poisonous Protocols by Umberto Eco
-
- [3] CIDE HAMETE BENENGELI, in Cervantes' spelling
-
- [4] Nom de plume of François Rabelais.
-
- [5] Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Evrei v SSSR i v budushei
Rossii, 2001 (in Russian)
-
- [6] Pluto Press, 1999
-
- [7] in an interview published in the New York World,
February 17th, 1921
-
- [8] The data provided by Kevin MacDonald of California
University.
-
- Israel Shamir is an Israeli journalist based in Jaffa.
His articles can be found on the site www.israelshamir.net
-
-
- Comment
-
- From Founders' America
- foundersamerica@hotmail.com>
- 11-24-2
-
- Dear Jeff,
-
- Re: "The Elders Of Zion And The Masters Of Discourse"
-
- On the question of authenticity, if it quacks like a
duck . . .
-
- Here are some paragraphs which relate to the matter,
from my collection of thoughts on America's steep moral/cultural decline,
"Paleoconservative Thoughts To Ponder":
-
- 14) Who controls the news rules the mind; who controls
entertainment rules the heart; who controls both rules the commonwealth.
-
- 194) A CONSPIRACY BY CONSENSUS requires no secret plans
or meetings, only an idea around which disconnected "conspirators"
can rally. Such a conspiracy is often begun by actual conspirators planting
an idea in "fresh soil," such as youthful minds, then cultivating
the field with carefully placed propaganda and events. Such a conspiracy
was begun in America by Bolshevik-minded Jews working as (or for) Stalinist
agents in the 40s and 50s, after they had infiltrated our entertainment
industries, college campuses and federal agencies. Read the news releases
about Soviet infiltration of federal agencies before and during the McCarthy
era, reporting on transcripts from intercepted KGB cables in '44 and '45
(the "Venona Project" files). From Scripps Howard News Service:
"U.S. cryptanalysts indicate that more than 100 Soviet agents had
infiltrated the State Department, Justice Department, War Department, Treasury
Department and even the Office of Strategic Services, the precursor of
the CIA." And you wonder why our federal agencies have always seemed
to be on the brink of traitorous actions against America's best interest,
such as the State Department's current program to recruit "under-represented"
Third World races and cultures for relocation into white communities across
America, which purpose is to dilute white voters' strength and influence,
in order to destroy the founding race and culture of white Western civilization--emasculating
once-strong communities of white males who might otherwise have stopped
installation of One-World Government and Global Economic Socialism. Those
Stalinist/Jewish spies never were routed from Washington, because progressive
Jews in media and entertainment had effectively silenced Commie-hunters
with charges of "red baiting" and "searching for communists
under every bed. "
-
- 1389) The endgame of multiculturalism for Marxian Jews
is racial mongrelization of whites, to destroy white Western civilization
and build worldwide socialism/communism.
-
- 1393) Marxian Jews' sexual revolution had had as its
purpose two outcomes: the destruction of the nuclear family and the destruction
of the white race. They had sought to destroy the family because it is
inimical to the idea COMMUNISM. They had sought to destroy the white race
and the idea "race" - because it is inimical to building a perfectly
egalitarian UNIVERSALIST COMMUNISM (Note: If races exist, and if there
are heritable differences between them, then UTOPIA is impossible to achieve).
Multiracialism (a k a multiculturalism) is sign of civilization in decline,
as history starkly teaches.
-
- 1414) A message from Marxian Jews to WHITE MALES: "We're
overrunning your race and civilization with people of color from diverse
cultures, and you'll shut up about it because our hate-speech laws will
make it so!
-
- 1426) America has not been a democracy from the time
Abraham Lincoln savaged the South. And it's barely a republic today. Actually,
this is an OLIGARCHY, directed by powerful and corrupt men in Congress
and Big Business. Recall what Thomas Jeffereson said about majority rule:
"The first principle of republicanism is, that the lex-majoris partis
[the law of the majority] . . . is the first of all lessons in importance,
yet the last which is thoroughly learnt. This law once disregarded, no
other remains but that of force, which ends necessarily in military despotism."
-
- 1427) If you do not know the history of Marxian Jews'
revolutionary bent, then you do not know why the West is in steep moral/cultural
decline.
-
- -Founders' America
|
