The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewRon Unz Archive
American Pravda: The Bolshevik Revolution and Its Aftermath
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Leon Trotsky-Lev Davidovich Bronstein (1879-1940), 100 anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution, 1917-2017
Leon Trotsky-Lev Davidovich Bronstein (1879-1940), 100 anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution, 1917-2017

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Although I always had a great interest in history, I naively believed what I read in my textbooks, and therefore regarded American history as just too bland and boring to study.

By contrast, one land I found especially fascinating was China, the world’s most populous country and its oldest continuous civilization, with a tangled modern history of revolutionary upheaval, then suddenly reopened to the West during the Nixon Administration and under Deng’s economic reforms starting to reverse decades of Maoist economic failure.

In 1978 I took a UCLA graduate seminar on the rural Chinese political economy, and probably read thirty or forty books during that semester. E.O. Wilson’s seminal Sociobiology: The New Synthesis had just been published a couple of years earlier, reviving that field after decades of harsh ideological suppression, and with his ideas in the back of my mind, I couldn’t help noticing the obvious implications of the material I was reading. The Chinese had always seemed a very smart people, and the structure of China’s traditional rural peasant economy produced Social Darwinist selective pressure so thick that you could cut it with a knife, thus providing a very elegant explanation of how the Chinese got that way. A couple of years later in college, I wrote up my theory while studying under Wilson, and then decades afterward dug it out again, finally publishing my analysis as How Social Darwinism Made Modern China.

With the Chinese people clearly having such tremendous inherent talent and their potential already demonstrated on a much smaller scale in Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Singapore, I believed there was an excellent chance that Deng’s reforms would unleash enormous economic growth, and sure enough, that was exactly what happened. In the late 1970s, China was poorer than Haiti, but I always told my friends that it might come to dominate the world economically within a couple of generations, and although most of them were initially quite skeptical of such an outrageous claim, every few years they became a little less so. The Economist had long been my favorite magazine, and in 1986 they published an especially long letter of mine emphasizing the tremendous rising potential of China and urging them to expand their coverage with a new Asia Section; the following year, they did exactly that.

These days I feel tremendous humiliation for having spent most of my life being so totally wrong about so many things for so long, and I cling to China as a very welcome exception. I can’t think of a single development during the last forty years that I wouldn’t have generally expected back in the late 1970s, with the only surprise having been the total lack of surprises. About the only “revision” I’ve had to make in my historical framework is that I’d always casually accepted the ubiquitous claim that Mao’s disastrous Great Leap Forward of 1959-61 had caused 35 million or more deaths, but I’ve recently encountered some serious doubts, suggesting that such a total could be considerably exaggerated, and today I might admit the possibility that only 15 million or fewer had died.

 

But although I always had a great interest in China, European history was even more fascinating to me, with the political interplay of so many conflicting states and the huge ideological and military upheavals of the twentieth century.

In my unjustified arrogance, I also sometimes relished a sense of seeing obvious things that magazine or newspaper journalists got so completely wrong, mistakes which often slipped into historical narratives as well. For example, discussions of the titanic 20th century military struggles between Germany and Russia quite often made casual references to the traditional hostility between those two great peoples, who for centuries had stood as bitter rivals, representing the eternal struggle of Slav against Teuton for dominion over Eastern Europe.

Although the bloodstained history of the two world wars made that notion seem obvious, it was factually mistaken. Prior to 1914, those two great peoples had not fought against each other for the previous 150 years, and even the Seven Years’ War of the mid-18th century had involved a Russian alliance with Germanic Austria against Germanic Prussia, hardly amounting to a conflict along civilizational lines. Russians and Germans had been staunch allies during the endless Napoleonic wars, closely cooperated during the Metterich and Bismarck Eras that followed, while even as late as 1904, Germany had supported Russia in its unsuccessful war against Japan. Later, Weimar Germany and Soviet Russia had a period of close military cooperation during the 1920s, the Hitler-Stalin Pact of 1939 marked the beginning of the Second World War, and during the long Cold War, the USSR had no more loyal a satellite than East Germany. Perhaps two dozen years of hostility over the last three centuries, with good relations or even outright alliance during most of the remainder, hardly suggested that Russians and Germans were hereditary enemies.

Moreover, throughout much of that period, Russia’s ruling elite had had a considerable Germanic tinge. Russia’s legendary Catherine the Great had been a German princess by birth, and over the centuries so many Russian rulers had taken German wives that the later Czars of the Romanov dynasty were usually more German than Russian. Russia itself had a substantial but heavily assimilated German population, which was very well represented in elite political circles, with German names being quite common among government ministers and sometimes found among important military commanders. Even a top leader of the Decembrist revolt of the early 19th century had had German ancestry but was a zealous Russian-nationalist in his ideology.

Under the governance of this mixed Russian and German ruling class, the Russian Empire had steadily risen to become one of the world’s foremost powers. Indeed, given its vast size, manpower, and resources, combined with one of the world’s fastest economic growth rates and a natural increase in total population that was not far behind, a 1914 observer might have easily pegged it to soon dominate the European continent and perhaps even much of the world, just as Tocqueville had famously prophesized in the early decades of the 19th century. A crucial underlying cause of the First World War was Britain’s belief that only a preventative war could forestall a rising Germany, but I suspect that an important secondary cause was the parallel German notion that similar measures were necessary against a rising Russia.

Obviously, this entire landscape was totally transformed by the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, which swept the old order from power, massacring much of its leadership and forcing the remainder to flee, thereby ushering in the modern world era of ideological and revolutionary regimes. I grew up during the final decades of the long Cold War, when the Soviet Union stood as America’s great international adversary, so the history of that revolution and its aftermath always fascinated me. During college and graduate school I probably read at least one hundred books in that general topic, devouring the brilliant works of Solzhenistyn and Sholokhov, the thick historical volumes of mainstream academic scholars such as Adam Ulam and Richard Pipes, as well as the writings of leading Soviet dissidents such as Roy Medvedev, Andrei Sakharov, and Andrei Amalrik. I was fascinated by the tragic story of how Stalin outmaneuvered Trotsky and his other rivals, leading to the massive purges of the 1930s as Stalin’s growing paranoia produced such gigantic loss of life.

I was not so totally naive that I did not recognize some of the powerful taboos surrounding discussion of the Bolsheviks, particularly regarding their ethnic composition. Although most of the books hardly emphasized the point, anyone with a careful eye for the occasional sentence or paragraph would surely know that Jews were enormously over-represented among the top revolutionaries, with three of Lenin’s five potential successors— Trotsky, Zinoviev, and Kamenev—all coming from that background, along with many, many others within the top Communist leadership. Obviously, this was wildly disproportionate in a country having a Jewish population of perhaps 4%, and surely helped explain the large spike in worldwide hostility towards Jews soon afterward, which sometimes took the most deranged and irrational forms, such as the popularity of The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion and Henry Ford’s notorious publication of The International Jew. But with Russian Jews so much more likely to be educated and urbanized, and suffering from fierce anti-Semitic oppression under the Czars, everything seemed to make reasonable sense.

 

Then perhaps fourteen or fifteen years ago, I encountered a rip in my personal space-time continuum, among the first of many to come.

In this particular instance, an especially rightwing friend of evolutionary theorist Gregory Cochran had been spending long days browsing the pages of Stormfront, a leading Internet forum for the Far Right, and having come across a remarkable factual claim, asked me for my opinion. Allegedly Jacob Schiff, America’s leading Jewish banker, had been the crucial financial supporter of the Bolshevik Revolution, providing the Communist revolutionaries with $20 million in funding.

My first reaction was that such a notion was utterly ridiculous since a fact so enormously explosive could not have been ignored by the many dozens of books I had read on the origins of that revolution. But the source seemed extremely precise. The Knickerbocker columnist in the February 3, 1949 edition of The New York Journal-American, then one of the leading local newspapers, wrote that “Today it is estimated by Jacob’s grandson, John Schiff, that the old man sank about 20,000,000 dollars for the final triumph of Bolshevism in Russia.”

Once I checked around a little, I discovered that numerous mainstream accounts described the enormous hostility of Schiff towards the Czarist regime for its ill-treatment of Jews, and these days even so establishmentarian a source as Wikipedia’s entry on Jacob Schiff notes that he played a major role financing the Russian Revolution of 1905, as was revealed in the later memoirs of one of his key operatives. And if you run a search on “jacob schiff bolshevik revolution” numerous other references come up, representing a wide variety of different positions and degrees of credibility. One very interesting statement appears in the memoirs of Henry Wickham Steed, editor of The Times of London and one of the foremost international journalists of his era. He very matter-of-factly mentions that Schiff, Warburg and the other top Jewish international bankers were among the leading backers of the Jewish Bolsheviks, through whom they hoped to gain an opportunity for the Jewish exploitation of Russia, and he describes their lobbying efforts on behalf of their Bolshevik allies at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference following the end of the First World War.

Even the very recent and highly skeptical 2016 analysis in Kenneth D. Ackerman’s 2016 book Trotsky in New York, 1917 notes that U.S. Military Intelligence reports of the period directly made that astonishing claim, pointing to Trotsky as the conduit for the heavy financial backing of Schiff and numerous other Jewish financiers. In 1925 this information was published in the British Guardian and was widely discussed and accepted throughout the 1920s and 1930s by numerous major media publications, long before Schiff’s own grandson provided a direct confirmation of those facts in 1949. Ackerman rather cavalierly dismisses all of this considerable contemporaneous evidence as “anti-Semitic” and a “conspiracy story,” arguing that since Schiff was a notorious conservative who had never shown any sympathy for socialism in his own American milieu, he surely would not have funded the Bolsheviks.

Now admittedly, a few details might easily have gotten somewhat garbled over time. For example, although Trotsky quickly became second only to Lenin in the Bolshevik hierarchy, in early 1917 the two were still bitterly hostile over various ideological disputes, so he certainly was not then considered a member of that party. And since everyone today acknowledges that Schiff had heavily financed the failed 1905 Revolution in Russia, it seems perfectly possible that the $20 million figure mentioned by his grandson refers to the total invested over the years supporting all the different Russian revolutionary movements and leaders, which together finally culminated in the establishment of Bolshevik Russia. But with so many seemingly credible and independent sources all making such similar claims, the basic facts appear almost indisputable.

Consider the implications of this remarkable conclusion. I would assume that most of Schiff’s funding of revolutionary activities was spent on items such as activist stipends and bribes, and adjusted for the average family incomes of that era, $20 million would be as much as $2 billion in present-day money. Surely without such enormous financial support, the likelihood of any Bolshevik victory would have been far lower, perhaps almost impossible.

When people casually used to joke about the total insanity of “anti-Semitic conspiracy theories” no better example was ever tossed around than the self-evidently absurd notion that the international Jewish bankers had created the worldwide Communist movement. And yet by any reasonable standard, this statement appears to be more or less true, and apparently was widely known at least in rough form for decades after the Russian Revolution, but had never been mentioned in any of the numerous more recent histories that shaped my own knowledge of those events. Indeed, none of these very comprehensive sources ever even mentioned Schiff’s name, although it was universally acknowledged that he had funded the 1905 Revolution, which was often discussed in enormous detail in many of those very weighty books. What other astonishing facts might they similarly be concealing?

When someone encounters remarkable new revelations in an area of history in which his knowledge was rudimentary, being little more than introductory textbooks or History 101 courses, the result is a shock and an embarrassment. But when the same situation occurs in an area in which he had read tens of thousands of pages in the leading authoritative texts, which seemingly explored every minor detail, surely his sense of reality begins to crumble.

ORDER IT NOW

In 1999, Harvard University published the English edition of The Black Book of Communism, whose six co-authors devoted 850 pages to documenting the horrors inflicted upon the world by that defunct system, which had produced a total death toll they reckoned at 100 million. I have never read that book and I have often heard that the alleged body-count has been widely disputed. But for me the most remarkable detail is that when I examine the 35 page index, I see a vast profusion of entries for totally obscure individuals whose names are surely unknown to all but the most erudite specialist. But there is no entry for Jacob Schiff, the world-famous Jewish banker who apparently financed the creation of the whole system in the first place. Nor one for Olaf Aschberg, the powerful Jewish banker in Sweden, who played such an important role in providing the Bolsheviks a financial life-line during the early years of their threatened regime, and even founded the first Soviet international bank.

 

When one discovers a tear in the fabric of reality, there is a natural tendency to nervously peer within, wondering what mysterious objects might dwell there. The Ackerman book denounced the notion of Schiff having funded the Bolsheviks as “a favorite trope of Nazi anti-Jewish propaganda” and just prior to those words he issued a similar denunciation of Henry Ford’s Dearborn Independent, a publication which would have meant almost nothing to me. Although Ackerman’s particular book had not yet been published when I began exploring the Schiff story a dozen years ago, many other writers had similarly conjoined those two topics, so I decided to explore the matter.

Ford himself was a very interesting individual, and his world-historical role certainly received very scanty coverage in my basic history textbooks. Although the exact reasons for his decision to raise his minimum wage to $5 per day in 1914—double the existing average pay for industrial workers in America—can be disputed, it certainly seems to have played a huge role in the creation of our middle class. He also adopted a highly paternalistic policy of providing good company housing and other amenities to his workers, a total departure from the “Robber Baron” capitalism so widely practiced at that time, thereby establishing himself as a world-wide hero to industrial workers and their advocates. Indeed, Lenin himself had regarded Ford as a towering figure in the world’s revolutionary firmament, glossing over his conservative views and commitment to capitalism and instead focusing on his remarkable achievements in worker productivity and economic well-being. It is a forgotten detail of history that even after Ford’s considerable hostility to the Russian Revolution became widely known, the Bolsheviks still described their own industrial development policy as “Fordism.” Indeed, it was not unusual to see portraits of Lenin and Ford hanging side-by-side in Soviet factories, representing the two greatest secular saints of the Bolshevik pantheon.

ORDER IT NOW

As for The Dearborn Independent, Ford had apparently launched his newspaper on a national basis not long after the end of the war, intending to focus on controversial topics, especially those related to Jewish misbehavior, whose discussion he believed was being ignored or suppressed by nearly all mainstream media outlets. I had been aware that he had long been one of the wealthiest and most highly-regarded individuals in America, but I was still astonished to discover that his weekly newspaper, previously almost unknown to me, had reached a total national circulation of 900,000 by 1925, ranking it as the second largest in the country and by far the biggest with a national distribution. I found no easy means of examining the contents of a typical issue, but apparently the anti-Jewish articles of the first couple of years had been collected and published as short books, together constituting the four volumes of The International Jew: The World’s Foremost Problem, a notoriously anti-Semitic work occasionally mentioned in my history textbooks. Eventually my curiosity got the best of me, so clicked a few buttons on Amazon.com, bought the set, and wondered what I would discover.

Based on all my pre-suppositions, I expected to read some foaming-at-the-mouth screed, and doubted I would be able to get past the first dozen pages before losing interest and consigning the volumes to gather dust on my shelves. But what I actually encountered was something entirely different.

Over the last couple of decades, the enormous growth in the power and influence of Jewish and pro-Israel groups in America has occasionally led writers to cautiously raise certain facts regarding the untoward influence of those organizations and activists, while always carefully emphasizing that the vast majority of ordinary Jews do not benefit from these policies and actually might be harmed by them, even leaving aside the possible risk of eventually provoking an anti-Jewish backlash. To my considerable surprise, I found that the vast majority of the material in Ford’s 300,000 word series seemed to follow this same pattern and tone.

The individual 80 chapter-columns of Ford’s volumes generally discuss particular issues and events, some of which were well-known to me, but with the vast majority totally obscured by the passage of almost a hundred years. But as far as I could tell, almost all the discussions seemed quite plausible and factually-oriented, even sometimes overly cautious in their presentation, and with one possible exception I can’t recall anything that seemed fanciful or unreasonable. As an example, there was no claim that Schiff or his fellow Jewish bankers had funded the Bolshevik Revolution since those particular facts had not yet come out, only that he had seemed to be strongly supportive of the overthrow of Czarism, and had worked toward that end for many years, motivated by what he regarded as the hostility of the Russian Empire towards its Jewish subjects. This sort of discussion is not all that different from what one might find in a modern Schiff biography or in his Wikipedia entry, though many of the important details presented in the Ford books have disappeared from the historical record.

Although I somehow managed to plow through all four volumes of The International Jew, the unrelenting drum-beat of Jewish intrigue and misbehavior became somewhat soporific after a while, especially since so many of the examples provided may have loomed quite large in 1920 or 1921 but are almost totally forgotten today. Most of the content was a collection of rather monotonous complaints regarding Jewish malfeasance, scandals, or clannishness, the sort of mundane matters which might have normally appeared in the pages of an ordinary newspaper or magazine, let alone one of the muckraking type.

However, I cannot fault the publication for such a narrow focus. A consistent theme was that because of the intimidating fear of Jewish activists and influence, virtually all of America’s regular media outlets avoided discussion of any of these important matters, and since this new publication was intended to remedy that void, it necessarily required coverage overwhelmingly skewed toward that particular subject. The articles were also aimed at gradually expanding the window of public debate and eventually shame other periodicals into discussing Jewish misbehavior. When leading magazines such as The Atlantic Monthly and Century Magazine began running such articles, this result was cited as a major success.

Another important goal was to make ordinary Jews more aware of the very problematical behavior of many of their community leaders. Occasionally, the publication received a letter of praise from a self-proclaimed “proud American Jew” commending the series and sometimes including a check to purchase subscriptions for other members of his community, and this achievement might become the subject of an extended discussion.

And although the details of these individual stories differed considerably from those of today, the pattern of behavior being criticized seemed remarkably similar. Change a few facts, adjust the society for a century of change, and many of the stories might be exactly the same ones that well-meaning people concerned about the future of our country are quietly discussing today. Most remarkably, there were even a couple of columns about the troubled relationship between the earliest Zionist settlers in Palestine and the surrounding native Palestinians, and deep complaints that under Jewish pressure the media often totally misreported or hid some of the outrages suffered by the latter group.

I certainly cannot vouch for the overall accuracy of the contents of these volumes, but at the very least they would constitute an extremely valuable source of “raw material” for further historical investigation. So many of the events and incidents they recount seem to have been entirely omitted from the major media publications of that day, and surely were never included in later historical narratives, given that even such widely known stories as Schiff’s major financial backing for the Bolsheviks were completely tossed down George Orwell’s “memory hole.”

With the volumes long out of copyright, I have added the set to my collection of HTML Books, and those so interested may read the text and decide for themselves.

 

ORDER IT NOW

As mentioned, the overwhelming majority of The International Jew seems a rather bland recitation of complaints about Jewish misbehavior. But there is one major exception, which has a very different impact upon our modern mind, namely that the writer took very seriously The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. Probably no “conspiracy theory” in modern times has been subjected to such immense vilification and ridicule as the Protocols, but a voyage of discovery often acquires a momentum of its own, and I became curious about the nature of that infamous document.

Apparently, the Protocols first came to light during the last decade of the 19th century, and the British Museum stored a copy in 1906, but it attracted relatively little attention at the time. However, all this changed after the Bolshevik Revolution and toppling of many other long-standing governments at the end of the First World War led many people to seek a common cause behind so many enormous political upheavals. From my distance of many decades, the text of the Protocols struck me as rather bland and even dull, describing in rather long-winded fashion a plan of secret subversion aimed at weakening the bonds of the social fabric, setting groups against each other, gaining control over political leaders by bribery and blackmail, and eventually restoring society along rigidly hierarchical lines with an entirely new group in control. Admittedly, there were many shrewd insights into politics or psychology, notably the enormous power of the media and the benefits of advancing political front-men who were deeply compromised or incompetent and hence easily controllable. But nothing else really jumped out at me.

Perhaps one reason I found the text of the Protocols so uninspiring is that over the century since its publication, these notions of diabolical plots by hidden groups have become such a common theme in our entertainment media, with countless thousands of spy novels and science fiction stories presenting something similar, though these usually involve far more exciting means, such as a super-weapon or a powerful drug. If some Bond villain proclaimed his intent to conquer the world merely through simple political subversion, I suspect that such a film would immediately die at the box office.

But back one hundred years ago, these were apparently exciting and novel notions, and I actually found the discussion of the Protocols in many of the chapters of The International Jew far more interesting and informative than reading the text itself. The author of the Ford books seems to appropriately treat it as any other historical document, dissecting its content, speculating on its provenance, and wondering whether or not it was what it purported to be, namely an approximate record of the statements of a group of conspirators pursuing mastery over the world, with those conspirators widely believed to be an elite fraternity of international Jews.

Other contemporaries seem to have taken the Protocols very seriously as well. The august Times of London fully endorsed it, before later retracting that position under heavy pressure, and I’ve read that more copies were published and sold in the Europe of that era than any other book save the Bible. The Bolshevik government of Russia paid the volume its own sort of deep respect, with mere possession of the Protocols warranting immediate execution.

Although The International Jew concludes that the Protocols was probably genuine, I doubt that likelihood based upon the style and presentation. Browsing around on the Internet a dozen years ago, I discovered quite a variety of different opinions even within the precincts of the Far Right, where such matters were freely discussed. I remember some forum writer somewhere characterizing the Protocols as “based upon a true story,” suggesting that someone who was generally familiar with the secretive machinations of elite international Jews against the existing governments of Czarist Russia and other countries had drafted the document to outline his view of their strategic plans, and such an interpretation seems perfectly plausible.

Another reader somewhere claimed that the Protocols were pure fiction but very significant nonetheless. He argued that the very keen insights into the methods by which a small conspiratorial group can quietly corrupt and overthrow powerful existing regimes arguably ranked it alongside Plato’s The Republic and Machiavelli’s The Prince as one of the three great classics of Western political philosophy, and earned it a place on the required reading list of every Political Science 101 course. Indeed, the author of Ford’s books emphasizes that there are very few mentions of Jews anywhere in the Protocols, and all the implied connections to Jewish conspirators could be completely struck from the text without affecting their content whatsoever.

In any event, this short work is now available as one of my HTML Books, making it quite convenient for reading and text-searching.

 

Some ideas have consequences and others do not. Although my introductory history textbooks had often mentioned Henry Ford’s anti-Semitic activities, his publication of The International Jew, and the concurrent popularity of the Protocols, they never emphasized any lasting political legacy, or at least I don’t recall any. However, once I actually read the contents and also discovered the enormous contemporary popularity of those writings and the huge national circulation of The Dearborn Independent, I quickly came to a very different conclusion.

For decades pro-immigration liberals, many of them Jewish, have suggested that anti-Semitism was a major factor behind the 1924 Immigration Act that drastically reduced European immigration for the next forty years, while anti-immigration activists have always heatedly denied this. The documentary evidence from that era certainly favors the position of the latter, but I really do wonder what important private discussions may not have been set down in print and entered into the Congressional Record. The overwhelming popular support for immigration restriction had been successfully blocked for decades by powerful business interests, which greatly benefited from the reduced wages of the resulting labor-competition, but now matters had suddenly changed, and surely the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia must have had been a powerful influence.

Russia, overwhelmingly populated by Russians, had been governed for centuries by a Russian ruling elite. Then, heavily Jewish revolutionaries, drawn from a group amounting to just 4% of the population had taken advantage of military defeat and unsettled political conditions to seize control of the country, butchering those previous elites or forcing them to desperately flee abroad as penniless refugees.

Trotsky and a large fraction of the leading Jewish revolutionaries had been living as exiles in New York City, and now many of their Jewish cousins still resident in America began loudly proclaiming that a similar revolution would soon follow here as well. Huge waves of recent immigration, mostly from Russia, had increased the Jewish fraction of the national population to 3%, not far below the figure for Russia itself on the eve of its revolution. If the Russian elites who ruled Russia had been suddenly overthrown by Jewish revolutionaries, is it not obvious that the Anglo-Saxon elites who ruled Anglo-Saxon America feared suffering the same fate?

The “Red Scare” of the 1919 was one response, with numerous immigrant radicals such as Emma Goldman rounded up and summarily deported, while the Sacco-Vanzetti murder trial in 1921 Boston captured the attention of the nation, suggesting that other immigrant groups were violent radicals as well, and might ally themselves with the Jews in a revolutionary movement, just like the Letts and other disgruntled Russian minorities had done during the Bolshevik Revolution. But drastically reducing the inflow of these dangerous foreigners was absolutely essential since otherwise their numbers might easily grow by hundreds of thousands each year, increasing their already huge presence in our largest cities of the East Coast.

Sharply reducing immigration would certainly cause a rise in worker wages and hurt business profits. But considerations of profits are secondary if you fear that you and your family might eventually end up facing a Bolshevik firing squad or fleeing to Buenos Aires with just the clothes on your backs and a few hurriedly-packed suitcases.

A noteworthy bit of evidence in support of this analysis was the subsequent failure of Congress to enact similar restrictive legislation curtailing immigration from Mexico or the rest of Latin America. The local business interests of Texas and the Southwest argued that continuation of unrestricted Mexican immigration was important for their economic success, with Mexicans being good people, politically docile workers, and no threat to stability of the country. This was a clear contrast with the Jews and some other European immigrant groups.

The much less familiar early 1920s battle over restricting Jewish enrollment in the Ivy League may have been another consequence. In his magisterial 2005 volume The Chosen, Jerome Karabel documents how the very rapid growth in Jewish numbers at Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and other Ivy League colleges had by the early 1920s become an enormous concern to the Anglo-Saxon elites which had established those institutions and always dominated their student bodies.

As a result, a quiet war over admissions broke out, involving both political and media influence, with the reigning WASPs seeking to reduce and restrict Jewish numbers and the Jews struggling to maintain or expand them. Although there seems no paper-trail of any direct references to the enormously popular national newspaper and books published by Henry Ford or any similar material, it is difficult to believe that the academic combatants were not at least somewhat aware of the theories of a Jewish assault on Gentile society then being so widely promoted. It is easy to imagine that a respectable Boston Brahmin such as Harvard President A. Lawrence Lowell regarded his own moderate “anti-Semitism” as a very reasonable middle-ground between the lurid claims promoted by Ford and others and the demands for unlimited Jewish enrollment made by his opponents. Indeed, Karabel himself points to the social impact of Ford’s publications as a significant background factor to this academic conflict.

At this point in time, the Anglo-Saxon elites still held the upper hand in the media. The very heavily Jewish film industry was only in its infancy and the same was true for radio, while the vast majority of major print outlets were still in Gentile hands, so the descendants of America’s original settlers won this round of the admissions war. But when the battle was rejoined a couple of decades later, the strategic political and media landscape had completely shifted, with Jews having achieved near-parity in print influence and overwhelming dominance in the more powerful electronic media formats such as film, radio, and nascent television, and this time they were victorious, easily breaking the hold of their longtime ethnic rivals, and eventually achieving almost complete dominance over those elite institutions.

And ironically enough, the most lasting cultural legacy of the widespread anti-Jewish agitation of the 1920s may be the least recognized. As mentioned above, modern readers might find the text of the Protocols rather boring and bland, almost like they had been cribbed from the extremely long-winded monologue of one of the diabolical villains of a James Bond story. But it wouldn’t surprise me if there were actually an arrow of causality in the opposite direction. Ian Fleming created this genre in the early 1950s with his string of international best-sellers, and it is interesting to speculate about the source of his ideas.

ORDER IT NOW

Fleming had spent his youth during the 1920s and 1930s when the Protocols were among the most widely read books in much of Europe and leading British newspapers of the highest credibility were recounting the successful plots of Schiff and other international Jewish bankers to overthrow the government of Britain’s Czarist ally and replace it with Jewish Bolshevik rule. Moreover, his later service in an arm of British Intelligence would surely have made him privy to details of that history that went far beyond those public headlines. I think it is more than pure coincidence that two of his most memorable Bond villains, Goldfinger and Blofeld, had distinctly Jewish-sounding names, and that so many of the plots involve schemes of world-conquest by Spectre, a secretive and mysterious international organization hostile to all existing governments. The Protocols themselves may be half-forgotten today, but their cultural influence probably survives in the Bond films, whose $7 billion of aggregate box-office gross ranks them as the most successful movie series in history when adjusted for inflation.

 

The extent to which established historical facts can appear or disappear from the world should certainly force all of us to become very cautious in believing anything we read in our standard textbooks, let alone what we absorb from our more transient electronic media.

In the early years of the Bolshevik Revolution, almost no one questioned the overwhelming role of Jews in that event, nor their similar preponderance in the ultimately unsuccessful Bolshevik takeovers in Hungary and parts of Germany. For example, former British Minister Winston Churchill in 1920 denounced the “terrorist Jews” who had seized control of Russia and other parts of Europe, noting that “the majority of the leading figures are Jews” and stating that “In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astonishing,” while lamenting the horrors these Jews had inflicted upon the suffering Germans and Hungarians.

Similarly, journalist Robert Wilton, former Russia correspondent of the Times of London, provided a very detailed summary of the enormous Jewish role in his 1918 book Russia’s Agony and 1920 book The Last Days of the Romanovs, although one of the most explicit chapters of the latter was apparently excluded from the English language edition. Not long afterward, the facts regarding the enormous financial support provided to the Bolsheviks by international Jewish bankers such as Schiff and Aschberg were widely reported in the mainstream media.

Jews and Communism were just as strongly tied together in America, and for years the largest circulation Communist newspaper in our country was published in Yiddish. When they were finally released, the Venona Decrypts demonstrated that even as late as the 1930s and 1940s, a remarkable fraction of America’s Communist spies came from that ethnic background.

A personal anecdote tends to confirm these dry historical records. During the early 2000s I once had lunch with an elderly and very eminent computer scientist, with whom I’d become a little friendly. While talking about this and that, he happened to mention that both his parents had been zealous Communists, and given his obvious Irish name, I expressed my surprise, saying that I’d thought almost all the Communists of that era were Jewish. He said that was indeed the case, but although his mother had such an ethnic background, his father did not, which made him a very rare exception in their political circles. As a consequence, the Party had always sought to place him in as prominent a public role as possible just to prove that not all Communists were Jews, and although he obeyed Party discipline, he was always irritated at being used as such a “token.”

However, once Communism sharply fell out of favor in 1950s America, nearly all of the leading “Red Baiters” such as Sen. Joseph McCarthy went to enormous lengths to obscure the ethnic dimension of the movement they were combatting. Indeed, many years later Richard Nixon casually spoke in private of the difficulty he and other anti-Communist investigators had faced in trying to focus on Gentile targets since nearly all of the suspected Soviet spies were Jewish, and when this tape became public, his alleged anti-Semitism provoked a media firestorm even though his remarks were obviously implying the exact opposite.

This last point is an important one, since once the historical record has been sufficiently whitewashed or rewritten, any lingering strands of the original reality that survive are often perceived as bizarre delusions or denounced as “conspiracy theories.” Indeed, even today the ever-amusing pages of Wikipedia provides an entire 3,500 word article attacking the notion of “Jewish Bolshevism” as an “antisemitic canard.”

I remember in the 1970s the enormous gusts of American praise for Solzhenitysn’s three volume Gulag Archipelago suddenly encountered a temporary headwind when someone noticed that his 2,000 pages had included a single photograph depicting many of the leading Gulag administrators, along with a caption revealing their unmistakably Jewish names. This detail was treated as serious evidence of the great author’s possible anti-Semitism since the actual reality of the enormously large role of Jews in the NKVD and the Gulag system had long since disappeared from all the standard history books.

As another example, the Rev. Pat Robertson, a leading Christian televangelist, published The New World Order in 1991, his fiery attack on the “godless globalists” whom he considered his greatest enemy, and it quickly became a massive national best-seller. He happened to include a couple of brief, somewhat garbled mentions of the $20 million which Wall Street banker Jacob Schiff had provided to the Communists, carefully avoiding any suggestion of a Jewish angle and providing no reference for that claim. His book quickly provoked a vast outpouring of denunciation and ridicule across the elite media, with the Schiff story seen as conclusion proof of his delusional anti-Semitism. I cannot really fault these critics since in pre-Internet days they could only consult the indexes of a few standard histories of the Bolshevik Revolution, and finding no mention of Schiff or his money, naturally assumed that Robertson or his source had simply invented the bizarre story. I myself had had exactly the same reaction at the time.

ORDER IT NOW

Only after Soviet Communism had died in 1991 and no longer was perceived as a hostile force were academic scholars in America once again able to publish mainstream books that gradually restored the true picture of that past era. In many respects, a widely praised work such as The Jewish Century by Yuri Slezkine, published in 2004 by Princeton University Press, provides a narrative quite consistent with long-forgotten works by Robert Wilton but marks a very sharp departure from the largely obfuscatory histories of the intervening eighty-odd years.

Until about a dozen years ago, I had always vaguely assumed that Henry Ford’s The International Jew was a work of political lunacy and the Protocols was a notorious hoax. Yet today, I would probably consider the former as a potentially useful source of possible historical events otherwise excluded from most standard accounts, while at least understanding the argument of why the latter might deserve a place alongside Plato and Machiavelli as a classic of Western political thought.

Related Reading:

 
The American Pravda Series
Hide 914 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. ‘…A crucial underlying cause of the First World War was Britain’s belief that only a preventative war could forestall a rising Germany, but I suspect that an important secondary cause was the parallel German notion that similar measures were necessary against a rising Russia…’

    Indeed. I forget where, but I have read that the German General Staff had calculated that after 1916, Russia would be unbeatable. While I disagree with the rather widespread belief that Germany was particularly responsible for World War One, it may well have been the case that once the ball started rolling, many in the General Staff calculated that it would be better to have it out now than to wait.

    Incidentally, to digress, I feel that while it was above all the situation and the paradigm of the times that brought World War One about, if anyone should be held culpable, it would be France and Serbia, while — in contrast to your opinion — I feel that Britain probably was the one power least responsible for the outbreak of war.

  2. Seraphim says:

    Should we expect the same tsunami of comments like for the previous post of American Pravda? I bet.

    • Replies: @iffen
    , @Wally
    , @Paw
  3. Dan Hayes says:

    Mr. Unz,

    With last week’s essay and this week’s discussion of Schiff, Ford, The Dearborn Independent and The Elders, it looks like it’s Damn the Torpedoes Full Speed Ahead.

    What Forbidden Topic will be discussed and what Sacred Cow will be dissected next week?

  4. Unfortunately the Jew has throughout history been Pogromed. The inevitable leftist turn and they are mostly responsible for it, in this country will bite them in their ass. Democratic Socialism is on its way. And the victomology that is such a big part of its core loves the Palestinian. Its gonna be a long next 100 years.

  5. Sean says:

    .

    And since everyone today acknowledges that Schiff had heavily financed the failed 1905 Revolution in Russia,

    Whoa, that puts the stories about 1918 in a very different light.

    Other contemporaries seem to have taken the Protocols very seriously as well. The august Times of London fully endorsed it, before later retracting that position under heavy pressure,

    I once looked up the text of that article by perusing the relative edition of the Times on microfilm and it was rather different in tone to what later authors such as Norman Cohn asserted .

  6. Dan Hayes says:

    The cited “eminent computer scientist” (obviously John McCarthy) was used as a token as was Carl Jung.

    • Replies: @sarz
    , @Anonymous
  7. I’d note that associations between Jews and revolutionary socialism in America weren’t just the product of observing events in Europe.

    I read an interesting book called More Powerful than Dynamite that describes the social unrest and pre-revolutionary agitation that gripped New York City in 1915-1916. The author appears genuinely unaware of the fact, but a very large proportion — half? two-thirds? — of the figures he names are Eastern European Jews. For whatever reason, a completely disproportionate percentage of these people came boiling out of their shtetls absolutely possessed by revolutionary fervor. Was it hatred of Tsarism? A reaction to being freed from the rule of their traditional communities and rabbis? I don’t know — but it’d be interesting to read about.

    More mundanely, I read Frederik Pohl’s memoir of the early science-fiction scene, The Way the Future Was. In it, he discusses his membership in the Young Communists League or some such thing in New York City in late thirties — and notes that although he didn’t find the fact significant, the membership was indeed disproportionately Jewish.

    It’s a bit like blacks and basketball. Not all basketball players are black, but they disproportionately are. Ditto for Jews and Communists — both in Europe and here. As a rough rule, they seem to have been overrepresented by a factor of between ten and a hundred. I think that seeing Communism as a Jewish plot is a paranoid over-simplification — but it is equally unreasonable to see no connection at all.

    • Replies: @dieter kief
    , @Daniel Rich
  8. You lost me at Robert Wilton. Wilton’s list has been debunked. Now I do not know a lot about the guy but some of what he says is obvious BS.

  9. As to the reality and extent of China’s famine during the Great Leap Forward, I strongly recommend you read Yang Jisheng’s Tombstone: the Great Chinese Famine 1958-1962. It was real — and fully as bad as advertised.

    • Replies: @Godfree Roberts
  10. Q; … 15 million or less dead…

    R: That’s still the entire population of 161 individual countries around the globe.

  11. Cyrano says:

    According to some, one of the ethnic groups that have benefited the most from the good old capitalism are the Jews.

    Thanks to the capitalist system, many of them have managed to become enormously rich – some would say thanks to their genetic predisposition towards greed, which of course is unique only to them.

    Well then it makes a perfect sense to me that they would be the ones to finance a revolution in Russia that would bring a system which pretty much doesn’t allow anyone to get rich.

    Wouldn’t it have made more sense if members of the Jewish community have financed a capitalist – sorry – “democratic” revolution in Russia, which will allow them to prosper financially like they did in the west?

    Or was the Bolshevik revolution a payback for the pogroms? What is the logic here? They did it because they are evil? How did the Jewish financiers of the October revolution knew that Stalin will come along and pervert the idea of Socialism (to a certain degree), and turn it into one massive orgy of pogroms (according to some) against anybody and everybody.

    The whole idea is pure nonsense. The only way that it will make sense to me is that the Jews financed the October revolution because they expected that their people will get more equal treatment under that system than in Czarist Russia. Not because they wanted to unleash something evil on this world.

  12. BenKenobi says:

    And here we are.

    • Replies: @Wally
  13. Heros says:

    This Pravda article was once again a frustrating read because it once again tries to dance around difficult issues while minimizing offense to jews.

    Having grown up watching every Bond movie as they came out, I never considered jew villains as an element of the plot, and I have still never had until I read this article. I guess the parallels the mob, where the front men were all italians but the real mob was Spiegel, Lansky and the Rothschilds.

    The Bond film series illustrates how deep jewery has penetrated our lives, and how it is almost always hidden, or crypto. As I have become woke over the last decade, I find that every rock in our history that I overturn, greedy jews pop out. Where ever Jews are involved in groups greater than one, throughout history, they always appear to lurking around following secret agendas that uniformly work counter to the interest of their Christian hosts and especially their children.

    We know from the murders of Sikorsky and others to cover up Katyn, from the creation of Bnai Brith, ADL and SPLC to cover up Blood Sacrifice, from the genocidal theft of Palestine and the murder of its people continuing today, that jews go to incredible lengths to cover up their tracks from goyim.

    So when I read these Pravda articles, I am always frustrated because Ron Unz is always deferring to some hidden jew in his background who he knows will take offense at what he says, so he has to temper it. Because he is a jew, he cannot call a lying jew a lying jew, or he will be ostracized and boycotted even more. Unz tells us how Ford documents event after event for 80 chapters about how jews have conspired, tricked, committed fraud, and even murdered Christians, sometimes in rituals, to cover it all up, yet as a Jew he cannot understand that we Christians find this centuries old, documented, and still ongoing, satanic blood conspiracy to be worthy of more than a nod and a “tsk”.

    The truth is that when we discuss history, no text written by a jew or crypto jew can be trusted unless it is indirectly exposing jewish guilt or malfeasance. They ALL have to be thrown out the window if we are seeking truth, because all of them are filled with deliberate misdirections and lies. We should treat jewish documents the same way jews treat Mein Kampf, only as evidence of jewish guilt.

    The fact the Bolsheviks made possession of the protocols an instant death penalty, and for the 10 closest family member, is alone proof of its veracity in their eyes, and also the true forces motivating them. We see this same jewish double goy jeopardy with the holocaust denial laws, where denying jewish lies can get you thrown in jail faster than an SS soldier was murdered by the Ritchie boys after surrender.

    • Agree: Kolo, Carroll Price
  14. Books I do not see mentioned:
    Alexander Solschenizyn, ´Die russisch- jüdische Geschichte 1795- 1916, >> Zweihundert Jahre zusammen <<´, Moskau 2001, München 2002
    Antony C. Sutton, ´Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution’, 1974 New Rochelle, N.Y.
    Voline ( Vsevolod Mikhailovitsch Eichenbaum), ‘The unknown revolution (Kronstadt 1921 Ukraine 1918-21)’, New York 1955
    Horace Meyer Kallen, ‘Zionism and World Politics; A Study in History and Social Psychology’, New York, 1921
    Elisabeth Dilling, ´The Roosevelt Red record and its background’, 1936, Chicago

    And I have a consolation, the murder of Rabin by an orthodox jew after the Oslo Accords made me wonder if zionist jews did want peace, being retired I had the time to investigate, and found about about fairy tales such as 'land without people for people without land'.

    Sept 11 was the next investigation trigger, once I could no longer prevent the conclusion that it had nothing to do with Islamic terrorism.
    How could our liberator of WWII have become an evil state ?
    I found out about Baruch and FDR, etc.
    Had there been no Baruch, I wonder if there would have been a WWII.
    As Hitler in 1939 threatened jewry 'if they again caused a world war …'.

    I must add that, though WWI was set up by GB, France and the tsar, I never found evidence that jews were involved in the conspiracy.

    However, the blackmail of the Balfour Declaration, jews do seem responsible for the German defeat in 1918.
    Without USA military interference Germany would have won in November 1917.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
    , @cassandra
    , @Seraphim
    , @j2
  15. One important historical figure who is unknown in the west is Alexander Parvus, aka Israel Helphand. He was the man who persuaded the German Generals to send Lenin to Russia in the sealed train. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Parvus#Russian_Revolution

  16. Waitemata says:

    Thanks for this article. I have just reread Ford’s ‘My Life and Work;’ my father’s old (1926) edition. Have also read Robert Wilton’s ‘Last Days of the Romanoffs’ several times so appreciate references to these two authors. I hope Wilton has been republished in this year of the anniversary of the cruel martyrdom of the Russian Imperial family by the Bolsheviks.

  17. Very interesting article.

    Here’s a fascinating quote from “The International Jew.”

    In other countries the Jew is permitted to mix more readily with the people, he can amass his control unchallenged; but in Germany the case was different. Therefore, the Jew hated the German people; therefore, the countries of the world which were most dominated by the Jews showed the greatest hatred of Germany during the recent regrettable war.

    If you replace “Germany” with “Russia,” perhaps this paragraph would be a good explanation of why Western leaders hate Russia so much. Interestingly enough, modern Jews seem to really like Germany these days.

    What are your thoughts on the refugee crisis in Europe? Given how much Jewish currency trader George Soros has done to encourage refugee migration into Europe, do you think there’s some sort of Jewish conspiracy at work here?

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-08/how-george-soros-singlehandedly-created-european-refugee-crisis-and-why

  18. Anon[341] • Disclaimer says:

    During the early 2000s I once had lunch with an elderly and very eminent computer scientist, which whom I’d become a little friendly.

    With

  19. Bukowski says:

    Article by Mark Weber – The Jewish Role in the Bolshevik Revolution and Russia’s Early Soviet Regime – can be found here.

    https://codoh.com/library/document/2487/

    • Replies: @Paw
  20. Anon[122] • Disclaimer says:

    Much of the problem with Jacob Schiff and his ilk is that he actually thought the ‘socialist utopia’ was achievable. He believed all the propaganda. When he was donating his money, he had no clue the communist takeover would turn out to be a bloody failure detested by the Russian people who lived all their lives under the system, although there was certainly a strong element of “Let’s get revenge on the Tsar and his ilk for treating us like animals,” in Schiff’s thinking.

    Much of what Jews have been trying to do in politics during the 20th century is idealistic lever-pulling by men with too much Asperger’s disorder to understand human nature, and who keep thinking that if you unleash the dark side of the human personality, everything will turn out all right.

    This is one reason why Jews keep insisting that blacks who commit crimes should only get a slap on the wrist and be turned loose right back into society again. They honest-to-god think that scolding will stop sociopaths in their tracks, in denial of all evidence, because Jews have no understanding of evil human nature. When Jews became a secular, modern, and scientific-minded people, they lost all their understanding of evil, because as moderns, they were now ‘above all that primitive, backward thinking.’

    Jews who think this way keep saying, “Of course communist Russia turned out to be bad because the wrong people were in charge.” This is a bunch of coded wording for, “If me and my friends were in charge we would do it right because we’re different and special,” without realizing that practically everyone becomes corrupt if handed the reins of power.

    At one point in their careers, Obama and Hillary, as well as many of their liberal friends in the Democratic party thought of themselves as decent, well-intended beings who would run things the Correct Way once in power. But once they were in power, they became corrupt, and they’re still too blinded by their egos to see it.

    Their supporters, left-wing Jews, are also too blind to see it because they have no self-knowledge at all. Part of the problem with Asperger’s, which is far too prevalent among Jews, is that the disorder blocks you from acquiring self-knowledge of your own personality, as well as preventing from gaining insight into the personalities of others. This leaves you with the ideological side of your brain entirely in charge.

    • Agree: Mike P
    • Troll: utu
  21. I read The International Jew about five years ago. Well, I tried to read it, but gave up before getting half way through. As Ron said, it became quite monotonous and too much of the discussion was focused on obscure events of the day. I might have persevered, but eventually the numerous speculative conspiracy-theory-style reaches in explaining contemporary and historical events got to me.

    As for the Protocols, neo-nazis often claim that the important thing about it isn’t whether it was a ‘hoax’ or not, but whether it explains the present. I suppose that’s true in the sense that it gives an insight into the mindset of the people who were concerned about the growth of Jewish influence before that influence became a fact. I haven’t read the whole thing, so I can’t comment on Ron’s claim that it deserves to be a considered a classic of political theory.

    Another neo-nazi point which I also think is partly correct is that “Jews are the skeleton key to history.” Neo-nazis take that and run with it, which leads to all sorts of weird and wonderful conspiracy theories, but the basic point has to be granted: that an understanding of certain historical events will always be incomplete without sufficient consideration of the Jewish role.

    It is a forgotten detail of history that even after Ford’s considerable hostility to the Russian Revolution became widely known, the Bolsheviks still described their own industrial development policy as “Fordism.”

    This makes it sound like the Russians coined “Fordism.” Did they? I don’t know. But modern historians and social scientists with a leftist bent routinely refer to Fordism, both as a management theory and as a social structure.

    • Replies: @Wally
    , @MarkinPNW
  22. Anonymous[283] • Disclaimer says:

    A fascinating piece, Ron. Thank you.

    In the passage about the Ivy League admissions debate, would it add or distract to include the proportion of Jewish representation at some of those institutions at its height, when the debate was getting underway?

    You mentioned your interest in China. Did any Jews participate in the communist revolution there, or in the government?

    • Replies: @Johnny Rico
  23. Thanks Ron for another true life thriller. I cannot say of this latest illustration of the American Pravda theme that I have yet come across anything on TV’s serious channels such as “History” or the National Geographic” which in any way suggests that a wider conception of MSM would qualify your main point about the memory hole and the diggers of it.

    I thank you too for reminding me of that very smart half Irish scientist who stayed with me in Australia many years ago. I mention him in the hope that your archive project might ensure, if it hasn’t been done by the university on whose campus he lived, that access to his major and minor writings will be available. (Cf. the Francis Galton archive – which comes to mind because I like linking to his 1864 letter to The Times headed “Africa for the Chinese” – like you c. 1980 he had already formed a favourable sociobiological view of the Chinese :-)

  24. A possible consequence of the Bolshevik Revolution was the rise of anti-Semitism in Germany. In Munich refugees from the Russian Empire met members of a new German Nationalist party, the NSDAP. The interactions between these people are believed to have resulted in the adoption of extreme anti-semitic policies by the NSDAP. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aufbau_Vereinigung

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  25. A crucial underlying cause of the First World War was Britain’s belief that only a preventative war could forestall a rising Germany, but I suspect that an important secondary cause was the parallel German notion that similar measures were necessary against a rising Russia.

    There was possibly another cause,-Britain’s fear of Russian expansion in East Asia and towards Persia and India. It has been argued that the British sought to redirect Russia towards Constantinople and the Balkans, thus bringing the latter into conflict with Austria-Hungary and Germany. http://bionicmosquito.blogspot.com/2017/08/the-silk-roads-to-great-war.html

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  26. By contrast, one land I found especially fascinating was China, the world’s most populous country and its oldest continuous civilization,

    A bit of a whopper from a man of Mr Unz’s Classical background. Chinese writing goes back to about 1250 BC, but Mycenaean Greek writing goes back to at least 1450 BC. And if you accept the hypothesis that Hurrian and Urartrian were merely the official languages of an essentially Armenian people, you can push Armenian civilisation back well beyond 2000 BC.

    • Replies: @Frankie P
    , @Anon
  27. A brave and necessary essay. I was not aware of many of the details here.

    That said, it’s worth noting that whatever the figures that Schiff contributed during 1917, they would have paled into irrelevance to the 50 million gold marks ($1 billion in modern currency) that the German government funneled through Swedish and Danish banks to the Bolsheviks in Saint-Petersburg that year. The Bolshevik Revolution would not have happened without vast amounts of German money (which, given the wartime context, is understandable).

    Incidentally, apart from being the Bolsheviks’ main money-man in the West, Olof Aschberg also acquired one of the world’s finest collections of Russian icons in the process of selling the values that the Bolsheviks had looted. The collection now resides in a Swedish museum.

    I recently discovered that his son is rather “colorful” too. Robert Aschberg went being a Maoist in his youth to the anti-racist commissar of Swedish journalism. Dollars to peanuts he also hates current-day Russia, hates Putin, etc. Incidentally, he used to be Director-General of the Swedish Institute, which last year released a 14,000 member list of far right extremists on Twitter, such as myself.

  28. iffen says:
    @Seraphim

    Should we expect the same tsunami of comments

    You can only jump the shark one time.

    After that, commentary will mostly appeal to the clueless and those who love tragicomedy.

  29. Frankie P says:
    @Verymuchalive

    Do you know what “continuous” means?

    • Replies: @Verymuchalive
  30. @Jon Halpenny

    The last thing GB wanted is that Russia got control of the Straits.

    • Replies: @Jon Halpenny
  31. @JohnnyWalker123

    The plans to destabilise the ME originate in Israel.
    If part of these plans was to destabilise Europe too, possible, but I never heard of it.
    Soros’ indoctrination scheme for open society has been running for many decades.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Paw
  32. @Jon Halpenny

    German antisemitism began around 1870.
    Ismar Schorsch, ‘Jewish Reactions to German Anti-Semitism, 1870 – 1914′, New York 1972

  33. Seraphim says:
    @Colin Wright

    As I feel that the subject of German responsibility for the outbreak of WW1, relevant for the outbreak of the revolution in Russia, will be attacked with gusto, I suggest to keep in mind firmly the fact that Germany was the first to declare war on Russia. The reason was indeed the fear that Russia by 1916 would be unbeatable and all the objectives of the ‘Weltpolitik’ of Germany, which would have been at a certain point in time opposed and countered by Russia. To refresh your memory, the date of the calculations was 1912. Just a few words for orientation (from Wikipedia):

    “The German Imperial War Council of 8 December 1912 was an informal conference of some of the highest military leaders of the German Empire. Meeting at the Stadtschloss in Berlin, they discussed and debated the tense military and diplomatic situation in Europe at the time. As a result of the Russian Great Military Program announced in November, Austria-Hungary’s concerns about Serbian successes in the First Balkan War, and certain British communications, the possibility of war was a prime topic of the meeting…
    [Kaiser Wilhelms'] opinion was that Austria-Hungary should attack Serbia that December, and if “Russia supports the Serbs, which she evidently does… then war would be unavoidable for us, too,” and that this would be better now than later, after completion of (the just begun) massive modernization and expansion of the Russian army and railway system toward Germany. Moltke agreed. In his professional military opinion “a war is unavoidable and the sooner the better”. Moltke “wanted to launch an immediate attack”…
    Admiral Tirpitz, however, asked for a “postponement of the great fight for one and a half years” because the Navy was not ready for a general war that included Britain as an opponent. He insisted that the completion of the construction of the U-boat base at Heligoland and the widening of the Kiel Canal were the Navy’s prerequisites for war. The British historian John Röhl has pointed out the coincidence that the date for completion of the widening of the Kiel Canal was the summer of 1914, but a reading of the report of the conference shows no agreement as to a war in 1914. However, Tirpitz did say that the Navy wanted to wait until the Kiel Canal was ready in summer 1914 before any war could start. Though Moltke objected to the postponement of the war as unacceptable, Wilhelm sided with Tirpitz. Moltke yielded “only reluctantly.”…

    The ‘controversial’ book of Fritz Fischer “Griff nach der Weltmacht: Die Kriegzielpolitik des kaiserlichen Deutschland 1914–1918 (published in English as Germany’s Aims in the First World War), will certainly come into the discussions. He devotes a large chapter to the subversive operations of the Germans in Russia in order to provoke the revolution and the exit from the war with the help of the Jews and Social-Democrats (both Mensheviks and Bolsheviks).

    • Disagree: L.K
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  34. @Colin Wright

    Did you read the critique, Ron’s link?

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  35. Jake says:

    Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for Ron Unz, who persists in telling far more truth than the powers that be normally allow to be expressed without arranging the ‘accidental’ death of the speaker/writer.

    • Agree: Dan Hayes
  36. @jilles dykstra

    In 1915 the British made a treaty promising Constantinople to the Russians. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantinople_Agreement

  37. @Anon

    This is one reason why Jews keep insisting that blacks who commit crimes should only get a slap on the wrist and be turned loose right back into society again.

    No, the reason is so that the masses will welcome the police state for their own protection.

  38. Dr. Doom says:

    What is “taboo” to Zion Pigs? They have no morals. Certainly no religion. Their religion is a set of scrolls purchased in Khazaria. Named for their ancient chieftain Khazar, I believe. They are horribly inbred due to a nasty habit of molesting their own children, and they have the genetic disorders to prove it. Their great pretense of “racial purity” is hiding a horrible little secret. They are the whores of Asia. The steppes is where every marauding horde from Asia goes through to raid Europe. They are a polyglot of a sea of semen gang bangs by every horde that rode through. The biggest and lowest mongrels in the Whole World.
    Followers of Babylon and every vice. The homosexuality comes from kneeling to their horde guests and being Ben Dover at their service. The ultimate cuckold of the World. Their Yentas have inherited their foremothers propensity to lie back and take a train. The ones that didn’t submit DIED. A selected breeding down that has manifested in some nasty habits even to this day apparently.

    Dirty Laundry on the Line. The Fake Religiosity and History hides it…

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  39. @Anatoly Karlin

    I recently discovered that his son is rather “colorful” too.

    Grandson, I believe.

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
  40. @Anonymous

    Yes. Mao, Deng, and Zhou Enlai were all Jewish.

    Although it is widely believed Ho Chi Minh was Jewish, he was not. However, General Vo Nyugen Giap was, making the Vietnamese communist takeover tricky.

    This Asian is obviously Jewish. We can only hope she starts a revolution.

    • Replies: @peterike
    , @Anon
  41. JackOH says:

    Ron, extraordinary, provocative stuff in your American Pravda series. Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of Unz Review is my impression that this is how big-shouldered people of goodwill and genuinely liberal disposition used to talk a century ago. I don’t know squat about The Protocols except as it’s referred to by others, almost always prefaced as “anti-Semitic”. The Unzian approach: “Let’s read the damned thing”, seems to me superior and more grown-up.

    BTW-a childhood friend of mine and her husband, both Jewish and one of them observant, retired and now live in the Carolinas. Their occasional stories of elderly neighbors, call them Morris and Sheldon, returning from prison after having served time for white collar crimes such as tax evasion or improprieties on government contracts are sort of unintentionally funny. Looks like they missed the memo on how to be the world’s wire-pullers.

  42. Influenced by Maxim Gorky, he and his nephew Nikolai Pavlovich Schmit[e] were significant financial contributors of the Bolshevik faction of the Russian Social Democratic Workers Party including the newspaper Iskra.[12][13]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savva_Morozov

  43. Jake says:

    “From my distance of many decades, the text of the Protocols struck me as rather bland and even dull, describing in rather long-winded fashion a plan of secret subversion aimed at weakening the bonds of the social fabric, setting groups against each other, gaining control over political leaders by bribery and blackmail, and eventually restoring society along rigidly hierarchical lines with an entirely new group in control.”

    That sounds exactly like traditional WASP rule of non-WASP peoples, exactly the way, for example, that Brit Empire businesses set about arranging for revolution of New Spain against Spain, and then of Mexican mestizos and Indios against Mexican criollos (meaning full of nearly full European blood).

    Of course, Anglo-Saxon Puritanism was a Judaizing heresy.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  44. From pages 390-1 of Henry Wickham Steed’s Through Thirty Years:

    ‘The gulf that severed Western Europe from Russia during the latter half of the 19th century was dug and kept open chiefly by Jewish resentment of Russian persecution of the Jews. Yet that resentment sprang also from Jewish detestation of the Russian Holy Synod and of the Russian Orthodox Church. … Against Russian Christian fanaticism was ranged an intense Jewish fanaticism hardly to be paralleled save among the more militant sects of Islam. This Jewish fanaticism allied itself with the anti-Russian forces before and during the earlier years of the war. It abated only when the Russian Revolution of March 1917 and the subsequent advent of Bolshevism, largely Jewish in doctrine and in personnel, overthrew the Russian Empire and the Russian Orthodox Church. The joy of Jewry at these events was not merely the joy of triumph over an oppressor but was also gladness at the downfall of hostile religious and semi-religious institutions—a joy, moreover, in which the Vatican shared, as its attitude towards the Bolshevist delegates to the Genoa Conference of April, 1922, significantly indicated.’

    The resurgence of Russian Christianity under President Putin has left the ‘joy of Jewry’ looking distinctly tattered. Enter the West’s largely Jewish-owned governments and media with their Russophobia campaign.

    • Replies: @Mike P
  45. I feel perhaps the most truthful book ever written on the Bolshevik Revolution was Juri Lina’s “Under The Sign Of The Scorpion”. It details both the heavy Jewish influence and the financial backing by American financiers such as the Schiff’s and Warburg’s
    https://archive.org/stream/Under The Sign Of The Scorpion/sign_scorpion#page/n0

    Another great source for information on the backing of the Bolshevik Revolution by American so called “Capitalist” is Anthony Sutton’s “Wall Street And The Bolshevik Revolution”

    https://archive.org/stream/WallStreetTheBolshevikRevolution#page/n0

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Them Guys
  46. Sean says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    At comment 7 above is an interview with Antony C. Sutton. From his book.

    http://www.reformation.org/wall-st-bolshevik-ch3.html
    Brockdorff-Rantzau’s ideas of directing or controlling the revolutionaries parallel, as we shall see, those of the Wall Street financiers. [...]

    A subsequent document5 outlined the terms demanded by Lenin, of which the most interesting was point number seven, which allowed “Russian troops to move into India”; this suggested that Lenin intended to continue the tsarist expansionist program. Zeman also records the role of Max Warburg in establishing a Russian publishing house and adverts to an agreement dated August 12, 1916, in which the German industrialist Stinnes agreed to contribute two million rubles for financing a publishing house in Russia.6

    Consequently, on April 16, 1917, a trainload of thirty-two, including Lenin, his wife Nadezhda Krupskaya, Grigori Zinoviev, Sokolnikov, and Karl Radek, left the Central Station in Bern en route to Stockholm. When the party reached the Russian frontier only Fritz Plattan and Radek were denied entrance into Russia. The remainder of the party was allowed to enter.

    The German-Jewish Economic Elite (1900 – 1933) was central to the German effort to help Lenin.

    • Replies: @Paw
  47. @JackOH

    WAYWARD JEWS

    I’ve known a few Jewish ex-cons, big tough druggies or con men.

    In jail, all the historical differences go right out the window. Its a black and white world in there.

    Usually Jewish ex-cons have a bunch of skinhead friends from jail with Swastika tattoos who will basically concur that “Some Jews are cool”.

    The toughest Jews will all be friends with the Nazis because they’ve done time with them.

  48. anon[317] • Disclaimer says:
    @Colin Wright

    Quite, man quite. the British Banksters would send your sweat ass to their London Tower for a neck stretching ceremony should they over hear Blasphemy suggesting “Britain was not strongest and most powerful promoter of WWI”.

    the case begins in earnest in 1896, Switzerland, Hertzl, Zionist Congress.
    The failure of the theme British and French and Russian Banksters(generally known as the Jewish controlled Entente) forced on the Congress (basically to orchestrate successfully the overthrow the whole of the oil and gas rich Ottoman Arab world. The plan was to replace the Ottoman system with a Colonial Rule of Law System, to enable Zionist producers of oil and gas access to Ottoman oil and gas). Revolution after revolution was initiated throughout the Balkans and Macedonia all designed in one way or the other to bring about this change..
    When regime change failed, plan B was initiated.. that plan involved using the highly distributed small groups of Jewish Populations to migrate into the Ottoman Territory. communicating the messages and propaganda to these distributed groups was a Jewish Network task. Immigration was weaponized and used to gain political control over the Ottoman Territory.. hence WWI purpose: get that control of Ottoman oil and block German and Russia competition for the Ottoman oil.
    British and French Palestine.. the result.

  49. @jilles dykstra

    Wasn’t Luther an anti Semite? And did this not infect his teachings?

  50. Check WALL STREET and THE BOLSHEVIK REVOLUTION by Anthony Sutton, can be had on Amazon leaves no doubt that the Zionists bankers were behind the overthrow of the Russian government and they are behind the overthrow of the Russian and American governments today.

  51. anon[148] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    Disclaimer, this is exactly the kind of real thinking I like and find to be rare. Please join my TALTRA group on facebook.

  52. CornCod1 says:

    It turns out that the events of the past few years has proven that the views of “right-wing cranks,” anti-Semites and “conspiracy theorists” had a more correct view of world events than mainstream conservatives. In the eighties I used to gently dismiss the theories of my Bircher friends (gently because they were nice people). Now I know that most of them were right on the money. The events of the last few years have proven this. We have a shadowy “deep state” rebellion against our president, a James Bond villain named George Soros, whose activities Wikileaks proves controls the Democratic Party and other Leftist parties in Europe. Now, anyone with half a brain admits that secret societies control governments across the world.

    • Replies: @Bill
  53. I never read the Protocols in its entirely, only bits and pieces. I remember thinking it seemed to be written by a caricature of an evil villain, not even a Bond villain, but a Scooby Doo level villain. It screams fakery from its style. In form, though, it’s brilliant.

    If I were ever to pen something like it, for the Anglo-Saxon world, I would write it just like that. It imparts all necessary information and instructions, yet has plausible deniability built into it. “It’s a fraud, you see. It’s anti-Anglo-Saxon.”

    I admire you for your courage, Mr. Unz; this sort of self-published introspection cannot be as easy as you sometimes make it out to be. Yet, I believe, for the very sake of world peace, we need to at least be able to discuss these issues. If there’s nothing at all to them, let the light shine on the facts, and let each judge for himself. The censorship around certain issues, particularly of the Holocaust, only convinces some of their lack of historical authenticity. Laws aren’t required to back up claims which history easily vindicates, after all.

    • Agree: mark green
  54. utu says:
    @Johnnie Walker Read

    Juri Lina film or the revolution.

  55. A crucial underlying cause of the First World War was Britain’s belief that only a preventative war could forestall a rising Germany, but I suspect that an important secondary cause was the parallel German notion that similar measures were necessary against a rising Russia.

    Required reading here is The Silk Roads, by Frankopan. He demarcates the reason for Russo-German war. Edward Grey, English foreign minister, at the behest of a declining British empire, knew that Russian expansion in Asia would eventually threaten Britain’s Jewel in the Crown, India. Russia had to be turned from a focus on Asia to one on Europe, and alliances with the South Slavs proved just the trick. Russia rightly saw Austria as an easy target for territorial gains, setting off war amongst what had once been the Dreikaiserbund.

    Perfidious Albion has killed more people than any other country as direct and indirect result of policy.

    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
  56. Most people also do not know, because of whitewashing history, that Germany in 1919 had a Bavarian Soviet Republic centered in Munich, headed by Communist Kurt Eisner. WWI vets, the Freikorps, and others rooted them out. Later Herr H and his men weren’t just street fighting for the hell of it; they were clashing with the Communists, still fighting to root the Communists all out once and for all. Not all Jews were Communists, but many Communists were Jews.

    In 1932, the three people on the ballot in Germany were old von Hindenberg, Hitler and Communist Ernst Thälmann. Eventually, as we know, Herr H won out. The rewriting history and whitewashing this Red scare, in the aftermath of WWII, has obscured all of this. My super educated Jewish husband, who was a history major, had never heard of this. All he knows is of trains going east, and nothing of the root of the fight.

    The same fight is actually going on today in a different form. If people knew more about the root of the fight generally, perhaps the issues would be clearer. Like @BenKenobi writes above: “And here we are.” The same fighting and choices in issues remain, but most people don’t even realize it.

    • Replies: @Bukowski
    , @Anonymous
  57. @Colin Wright

    I would like to see elaboration and justification of that apparently careful formulation of Ron’s that “a crucial underlying [sic] cause of the First World War was Britain’s belief [sic] that only a preventative war could forestall [sic] Germany”.

    Maybe Jilles Dykstra who makes the extraordinary claim that Britain, France and the Czar conspired to get up the war might pitch in.

    Rational consideration, absent any evidence, would star with the demographics. Unlike Germany and Russia the birth rates of France and Britain had become quite modern and sustainable. Consistently with its traditional balance of powers policy it made sense for Britain to make an alliance with France to deter Germany from attacking the latter and, in particular from occupying the Low Countries – an interest of Britain since at latest 1588. Germany would have to concentrate its resources on its army so its naval building program did not loom up as more than a cause of expense to the British taxpayer as Britain stepped up its shipbuilding program accordingly. In a world of no permanent friends what was it that made Britain turn the alleged belief into some action, not mentioned, to precipitate a war against Germany – especially when it must have known that Russia wasn’t yet ready. Or is there some record somewhere of Britain calculating that 1914 was the perfect time to ensure parity of German and Russian losses?

    • Replies: @refl
    , @jilles dykstra
  58. @Wizard of Oz

    He was a philo-semite, or at least sympathetic to the Jews re the Catholic Church. He seems to have expected the Jews to convert to Christianity under his new ideas. They rejected his version of the Gospel, unsurprisingly, and then he did a 180, and published, “On the Jews and Their Lies.”
    He seemed to believe that no honest, thinking person could deny what he was preaching, something hardly unusual in religious figures.

    Luther’s story somewhat parallels that of Mohammed, who was initially very gratuitous toward the local Jewish people in Medina. The Jews didn’t want any part of his new polity, and plotted in secret with his enemies, which proved catastrophic for those Jews.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @JackOH
    , @Wizard of Oz
  59. @Anarcho-Supremacist

    Anarcho-Supremacist? What bunk dedunk.

  60. @Cyrano

    Just a doin’ a what comes nachurally.

  61. Anonymous[306] • Disclaimer says:

    Ron Unz is kickin’ ass and takin’ names! I just love American Pravda.

    The thing about Jacob Schiff is: what really motivated him? I think the standard version of the story is that he hated Czar because of the pogroms, the Cossacks, etc. But what if there was something more at work than some merely personal peeve, or some gauzy notion of ‘tikkum olaam’? Unz also mentions Olof Aschberg (whom I had never heard of), so what if this was not merely the lone act of vengeance of a single Russian Jew, but rather a real plot with a strategy?

    One other fact that Unz doesn’t mention that draws my attention is that, at exactly the same time that Schiff was financing the Bolsheviks, the US Army was deployed to Russia:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Expeditionary_Force,_North_Russia

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Expeditionary_Force,_Siberia

    What were they really doing there? Not even in the official version of events were they ‘fighting the Reds’. Some of my Russian contacts have insisted that this was really a sinister Anglo-Zionist plot to fragment or balkanize Russia. (I’m thinking along the lines of Mackinder’s old Eurasian ‘heartland’ theory, which some of the commenters above also mentioned.) If so, could it be that Schiff was really working in tandem with the US Govt. to carry out such a plan? Could it be that the original Bolsheviks were really just an ISIS-like terrorist group that somehow got out of hand and managed to take over all of Russia?

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
  62. Anonymous[253] • Disclaimer says:
    @JackOH

    “the only statement I care to make about the Protocols is that they fit in with what is going on.” – Henry Ford

    “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”.- the Protocols

    Before you read “the damned thing”, you may read an interesting article by Mr Israel Shamir:

    The Elders of Zion and the Masters Discourse

    http://www.israelshamir.net/English/Elders_of_Zion.htm

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Seraphim
  63. utu says:
    @RebelWriter

    Philosemitic undercurrent was present in many anti RC heresies. Often the idea was that the reform would bring Jews to Christianity. Before Martin Luther there was Jan Hus and the subsequent splinter groups that believed that their improved Christianity would be more palatable to Jews. The end result was Judaization of Christianity.

    Martin Luther’s anti-semitism has all marks of resentment for being betrayed.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @anonymous
  64. JackOH says:
    @RebelWriter

    Rebel, that’s pretty much my understanding, too, that Luther’s “On the Jews . . .” was a specific ephemeral work addressing a specific issue of the time with respect to Jews, the Church, and the Reformation. I scanned it years ago, in the Pelikan edition I think, and can’t remember much more about it. I’m pretty sure I’ve seen it and other works of Luther described as adiaphoric, not essential to Luther’s teaching.

  65. @RebelWriter

    Thanks. Interesting. It does seem likely then that Luther contributed to anti Semitism in Germany well before the 19th century.

    Cf. also the novel Jud Suß by Lion Feuchtwanger which suggests there was popular anti Semitism in 18th century Germany.

  66. Anonymous[155] • Disclaimer says:
    @JohnnyWalker123

    Soros thinks he’s a god:

    It seems that Soros believes he was anointed by God. “I fancied myself as some kind of god …” he once wrote. “If truth be known, I carried some rather potent messianic fantasies with me from childhood, which I felt I had to control, otherwise they might get me in trouble.”

    When asked by Britain’s Independent newspaper to elaborate on that passage, Soros said, “It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.”

    … and not a benevolent one. The “philanthropist” persona is fake:

    Despite his reputation as an international philanthropist, Soros remains candid about his true charitable tendencies. “I am sort of a deus ex machina,” Soros told the New York Times in 1994. “I am something unnatural. I’m very comfortable with my public persona because it is one I have created for myself. It represents what I like to be as distinct from what I really am. You know, in my personal capacity I’m not actually a selfless philanthropic person. I’ve very much self-centered.”

    http://articles.latimes.com/2004/oct/04/opinion/oe-ehrenfeld4

    So there it is. The lizard himself gave you some basic truths. Now you’re free to connect the dots of his various “philanthropic” projects and see the common thread (white genocide).

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
    , @Paw
  67. @jilles dykstra

    Dear Innocent in Paradise: German “Anti-Semitism” was the invention of a Jewish journalist, Wilhelm Marr (yes, he was Jewish, and Karl Marx was a Lutheran) hired by the Zionists to prepare the way for the coming of the Millennium. Anti-Semitism was at that time already invented in Russia by a respectable doctor, Leon Pinsker, who said Anti-Semitism is thousands of years old, hereditary and incurable. Dr. Pinsker MD was an early front man, a public spokesman for Zionism, who already adopted Hatikvah as the anthem, before Herzl was hired. And yes, Theodore Herzl was also a hired journalist, a front man, an employee, who did as he was told, until he was disposed of. And yes, the Dreyfus Affair was a gimmick, a phony Psy-Op like 9/11. And yes, Emile Zola was another hired journalist. And yes, the pogroms, including the Kishinev pogrom, were just riots. The people killed were rioters. That the pogroms were Anti-Jewish is pure spin, like what you watch on television. Goyim are hopeless and helpless, muscle bound but dumb, a little like cattle or beasts of burden. Give them a peanut, and they are grateful. You can dance circles around them. You can tell them everything, and they just grunt. And then you can lead them by the ring in their noses because they were not endowed with free-will and can’t think for themselves.

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    , @Paw
  68. utu says:
    @Anonymous

    http://www.israelshamir.net/English/Elders_of_Zion.htm

    Indeed Israel Shamir’s article on Elders of Zion is very good. He cites Solzhenitsyn:

    “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”.

    “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?”

    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.

    • Replies: @j2
  69. @Wizard of Oz

    Martin Luther was a competing product to Judaism, but the same materialist, Dualist thing in Christian garb. He was just knocking the competition. The princes supported him because he said that the peasants deserved to treated like animals. Because they were animals.

    • Replies: @Bill
    , @Wizard of Oz
  70. “When one discovers a tear in the fabric of reality, there is a natural tendency to nervously peer within, wondering what mysterious objects might dwell there.”

    Very Lovecraftian statement. In the previous American Pravda, Ron Unz revealed the polytheistic secret of Judaism. Perhaps the above “mysterious objects” found in the void beyond the veil are the gods of the Kabbalah.

    ” … two of his [Fleming's] most memorable Bond villains, Goldfinger and Blofeld, had distinctly Jewish-sounding names, and that so many of the plots involve schemes of world-conquest by Spectre …”

    Agree with the idea that Goldfinger is Fleming’s concept of an international criminal of Jewish origin, probably an agent of the Schiff or Rothschild cartels. But Spectre was a representation of the shadow power in the Cold War — the ODESSA/Die Spinne network of diaspora Nazis who had operational ties with the Dulles faction at CIA.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  71. @Anatoly Karlin

    Robert Aschberg is not the son, but the granson of Robert Aschberg. He was central in Swedish maoism in the seventies, then turned to journalism. He has been a driving force in the “anti-extremism”-movement in Sweeden. Not just the Swedish Institute, but also the Expo – a Swedish branch of the ADL/SPLC “antiracist” network.

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
  72. You failed to mention the Schiff-Gore merger: http://www.apfn.org/apfn/kgore.htm

  73. Dutch Boy says:

    Transferring a good part of American manufacturing to China and beggaring the American working class thereby had quite a bit to do with the Chinese economic miracle and that was done by our own ruling class, not the Chinese.

  74. Wally says:
    @Seraphim

    Said by a hasbarist / Zionist who hates free speech.

    And yes, that tsunami is coming whether you like it or not.

    http://www.codoh.com

  75. @Anonymous

    Easy, the Entente were blocking Russian ports so that they could not be utilized by the Germans, whom they were at war with.

    This was of course a tragedy for Russia, since the Bolsheviks could point to this as evidence of an Angl0-French “invasion” of Russia and portray themselves as its defenders (even though they themselves were more or less direct hirelings of the Germans), while the Whites got entirely negligible military benefits from it.

    There’s no need for conspiracies on this score. None of the Western Powers had a democratic mandate to participate in the Russian Civil War, and having the Bolsheviks win was not entirely negative from their perspective, since there would then be no need to share the postwar spoils with it (the French were a partial exception, since the Bolshevik repudiation of Tsarist era debt hit them far harder).

    • Replies: @anon
  76. Wally says:
    @Charlie Wyoming

    What ‘pogroms’ do you refer to.
    Please present proof.

    Thanks.

  77. Wally says:
    @Sean

    If so, then what exactly did that “microfilm text” say?
    And citation, please.

    http://www.codoh.com

    • Replies: @Sean
  78. @Charlie Wyoming

    “Democratic Socialism is on its way.”

    It’s already here in the form of a mixed economy. What we need to fear is the new breed of elites, Trotskyite racialists who have prospered in the capitalist game and now want world revolution, at the behest of the Babylonian supremacist cult.

  79. Wally says:
    @Cyrano

    said:
    “Or was the Bolshevik revolution a payback for the pogroms? ”

    Please present proof for these alleged “pogroms”.

    said:
    “According to some, one of the ethnic groups that have benefited the most from the good old capitalism are the Jews.”

    You surely mean “capitalism” where Jews play by a different set of self serving rules.

    http://www.codoh.com

  80. Ronnie says:

    Another very significant book of the time is “The Rulers of Russia” 1938 by Father Denis Fahey (Amazon), an Irish Catholic Priest who had traveled to Russia and analyzed the make up and financing of the Revolution. He made most of the same points as Ron and his book was widely sold at the time even in the USA. Although Fahey was a noted theologist he was also a brilliant observer and acute analyst. I think that Ron Unz would be very interested to read this book from a sophisticated and honest contemporary of the Revolution.

    • Replies: @for-the-record
  81. @Anonymous

    “Soros thinks he’s a god …”

    By the weights and measures of the Materialist reality, Soros is a god.

  82. @Hans Olav Brendberg

    Correct, I made a mistake, Robert is ofc Olof’s grandson, it can’t be otherwise even just age-wise.

    As a Swede (I assume), do you know what his position on Russia is? I imagine it’s the standard Putlerreich narrative, perhaps turned up to 11. I am curious to see if this guess is correct.

    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
  83. Wally says:
    @silviosilver

    said:
    “Neo-nazis take that and run with it, which leads to all sorts of weird and wonderful conspiracy theories, …”

    Please tell us what alleged ‘neo-Nazi’ “weird and wonderful conspiracy theories” that it “leads” to.

    http://www.codoh.com

  84. anon[393] • Disclaimer says:
    @Sean

    Yes id like to see Unz take a run at anthony suttons work which strikes me probably true but all these things so hard to get to bottom when memory holed by powers that be

  85. roo_ster says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Luther started out philo-semetic. He railed against the Roman church for using bad technique in its efforts to convert Jews to Christianity. Once the Jews heard Luther and his way of explaining the Gospel, they’d come around.

    Then Luther met and interacted with many learned and influential Jews and modified his views accordingly.

  86. Anonymous[306] • Disclaimer says:
    @SunBakedSuburb

    But Spectre was a representation of the shadow power in the Cold War — the ODESSA/Die Spinne network of diaspora Nazis who had operational ties with the Dulles faction at CIA.

    It is likely that Odessa/Spinne was penetrated by Mossad. Founding member Otto Skorzeny was probably an asset: https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/the-strange-case-of-a-nazi-who-became-a-mossad-hitman-1.5423137

    • Replies: @Paw
  87. @Seraphim

    ‘…“The German Imperial War Council of 8 December 1912 was an informal conference of some of the highest military leaders of the German Empire…” ‘

    Yes, but…

    I think all the great powers were making preparations and calculations in the same way.

    Against this must be set the fact that Germany was essentially a ‘satisfied power’ at the time. As even your quote implies, she sought no change in the status quo, but on the contrary, feared such a change.

    It was other powers that threatened to bring about that change: France, with her incessant scheming and machinations to create a coalition that could avenge 1870, Serbia, with her pathological belligerence towards everyone, Russia, with her Slavophile pretensions that, in the upshot, led her to support a Serbia that was manifestly in the wrong. Here, too, France played an apparently key if obscured role in egging both Serbia and Russia on, and then in the case of Russia, making sure she didn’t back down.

    I am not arguing that Germany was innocent. I am merely insisting that (a) it was above all the underlying paradigm that made an eventual explosion probable, and that (b) other powers were more at fault.

    There’s a lot to be said about it. For example, it’s been argued that if Austria hadn’t delayed and sought the support of Germany, but rather, had promptly attacked Serbia, then the other powers wouldn’t have found themselves taking up the positions that made general war inevitable. Of course, this makes the rather dubious assumption that Austria could in fact have quickly beaten Serbia, but it is an example of how the blame for the greater conflagration shifts depending on how one looks at it.

    Germany can be blamed for the gratuitious provocation of building a High Seas Fleet. However, if there was any one nation that could have prevented the war from breaking out, it would have been France. Absent her activities, a great war becomes discernably less probable. Serbia would never have dared to have engaged in the provocations she did, and isolated and without encouragement from France, Russia would have been more likely to seek security in an accord with Germany and Austria rather than hostility towards them. After all, for Russia above all, a great war objectively offered nothing. Finally, theories about British bankers notwithstanding, I see Britain as less guilty than any other player. She didn’t even have an immense conscript army. She was the only player who had refrained from building one.

  88. Mike P says:
    @Johnny Rottenborough

    The joy of Jewry at these events was not merely the joy of triumph over an oppressor but was also gladness at the downfall of hostile religious and semi-religious institutions …

    The resurgence of Russian Christianity under President Putin has left the ‘joy of Jewry’ looking distinctly tattered. Enter the West’s largely Jewish-owned governments and media with their Russophobia campaign.

    Good observations. However, the degenerate Western “elites,” whose degradation was caused to a large extent by decades of Zionist blackmail and corruption, are unable to mount another serious challenge to a renewed Russia supported by a rapidly surging China.

    • Replies: @Johnny Rottenborough
  89. LSJohn says:
    @JohnnyWalker123

    “If you replace “Germany” with “Russia,” perhaps this paragraph would be a good explanation of why Western leaders hate Russia so much. ”

    Simpler than that: Russia supports Iran and Syria, which each support Hezbollah, Public Enemies #s 1, 2, and 3 of you-know-who(m),

  90. Anon[781] • Disclaimer says:

    …therefore regarded American history as just too bland and boring to study.
    By contrast, one land I found especially fascinating was China, the world’s most populous country and its oldest continuous civilization, with a tangled modern history of revolutionary upheaval…

    In macro terms, Chinese history was more exciting because of massive upheavals and titans like Mao.
    But in micro terms, Chinese history of the 20th century was mostly simple: Until 1950, chaos, humiliation, and incompetence. After 1950 to mid 70s, one-man show of Maoism, a period that produced nothing of interest in thought, art, literature, science, technology, cinema, music, etc. In contrast, US history produced so many important individuals and movements in the arts, sciences, enterprise, music, and just about everything. For Mao to be god, everyone had to be ant-like minions. The US, having a more stable system and short-term leaders, was less exciting on a grand scale. But it achieved so much in so many areas.

  91. utu says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    That said, it’s worth noting that whatever the figures that Schiff contributed during 1917, they would have paled into irrelevance to the 50 million gold marks ($1 billion in modern currency) that the German government funneled through Swedish and Danish banks to the Bolsheviks in Saint-Petersburg that year.

    But we do not know how much money Schiff put into the project of revolution. We know that he put a lot of money into Japan:

    http://nda-repository.nda.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/11605/91/1/1-2_人文科学抜刷_村岡先生.pdf
    By the end of 1905, Kuhn, Loeb&Co., to the surprise of many, floated a bond issue in the sum of $200 million – equivalent to some $4.5 billion in today’s money. Schiff’s loans were an important factor—and his extensive financial involvement, a deciding factor—in bringing victory to Japan.

    Is it possible that German project was linked and coordinated with Schiff? Who was peddling this project to Germans? Are there any links between Alexander Pavrus and Jacob Schiff?

    • Replies: @for-the-record
  92. Small issue:

    I had been aware that he had long been as one of the wealthiest and most highly-regarded individuals in America

    Missing word or redundant word in there …

    • Replies: @David
  93. Rurik says:

    Great read, Mr. Unz.

    He very matter-of-factly mentions that Schiff, Warburg and the other top Jewish international bankers were among the leading backers of the Jewish Bolsheviks, through whom they hoped to gain an opportunity for the Jewish exploitation of Russia,

    Echoes of the (((“Russian”))) oligarchs that looted the wealth and resources of the Russian people following the generations of Jewish Bolshevik genocide and slavery of the Russian people.

    They go from being brutalized by commie Jews, to being looted by (crony, klepto)-capitalist Jews. Such a deal!

    Many people point out that the “Russian” oligarchs weren’t all Jews, and neither was Yeltsin- who summarily betrayed Russia and her people to destitution on behalf of their most intractable enemy, and they’d be right.

    But I feel an article like this should include the worst and most loathsome man who ever lived, and he wasn’t a Jew.

    Schiff and Trotsky would have been stopped long before their treachery could have sent Russia and millions of others reeling into the abyss, were it not for the most execrable man who ever befouled the ether; a one president Woodrow Wilson.

    It was Wilson who accommodated Schiff by betraying the American people and handing over the keys to our Treasury to this sinister cabal of Jewish supremacist banksters.

    It was Wilson whose betrayals and intrigues allowed for Trotsky to escape Canadian internment and be sent with ‘suitcases’ full of lucre into Russia, with Wilson even arranging a passport and transport documents.

    Also, we shouldn’t forget that it was also Wilson who promised the American people that he would keep us out of the war, (and was consequently elected president) and then did all he could to betray that promise, and involve us in that disastrous conflict.

    Let’s not forget that it was Wilson who foisted the ruse of his “Fourteen Points”, guaranteeing ‘self-determination’ to Germany if she laid down her arms, only to betray Germany with a starvation campaign into signing Germans into perpetual slavery. Leading directly to WWII, and all the attendant horrors.

    The weight of Woodrow Wilson’s singular treachery, treason, betrayals and enormities is beyond my comprehension, but when calculating the worst villains of the 20th century, he certainly takes all the cakes I can think of.

    http://www.wildboar.net/multilingual/easterneuropean/russian/literature/articles/whofinanced/whofinancedleninandtrotsky.html

    The Bolshevik government of Russia paid the volume its own sort of deep respect, with mere possession of the Protocols warranting immediate execution.

    Not just possession of the Protocols, but any perceived ‘anti-Semitism’ was declared a capital offense when Lenin came to power. (I remember reading somewhere, that this law, death for “anti-Semites”, was the first one enacted, but I don’t remember where I read that).

    http://truthmegasite.com/the-bolshevik-revolution-in-russia-was-the-work-of-jewish-planning-and-jewish-dissatisfaction-our-plan-is-to-have-a-new-world-order/

    with the Schiff story seen as conclusion proof of his delusional anti-Semitism.

    conclusive ?

    Plato and Machiavelli as a classic of Western political thought.

    the problem I would have with calling it “Western”, is that I consider the Protocols (and Bolshevism), as distinctively anti-Western.

    For me, the meaning of ‘Western’ goes back to the Greeks and Romans, marching though Bysantium and finding its perfect expression in the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights, and is an expression of something intrinsic to the spirit and genes of Western man. Fundamental to what I’d describe as the ultimate virtue of the West, is honor. IOW honesty, decency, blood, home and hearth. Father and motherland, and fair play.

    Whereas the Protocols seems to mock these notions as the weaknesses of ‘beast-like’ simpletons. The Achilles heal of the West- to be exploited as a means to bashing the West on the rocks of genocidal malevolence, and enslaving the survivors, just as the Old Testament commands.

    So it’s difficult for me to consider the Protocols anywhere near the writings of Plato/Socrates, who seemed above all to love the Truth. Whereas such quaint weaknesses like ‘honor’ are exploited in the Protocols with sinister glee.

    Sort of like comparing Ron Paul to Richard Pearl. To me they are mutually exclusive.

    Anyway, you’re a magnificent and brave intellect Mr. Unz, for taking on these most salient and even urgent issues of our day.

    Kudos to you Sir!

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Paw
  94. sarz says:

    Brother Nathanael Kapner at realjewnews.com has published several pieces on the status of the Protocols,showing why they are not to be dismissed with the usual tired responses such as “forgeries”. Put Protocols in the search box at his site.

    • Replies: @Rurik
  95. Sean says:
    @Wally

    It was the Times on microfilm so a reproduction of that days edition. Don’t get me wrong the Times article can be read as fully endorsing them, but that is the bit where the piece is rhetorically imagining the effect of the Protocols on lesser minds, so such a quote would be really obtuse if it was sincere . The Times article that is often cited as accepting the Protocols authenticity actually took it for granted that the Protocols were fake, it just bemoaned the lack of information proving they were not what they purported to be. The Times piece was an appeal for someone to find out exactly who wrote the protocols.

    • Replies: @Wally
  96. ” ‘…“The German Imperial War Council of 8 December 1912 was an informal conference of some of the highest military leaders of the German Empire…” ‘ ”

    The Morgenthau phantasy ?

  97. Anon[680] • Disclaimer says:
    @Dan Hayes

    I got $50 on the holocaust

    • Replies: @Moi
  98. Not longer afterward, the facts regarding the enormous financial support provided to the Bolsheviks

    Another small one.

  99. @Wizard of Oz

    Balfour already in 1907 said to the USA ambassador ‘that maybe war was the cheapest way to keep the British standard of living’.
    Patrick J. Buchanan, ‘Churchill, Hitler and “The unnecessary war”, How Britain lost its empire and the west lost the world’, New York, 2008, Balfour, US ambassador Henry White, 1907, page 48/ 49

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  100. @ploni almoni

    See also:
    Fritz Stern, ‘Gold and Iron, Bismarck, Bleichröder, and the Building of the German Empire’, New York, 1977.
    Jakob Wassermann, ‘MEIN WEG ALS DEUTSCHER UND ALS JUDE’, Berlin 1921
    ‘From prejudice to destruction’, Jacob Katz, 1980, Cambridge MA
    ‘Christianity and the Holocaust of the Hungarian Jewry’, Moshe Y Herclz, 1993 New York University press

  101. @Jon Halpenny

    Never heard of this treaty.
    If you just read the introduction you understand that it never was.
    If you understood anything of geopolitics you would know that never would Britain allow Russia free access to the Med.
    The movement of grain ships from Russia to the Med interrupted for two days, already Russia could not pay the interest on her foreign debt.
    So the Straits were perfect for controlling Russia.
    It of course may have been that perfidious Albion held out a herring.

    • Replies: @Jon Halpenny
    , @Seraphim
  102. Hibernian says:
    @Jake

    Juarez served the purpose of evicting the French. Criollo rule continues to this day, exemplified by my Hibernian brother Vicente Fox.

  103. Old fogey says:
    @Sean

    Many thanks for the link to Antony Sutton. I will need to read his books. He had scathing things to say about the Hoover Institution, by the way.

    • Replies: @James Charles
  104. Hibernian says:
    @Colin Wright

    “She didn’t even have an immense conscript army.”

    We Americans proved in 1863, 1917, 1940, and 1948 (this last continuing until 1971) that those can be put together quickly, as long as you have a strong cadre to start with. The British have a strong tradition of reserve units, also.

  105. Anonym says:
    @Heros

    So when I read these Pravda articles, I am always frustrated because Ron Unz is always deferring to some hidden jew in his background who he knows will take offense at what he says, so he has to temper it. Because he is a jew, he cannot call a lying jew a lying jew, or he will be ostracized and boycotted even more. Unz tells us how Ford documents event after event for 80 chapters about how jews have conspired, tricked, committed fraud, and even murdered Christians, sometimes in rituals, to cover it all up, yet as a Jew he cannot understand that we Christians find this centuries old, documented, and still ongoing, satanic blood conspiracy to be worthy of more than a nod and a “tsk”.

    I think within the last few weeks Ron has shown immense courage. Ron is an agent of reform and I am thankful he exists.

    Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

  106. Art says:

    The Unz Review is a modern day – The Dearborn Independent.

    Thanks!

    Art

  107. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    For God’s sake read Strunk and White, or if you have, follow Strunk’s rule: “eliminate unnecessary words”: all those damn intensifiers — very, actually, entirely, somewhat, rather importantly, extremely, considerably, exactly, etc.

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @Bill
    , @Mike P
    , @Ron Unz
  108. Bukowski says:
    @Winnetou1889

    A lot of people also don’t know that there was a short lived communist government in Hungary in 1919 led by Bela Kun.

    http://www.jrbooksonline.com/some_pics_from_cecile_tormay.htm

  109. @Frankie P

    None of the civilisations mentioned has been continuous in the sense of unconquered. All have been subject to foreign conquest, partition and warring states at various times. The last continuous civilisation was the Japanese, until their defeat in 1945.

    • Replies: @Che Guava
    , @Frankie P
  110. peterike says:
    @Johnny Rico

    Yes. Mao, Deng, and Zhou Enlai were all Jewish.

    You mock, but in fact there WERE Jews along with Mao. Which is another topic for Ron some day, perhaps.

    https://forward.com/schmooze/159051/a-jew-in-maos-china/

    https://jewishjournal.com/news/world/179731/

  111. sarz says:
    @Dan Hayes

    No, my money for “the eminent computer scientist” is definitely on Claude Shannon, whom I ran into a couple of times in the 60s at the house of a Jewish friend and mentor of mine with whom he used to play chess. I knew about his communism, but not about his Jewish mother. The main thing about him, of course, was that he had pioneered information theory.

    • Disagree: Dan Hayes
    • Replies: @Anon
  112. Rurik says:
    @sarz

    Put Protocols in the search box at his site.

    from the article

    In any event, this short work is now available as one of my HTML Books, making it quite convenient for reading and text-searching.

    The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion

    http://www.unz.com/book/anonymous__the-protocols-of-the-learned-elders-of-zion/

  113. Rurik says:
    @CanSpeccy

    “eliminate unnecessary words”: all those damn intensifiers — very, actually, entirely, somewhat, rather importantly, extremely, considerably, exactly, etc.

    • Replies: @Allan
  114. Once I checked around a little, I discovered that numerous mainstream accounts described the enormous hostility of Schiff towards the Czarist regime for its ill-treatment of Jews

    But the Czarist regime had already fallen in March 1917 and the liberals that replaced it enacted Jewish emancipation.
    And the allies, including the US, had no interest in overthrowing the provisional government, they wanted it to continue the war against Germany, so Schiff would have acted against American interests, surely not without some risk.
    And of course in November 1917 there was the Balfour declaration, which should have aligned any ethnocentric Jewish nationalist with the Allied cause.
    So apart from irrational hatred of Russia, what plausible motive could Schiff have had for financing the Bolsheviks?

    • Replies: @iffen
    , @ploni almoni
    , @Paw
  115. Arnieus says:

    By the time Jewish capitalists financed the Bolsheviks they had honed their weaponized economics to a high degree. The similar MO of most if not all “revolutions” in Europe gives credence to the reality of this articles premise.

    It is not hard to find Jewish financing for Cromwell, and later William of Orange. One of the first things William did after deposing James was borrow money to fight France from a central bank the newly created Bank of England. The French and the Bolshevik revolutions were instigated and financed and the reining monarchs were murdered just like Cromwell executed Charles the first. In France the aristocracy was wiped out. Napoleon thwarted the banker plan in France and was put down with Rothschild financing. The revolution in Germany that deposed Kaiser Wilhelm and ended WWI was all too similar though the Kaiser escaped the fate of his cousin in Russia. Like Napoleon, Hitler thwarted the agenda planned for Germany, that is a Bolshevik slaughter of Germans. WWII was the result. As Russia is all too aware the US spent billions to hire revolutionaries to depose the elected, Russia friendly government in the Ukraine.

    The revolutions are not ideological. All that “workers paradise” and “freedom and liberty” drivel is to motivate the peasants. Russia was pillaged and the likes of Jacob Schiff received a 20-fold return on investment. Only Bankers win the wars.

  116. @Ronnie

    Another very significant book of the time is “The Rulers of Russia” 1938 by Father Denis Fahey

    It’s in the public domain. Here is a link (PDF):

    https://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/WebSources/B_345_The-Rulers-of-Russia.pdf

  117. @Anatoly Karlin

    This dipshit led the program Trolljägarna (Troll Hunters), which EXPOSED internet commenters with right-wing views. Such as the dangerously extremist view that Sweden is for Swedes.

    He has the standard Establishment views on Russia and Putin. See this op-ed in Aftonbladet (evening daily, formerly had a working class orientation): https://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/kolumnister/a/qnpWom/sociala-medier–demokratins-undergang

    Rysslands Vladimir Putin har trollfabriker som jobbar dygnet runt och har satt upp tweet-robotar som den senaste tiden gjort allt för att stödja separatisterna i Katalonien.

    Russia’s Vladimir Putin has troll factories who work around the clock and have set up Twitter robots that the most recent time did everything to support the separatists in Catalonia.

    Karl XII should be reviled less for his disastrous invasion of Russia and more for bringing the Jews into Sweden for the first time ever.

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
  118. @Colin Wright

    Add to that the tight connection between jews and the secret police and spys and – you know: intelligence services of all kinds in Eastern Europe. It’s said, that they were heavily dominated by Jews – one of the rather solid reasons for anti-semitism there after the implosion of the Eastern Block.

    Later famous German literary critic Marcel Reich-Ranicki for example was one of those secret service men in London after he had survived the Third Reich in a hideawy in Poland.

  119. jsm says:
    @Anon

    his is one reason why Jews keep insisting that blacks who commit crimes should only get a slap on the wrist and be turned loose right back into society again. They honest-to-god think that scolding will stop sociopaths in their tracks, in denial of all evidence,

    Why do you assert that Jews insist criminal blacks be let out because they honest to go think scolding will work…

    …as opposed to…

    that the Jews insist blacks be let out because they are parasites who want to weaken their White host?

    What makes YOU an expert in what goes on in Jews’ minds?

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @jsm
  120. SCL says:

    I think it is odd that no one has mentioned Solzhenitsyn’s TWO HUNDRED YEARS TOGETHER. It seems the obscuring of this work has been successful.

    • Disagree: utu
  121. There are some other examples of Jewish influence in America which few people are aware of.

    In the latter part of the 19th century, it became customary for the United States to send Jewish ambassadors to the Sublime Porte. The first Jew was appointed in 1889, and up until the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire WASPs would only hold the post for a total of seven years.

    The reason why hardly needs to be explained.

    Jews also helped poison Russo-American relations in this period (which previously had been quite friendly) by successfully lobbying the American government to intervene diplomatically every time there was a pogrom in Russia.

    • Replies: @for-the-record
  122. Jews have never found a more secure perch than within the Anglo-Saxon nations of England and the United States.

    Jews have rarely displayed any gratitude whatsoever for being able to launch their global plots from such safe perches.

    Jacob Schiff was a Jew globalizer banker who funded the Jew-controlled Bolsheviks in Russia. The Jews were so fond of Bolshevism because they saw it as an excellent way to attack and destroy their European Christian enemies.

    Paul Singer, George Soros, Seth Klarman, Mark Zuckerberg, Shelly Adelson, Mike Bloomberg and many other wealthy Jews are no different than Jacob Schiff.

    Mass immigration will prove to be the ultimate undoing of the Jews in European Christian nations.

    The response to the Jew push for open borders mass immigration will be the mass expulsion of Jews from European Christian nations.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    , @Anon
  123. Anonymous[155] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    Much of the problem with Jacob Schiff and his ilk is that he actually thought the ‘socialist utopia’ was achievable. He believed all the propaganda. When he was donating his money, he had no clue the communist takeover would turn out to be a bloody failure detested by the Russian people who lived all their lives under the system, although there was certainly a strong element of “Let’s get revenge on the Tsar and his ilk for treating us like animals,” in Schiff’s thinking.

    Lol no!

    The “socialist utopia” angle was clearly designed to appeal to the poor Russian goyim. Did I miss the part where Schiff abandoned his treasures and moved to Russia to bask in that utopia?

    The “revenge” angle was the goal. Obviously. He poured money into “utopia propaganda” and into “revenge”. Only one of them worked as advertised. Imagine my shock.

    Much of what Jews have been trying to do in politics during the 20th century is idealistic …

    Haha, save that shit for Yahoo Answers or Wikipedia.

  124. @utu

    Is it possible that German project was linked and coordinated with Schiff? Who was peddling this project to Germans? Are there any links between Alexander Pavrus and Jacob Schiff?

    From The World at the Cross Roads by Boris Brasol (1921), pp. 70-71:

    The full history of the interlocking participation of the Imperial German Government and international finance in the destruction of the Russian Empire is not yet written. Much time and research will be required in order to disentangle the complex relations between the two powers, which sought to beat down the Russian Colossus which for centuries stood as a watchful sentinel on the border of Europe, protecting Western civilization from savage invasions originated in the depths of Asia.

    It is not a mere coincidence that at the notorious meeting held at Stockholm in 1916, between the former Russian Minister of the Interior, Protopopoff, and the German Agents, the German Foreign Office was represented by Mr. Warburg, whose two brothers were members of the international banking firm Kuhn, Loeb & Company, of which the late Mr. Jacob Schiff was a senior member. Nor is it a mere coincidence that in the later stages of the Russian Revolution we still find international finance hard at work engaged in further endeavors to break the last resistance of Russia against the onslaught of the “Triple Alliance” — that is of the Central Powers, Revolutionary internationalism and International Finance itself.

    This is a link to the book (pdf).

    • Replies: @Daniel Rich
  125. @Mike P

    Mike P—Yes, the chances of engineering another Russian Revolution or replacing Russians with assorted ethnics are slim indeed.

  126. @Thorfinnsson

    In the latter part of the 19th century, it became customary for the United States to send Jewish ambassadors to the Sublime Porte.

    The most famous being Henry Morgenthau Sr. (1913-1916), perhaps now better known for being the father of Henry Morgenthau Jr., father of the “Morgenthau Plan”.

    Morgenthau Sr. was the maternal grandfather of the historian Barbara Tuchman (Guns of August).

  127. Moi says:
    @Anon

    Wow. That would be something. I was thinking maybe the shenanigans that established Israel.

    • Replies: @Zumbuddi
  128. @refl

    Thanks but different subject/question.

  129. Anon[859] • Disclaimer says:
    @jsm

    And what makes YOU expert enough to proffer that counter speculation seriously? (Have you any idea at all of the balance of written evidence one way or the other?).

    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
  130. @jilles dykstra

    It was a real agreement. Why do you think the British attacked Gallipoli? It was to fulfil the promise to Russia. The Russians gave a Quid Pro Quo in the form of allowing Britain a larger occupation zone in Persia.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  131. MBlanc46 says:
    @Charlie Wyoming

    Jews are seen as white and Palestinians are seen as people of color. That probably doesn’t bode well for the Jews.

  132. By contrast, one land I found especially fascinating was China, the world’s most populous country and its oldest continuous civilization, with a tangled modern history of revolutionary upheaval, then suddenly reopened to the West during the Nixon Administration and under Deng’s economic reforms starting to reverse decades of Maoist economic failure.

    Very unambiguously, Mao >> Deng. Of course, the US media will always twist it the other way round. For an explanation, see this: https://www.unz.com/tsaker/book-review-losing-military-supremacy-the-myopia-of-american-strategic-planning-by-andrei-martyanov/#comment-2415952. And https://www.unz.com/jderbyshire/trump-trips-but-hes-right-on-russia-our-ruling-class-is-crazy-remember-the-romanovs/#comment-2429247.

    I used to believe the mainstream American narrative on this too, until I realized that the faster economic growth starting from the reforms had more to do with China’s finally being able to trade with the US (at its core more a product of what happened later on in Mao’s era than what Deng and his supporters did) than with the accompanying change in economic policy. I came to the conclusion that China in 1970 had more or less secured herself to the extent that establishing relations with the US became a possibility. With the industrial and modern foundation already developed and integration into the wider international community, rapid economic growth became more or less inevitable. One can think of China in Mao’s years as having developed a proven to work operating system and programming language in bootstrap mode, on top of which the application software that delivered more immediate and tangible returns were built as part of “economic reform.” Many knowledgeable people in China feel the same; that those reformists who returned to power afterwards were actually less competent leaders taking undue credit by building on the work of others.

    With the Chinese people clearly having such tremendous inherent talent and their potential already demonstrated on a much smaller scale in Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Singapore, I believed there was an excellent chance that Deng’s reforms would unleash enormous economic growth, and sure enough, that was exactly what happened. In the late 1970s, China was poorer than Haiti, but I always told my friends that it might come to dominate the world economically within a couple of generations, and although most of them were initially quite skeptical of such an outrageous claim, every few years they became a little less so. The Economist had long been my favorite magazine, and in 1986 they published an especially long letter of mine emphasizing the tremendous rising potential of China and urging them to expand their coverage with a new Asia Section; the following year, they did exactly that.

    I think the comparison between China and Haiti in the late 70s is patently ridiculous, for obvious reasons. Many in Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Singapore look down on mainland Chinese for being much poorer and for being 共匪. The reality is that it’s like comparing ordinary engineers in the dominant company to those who started and built an inferior but for the most part working alternative. And now, that alternative China created is starting to become serious competition to the long established market standard.

    These days I feel tremendous humiliation for having spent most of my life being so totally wrong about so many things for so long, and I cling to China as a very welcome exception. I can’t think of a single development during the last forty years that I wouldn’t have generally expected back in the late 1970s, with the only surprise having been the total lack of surprises. About the only “revision” I’ve had to make in my historical framework is that I’d always casually accepted the ubiquitous claim that Mao’s disastrous Great Leap Forward of 1959-61 had caused 35 million or more deaths, but I’ve recently encountered some serious doubts, suggesting that such a total could be considerably exaggerated, and today I might admit the possibility that only 15 million or fewer had died.

    Wow, what exactly did you expect back in the late 1970s for the next forty years? More or less what’s happening now? And that was considered extremely farfetched at the time? The more I look at it, the more I realize that China in the late 1970s was in essence not anywhere near as bad as it might have appeared on the surface. There was already, for instance, the expertise to develop not great but passable nuclear submarines, which Andrei Martyanov characterized in his book as “the most complex machinery in human history.” I also realized that that estimate of 35 million was made by comparing to the death and birth rate of 1958 (so number of excess deaths plus number of fewer births relative to 1958 baseline). It’s laughable to label a “dictator” one does not like as a “mass murderer” by comparing himself to himself in population statistics. The overall trend was that during his 25 years, the population of China went from 475 million to 900+ million, hardly what one would expect from a genocidal state.

    Now that China is so much more powerful and credible internationally, more people will discredit what those silly and politically motivated American scholars have put in their history books for the masses.

    I’m a pretty exceptional and extreme guy (as are you Ron), so I naturally prefer those who dare to use more extreme and unorthodox approaches. I like revolutionaries who transform weird into normal, be they in science, be they in politics. Because the most consequential to our civilization happens at the extremes. Because there’s so much more of a story to tell. Mediocrity and conformism is the default, and more people ought to try radical (but appropriated hedged) methods if societal advancement is to be optimized for. Like, what Stalin did, in pioneering the planned economy, was truly revolutionary and met with fierce opposition from the outside world, but it proved to be a miraculous success. Mao replicated it successfully in the Chinese context to modernize China. I think Mao was a genius poet and political thinker and leader and a true revolutionary at heart. His brothers and sons were all killed for “revolutionary” activities. Nearing the last decade of his life, he wasn’t about leaving behind wealth and power to heirs of blood like the typical dictator/magnate, as he had few real ones. Most likely, he cared much more about his legacy and what would happen to China afterwards. He distrusted those people under him running things, Deng included, who were scrambling to ensure the best position for themselves and their children after he died. So he launched the Cultural Revolution, using popular uprising to instigate a political reshuffle at the top. Of course, the people who made it to the top who ran things during his last decade were very questionable. He may well have been quite displeased with the result. Nonetheless, he probably felt this political balancing would be the healthiest choice for his legacy, for the political situation afterwards. The people he brought down came back to power after he died, and I’m sure many of them secretly resented him but were too scared to say anything. So he succeeded, unlike Stalin, in not getting posthumously denounced. And China is still thriving forty years after his death, though maybe not as much as he would have hoped.

    As I write this, I am reminded of Mao’s poetic quote: 人间正道是沧桑, which means literally “the correct course for the human world is for seas to turn into mulberry fields.”

    • Replies: @Parfois
  133. bjdubbs says:

    Re Nixon and the problems of hiding the ethnic dimension of red-baiting, it was always puzzling why conservatives focused so much on “Whitaker Chambers and Alger Hiss” because the story itself seemed pretty inconsequential and not really worth the monumental status it seemed to possess for conservatives. Now it makes sense if Hiss served the role of being the respectable, WASP target of redbaiting.

  134. @Colin Wright

    Westerns on TV would have Native Americans burn down everything within sight [and mostly without any logical reason].

    But when you start looking at who’re behind such scenarios [writers, directors, producers], you’ll discover a projection of pogroms [quite often by Jews with an Eastern European background].

    And, yes, I fell for it too.

    The Hollywood Indian – Link to Wikipedia [this being a Wikipedia entry, don't expect to find the full and naked truth]

  135. MarkinPNW says:
    @silviosilver

    Wasn’t “Fordism” the official state religion in Huxley’s “Brave New World”, with the symbol of the capitol T in honor of the Ford Model T automobile replacing the Christian Cross (resembling the lower case t) as the primary religious symbol?

  136. @Charles Pewitt

    Not a fact that “Jews have rarely displayed any gratitude….”. In the Anglophone countries many of the great charitable gifts, to art galleries/ museums, to medical research and hospitals, to musical events and institutions and other objects of charity are from Jews.

    Done anonymously? Probably not? “Displayed”? Yes.

    • Replies: @Kratoklastes
    , @Weaver1
  137. @for-the-record

    Most likely you’ve already read this book, but I’ll add a link to it for those who haven’t:

    “George Bush : the unauthorized biography” – Link to Archive.org

    Indeed, what a tangled web they’ve woven and how we’re ff-ing stuck in it…

    • Replies: @for-the-record
  138. Mr. Unz,

    The intellectually curious know the problem of Jewish, power, influence , propaganda, and subversion. Enlightenment has tremendous value, but the paramount question is how do we stop international Jewish power. The combination of ethnic unity, wealth, media manipulation, high IQ and institutional infiltration creates a formidable deadly opponent. This has been going since the ancient world.

    JQ has dire consequences for the very survival of western civilization particularly with mass demographically swamping immigration policies.

    What will happen to Jews when the Occident becomes minority majority? Jews will be perceived as just any other white person by minority groups, many of which harbor hatred against Jews. There will be a Chinese world hegemony when the west falls, which will not be good for Jews. The elite Jews need to wake up. Destroying the goyim is not good for them!

    • Agree: gmachine1729
    • Replies: @gmachine1729
  139. Anon[330] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rurik

    Remember that Wilson was blackmailed into WW1 by Sam Untermeyer Zionist and big shareholder in Standard Oil

    He was also the kind of do gooder Puritan who causes so many problems in the world

  140. @Jon Halpenny

    Isn’t Gallipoli – and the original attempt to send warships through the Bosporus – explicable as
    1. An attempt to knock a German ally out of the war
    2. Open an ice free supply route to Russia (and maybe an export route for Russian grain?)?

    • Replies: @Jon Halpenny
    , @refl
    , @anon
    , @Paw
  141. Anonymous[199] • Disclaimer says:
    @Sean

    Whoa, that puts the stories about 1918 in a very different light.

    How so? I can’t tell if that is sarcasm.

    What was the tone of the Times article?

    • Replies: @Sean
  142. Anonymous[199] • Disclaimer says:
    @Dan Hayes

    How do you know they were deliberately used as tokens?

    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
  143. Bill says:
    @ploni almoni

    The princes supported [Luther] because he said that the peasants deserved to treated like animals.

    Well, the fact that he gave them cover to steal all the Church’s stuff helped, too.

  144. Bill says:
    @CornCod1

    In the eighties I used to gently dismiss the theories of my Bircher friends (gently because they were nice people). Now I know that most of them were right on the money.

    Birchers were quite philo-semitic.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  145. Cyrano says:

    If anybody ever benefited from the Bolshevik revolution – it was the workers in the west, primarily US.

    The October revolution forced the capitalists to make concessions to the working class that they wouldn’t have otherwise made simply out of their good natured kind hearts.

    If the Jews were so diabolical to unleash the Bolshevik revolution because of sinister motives only, how come that they didn’t predict that it’s going to hurt their profit margins in the US – via increased wages and benefits that they were forced to pay in order to keep the working class calm – out of fear that the Bolshevik revolution might have given them some ideas about conducting feasibility study of staging a copycat revolution.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  146. Anonymous[199] • Disclaimer says:
    @Dan Hayes

    I’d be interested in a review of the history of pogroms in Eastern Europe, perhaps combined with Solzhenitsyn’s 200 Years Together.

    • Agree: Colin Wright
  147. Bill says:
    @CanSpeccy

    Yeah, Ron is great, but his writing is undisciplined.

    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
  148. @jilles dykstra

    If actually said it counts for some fraction of one per cent of the needed evidence. That is true, in particular, because it suggests no knowledge of Balfour the man. I recall a vignette (here’s another tiny fractional piece of evidence) from an essay by Leonard Woolf (Virginia Woolf’s v clever husband) in an essay where he describes Balfour in committee in 1915 receiving a note, pausing for just a moment, then continuing “as I was saying, in the matter of an additional farthing….”. The note told him of the sinking of the Lusitania. At least my informants of what was said on the occasion of news being received of, first, the invasion of the Soviet Union and, second, Pearl Harbour, reported “we’ve won the war” as the enthusiastic expression on both occasions.

    I commend resurrection of Leonard Woolf’s writings as a pleasure awaiting Ron and like minded fossickers for small nuggets (with hopes of greater ones).

  149. Anonymous[199] • Disclaimer says:
    @jilles dykstra

    Destabilize might not be quite the word for it. Pulverize and dilute the various indigenous national identities? Yes.

    One other related maneuver that is underway is that the Jews are giving Muslims territory in Europe and the United States in exchange for the Jews’ having taken Palestine. It’s a form of pacification, of letting the pressure out. It distracts the Muslims with the fruits of capitalism and other material wealth and political power (in Europe and US). It also clears potentially resistant young men out of Israel’s neighborhood. I suppose one could also view it as payment of compensatory damages.

    • Replies: @James N. Kennett
  150. Anonymous[199] • Disclaimer says:
    @JackOH

    Well put, deserved praise of Ron.

    • Replies: @JackOH
  151. Allan says:
    @Rurik

    Let he who is without hypocrisy cast the first damn.

    It’s by the way that I agree with your summary of the bust out phase of the life of the crime organization established through the supposedly “Russian Revolution”:

    Echoes of the (((“Russian”))) oligarchs that looted the wealth and resources of the Russian people following the generations of Jewish Bolshevik genocide and slavery of the Russian people.

    So, are not reparations owed to Russians? If so, they must not be financed by further extractions from the Germans, who appear to be the victims of a set up for a holocaust (Dresden, etc.) after a suitable pretext had been identified by the same cabal, more or less, who financed and plotted the 1905 & 1917 insurrections in Russia. Adequate compensation must include unconditional surrender of any and all ownership and control over the many “Holocaust” museums that have been foisted upon us in order to cripple us with guilt and to distract us from another painful pravda about Jewish history.

    The painful truth about the Holocaust is basically just this: Any holocaust of Jews in Europe during the 1940′s can be explained correctly as an own goal brought about by compassionate activists such as Hugo Preuß. He and others labored for generations to plunge Europe into chaos again and again and now again with the movement to abolish border controls and to relocate to Europe tens of millions of Muhammadists, subsaharans Africans, and other aliens.

    • Agree: Rurik
  152. Anonymous[199] • Disclaimer says:
    @Winnetou1889

    The same fight is actually going on today in a different form.

    What’s the fight today? What form has it taken? Thanks for explaining.

    • Replies: @Winnetou1889
  153. Sparkon says:
    @jilles dykstra

    I must add that, though WWI was set up by GB, France and the tsar, I never found evidence that jews were involved in the conspiracy.

    The evidence is there already by 1903 in Zionist co-founder Max Nordau’s stirring speech that year to Zionists in Paris:

    Litman Rosenthal:

    “About a month later [~Sept. 1903] I went on a business trip to France. On my way to Lyons I stopped in Paris, and there I visited, as usual, our Zionist friends. One of them told me that this very same evening Dr. Nordau was scheduled to speak about the Sixth Congress”
    [...]
    “When we reached the hall in the evening we found it filled to overflowing and all were waiting impatiently for the great master, Nordau, who, on entering, received a tremendous ovation. But Nordau, without paying heed to the applause showered upon him, began his speech immediately, and said:”

    ‘You all came here with a question burning in your hearts and trembling on your lips, and the question is, indeed, a great one, and of vital importance. I am willing to answer it. What you want to ask is: How could I—I who was one of those who formulated the Basle program—how could I dare to speak in favor of the English proposition concerning Uganda, how could Herzl as well as I betray our ideal of Palestine…’

    “The whole assembly was under the spell of Nordau’s beautiful, truly poetic and exalted diction, and his exquisite, musical French delighted the hearers with an almost sensual pleasure. For a few seconds the speaker paused, and the public, absolutely intoxicated by his splendid oratory, applauded frantically. But soon Nordau asked for silence and continued”:

    ‘Now this great progressive world power, England, has after the pogroms of Kishineff, in token of her sympathy with our poor people, offered through the Zionist Congress the autonomous colony of Uganda to the Jewish nation. Of course, Uganda is in Africa, and Africa is not Zion and never will be Zion.’
    [...]
    ‘…let me tell you the following words as if I were showing you the rungs of a ladder leading upward and upward: Herzl, The Zionist Congress, the English Uganda proposition, the future world war, the peace conference where with the help of England a free and Jewish Palestine will be created.’

    https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_International_Jew/Volume_1/Chapter_14

  154. Them Guys says:
    @Johnnie Walker Read

    Yes, I found that book as a free read online and read it. It is amazing how purely evil and so filled with hatred those jewish Bolshevik torturers and mass murderers actually were/are.

    Every description in that book of the many, many ways jews invented for use as a torture reminds one of Apache Indians of the 1800′s era. There is simply No method of torture or murderous deaths, them bolshie jews will not do. One thing certain is, whoever reads that book better have a strong stomach, and even the strongest of men will be found wiping a few eye tears away now and then, since the abject brutality and totally Inhuman tortures gleefully done border on being unspeakable.

    And with No other valid reason to be found, other than a true explaination of how, be it Talmudic religion, or other dna traits, or some form insanity present within jewry in general, folks better trained medically than me can debate…But the best reasons when all is added up is simply jews are jews and its Bad for all non jews period. Far too many historical evidences and eras seem to validate that regardless of which nation jews choose to infiltrate in large numbers, so that it then becomes the Next New Host Nation of 1/2 of more of international worldwide jewry. Very evil and immoral and unethical situations develop and develop to the proverbial, Inth-degree every damn time.

    And to date about the only remedy has been for every host nation to give jewry the Big Boot Out.

    At least now, todays usa host nation, none can claim jews still have zero places to call home eh.

    Israel’s big enough to fit them all within it. And you can bet all you own, and win the bet, if you bet that within two seconds flat of usa jewry finds out of a plan to get jewry out of America. Most American dwelling jews will screech and squak and holler as if a swine pig stuck with a dagger knife.

    All of their constant talk of how jews so so love israel, how they Own it, and even most every athiest jew when asked “Why so, a right to return eh jewboy”? Those athiests with out skipping a beat, will answer back…”Oh thats due to G-d (god) Gave land of israel to Us jews, see”!…Indeed that same god they reject and refuse to believe even exists, somehow Gave jews lands in palestine like a real estate agent at centruy-21 real estate co. eh. And soon as they get wind of an exit agenda, a thousand excuses to why cannot go live in israel shall surface and do so fast. Benjamin Franklin, founding father, said it best. They are Paristies and like Vampires a jew can’t live off another vampire. Nor a flea live off of another flea…They always require a Host Body aka Nation to keep 1/2 of jewry in so to provide for the other 1/2 thru too many corrput ways and means to list.

    Yet no other method of fixing a host nation works. How long has america left before even that option wont work. It sure be real swell if for a change jewry as a whole would finally just act like Mr. Ron Unz, and be willing to admit to facts and truths without any baggage of talmudic fantasy and jewy jewish fables eh…I wont hold my breath for such, and expect that unless jews are who make first moves to fix what they fucked up, it will not end good for anyone involved.

    Cannot help but wonder at times what if?…What If, about 800 or so years ago when some Pope and european Kings agreed to hunt down and find and Burn every talmud scrolls or copies etc to be found…What if they succeded and located every single one, by now 800 yrs later maybe jewry would have assimilated much better and none of this would be reality.

    However for now the real main reality is Yes usa Is latest Host nation, Yes many maybe most jews within usa are grand kids of orig russian bolsheviks, and so far many of them have shown their true colors and leave no secret that america is Next up to play role russian whites and christians suffered so badly under….Read that book, see for yourself what a real fully Depraved and pure evil jewish mind can conjur up when it comes to vicious unspeakable tortures, and mass murderous venomous hatred for the “other” aka all non jews…HINT: Forget MSM claims of how bad a torture Water Boarding is!..Yes it too sounds not too nice to experience, but compared to 1917 and onwards Russia and jewsih invented methods of tortures and mass deaths, no comparison at all.

    Many jews and their Shabboz goy defenders will likely claim such an honest book need be Banned due to it creates more jew haters…Well maybe so eh…But maybe also after you read of those vile evil methods, maybe some jews deserve being hated so badly. That alone should cause naysayer jews and shabboz goys to divert atten To jews and seek a rapid and lasting jew-fix, before too many more folks read the book perhaps.

  155. @ploni almoni

    “competing product” seems excessively loose language. How many conversions to Judaism were there in German speaking polities between 1400 and 1600? Indeed were there any attempts being made to proselytize for Judaism?

    • Replies: @ploni almoni
  156. David says:
    @Peripatetic commenter

    I think Mr Unz should add a feature whereby one can highlight a phrase, right click, and select “report usage” or “syntax” or something like that.

  157. @Wizard of Oz

    Both of the reasons you give are valid in their own right. But it is a fact that the British had given an assurance to hand Constantinople over to the Russians shortly before they began the Gallipoli Campaign. If the campaign had succeeded Russia would have got Constantinople and the Straits.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  158. @Daniel Rich

    Thanks, I haven’t read it. The problem is that just with this thread I’ve come up with a reading list that will keep me fully occupied for the next year or so . . .

  159. refl says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    According to the site I mentioned above (firstworldwarhiddenhistory), the British attacked Gallipoli to keep Russia in the war until the coming collapse of Germany and Russia – hard to swallow but the authors make quite a compelling case. I do not want to unnerve anyone but the site by these two Scots is certainly worth a mention on tis forum.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    , @Bukowski
  160. Che Guava says:
    @Verymuchalive

    Aah, the myth of etternal Japan.

    In the fifth century, the nobility was 60% Korean, 20% Chinese, and 20% native.

    After that brief period, thie Shogunates were in power.

    The Mongol invasion was, indeed, unsuccessful, but enough landed and wrought havoc in Kyushu, the Kamakura Shogunate fell as a result.

    That it never happened (they were all blown away by divine winds), is simply a confection for the (unfortunately, still) occupying Americans.

    In southern Kyushu, ynu can still see populations of Mongolian ponies, and markers of the sites of landings and battles.

    One reason the right hates the current emperor is that he once acknowledged his Korean ancestry.

  161. @Dan Hayes

    Nah. It will be: How the Russians are really to blame for the Bolshevik Revolution.

    The Russians seem to be the explanation for everything these days.

  162. Dan Hayes says:
    @Anonymous

    Anonymous[199]:

    I believe that Freud explicitly conveyed to Jung that he was to be used to negate the pervading Jewish public image of psychoanalysis. Jung certainly thought that he was being used as a token.

    The “eminent computer scientist” certainly thought (and resented) that he was used as a token.

  163. Dan Hayes says:
    @Bill

    Bill:

    What you mistakenly term “undisciplined” is Ron serving up myriad topics for discussion.

    • Replies: @Bill
  164. Mike P says:
    @CanSpeccy

    How about you do that for him? Should not be to hard to build a web proxy that gives a Strunkian cleansing to everything you read online. You could get rich!

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  165. iffen says:
    @German_reader

    You’re always trying to bring facts into the discussion. Why is that?

    • Replies: @German_reader
  166. @Anarcho-Supremacist

    People who say things like “[X] has been debunked” without giving any evidence of the debunking of [X], debunk themselves.

    It takes about ten seconds to buttress a claim of ‘debunking’ by typing in a reference to the work that supposedly does the debunking.

    I know this isn’t a graduate seminar or a think-tank tea-room, but given Unz’s preparedness to disclose his previous naïveté (and the process by which the scales fell from his eyes), it would be good form to make counter-arguments rather than what amounts to a content-free tweet.

    Give Unz some credit: he has the training to discriminate between sources, and seems genuinely committed to figuring out what things are true and what are not. To assert that his process is retarded (which is what you’re doing by dismissing a source so flippantly), without any obligation to buttress your assertion, makes you immediately suspect.

    • Agree: James N. Kennett
  167. mcohen says:

    The south african communist party had several jewish leaders such as ruth first, joe slovo,bram fischer,and many others.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_African_Communist_Party

    Prominent members of the Central Committee of the SACP

    Jeremy Cronin
    Ruth First
    Bram Fischer
    Chris Hani
    Ronnie Kasrils
    Mac Maharaj
    Nelson Mandela
    Govan Mbeki
    Thabo Mbeki
    Raymond Mhlaba
    Joe Slovo
    Yusuf Dadoo

    Jews were involved in the fight against apartheid from the begining and several went on trial with nelson mandela.denis goldberg,lionel bernstein,james kantor.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rivonia_Trial

    Interestingly todays south african leadership is anti israel and opposes the jewish struggle for liberation and the fight for a country of its own.
    They even go as far as to accuse israel of apartheid.

    A great song from an old south african band

    It’s a strange, strange world we live in, Master Jack
    You taught me all I know and I’ll never look back
    It’s a very strange world and I thank you, Master Jack

    You took a colored ribbon from out of the sky
    And taught me how to use it as the years went by
    To tie up all your problems and make them look neat
    And then to sell them to the people in the street

    It’s a strange, strange world we live in, Master Jack
    You taught me all I know and I’ll never look back
    It’s a very strange world and I thank you, Master Jack

    I saw right through the way you started teachin’ me now
    So some day soon you could get to use me somehow
    I thank you very much and though you’ve been very kind
    But I’d better move along before you change my mind

    It’s a strange, strange world we live in, Master Jack
    You know how I feel as if I’ll never come back
    It’s a very strange world and I thank you, Master Jack

    You taught me all the things the way you’d like them to be
    But I’d like to see if other people agree
    It’s all very interesting the way you disguise
    But I’d like to see the world through my own eyes

    It’s a strange, strange world we live in, Master Jack
    No hard feelin’s if I never come back
    You’re a very strange man and I thank you, Master Jack

    You’re a very strange man and I thank you, Master Jack
    You’re a very strange man and I thank you, Master Jack

    Songwriters: David Marks

    Master Jack lyrics © Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  168. @Heros

    This Pravda article was once again a frustrating read because it once again tries to dance around difficult issues while minimizing offense to jews.

    When presenting controversial material, IMHO it is best to minimize offense to everyone, so that the material can speak for itself. Do not give one’s opponents an excuse to label the article as anti-semitic or anti anything else. Do not give them an excuse to avoid thinking about the subject matter. Present the facts.

    I think the American Pravda series strikes the right tone, and each article surprises me with vital historical information that has been memory-holed.

    • Replies: @Heros
  169. @Scipio Africanus

    I don’t think the West will fall, but it will certainly weaken relative to China and East Asia at large. I feel like the Chinese are the most able to see through Jewish shenanigans and also most politically able to openly talk about it. There is a benefit from being half isolated from Western culture. It’s perfectly okay in China to be like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yang_Rui#Controversy. This is coming from the host of the most prominent English news show of CCTV, China’s virtual TV monopoly. Chinese businessmen can openly say that Jews are the types to do whatever they can to get ahead, scruples be damned. I used to much admire, to a great extent blindly, Jewish achievement, especially in science. I still do to a great extent. But now I think they are overrated, especially in terms of raw ability. It’s the combination of higher raw ability and being a privileged minority group within elite Western culture. Nowadays, in the US it’s the East Asian kids winning the 100% meritocratic contests at the high school level, where there is basically zero, human promotion subjective factor. Moreover, from the 40s on, the Japanese more or less held their own vis-a-vis the Jews in theoretical physics. Yukawa, Tomonaga, Nambu, Maskawa, Kobayashi all won Nobel, and their work arguably exceeded that of the typical physics theory Nobel, as there was still some bias in the committee, against Soviets, against Japanese. The more mathematical and theoretical and loaded on individual brilliance the field, the better East Asians have done. My non-Jewish white friend who placed at the top in elite math contests shocked me by suggesting that in terms of biological intelligence, East Asians may actually be higher than Jews are.

  170. @Cyrano

    ‘…If anybody ever benefited from the Bolshevik revolution – it was the workers in the west, primarily US.

    The October revolution forced the capitalists to make concessions to the working class that they wouldn’t have otherwise made simply out of their good natured kind hearts…’

    I don’t think so. When opportunity afforded, capitalists would be just has hard-hearted and exploitative as ever: see Union Carbide knowingly virtually sentencing workers desperate for employment to death by having them drill a tunnel through dry silica at the height of the Great Depression.

    On the other hand, long-term, the restriction on immigration drove wages up; Archie Bunker was able to afford his own house and a stay-at-home wife on a forklift driver’s salary, and that wasn’t a TV fantasy. By 1970, it was a reality — and American workers were hardly vulnerable to Communist propaganda.

    But opening up the floodgates to immigration did away with that. Now we’re back to masses of desperate, suitably docile workers.

    It’s immigration, not fear of communism. Reduce the supply of labor; conditions for the working man improve. Increase the supply of labor; they decline. This has been true since at least the Enclosure movement.

    • Replies: @Cyrano
  171. @Wizard of Oz

    Why do you think that naming a wing after oneself in a museum or university or hospital, is an expression of ‘gratitude‘? It’s an expression of economic power, and is self-serving.

    “Charity vampires” are a thing: they’re the people who draw a $500k/yr salary, and first-class travel and accom, from the proceeds of earnest-but-naïve ‘chuggers’ who collect loose change from earnest-but-naïve citizens.

    The notion that $2500-a-plate (and upwards) ‘charity dinners/galas/events’ exist to raise money for ‘charity’, is marketing aimed at rubes. Such events exist in order for people to rub shoulders with each other, in tax-deductible ways that specifically exclude hoi polloi (because the price of entry is far too high).

    The only thing more likely to fund the lives of an economic vampire than a self-styled ‘charity’, is a self-styled ‘foundation’.

    (Note – this is all completely independent of the ethnocultural background of the vampire in question: Gentile, Joo, and Musselman too… there are parasitic sociopaths in all human societies, and they find the easiest grifts – ‘charity’ and politics chief among them).

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Wizard of Oz
  172. @iffen

    Claiming that a New York banker financed communist revolutionaries seems rather implausible to me…all the more so at a time when Czarism had already been overthrown and legal discrimination against bourgeois Jews like Schiff had just been removed by the new liberal government in Russia.
    The situation in 1917 was very unlike that in 1904/05, and supporting the Bolsheviks would have been much more extreme than supporting Japan (which was then a British ally; public opinion in the US and Britian had been pro-Japan during the Russo-Japanese war).
    I can’t think of any plausible reason why Schiff would have supported the Bolsheviks (apart from completely irrational hatred of Russia…or did he want to support his old home country Germany in WW1 and help Russia knock out of the war?). If he had wanted to make Russia ripe for exploitation by Jewish finance as Unz seems to insinuate with his vague hints about “Jewish exploitation”, there surely would have been more fitting ways than supporting communist revolution.
    But yes, I suppose expecting an answer to those questions here is probably futile.

  173. jsm says:
    @jsm

    I simply asked a question. I didn’t MAKE any assertions to knowing what goes on in jews’ minds. YOU did.
    So, what make YOU an expert?

    Stop trying to deflect. That’s a jewy thing to do. If you have reason to know, then present it. If you don’t and you’re pulling stuff outta yer ass, then own up to.

  174. @German_reader

    Money. They paid him back plus.

  175. Frankie P says:
    @Verymuchalive

    The fundamental difference that you are ignoring is that although China was conquered, its strength as a true civilizational state subsumed the conquerers, who acquiesed and became Chinese culturally.
    Ron is absolutely correct: China is the world’s oldest continuous civilization. Perhaps the greatest weakness in the attitudes and policies of the west towards China is viewing China as a nation state instead of as a civilizational state.

  176. Seraphim says:
    @Anonymous

    Before one reads the ‘damn thing’ I recommend to peruse a site less frequented:

    “Neither Aryan Nor Jew This site is for serious researchers of the “higher tribalism” (Aryanism, Zionism, Nihonism etc), Globalization and World [email protected] http://mailstar.net/index.html.

    It covers all the topics in discussion here. The author is in correspondence with Israel Shamir.
    Subject-indexes:
    “Higher Tribalism” after the demise of the Nation-State
    Aryanism (European Tribalism) & Western Civilization
    Globalization & World Government
    Zionism (Jewish Tribalism) And/Or Communism
    Nihonism (Japanese Tribalism) & Asian Civilization
    Australiana
    especially ‘The Protocols of Zion [email protected]://mailstar.net/toolkit.html for an extensive discussion about the authenticity.

  177. Anonymous[199] • Disclaimer says:
    @German_reader

    What if his motive was to weaken the Russian people?

  178. John King says:

    Some people on this list will be familiar with the name of Benjamin Freedman and his 1961 speech at the Willard Hotel on youtube, where he talks about the origins of the Balfour Declaration.

    One of the things that he mentions is that he was one of the Jewish delegates to the Paris Peace Talks, where Palestine was handed over to the British and the Jews staked their claim, armed with the letter from Balfour to Rothschild. In part, this is how he reassures his audience that he knows what he is talking about.

    If you pop over to Wikipedia, you can read about Freedman here:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_H._Freedman

    However, you will note that the first 35 years of his life are missing, with discussion of his activities only beginning in 1925, with his partnership in a dermatological institute and the Woodbury Soap Company.

    Since so much turns on this point, I am curious whether anyone can definitively answer the question: Was Benjamin Freedman a member of the Jewish delegation to the Paris Peace Talks?

  179. @Wizard of Oz

    Lutheranism and Judaism are both the same philosophic0-theological system. They are both materialist Dualisms. The devils are all nasty to each other because it is in their nature, aren’t they?

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  180. @Charlie Wyoming

    Landowners throughout history have been pogromed as well, oftentimes alongside the Jews who were their tax farmers, estate managers etc.

    Isn’t it the evidence of Anti-Landownerism?

    • Replies: @Anon
  181. jsm says:

    Ron, my heartfelt thank you for being one Jew who IS doing what us Gentiles have begged for for so long:

    Explaining to your own ethnicity why the Jews need to clean up their act.

    We’ve tried. They won’t listen to us. Us, they mock, they call us insane, “anti-Semites” who’ve gone nutso, claiming we’re just making up bizarre stories. Thank you, thank you, for doing it. They might LISTEN to you!

    Ron, continue to tell them, knock it off with the anti-White propaganda, the pushing for mass immigration of hostile non-Whites, and the economy manipulating.

    Keep telling American Jews to stop themselves, before we White Americans of Christian Heritage are forced to take care of the Jewish Question ourselves — for the umpity-umphth- time. We don’t wanna “go there” — and neither do the American Jews want us to, I should think.

    Tell them, stop it all now, clean up the mess you’ve made, and if you do, it’s likely we can probably come to a modus vivendi without bloodshed or expulsion.

    Ron, tell them, if they DON’T do it now, if they leave it to us, it’s gonna end badly –just like every time prior.

    Keep telling them, Ron. Head off what’s coming!!

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @mcohen
  182. Ron Unz says:
    @CanSpeccy

    For God’s sake read Strunk and White, or if you have, follow Strunk’s rule: “eliminate unnecessary words”: all those damn intensifiers — very, actually, entirely, somewhat, rather importantly, extremely, considerably, exactly, etc.

    Sure, that’s an extremely valid criticism. But an even stronger one would be the fact that the entire first section dealing with China has absolutely no connection to the topic of the article. Furthermore, the beginning of the second section, mostly dealing with Russian-German relations, is also largely irrelevant.

    However, there’s a reason, whether right or wrong, for all three of those things.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @CanSpeccy
    , @Mike P
    , @Anon
  183. Svigor says:

    One week after the Evil Judaism article we get an article about the Jewish Bolsheviks!

    Fucking Based! Ron Unz for Fuhrer!

    Okay, sorry, I’ll stop now.

    (I just started listening to the Merchant Minute guy. Love that dude.)

    • Replies: @Wally
  184. Ron Unz says:
    @German_reader

    I can’t think of any plausible reason why Schiff would have supported the Bolsheviks (apart from completely irrational hatred of Russia…or did he want to support his old home country Germany in WW1 and help Russia knock out of the war?). If he had wanted to make Russia ripe for exploitation by Jewish finance as Unz seems to insinuate with his vague hints about “Jewish exploitation”, there surely would have been more fitting ways than supporting communist revolution.

    Well, I did provide the sources that made those specific claims, and included their own explanations. The editor of the Times of London, one of the leading international journalists of his era, specifically says that Schiff and the other Jewish bankers backed the Jewish Bolsheviks so that they could exploit Russia, and US Military Intelligence said the same thing, while Schiff’s grandson described the financial commitment decades later.

    What do I know?— I wasn’t there! But if all those seemingly credible contemporary sources said it, then maybe it’s actually true. How do any of us know anything about the world? Just read the sources I provided and decide for yourself.

    • Replies: @German_reader
    , @utu
  185. I wonder if the computer scientist mentioned in the article is John McCarthy, the AI pioneer, and a Stanford Professor.

    I’ve never known that he was Jewish.

  186. Ron Unz says:

    Incidentally, I just came across a very interesting point relating both to the topic of this article and also my previous one. An eminent American historian noted that Britain’s very famous Jewish-born Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli always greatly emphasized racial issues, and given his enormous prominence, may have been the single most influential 19th century advocate of that ideological perspective.

    Furthermore, in one of his most famous novels, he’d apparently promoted the existence of a vast and secret international organization of powerful Jews bent on dominating the world.

    Given that Disraeli was at the height of his political influence right around the time the Protocols was written, I can’t think of a more plausible inspiration for that document.

  187. @Ron Unz

    The editor of the Times of London, one of the leading international journalists of his era, specifically says that Schiff and the other Jewish bankers backed the Jewish Bolsheviks

    I looked Wickham-Steed’s memoirs up on the archive.org page you linked to. There are only three mentions of Jacob Schiff, and Wickham-Steed doesn’t give any sources, so those claims are hard to evaluate. As far as I can tell, it also isn’t about financial support for the Bolsheviks, but about diplomatic relations/recognition of the Bolsheviks.

    Schiff’s grandson described the financial commitment decades later.

    I tried to look up this New York Journal-American, but it doesn’t seem to be digitized anywhere and only available on microfilm, so again, hard to evaluate.
    I’m not saying it’s impossible Jacob Schiff played some role regarding the Russian revolution(s), but the material presented here is pretty meagre. More research would be needed.

  188. Sparkon says:
    @Bill

    Birchers were quite philo-semitic.

    Quite right.

    In 1966, Prof Revilo Oliver (now deceased), who was co-founder (with eleven others) of the Birch Society and Associate Editor of its major organ, American Opinion, discovered that Robert Welch, the JBS’s principal founder, was controlled by Jews, the purpose of said control being to harmlessly absorb and deflect the energy and money of patriotic Americans who wished to fight the ‘international communist conspiracy’, while leaving unmolested the Jewish-led conspiracy against America and Western civilization.

    Introductory note:
    The John Birch Society — Exposed!
    By John “Birdman” Bryant

    http://www.thebirdman.org/Index/NetLoss/NetLoss-Oliver.html

    I found Birdman’s article from a link provided by David Martin “DC Dave” in his article
    Is the Birch Society a Zionist Front?

  189. Anon[846] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz

    Well I wish you to keep using as many adverbs, inte sifiers, and whatever you want to hse in your writing.

  190. Wally says:
    @Svigor

    So then, how do you explain the fact that Jews have been pushing their ’6,000,000′ lie since at least 1823?
    And yes, you should stop now, you’re making a fool of yourself. http://www.codoh.com

    https://imgur.com/a/0LFFF

    and:
    http://balder.org/judea/New-York-Times-Six-Million-Jews-Since-1869.php

    • Replies: @Svigor
  191. iffen says:
    @German_reader

    Come on GR, just get with the narrative. These questions and facts just muck it up.

  192. Anonymous[155] • Disclaimer says:
    @Kratoklastes

    Good point. That said, Jewish interest in politics (managing the livestock of host populations) is pronounced.

  193. Tim too says:

    “The extent to which established historical facts can appear or disappear from the world should certainly force all of us to become very cautious in believing anything we read in our standard textbooks, let alone what we absorb from our more transient electronic media.”

    Dr. Unz!, this is a caption for your site.

    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
  194. Anon[199] • Disclaimer says:
    @siberiancat

    Landowners throughout history have been pogromed as well, oftentimes alongside the Jews who were their tax farmers, estate managers etc.

    Do you have a citation or at least some examples to mention?

  195. @German_reader

    And anyway, I don’t know why one should attribute much credibility to this Wickham-Steed character. He was just a journalist, and journalists mostly aren’t reliable (something this American Pravda series acknowledges regarding contemporary journalism).
    He also seems to have been intensely Germanophobic, so something must have been deeply wrong with his judgement anyway.

    • Replies: @iffen
  196. iffen says:
    @German_reader

    He was just a journalist, and journalists mostly aren’t reliable (something this American Pravda series acknowledges regarding contemporary journalism).

    But if you have the decoder ring, you can read the Jew York Times every day for years and “know” which writers to trust.

  197. Anonymous[155] • Disclaimer says:
    @jsm

    I’m sorry but this situation won’t be solved amicably. It can’t.

    Learn your history and try to not disappoint your ancestors (clue: it’s a river of blood and that’s the only reason you were born).

    Spreading the truth is absolutely crucial now but that, alone, won’t fix the problem.

  198. Zimriel says:

    ‘The Protocols’ is a lie. A czarist plagiary of Maurice Joly’s (excellent) broadside against Napoleon III. Frankly I am amazed that you did not know this, Mr Unz; it casts some doubt that you did not know the Dearborn Independent, either.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    , @Svigor
  199. mcohen says:
    @German_reader

    German reader

    More research lol

  200. @Ron Unz

    “An insurrection takes place against tradition and aristocracy, against religion and property. Destruction of the Semitic principle, extirpation of the Jewish religion, whether in the Mosaic or in the Christian form, the natural equality of man and the abrogation of property, are proclaimed by the secret societies who form provisional governments, and men of Jewish race are found at the head of every one of them. The people of God co-operate with atheists; the most skilful accumulators of property ally themselves with communists; the peculiar and chosen race touch the hand of all the scum and low castes of Europe! And all this because they wish to destroy that ungrateful Christendom which owes to them even its name, and whose tyranny they can no longer endure. When the secret societies, in February 1848, surprised Europe, they were themselves surprised by the unexpected opportunity, and so little capable were they of seizing the occasion, that had it not been for the Jews, who of late years unfortunately have been connecting themselves with these unhallowed associations, imbecile as were the governments the uncalled-for outbreak would not have ravaged Europe. But the fiery energy and the teeming resources of the children of Israel maintained for a long time the unnecessary and useless struggle. If the reader throws over the provisional governments of Germany, and Italy, and even of France, formed at that period, he will recognize everywhere the Jewish element.”

    -Benjamin Disraeli, 1852

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  201. renfro says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    The Aschberg Diamond—from the Crown Jewels of Russia

    Olof Aschberg clamed he bought the diamond in 1934, when a Russian trade delegation visited Stockholm during that year.
    I seriously doubt he ‘bought’ it….a lot of valuables ‘fell off the truck’ and into the hands of those like Aschberg as the Bolsheviks looted Russia.

    • Replies: @utu
  202. JackOH says:
    @Anonymous

    199, thanks. Credit where it’s due, and Ron is doing a great job. I’ve “sold” Unz Review to a few junior faculty at my local state university, and they’re still talking to me. I’m convinced a good, successful political faction could be founded based on some common themes here, but most folks aren’t ready for that yet.

    BTW-the late Hugh Hefner used to occasionally write something under the heading, “What Kind of Man Reads Playboy?” (Hope my memory isn’t confecting stuff.) I’m not sure if the essays had a strong statistical content, but they were complimentary of the readers, and helped induce a bit of solidarity between readers and the editors and writers. Maybe Ron could consider something similar, although I haven’t a clue how to do it with a Web pub.

  203. @Anonymous

    In its most simplistic description, it’s nationalism vs. globalism. Nationalists want borders and respect of property rights; globalists want no borders, sharing of everything and to pack more people in to sell more widgets to. Nationalists want to build homes; globalists want to build housing. It’s just a different and competing set of values.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  204. @Jon Halpenny

    Talk about no permanent enemies! What would veterans of the Crimean War have said? Given the situation Britain got itself into with the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate one wonders whether Albion Perfide, under pressure, would have found ways if avoiding any such “promise”.

    • Replies: @Jon Halpenny
  205. @refl

    Well my point 2. goes most of the way but, at this point, I find it difficult to imagine any expectation – as opposed to wishful thinking – of an imminent collapse by both Germany and Russia. By April 1915 Germany had hold of a big slice of France and had inflicted huge defeats on the Russians at ? Tannenberg and ? the Masurian Lakes. Sorry, my memory of events iver 100 years ago is getting patchy.

    • Replies: @refl
  206. Weird Wizard of Oz said: “Indeed were there any attempts being made to proselytize for Judaism?”

    Hi Wiz,

    Fyr, linked below is a September 2013 Veterans Today article by Kevin Barrett.

    Uh…, Did Jewish proselytization of Egypt begin before or after the Camp David Agreement?

    https://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/09/16/al-sisi-jew/

    (Zigh) Is there anything that the washed-up Wizard knows that he ain’t said?

    • Replies: @Anon
  207. utu says:
    @renfro

    The artwork and jewelry to be stolen was already on the lists with names of buyers before the looting gangs went after museums in Bagdad in 2003 the moment Americans entered Bagdad. I would not be surprised that similar targeted looting to the order was happening in Russia.

    • Replies: @renfro
  208. @Ron Unz

    Given that Dizzie was one of my boyhood heroes after reading André Maurois’ biography of him I thought I remembered his dates as a bit early for the Protocols – first published in 2003. Indeed he died in 1881 but now I commend the Wikipedia article on the Protocols despite its uncompromising branding of them as an anti-Semitic fabrication.

    What is interesting is the characterisation of them as plagiarism upon plagiarism. The train of plagiarisms is given, with links. Whether or not Thorfinnsson’s quote is genuine it seems reasonable to put Disraeli, especially as novelist, into a well known mystery thriller tradition of the times. The Sherlock Holmes stories and John Buchan’s “39 Steps”, Erskine Childers’ “The Riddle of the Sands” etc aren’t too far away in some aspects. Just add a twist of anti-Semitism to flavour the sinister foreigners theme.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    , @Anon
  209. @Thorfinnsson

    Not implausible but can you firm up the source to somewhere 100 per cent trustworthy?

    • Replies: @for-the-record
  210. What has always confused me is why the US-ZOG government, Wall st bankers use the CIA to go into all of the Socialist/Communist countries in Latin America to overthrow them. All the mass murder and brutal torture that takes place against dissidents in these coups are very similar to what I read about the Bolshevik rev. Seems like its the same players.
    If the same Bankers and their enforcers the CIA supported/funded the Commie Bolshevik Rev., why do they fight so hard against supposedly Commie/Socialist govts in Latin America, Vietnam too I guess. Seems that it really isn’t about the system itself, but about control.

    One thing that crosses my mind is maybe the Bolshevik rev. was basically like the Wall St./CIA adventures in Latin America, the death squads, sounds a lot like what happend in the Bolshevik Rev.
    Even the Syria war seems similar, it isn’t a civil war like we hear from the MSM, its US/Saudi/Israeli backed mercenaries from foreign countries.
    So were the Bolsheviks really Commies? Or were they just Capitalists playing a part, to go in and take control of Russia and loot its resources. Like CIA/Wall St. is now doing in Syria. Probably Iran next. Working on Venezuela because they want to control their oil as well.
    So who do you blame for the mass murder? The capitalists? Or the supposed Commie that was financed by the capitalist? It just seems to me that capitalism/wall st is the usury that is forbidden by the bible. Capitalism is the love of money, profit is all that matters, if people have to die or be oppressed so be it. I think American history proves this, what other country murders more than America? Look at the payday loans, title pawns, debt based society we live in, anyone that really believes the politicians who allow this usury are true Christians is beyond brainwashed.

    I don’t know what the solution is, no system will work with the bastards we have in power now still in control. I lean more to the socialist side, the international corporations should not be able to exploit all of our resources and not give anything back to the country. The monopolies and corruption should be punished not rewarded. But for any system to work we have to have an honest government, that cares about its citizens.
    The Jewish people should really be speaking out on the same things white Americans are speaking out on, the overwhelming influence of Zionist/supremacist Jews, anyone can see they are sowing the seeds of their own destruction, digging their own graves. You just can’t act the way they act and expect to get away with it for too long. Maybe the Albert Pike thing about the three world wars is accurate, sure seems like it, they really do seem to be begging for a war to end all wars, destruction of Israel/Palestine, its almost like they want truly people to hate them. I think a lot of Jews/Israelis are just as brainwashed as some Americans though, they’ve been taught to hate. These types should never be in positions of power or influence.
    Good article, lots of questions remain for me. Wish I had more time to research all these events.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Anonymous
  211. utu says:
    @Ron Unz

    If he had wanted to make Russia ripe for exploitation by Jewish finance as Unz seems to insinuate with his vague hints about “Jewish exploitation”, there surely would have been more fitting ways than supporting communist revolution.

    Good people can’t imagine real evil. At best they may try to explain to themselves that 2003 war in Iraq was because of greed of oil companies or because of Hussain trying to sell oils for Euros instead of dollars. They can’t comprehend that the real objective was to destroy the country and its infrastructure and to bring chaos and fraternal and sectarian fighting that can be fueled forever by supporting the weaker faction against the stronger faction that may reunify the country. Yes, the profit is necessary but it is not the objective of the 1st tier.

    http://www.unz.com/article/tracing-the-rush-to-war/#comment-2291549

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Anonymous
    , @Wizard of Oz
  212. “Richard Nixon casually spoke in private of the difficulty he and other anti-Communist investigators had faced in trying to focus on Gentile targets since nearly all of the suspected Soviet spies were Jewish”

    As a child in England in the 70s, I’m old enough to remember how universally Nixon was abhorred. And as time passes it becomes increasingly clear that, for all his faults and crimes, he was the last serious man to be president.

    After him we have had a succession of puppets and clowns.

  213. Anon[408] • Disclaimer says:
    @ChuckOrloski

    Well you are clearly not WEIRD and, as one of the deficiencies is clearly in education it perhaps should not come as a surprise that

    (a) you do not understand the primary and usual meaning of proselytize – indeed the only meaning that could have been intended in context

    (b) you cite veteranstoday as a source.

  214. Anon[297] • Disclaimer says:
    @utu

    Gnosis is the reigning heresy of our times. It was also the first, the one with which  Lucifer tempted Eve: “eat this, and you shall be like Gods”. 
    In stark contrast to other heresies, which are simply mistaken understandings of truths or Truth, gnosis starts out with a lie: the lie that there exists a hidden trove of knowledge, reserved for a select few. Those blessed few initiates will and then evolve, not through acts of the will, but by sheer knowing. They will become superior, perfect, deified. Essentially, man shares nature with God, the difference is of degree.  Gnosis is a deliberate lie, that springs up recurrently, in many places, in many religions, with modern pagans and atheists too. Lucifer knew it as well as any present day con-man with an ‘enhanced consciousness’ seminar to sell.

    It’s interesting that the Kabbalah, gnostic as you please, is a perversion of the original oral tradition of the Old Testament, through contamination during the Egyptian and Babylonian captivities. The original contained insights about a transcendent God, including a presaging of the Holy Trinity, that are consistent with the truths taught by Christ. 

    Gnosis is all around us: in New Age movements, Kabbalah, Freemasonry, Wicca, ‘human potential’ sects and institutes. Depak Chopra and the Esalen Institute. There’s really no such thing as truth, except the one I can sell you. It even, I think, underpins theories that explains to the masses how the world really works, like Marxism and de constructivism, but those enlightened fellows generously chose to unveil the eyes of a wider public.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
  215. Anonymous[199] • Disclaimer says:
    @Winnetou1889

    Interesting. And you think that’s what was going on then, too?

    • Replies: @Winnetou1889
  216. Anonymous[199] • Disclaimer says:
    @redmudhooch

    What has always confused me is why the US-ZOG government, Wall st bankers use the CIA to go into all of the Socialist/Communist countries in Latin America to overthrow them. All the mass murder and brutal torture that takes place against dissidents in these coups are very similar to what I read about the Bolshevik rev. Seems like its the same players.

    Nationalism versus globalism. Many of those socialist/communist countries had a strong sense of national identity, or at least were relatively independent of the globalist US empire.

  217. anon[265] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    For lack of strength? The British Empire was at the time at the peak of its strenghth, the word’s superpower. In 1919, they sent 100,000 men, of all places of the world, into Afghanistan. Was there any “democratic mandate”?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Anglo-Afghan_War

    Just like in Syria and other places, the “intervention” was calculated to prolong the war as much as possible, for maximal death and destruction. It worked then, and it still works.

  218. Anon[199] • Disclaimer says:
    @utu

    Very interesting observation. One relatively insignificant detail that nonetheless stands in support of the theory is the way the United States turned a blind eye to all the looting and destruction of Iraqi cultural and historical artifacts. It was as if the people behind the invasion wanted to destroy Iraqi (or at least Sunni) group identity.

    • Replies: @utu
  219. Seraphim says:
    @Colin Wright

    That all states make preparations for war and calculations about the chances of winning it is a truism. The real problem is the real intentions underlying these preparations. There is not an exact equivalence between preparations for offense and preparations for defense.

    Germany was not a ‘satisfied power’ at that time. On the contrary. Her building of a High Seas Fleet was not a ‘gratuitous provocation’ but an assertion of her pretensions to be given ‘a place in the Sun’, rather at the table of the big spoliators of the world, of England in the first place. Unimpeded control of Russia’s resources (particularly of its oil resources, but also of the newly discovered oil fields of Iran and Mesopotamia) was practically an imperative in view of the lack of internal ones (the more in the conditions of the conversion of the British Navy to oil, which multiplied its advantage over the German upstart fleet). The High Seas Fleet was a mistake, here Germany was punching above her weight.
    German professors started talking in terms of Germany “fulfilling a world mission” by virtue of that ‘fitting share of the world power which human nature and higher Providence assign to the civilised peoples’ which her army and navy would ensure for her. Against the ‘cultural monopoly of the Anglo- Saxons’ (Britain and America) and the ‘Russo-Muscovite world’ they called for a policy which should make Germany’s special cultural and political heritage safe and thereby guarantee at once the multiplicity and individuality of all peoples and the balance of power in a new world system of states”. This ‘world mission’ could not have been successfully fulfilled without a solid European economic basis under German leadership. Clamors for ‘Lebensraum’ for the young and energetic German nation became louder, sustained by the intoxicating fumes of ‘European cultural superiority’.

    As a matter of fact Russia was the ‘satisfied power’, essentially preoccupied with her internal development. Russia had more than enough ‘Lebensraum’ of her own and she was not after any external conquests. Russia was the first power in the world to ask for a limitation of the crazy arms race that gripped the ‘civilized’ world, Germany in the first place. It was the steady refusal of Germany to reduce armaments that compelled Russia to initiate her program of modernizing her army and not any fanciful ‘Slavophile pretensions’. Russia’s protection for the Orthodox peoples in the Ottoman Empire (not only Slavs, actually primarily Romanians and Greeks) was a policy inscribed in the peace treaties concluded with the Ottoman Empire since the 18th century. It was not only a moral obligation. Russia’s ‘ambitions to control the Straits’ was in fact a policy meant to keep them open for her trade and to prevent a repetition of the Crimean war. The Black Sea was not given by God to the English merchants and Light Brigades.
    The famous ‘Damascus speech’ of Kaiser Wilhelm, his casting himself as the ‘protector’ of the ’300 million Mohamedans’ in the world ‘at all times’, and the building of the Berlin-Baghdad railway couldn’t have but raise Russian and British alarms.

    And it must be remembered that it was Germany seconded by Austria who renounced all the security agreements with Russia, foolishly and irresponsibly not heading the warnings of Bismarck.
    Serbia’s ‘belligerence against everyone’? What about the annexation of Bosnia-Hertzegovina by Austria?

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  220. Anonymous[155] • Disclaimer says:
    @utu

    Good post.

  221. I bought a copy of The Protocols and read it about a year ago. I was struck by the same thing Ron was, how anti climactic it was. Given its fearsome reputation I was expecting to hear stories of Jews dining on goy babies but it reads more like the plans for a corporate takeover of a company or CIA plans to take over a small nation.

    And that, to me, makes it even more chilling and believable.

    • Replies: @Rod1963
  222. Mr. Hack says:
    @Anon

    Gnosis is all around us: in New Age movements, Kabbalah, Freemasonry, Wicca, ‘human potential’ sects and institutes. Depak Chopra and the Esalen Institute.

    Indeed. One would have to put transhumanism squarely within this macro mold too. This movement got its impetus from the likes of Julian Huxley and Arthur C. Clark and perhaps inadvertently by Clark’s confidente, Robert Heinlein. All humanistic attempts to try to deal with and alleviate the maladies associated with life and life extension itself. Obviously an atheistic philosophy. True deification can only proceed from the teachings of Christ.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  223. @Godfree Roberts

    ‘Did you read the critique, Ron’s link?’

    I scanned it. It seemed to rely on (a) an a priori assumption that Mao was a wise and benevolent leader, and (b) a belief that Edgar Snow could be relied upon to give a clear-eyed and objective appraisal of the situation. This is a bit like consulting Hitler and Goebbels in 1943 and concluding that Germany’s got it in the bag.

    Conversely, Tombstone is a carefully researched and painstakingly reasoned book that leads inexorably to the conclusion that while no exact total can even be established, the number was indeed in the region of thirty five million deaths plus forty million fewer births.

  224. utu says:
    @Anon

    Looting was done by lower lever operators who were prepared in advance and probably had lists of things to be looted and names of buyers who were ready to pay for the items. Nothing was left to chance. It was not spontaneous because of chaos. Looting began the moment Americans entered Bagdad.

    • Replies: @Anon
  225. mcohen says:
    @jsm

    Hey man i feel your pain but instead of blaming the jews why not do something to stop the migration.go down to to the border and physically ask those non white people to go home.dont forget to take your leatherman.

  226. Anonymous[199] • Disclaimer says:
    @German_reader

    If he had wanted to make Russia ripe for exploitation by Jewish finance as Unz seems to insinuate with his vague hints about “Jewish exploitation”, there surely would have been more fitting ways than supporting communist revolution

    Such as what?

  227. Ron Unz says:
    @Colin Wright

    I scanned it. It seemed to rely on (a) an a priori assumption that Mao was a wise and benevolent leader, and (b) a belief that Edgar Snow could be relied upon to give a clear-eyed and objective appraisal of the situation. This is a bit like consulting Hitler and Goebbels in 1943 and concluding that Germany’s got it in the bag.

    Actually, I’ll admit I didn’t find Godfree Roberts’s article too convincing, but the long comment-thread led me to a couple of other sources that raised some serious doubts in my mind. I’ll freely admit I haven’t read Tombstone, and it’s very possible that book would settle those doubts.

    • Replies: @BillyBob
  228. @Kratoklastes

    As my last paragraph indicates I don’t say you are substantially wrong but I think you perhaps overstate your case though I expect you know the US, especially NYC and LA situation much better than I.

  229. @Seraphim

    ‘Germany was not a ‘satisfied power’ at that time…’

    I feel that your points about Germany have some validity; after all, I am not claiming that Germany was blameless, merely that she was no more to blame than others.

    On the other hand, you appear to grant legitimacy to the most extravagant Russian claims. You would grant her domination of the entire Balkan peninsula and control of ‘the straits’ — which would happen to be the core of the Ottoman Empire. That’s a bit like deciding Turkey should have title to Moscow. To get back to the immediate cause of the war, Russia had no rational reason to decide that Austria deciding to bring Serbia down a peg was any of her business; Serbia was literally hundreds of miles from the nearest Russian frontier. Why should Russia have perceived herself to have a cause for war in anything Austria did vis-a-vis Serbia?

    Finally, I note you don’t contest the role of France in all this.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    , @Epigon
  230. @ploni almoni

    If by “dualist” you refer to belief in mind (or soul) and body as separate subjects of causation in distinct spheres then I wonder why you don’t include all Christians.

  231. Ron Unz says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    I thought I remembered his dates as a bit early for the Protocols – first published in 2003. Indeed he died in 1881

    My carelessness in that comment. The Protocols supposedly first surfaced around 1895, and for some reason, I vaguely thought Disraeli was still alive at that point. But anyway, his novel I was referring to was published in the 1840s.

  232. Ron Unz says:
    @German_reader

    (1) At the time Wickham Steed wrote the 1922 memoirs I cited, the reports of Schiff’s heavy financing of the Bolsheviks hadn’t yet gotten out, which happened in 1925 I think. However, he was able to identify Schiff as a strong political backer of the Bolsheviks at the Peace Conference, which tends to strongly support those latter stories.

    (2) Regarding the New York Journal-American column, even sharp critics of the Schiff theory have never disputed its authenticity. Surely if it didn’t exist, surely someone over the years would have checked the microfilm records and exploded the hoax. Fanatic Jewish-activists types always do that sort of thing.

    (3) There seems absolutely no doubt of Schiff’s financial backing for the 1905 Revolution, as personally described by his local agent, George Kennan. Here are a couple of links (including to an NYT article), which also provide some discussion on the 1917 involvement:

    https://www.counter-currents.com/2013/10/wall-street-and-the-march-1917-russian-revolution/

    https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-Jacob-Schiff-Jewish-banker-financed-35-million-dollar-to-Lenin-and-Trotsky-for-the-purpose-of-changing-Russia-into-a-communist-state

    (4) As for Wickham Steed “just being a journalist,” well, sure. But he was Editor of The Times of London, and presumably he had lots of good sources in the diplomatic and political world. Maybe he was just lying—who knows? Maybe Schiff’s grandson was also lying. Maybe Kennan was lying. But if there’s absolutely nothing on the other side, the default assumption is generally to accept these sorts of sources.

    • Replies: @German_reader
  233. ohmy says:
    @Cyrano

    … “According to some, one of the ethnic groups that have benefited the most from the good old capitalism are the Jews.”
    “Thanks to the capitalist system, many of them have managed to become enormously rich – some would say thanks to their genetic predisposition towards greed, which of course is unique only to them”.

    The problem with the capitalist system is not capitalism per se, rather the problem is, it’s their system.
    FACT … if you’re a Jew, and in good standing with the Synagogue you may file bankruptcy in State Court, then trot right over to the local temple, and get a loan from the Tribe. Then change your name and shingle. Presto your still in business, and never missed a beat. A Jew can do this 3 times.
    If my memory is correct the check will have 3 small 6 pointed stars near the top border. If you aren’t a Jew and are unfortunate enough to file bankruptcy you’re out of luck. Just get in line with the other goyim at your local bank. The wait is about 7 years.

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
  234. Anon[199] • Disclaimer says:
    @utu

    …the way the United States turned a blind eye…

    • Replies: @utu
  235. @Anon

    It isn’t difficult at all to fathom. (JP) Morgan’s Law: Two reasons for everything, a good reason and the real reason. More crime results in greater acceptance of repressive policing, a “security state”.

  236. Cyrano says:
    @Colin Wright

    Ever heard about the New Deal? Do you have any idea why it happened? Because the capitalists took pity on the working class in the middle of the great depression? When the same capitalists were bled dry by the recession too and could least afford to implement any generosities towards the working class?

    If it wasn’t for the communist threat, you still would be working 12 hours, six days a week, with no pensions or any kind or unemployment insurance.

    Why do you think the capitalists hated Russia so much? Because they violated the human rights of their citizens and because of the Gulag?

    Capitalist hated Russia because it forced them to be little bit more generous to the domestic servants – the working class. It’s not the communist propaganda that the capitalists were afraid of. They were afraid that the communist revolution might give some ideas to the dummies.

    Propaganda wasn’t invented by the communists anyway. It was invented by the capitalist in order to counter the appeal that communism actually did have in those days. The main function of immigration is not to control the wages, it’s to feed the continuous expansion and growth of capitalism, because the only alternative to growth in capitalism is recession, not maintenance of the same level of standard of living.

    • Replies: @Sean
    , @James Charles
  237. Ron Unz says:
    @Zimriel

    ‘The Protocols’ is a lie. A czarist plagiary of Maurice Joly’s (excellent) broadside against Napoleon III.

    Actually, the whole “plagiarism” argument seems totally ridiculous to me…

    After all, I think it extremely unlikely that the Protocols represents an actual transcript of loquacious super-villain exhaustively describing his diabolical master-place to conquer the world.

    On the other hand, if they went to outline what the author believed that people like Schiff were doing, then it’s perfectly possible various elements might have been borrowed from previous works, such as the Joly one you mention. I’d really have to compare the two texts in detail to decide how close the match might be.

  238. @Tim too

    Because it’s so catchy? I’d suggest he go with something like, “A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media”. Oh wait, he already does.

  239. Ron Unz says:
    @German_reader

    Actually, a very detailed contemporaneous discussion of Schiff’s activities which seems pretty plausible is Ford’s The International Jew, which I repeatedly linked above. Since the text is fully searchable, you can use:

    http://www.unz.com/book/henry_ford__the-international-jew/?highlight=schiff

    Once you’re in the document, you might want to search “schiff and russia” to get the parts discussing his anti-Russia activities, which seem entirely consistent with the (much less detailed) New York Times article published around the same time.

    • Replies: @German_reader
  240. Wally says:
    @Sean

    You dodged my questions to you, which were:

    If so, then what exactly did that “microfilm text” say?

    And citation, please.

    • Replies: @Sean
  241. Weaver1 says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Just as a general statement, controlling the culture and history of a people is powerful. How Jews have acted as a group here, I couldn’t say, but charity of this sort isn’t necessarily helpful.

    Medical research and hospitals sound incorruptible.

  242. Svigor says:
    @Wally

    WTF are you talking about you lunatic? Do you even know?

    • Replies: @Wally
  243. Anonymous[199] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz

    What do you see as the menu of possibilities (within reason) with respect to what the document is:

    A. Authentic strategy document from a Jewish group
    B. Outsider parody of Jewish behavior
    C. Outsider attempt to describe certain Jewish behavior and to educate
    D. Attempt to teach governing strategies, with relative indifference to the actor (Jews being arbitrary)
    E. Outsider hoax to cast Jews in a bad light
    F. Plagiarized (by whom?) document (of whom?)
    G. ???

    And which do you consider most plausible?

  244. Tyrion 2 says: • Website

    Sure, Unz. One Jewish banker trying his luck and attempting to make money off a revolution is crucial to world undertanding, but the military invasion of the Soviet Union in order to topple the Bolshevik government by the British Empire, Czechoslovakia, France, Greece, Japan, Italy, Serbia, America and even China gets absolutely no mention.

    It must be a strange feeling to think that Schiff’s relatively minor lending to an emerging market was the decisive factor in the defeat of those forces.

  245. @Colin Wright

    It relies on data. What a concept.

  246. Rod1963 says:
    @Johnny Smoggins

    That was my impression after reading it as well.

    The people who wrote it certainly knew a lot about social engineering which leads me to think it was not written by some crank in a basement but by those whose job it is monitor nations and peoples, and to manipulate them. IOW intelligence agents. Probably British given they had a world wide spy network at the time.

  247. utu says:
    @Anon

    …the way the United States turned a blind eye…

    Have Pillaged Iraqi Artifacts Ended Up in a Museum in Israel?

    https://richardedmondson.net/2015/03/12/have-pillaged-iraqi-artifacts-ended-up-in-a-museum-in-israel/

    Ancient artifacts seized in Jerusalem in Hobby Lobby antiquities case

    https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/01/middleeast/antiquities-arrests-jerusalem/index.html

  248. @utu

    There remain unresolved puzzles despite the elements of truth in your post. It goes without saying that Israel saw it as in its interests for the ME to be Balkanised. Iraq was seen as dangerous despite it’s being under minority rule (if not as extreme as in Syria). But it must surely have occurred to those egging on the neocons and those they influenced who really thought they could democratize the ME that Iran might be given a lift to unwelcome dominance. Surely?

    Then the establishment of a Kurdish state that would prima facie be a friend seems a worthwhile goal – and one consistent with Iraq remaining destabilized by conflict between Shia and Sunni Arabs. But on the face of it the US has been for keeping all of Iraq united in one state.

    US oil interests – pre the fracking breakthroughs – would hardly want Iraq to remain in chaos and, indeed, the US must rationally have wanted to be able to show that its interventions worked for prosperity and peace. So….

    I am not sure that any major force was in favour of the permanently manipulable failed state condition you posit.

  249. Jacob Schiff funded the Japanese in the Russo-Japanese war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Schiff#National_loans

  250. @Ron Unz

    ‘Actually, the whole “plagiarism” argument seems totally ridiculous to me…’

    What I find improbable isn’t the notion that individuals such as Schiff may have financed Communist revolution, and even that they came from a culture where such activities would be seen as good, so much as I doubt the notion that there was a conscious, organized conspiracy — that has never been clearly caught out.

    One thinks of Mitt Romney’s ’49%’ remark, of Israel’s various machinations that have come rather embarassingly to light, of Nixon’s ‘secret’ bombing of Cambodia, of Katyn.

    These things have a nasty tendency to come out. Yet we’re to believe that there has been a conscious, organized kabal of Jews working to bring about some kind of anti-utopia for over a century — and no one’s spilled the beans. Ever.

    I don’t think so. I don’t think things actually work this way. I think that people tend to imagine that they do — Freemasonry, the Trilateral Commission, Roosevelt knew about Pearl Harbor, etc. It provides a nice, simple explanation for it all. Sort of a substitute for a belief in God, perhaps? There must be some guiding consciousness.

    But I just don’t think it’s that way. I don’t think reality’s that organized. It’s appallingly akin to a random walk. No one’s running the show. I think that’s actually a frightening thought. After all, if someone was in charge, we would at least be assured there was some sort of light at the end of the tunnel — even if it wasn’t one we were going to like.

    Well, maybe there isn’t a light at the end of the tunnel. There’s no plan at all, and things are just going to keep happening.

  251. Tyrion 2 says: • Website

    SJW checklist:

    Only the deplorable group have moral agency. (One American Jewish banker versus governments that literally ruled half of the world.)

    Everyone else are piteous victims who are too moral for their own good.

    The deplorable group are responsible for all bad. (Jews made Stalin)

    The default is all good. (Russia absent Jews)

    Utterly false documents speak to a larger truth if they fit SJW ideology. (Protocols of Zion)

    A basic fact of history was ignored by all until SJW ideology came along. This validates all SJW claims. (Everyone always knew that France was the dominant power that everyone else had to gang up on prior to Germany uniting.)

    It is useful to bizarrely obsess about the deplorable group as few other publications bizarrely obsess over them.

    A newspaper once published something SJW stuff agrees with, therefore it must have value.

    Also, the Protocols are hokey as it gets. Sure, if you parse to a few points you might find some coincidence but with a five minute read I found out that supposedly the great conspiracy was to implement “object lessons” in schools.

    This is what “object lessons” seem to be. And it was supposedly one of the Elders “top 4 agents” who helped introduce them to France. One of the top 4!

    What a plan! Get children to choose an object and talk about it. Ooh, the subversion! Plato’s Republic has nothing on the intellectual rigour of this text.

    http://history.powys.org.uk/school1/knighton/objects.shtml

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    , @anonymous
  252. @Wizard of Oz

    It has been speculated Britain deliberately botched the Gallipoli campaign. They sacrificed tens of thousands of soldiers to avoid their commitment to give Constantinople to Russia. If true it would give an indication of the evil nature of the British Empire. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-04-24/30630

  253. Anonymous[135] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz

    Actually, the whole “plagiarism” argument seems totally ridiculous to me…

    Yeah, it’s the absolute dumbest argument against The Protocols I can think of. Not only does the document not fit the technical definition of forgery–i.e., that it used some author’s name without permission–but it’s a criticism that misses the main point the entirely: namely, the validity of the ideas contained in the document. I mean, one might as well condemn Orwell’s 1984 for being a ‘fake’. After all, we know that Oceana never really existed, and that Winston Smith was an imaginary person, so we can safely assume that nothing similar to what is described in the book ever happened anywhere, right?

    • Agree: Ron Unz
    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
    , @renfro
  254. cassandra says:
    @Cyrano

    “The only way that it will make sense to me is that the Jews financed the October revolution because they expected that their people will get more equal treatment under that system than in Czarist Russia.”

    The simplest, most direct, strategy is to simply seize power. Why would the Jews worry about establishing favorable economic or political systems for themselves if they could wield power directly? In financial terms, why be the czar’s middleman tax collector when you can keep the take for yourself? Only catch is, how do you con the population into accepting a program which will only benefit a few %. For this it’s necessary to provide some plausible ideology, to psychologically propagandize the masses to accept what’s going on, long enough for a secret police to be established. Then control is firm, and the ideology just morphs into slogans, and when circumstances devolve, into tyrrany (this happened in Germany). The hazard is that another party might seize these levers of power, so carefully established established, in a coup. I think that is what Stalin managed, but I’m not competent to address the main problem for this scenario, namely, how did he wrest power from the Jewish cabal when they had so much international support? Perhaps Jewish control was never decisive in the first place. After all, ethnic Lithuanian Dzerzhinsky was the one who controlled the GRU and the Cheka, and Krupskaya and others maintained substantial political influence.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  255. Seraphim says:
    @Colin Wright

    I can see how hard is to ‘un-learn’ hardwired tropes like ‘Slavophils’, ‘Panslavism’, ‘Russian aggression’. Turkey couldn’t possibly have any title on Moscow, whereas the Orthodox had on Constantinople, on which the Ottomans had not.
    You instinctively think in the ‘Western’ paradigm. These countries of the ‘pesky’ Balkans don’t really exist, their history is meaningless until they are touched by ‘Europe’, their culture is non-existent, they can’t have their national aspirations. You should know that the Orthodox Serbians were in Serbia and Bosnia before any Austrian decided to bring them ‘to a peg’ or to a pig (punny reference to the ‘Pig War’ of 1906-09, you perhaps heard about it). Now, if Russia had a cause in Serbian cause it was because they were Orthodox, they fought together against the Ottoman oppressor, they have been under formal Russian protection until 1856.
    Russian foreign policy was not based on any ‘Panslavism’. Actually Panslavism was a creation of the ‘Austrian’ Slavs and it was not meant to include the Russians. Russian foreign policy was always motivated by geo-political reasons.
    Probably the Franco-Russian alliance would have never happened, had Germany not renounced the Reinsurance Treaty of 1887, negotiated by Bismarck. The dismissal of Bismarck and the renewal of the Triple Alliance in 1891 left Russia with little options.

  256. Epigon says:
    @Colin Wright

    To get back to the immediate cause of the war, Russia had no rational reason to decide that Austria deciding to bring Serbia down a peg was any of her business; Serbia was literally hundreds of miles from the nearest Russian frontier.

    Because you have exactly 0 understanding of Balkan history and affairs.

    Because you fail to realise the huge strategic importance of Belgrade overwatching Danube and Serbia controlling central Balkan peninsula, especially post-Balkan wars

    Because you have no idea on the background of 1903 coup in Serbia, nor the reality of Austro-Hungary having larger Serb population than Serbia, nor their explicite program of exploiting their Slavic provinces due to lack of overseas ones; finally, German imperialism demanded a tight control and rule of an area from Baltic to Black and Mediterranean Sea: they were so transparent in this that even “liberal theologians” like Naumann expressed those desires.

    1878 Berlin congress and 1912/1913 London conference were Germans, Austrians, French and British blocking Russian success, reanimating Ottoman corpse and furthering Austrian/German influence in the Balkans. Crimean war is telling enough.

    France and Ottomans had a century long alliance, British and French played a great part in prolonging Ottoman rule in many regions, not to mention Turkish and Kurdish atrocities against Armenians, Assyrians and Greeks.

    Drang nach Osten is dead. European Imperialism is dead. Far too late and at far too great a cost.

  257. Sean says:
    @Anonymous

    Not sarcasm, I think the 1905 Revolution was a key turning point for ending Britains isolationist policy . Before 1905 Russia was a powerful deterrent to Germany but that year Russia was in chaos, though it was obviously caused by a defeat of Russia by Japan, which was in turn contributed to by the fact that , as John Mearshiemer put it “Neither Japan nor Russia was able to gain the upper hand in Korea, mainly because Korean policymakers skillfully played the two great powers off against each other”, so there was a war, It was a bit like Britain being defeated in the battle of France in WW2, suddenly US isolationism was too risky

    The Times”s tone was that responsible people should not ignore such fake news and let it go unchallenged, because it was having a real effect on public opinion

  258. @Wizard of Oz

    Not implausible but can you firm up the source to somewhere 100 per cent trustworthy?

    Here you go! As you will see it’s from his “political biography” of Lord George Bentinck.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  259. @German_reader

    I haven’t read it, and certainly can’t vouch for the its credibiity, but a book referred to earlier (Antony Sutton, Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution) seems to make a strong case for its title. I suggest you have a look at the section “The Evidence Presented: A Synopsis” (Chapter XI) to give you a better idea of what he claims (and maintains that he has shown in the book):

    https://archive.org/stream/WallStreetTheBolshevikRevolution#page/n63/search/synopsis

    This section also provides his “Explanation for the Unholy Alliance”.

  260. Sean says:

    Lord Alfred Douglas’s* Plain English magazine claimed that Nalopeon III was sired by a Rothschild. So the protocols were about Jewish strategising. I think you can get something out of the Protocols if you take them as Salena Zito said Trump supporters take him: seriously, not literally. The Protocols are rhetoric (“Rhetoric is not the devious art of non-rational persuasion, but the best tool we have for exposing the unstated assumptions that lie behind any surface proposition. The analytic contempt for rhetoric and metaphor must not be emulated – not just because this attitude leads to boring results, but because it is philosophically false.” – Graham Harman)

    *The perils of taking it literally

    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2000/jun/04/biography
    Douglas’s public nadir came when Churchill sued him over wild allegations that he had taken part in a Jewish-financed conspiracy to have Kitchener ‘murdered’ in 1916; Douglas received a prison sentence.

  261. @German_reader

    I can’t think of any plausible reason why Schiff would have supported the Bolsheviks …

    But yes, I suppose expecting an answer to those questions here is probably futile.

    The first thing is to understand whether Schiff did indeed support the Bolsheviks, and the answer appears to be “yes”.

    Then we can try to understand his motives, which is a much more difficult problem and may be impossible to resolve. If it is hard to search for an answer here, it will be even more difficult in other contemporary discussion boards, where unwanted questions are either suppressed or shouted down.

  262. Sean says:
    @Cyrano

    Antony C. Sutton said the New Deal was supported by big business because the free market system was begining to create too much competition and business faced with ever increasing competition preferred to retreat into cartels.

    • Replies: @pogohere
  263. @Colin Wright

    ” I feel that Britain probably was the one power least responsible for the outbreak of war.”

    Here is someone that thinks that Britain was the main instigator of the war?

    Conjuring Hitler: How Britain and America Made the Third Reich
    by Guido Giacomo Preparata

  264. Seraphim says:
    @Tyrion 2

    @Jews made Stalin

    And unmade him.

  265. @Tyrion 2

    ” . . . but the military invasion of the Soviet Union in order to topple the Bolshevik government by the British Empire, Czechoslovakia, France, Greece, Japan, Italy, Serbia, America and even China gets absolutely no mention.”

    An half-hearted attempt?

    The US committed 2m troops in an attempt to defeat Germany.

    The Anglo-American forces deployed against the ‘greater evil’, the S.U., were 30,000.

    Conjuring Hitler: How Britain and America Made the Third Reich
    by Guido Giacomo Preparata

    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
  266. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @James Charles

    That they put up any force at all following WWI is truly remarkable.

  267. @Ron Unz

    I looked up your links, and found this, a letter by Schiff to the NYT from March 1917:

    https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1917/03/18/113302374.pdf

    where he expresses his joy about the February revolution (“…my joy that the Russian nation, a great and good people, have at last effected their deliverance from centuries of autocratic oppression and through an almost bloodless revolution have now come into their own”). He certainly was opposed to the Czarist system (a common sentiment among Western liberals at the time), and it seems not implausible that he supported efforts to remove it. But why should he have supported the Bolsheviks after March 1917 when Czarism had been overthrown by Western-style liberal republicans? So far, nobody here has given a satisfying answer to that imo.

    Regarding the New York Journal-American column, even sharp critics of the Schiff theory have never disputed its authenticity.

    The problem is that you cited only one sentence from this column, so it’s very hard to evaluate the context. It would be good if someone could track down the entire text and make it available. I’m unable to do so, but maybe some other reader can do it.

    But he was Editor of The Times of London

    According to Wikipedia Wickham-Steed wrote on July 31 1914 about efforts to stop British intervention in the approaching war that they were “a dirty German-Jewish international financial attempt to bully us into advocating neutrality”.
    I have serious doubt about his judgement, and he doesn’t give any sources in his memoirs for his (vague and short) claims about Schiff’s alleged pro-Bolshevik lobbying in 1919, so it’s hard to see what was the reality behind those claims.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    , @Colin Wright
    , @Anon
  268. @Ron Unz

    I skimmed through it, and only found references to Schiff’s support of Japan in the Russo-Japanese war, and other vague references to anti-Russian activities (something about trade relations during the Taft administration in 1911)…but as far as I can see nothing that is clearly about Schiff directly supporting the Bolsheviks.
    I might have to look more closely though.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  269. @Tyrion 2

    but the military invasion of the Soviet Union in order to topple the Bolshevik government

    That didn’t really happen, it’s a commie myth…as far as I know, there was no concerted allied attempt to end Bolshevism, the allies merely wanted to safeguard their own interests (e.g. preventing military supplies like munitions from falling under German control).

    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
  270. @for-the-record

    Thank you! What a discovery. An intelligent anti Semite could cause immense mischief with that and have a lot of fun at the same time ;-)

  271. Is current financial investor and commenter Peter Schiff related to Jacob Schiff?

  272. @Jon Halpenny

    Thank you. I started out thinking not even the most rabidly anti English of my Irish forebears could have believed that but ended up hoping more light could be thrown on it.

  273. Ron Unz says:
    @German_reader

    I looked up your links, and found this, a letter by Schiff to the NYT from March 1917:

    Actually, the Kennan remarks are in a different NYT article:

    https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1917/03/24/102324302.pdf

    He confirms Schiff’s crucial role in fomenting the 1905 revolution, something never mentioned in any of my standard history texts, but covered in the Ford book, which considerably enhances the credibility of the latter relative to the former.

    As I mentioned in my article, I strongly suspect that the $20M figure refers to his total funding over the decades for all Russian revolutionary activities, including both Menshevik and Bolshevik (e.g. Trotsky wasn’t really a Bolshevik until late 1917), and the difference to most outsiders would have been very obscure until later.

    Then, once the Bolsheviks took power, Wickham Steed describes Schiff as one of their crucial political backers and allies. I’m sure if the Mensheviks had won, he would have filled the same role.

    All of these remarkable facts, once widely accepted in the MSM, were totally “disappeared” from the standard history books for over 80 years, which really should give us pause.

  274. [quote]A file in the U.S. State Department, ‘Bolshevism and Judaism’, dated November 13, 1918, asserted that there could be no doubt that the ‘Jewish Firm’ Kuhn, Loeb & Company and its partners ‘started and engineered’ the revolution in Russia[/quote]

    https://firstworldwarhiddenhistory.wordpress.com/category/banking/max-warburg/

  275. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @German_reader

    Supposedly the British supplied the White Russian forces with 600,000 rifles amongst other things, but, otherwise, it seems that you’re right. The allied intervention was pretty weak. I would say that it amounted to rather more than Schiff’s moneylending though.

    This website also claims that only 1.5% of Bolshevik party members on the eve of the revolution were known to be Jewish. Does anyone know of any membership list?

    https://therebbeblog.wordpress.com/2018/04/02/the-jewish-question-answered/

    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
    , @Svigor
  276. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @Tyrion 2

    Alternatively, the Jerusalem Post reports this on leadership positions:

    The Central Committee of the USSR is instructive as an indicator of the prominence of Jews in leadership positions. In the Sixth Congress of the Bolshevik Russian Social Democratic Labor Party and its Central Committee elected in August 1917, we find that five of the committee’s 21 members were Jewish. This included Trotsky, Zinoviev, Moisei Uritsky, Sverdlov and Grigori Sokolnikov. Except for Sverdlov, they were all from Ukraine. The next year they were joined by Kamenev and Radek. Jews made up 20% of the central committees until 1921, when there were no Jews on this leading governing body.

    The high percentage of Jews in governing circles in these early years matched their percentage in urban environments, politburo member Sergo Ordzhonikidze told the 15th Congress of the party, according to Solzhenitsyn. Most Jews lived in towns and cities due to urbanization and laws that had kept them off the land.

    Jewish membership in top circles continued to decline in the 1920s. By the 11th Congress, only Lazar Kaganovich was elected to the Central Committee in 1922 alongside 26 other members. Subsequently few Jews served in these leadership positions. In 1925 there were four Jews out of 63 members. Like the rest of their comrades, almost all of them were killed in the purges. Others elected in 1927 and 1930 were shot as well, including Grigory Kaminsky, who came from a family of blacksmiths in Ukraine. With the exception of Lev Mekhlis and Kaganovich, few senior communist Jews survived the purges.

    https://www.jpost.com/Magazine/Was-the-Russian-Revolution-Jewish-514323

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  277. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @Anonymous

    People use the Protocols as some sort of evidence of Jewish conspiracy. If you used 1984 as evidence of Big Brother conspiracy you’d be carted off to the madhouse.

    • Replies: @Sean
    , @Wally
  278. @Ron Unz

    He confirms Schiff’s crucial role in fomenting the 1905 revolution

    I’m not sure he “confirms” a crucial role for the subversive activities sponsored by Schiff…Western democracy-promoters may have liked to exaggerate their own importance even back then, and there had been at least some revolutionary ferment in Russia since the 1870s or so.
    It seems to be clear that Schiff was opposed to Czarism, and his Jewish ethnicity certainly played some role in that due to the perception of Russia as the primary antisemitic power, and at least before March 1917 he sponsored some anti-Czarist activities. But that’s not the same imo as the claim that Schiff provided financial backing for the Bolshevik takeover in 1917/18.
    But thanks for posting the link to this NYT article…a fine example of American self-righteousness and the delusional nature of American democracy-worship. Some things haven’t changed at all since 1917.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Ron Unz
  279. Sean says:
    @Wally

    You could have found out for yourself by now, old mate.

  280. Sean says:
    @Tyrion 2

    Animal Farm does have the pigs, who are the cleverest animals in the barnyard and invent communism. I wonder who they are meant to be.

    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
    , @Anon
  281. @Cyrano

    The ‘Capitalists’ may have hated the S.U., however, ‘the West’ were, at the same time, aiding the communists?

    “Taken together, these four volumes constitute an extraordinary commentary on a basic weakness in the Soviet system
    The Soviets are heavily dependent on Western technology and innovation not only in their civilian industries, but also in their military programs.
    An inevitable conclusion from the evidence in this book is that we have totally ignored a policy that would enable us to neutralize Soviet global ambitions while simultaneously reducing the defense budget and the tax load on American citizens.”

    http://www.crowhealingnetwork.net/pdf/Antony%20Sutton%20-%20The%20Best%20Enemy%20Money%20Can%20Buy.pdf

  282. Wally says:
    @Tyrion 2

    The problem for you and those like you is the accuracy of the claims within the Protocols.

    http://www.codoh.com

  283. Wally says:
    @Svigor

    Sorry, I realize you’re a Zionist Jew, I’ll spoon feed you.

    1. You think that by essentially calling Unz ‘another Hitler’ you somehow can deflect his article.

    That tactic is especially absurd since Hitler didn’t do the impossible ’6M’, and that fake ’6M’ is only in the mind of curiously wishful thinking Jews, since at least 1823.

    2. You dodge the fact that your guys have been trying the fake ’6M’ scam since 1823.
    Why is that?

    for your reading pleasure:

    Jerusalem, the Capital of Apartheid
    by Ran HaCohen

    https://original.antiwar.com/hacohen/2017/12/10/jerusalem-capital-apartheid/

    • Replies: @jsm
    , @Svigor
  284. Wade says:

    Bravo Ron! Thanks for another great piece. I thoroughly enjoyed reading it. As usual, your articles and the comment sections always distract me from my job for about an hour or more! But it is always a very welcome distraction. Looking forward to what you’ll write next.

  285. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @Sean

    Orwell didn’t much like many of the Jews he met, especially when he was younger. I can’t say I’m unsympathetic, but it is a bit of a stretch to say that the pigs = Jews. I haven’t seen any evidence that this was intended.

    We also know who some of the pigs actually represented.The one pig who was actually Jewish was Snowball/Trotsky. He was very sympathetically portrayed.

    Meanwhile, Napoleon/Stalin and Squealer/Molotov were portrayed monstrously.

    Furthermore, my point was merely that something featuring in a fictional work is not therefore true; which is such a banal observation, I am shocked that I have had to make it!

    • Replies: @Anon
  286. Wade says:
    @Wally

    Lol! Wally we can always count on you for a quick response. This is one of your best retorts.

  287. Anon[202] • Disclaimer says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Those “times” are late 19th and early 20th centuries, long after Disraeli’s prime, and his work (or at least all I’ve ever known of it) does not really fit into that category at all.

    What is the significance of the date 2003?

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  288. jsm says:
    @Wally

    Wally, I think you’ve gotten Svig mistaken for someone else.

    He’s been fighting the Good Fight against the anti-anti-Semites for as long as I’ve been hanging around. Twenty years or more..

    Click on his name, read his back posts.

  289. Anon[202] • Disclaimer says:
    @Sean

    Given that one of them is Stalin, not Jews?

    • Replies: @Sean
  290. Heros says:
    @James N. Kennett

    “When presenting controversial material, IMHO it is best to minimize offense to everyone, so that the material can speak for itself.”

    That really begs the question “For what purpose is Ron Unz publishing the Pravda series”?

    If Unz is trying to convince Jewish supremacists that they know even less than the goyim about history, then I don’t think these articles will change a single jews mind. I have been watching the comments closely looking for clues, and the standard Jewish reaction is denial, misdirection, or the usual:

    “Sure, goyim, it could have happened. Now turn the other cheek and let bygones be bygones.”

    In other words, no jew is going to change his supremacist and prejudiced view of goyim, and no jew is going to admit that anti-semitism is just a reaction to jewish supremacism. Instead, we see many jews trying to use these articles as opportunities to goy bait, race bait, and spit their usual goy hatred. You know, call goyim inbred kkk hood wearing redneck hicks.

    From the viewpoint of a Christian however, we have a web site that very rarely censors or blocks comments covering massive jewish conspiracies and crimes that led to the death of millions of Christians. This is one of the rare opportunities we have to discuss jewish hatred, and when talking about people who want to see you and your family obliterated, a little sharp language is in order.

    The real issue here is the deliberate, coordinated, and systematic jewish overthrow of a Christian country and the subsequent genocide of tens of millions of Christians, plus another document written clearly by jews laying out their plans for the genocide of all Christians on the planet.

    In case you haven’t noticed, genocide is considered a major, if not the major, crime against “humanity”. Every week we have more proof of jewish perfidity and sadism, we have jews making snotty arrogant replies, and we have people like you saying that Unz should “minimize offense” to jews.

    What you are demanding is that Unz, and everyone else too, show self-censor whenever jews might kvetch or spit at us, while the only thing I want to hear from Jews posting at Unz is an apology for centuries of our exploitation by their tribe of secret societies.

  291. TheOldOne says:

    Anybody know of an English translation of Solzhenitsyn’s commentary on the Protocols?

    Thanks in advance.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  292. gsjackson says:

    Wow, I just read the Protocols for the first time. Whatever its provenance, I’ve never seen anything that explains the last 100 years or so of American history so thoroughly and accurately.

    • Replies: @Svigor
  293. @Anon

    2003? I had in mind 1895 which is what Ron subsequently mentioned but I found 2003 given as the publication date (in Russian I think).

    I wasn’t intending to suggest that there weren’t considerable changes in literary and politico-philosophical fashion between the days of Disraeli as novelist and the late Victorian and Edwardian stories I referred to. But there was maybe a bit more continuity than you would expect once wireless and cinema took off.

  294. Anon[202] • Disclaimer says:
    @Tyrion 2

    There is also Old Major who is at least partly based on Marx. My recollection of Animal Farm is spotty so I turned to wiki, which thinks several other (unnamed) pigs are based on Zinoviev and Kamenev.

    But actually Animal Farm is a very good example of political satire, in the form of fiction, used as analysis, and a cutting analysis at that.

  295. utu says:
    @German_reader

    Absolutely. Bringing in Schiff into the story of Bolshevik Revolution and mixing Jews in takes away responsibility from true perpetrators who is Germany and Germans. It is Germany that is responsible for Bolshevik revolution. Germany paid millions and sent Lenin, who btw was a crypto-German, to Russia. They did it in order to start a bloody revolution for which they could blame Jews so they could bring Hitler to power who then would be able to justify his attempt at exterminating Jews which he almost succeeded. But not all Germans are bad. You, German_reader are a shining example of new breed of good Germans. Keep sending the virtue signal to the whole world that there are good Germans who are willing to take the whole guilt on themselves and will not share responsibility for anything with anybody. Good job.

    • LOL: Yevardian
    • Replies: @German_reader
    , @annamaria
  296. @Ron Unz

    There is nothing too outrageous about Schiff’s support for anti-Czarist forces by the standards of modern American foreign policy and practice. Moreover the only reason George Soros can’t be seen as backing the Bolsheviks is that he has had the benefit of hindsight. Did Schiff have any prospective idea about the likely reality that didn’t escape Bertrand Russell’s clear eyes as early as 1921?

  297. And people vilified Hitler for raving about a ‘rootless international clique’ of financiers.

  298. Ron Unz says:
    @German_reader

    I’m not sure he “confirms” a crucial role for the subversive activities sponsored by Schiff…Western democracy-promoters may have liked to exaggerate their own importance even back then, and there had been at least some revolutionary ferment in Russia since the 1870s or so.

    Well, look. I gave you a 1917 NYT article in which Schiff’s operative boasts in detail about how his boss had funded and fomented the 1905 revolution. The editor of the Times of London described Schiff as a key backer of the Bolsheviks, and Schiff’s grandson later said he’s spent $20M to overthrow the Russian government. I also referenced Ackerman’s 2016 book on Trotsky which cites numerous sources regarding these matters, including U.S. Military Intelligence reports saying Schiff financed the Bolsheviks via Trotsky, but dismisses them all as “anti-Semitism.”

    If you just dismiss all the claims and quotes you don’t like, then how does anyone know anything about history? Suppose Schiff had published a book bragging that he had single-handedly been responsible for the Bolshevik Revolution and got Lenin and Trotsky to provide blurbs confirming that claim. You could still argue that they were all lying, and it wasn’t true…

    • Replies: @German_reader
  299. @utu

    It is Germany that is responsible for Bolshevik revolution.

    Well, to some degree that may be true, German support for the Bolsheviks certainly played some role, and was a very bad idea in hindsight. But Germany’s situation in 1917 was desperate, and the Russian provisional government could easily have avoided German backing for the Bolsheviks if it had concluded a separate peace (which it would have gotten at favorable conditions in mid-1917), instead of continuing the war and actually starting another offensive.
    The real fault lies with Britain, France and the US whose leaders believed their own demented propaganda about “German militarism” and who resisted every German attempt at bringing the war to an end via negotiations.

    You, German_reader are a shining example of new breed of good Germans.

    I’m a German nationalist and very far from being a “good German”. But extraordinary claims like “New York banker financed the Bolsheviks” require convincing evidence, and so far I haven’t seen any. Maybe you could investigate the matter (how about getting the full text of that New Your Journal-American article?) and show us the results.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    , @Rurik
  300. cassandra says:
    @jilles dykstra

    Another “missing” book, recently published by describing this era, is Gerd Schulze-Rhonhof’s “1939-The War That Had Many Fathers”. From the start, the book gives the impression that Western Europe (specifically England, in this case) doesn’t want Eastern Europe (in this case Germany) to become an equal player on the world stage. The fanatical pre-WWI propaganda campaign against Germany, documented here, eerily resonates with contemporary media demonization of Russia, another Eastern country whose transgression is trying to stand on its own feet and claim some respect.

  301. Rurik says:
    @Heros

    when talking about people who want to see you and your family obliterated, a little sharp language is in order.

    lol

    The real issue here is the deliberate, coordinated, and systematic jewish overthrow of a Christian country and the subsequent genocide of tens of millions of Christians, plus another document written clearly by jews laying out their plans for the genocide of all Christians on the planet.

    very cogent

    somewhere in the comments, someone compared The Protocols to Orwell’s 1984.

    That was very insightful, because in both cases, it doesn’t matter who wrote it or why, the point is that both books were and are extremely prescient and demonstrated the motivations and methods of the Fiend’s very real manifestations in our world.

    They are both blueprints for engineering a nightmare dystopia as an expression of the psychotic hatred of human happiness that motivates their zealotry.

    Who cares if the Protocols are a ‘forgery’. Would 1984 be any less prescient if it were written by a ‘forger’?

    It’s enough that both books are pertinent in the extreme.

  302. @Ron Unz

    I looked up that book by Ackerman, some relevant quotes:

    p.108:

    Since the outbreak of world war in 1914, Schiff again had refused to lend money to Britain and France so long as they supported the tsar, even if his Kuhn Loeb bank lost business and he was personally vilified as pro-German. Instead, he contributed to groups sending anti-tsarist literature to Russian soldiers at the front.

    p.189/190:

    Kerensky also declared amnesty for overseas political refugees and legal equality for Russian Jews. This last point brought a quick response from Jacob Schiff, head of New York’s Kuhn Loeb banking house, who had used his fortune to protest Russia’s violent anti-Semitism, even to the extent of blocking war loans and funding anti-tsarist propaganda. Schiff now sent an urgent telegram to the Evening Post from White Sulphur Springs, West Virginia, where he was visiting, praising the new government and pledging financial support. “With the shackles removed from a great people,” he wrote, “Russia will before long take rank financially among the most favored nations in the money markets of the world.”

    p.320/321:

    What’s more, Schiff’s politics at that point directly opposed Trotsky’s. Schiff’s gripe against Russia had been its anti-Semitism. At home Schiff had never shown any sympathy for socialism, not even the milder Morris Hillquit variety. Schiff had declared victory for his purposes in Russia after the tsar was toppled in March 1917 and Alexander Kerensky, representing the new provisional government, had declared Jews to be equal citizens. In addition to repeated public statements of support, he used
    both his personal wealth and the resources of Kuhn Loeb to float large loans to Kerensky’s regime. When Lenin and Trotsky seized power for themselves in November 1917, Schiff immediately rejected them, cut off further loans, started funding anti-Bolshevist groups, and even demanded that the Bolsheviks pay back some of the money he’d loaned Kerensky.
    Schiff also joined a British-backed effort to appeal to fellow Jews in Russia to continue the fight against Germany

    Ackerman claims the military intelligence report you mentioned is nonsense and doesn’t contain any solid evidence for Schiff having supported the Bolsheviks.
    I have no way of evaluating that, but so far I remain unconvinced.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Ron Unz
  303. @German_reader

    ‘…According to Wikipedia Wickham-Steed wrote on July 31 1914 about efforts to stop British intervention in the approaching war that they were “a dirty German-Jewish international financial attempt to bully us into advocating neutrality”…’

    I think about all this demonstrates is that Wickham-Steed was pro-intervention — a perfectly defensible position.

    On the other hand, a war obviously could be catastrophic for international finance, and Jews in 1914 were indeed associated as much with Germany as they were with anyone else. What’s particularly damning about the remark? German Jewish financiers may well have been maneuvering to head off British intervention. It sounds both reasonable and patriotic to me. If I were a German Jewish financier in 1914, that’s what I would do. Why shouldn’t I — and why shouldn’t a pro-war Englishman view my activities as ‘dirty’?

  304. Anon[202] • Disclaimer says:
    @sarz

    Shannon would probably have described himself as an “electrical engineer”, besides being not really lucid during the extremely brief portion of the 2000s through which he lived.

    But any experiences you had with him are very interesting.

  305. @German_reader

    ‘…The real fault lies with Britain, France and the US whose leaders believed their own demented propaganda about “German militarism” and who resisted every German attempt at bringing the war to an end via negotiations…’

    I think the whole subject of Germany in World War One — and in particular, of German willingness to end the war on reasonable terms starting in about 1916 — could do with some illumination.

    At the time, this was obscured by all the propaganda aimed at vilifying Germany — and certainly Germany was no more saintly than any of the other players. However, it all didn’t make for an accurate picture.

    Then — courtesy of the Third Reich — an anachronistic assumption now exists that if Germany was bad in World War Two, she must have been bad in World War One. This is exacerbated by the somewhat masochistic attitude of post-World War Two German historians, many of whom seem to regard it as their duty to exaggerate German guilt as far as possible and minimize German suffering as far as possible.

    Of course, at least with respect to World War One, this is all but nonsensical. Babi Yar does nothing to demonstrate that Germany was at fault in World War One, or that she rather than the Entente wasn’t the party most willing to come to terms in 1916-18. Nevertheless, it’s a real influence on perceptions of the situation.

    • Replies: @German_reader
    , @Anonymous
  306. Rurik says:
    @German_reader

    But extraordinary claims like “New York banker financed the Bolsheviks” require convincing evidence,

    what’s extraordinary is that something that has been common knowledge for decades (at least for me!), you consider an “extraordinary claim”.

    This

    In the February 3, 1949 issue of the New York Journal American Schiff’s grandson, John, was quoted by columnist Cholly Knickerbocker as saying that his grandfather had given about $20 million for the triumph of Communism in Russia. (To appraise Schiff’s motives for supporting the Bolsheviks, we must remember, that he was a Jew and that Russian Jews had been persecuted under the Tsarist regime. Consequently the Jewish community in America was inclined to support any movement, which sought to topple the Russian government and the Bolsheviks were excellent candidates for the task

    is from a link I posted in post 98

    http://www.wildboar.net/multilingual/easterneuropean/russian/literature/articles/whofinanced/whofinancedleninandtrotsky.html

    more here

    •Jacob Schiff and Federal Reserve founder Paul Warburg ran Kuhn, Loeb & Co. – the Rothschilds’ New York banking satellite. Schiff supplied $20 million in gold to Trotsky, who sailed from New York with 275 other terrorists on a passport obtained through pressure the bankers put on the Wilson administration.

    http://truthmegasite.com/the-bolshevik-revolution-in-russia-was-the-work-of-jewish-planning-and-jewish-dissatisfaction-our-plan-is-to-have-a-new-world-order/

    and it dovetails perfectly with the Benjamin Freedman speech in post 184.

    and more to the point, it dovetails with virtually everything we witness today about International Jewish supremacist treachery and designs. Specifically the destruction of Western civilization.

    Exactly as Churchill laid out in one of his speeches

    ” …the schemes of the International Jews. The adherents of this sinister confederacy are mostly men reared up among the unhappy populations of countries where Jews are persecuted on account of their race. Most, if not all of them, have forsaken the faith of their forefathers, and divorced from their minds all spiritual hopes of the next world. This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognisable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.”

    President Wilson (who you should know of because he was the one whose treachery brought America into the war on Perfidious Albion’s side, and then created the ruse of his ‘Fourteen Points’ to trick Germany into disarming, before they starved Germany into accepting a blame for the war that wasn’t Germany’s. And crushing reparations under a cruel and depraved ((Weimar)) regime.

    How can it be that you’re not aware of any of that?

    Have they so shat in the German collective soul to the point that all that’s left is abased self-loathing and ignorance?

    • Replies: @Mike P
    , @Anon
  307. @Anonymous

    No, today is the modern iteration.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  308. I imagine the Russians know more about these matters than most anyone else, given that they probably have access to their secret archives from the Soviet period.

    Perhaps they want revenge, which would explain why certain groups want a war between the US and Russia.

  309. anonymous[965] • Disclaimer says:

    Eisner. Thälmann. Something about those names …

  310. anonymous[965] • Disclaimer says:
    @utu

    Oh yeah, Jews brought “reform” to Christianity all right. Read: https://forward.com/opinion/159955/converts-who-changed-the-church/

  311. Cyrano says:

    The main reason why the Bolshevik revolution failed was because of the cost overruns its launch had to be delayed for several weeks, thus instead of October revolution, in reality it became a November revolution.

    Some blame it on the fact that the Russians were using a wrong calendar. Wrong calendar my a**. When the revolutionaries received the money from the Jewish investors, instead of launching the revolution on time, they probably got their hands on some large quantities of vodka and forgot all about the revolution.

    From that point on, not only the Gregorian calendar couldn’t save the revolution anymore, but even Gregorian chants wouldn’t have helped any. The shareholders lost faith in the IPO, the value of the revolution stocks plummeted forcing the investors to withdraw their money, resulting in total disaster where the revolution degenerated into a civil war and never got its footing back. Moral of the story – don’t mess with Jewish investors.

  312. renfro says:
    @utu

    How fortunes are made—-some Bolsheviks pirated a lot of jewels and art when they fled Russia. There was an article in Art World several years ago where Jews were claiming some paintings that were actually stolen from a Russian noble family during the Bolshevik revolution —-in a rare incident of justice the court awarded the paintings to the Russian grandson.

    No. 26. Mr. Alston to Earl Curzon.— (Received January 25.) (Telegraphic.) • Vladivostock,
    January 23, 1919. FOLLOWING from High Commissioner : — ” Following statements respecting Bolsheviks in Perm and neigh- bourhood are taken from reports sent by His Majesty’s consul at Ekaterinburg. The Omsk Government have similar information : —

    ”Within three days of the arrival of the Austrian army in Odessa, the Russian Bolshevik troops fled at the approach of the Austnans. The Black Sea fleet left the morning Odessa was surrendered. Some of the ships were so heavily laden with plunder they could scarcely make way. A large proportion of the worst Bolshevik criminals of the district, together with the more notorious bands of assassins and highwaymen, escaped with the fleet.

  313. @Colin Wright

    There’s a recent book by WW1 historian Holger Afflerbach (Auf Messers Schneide. Wie das Deutsche Reich den Ersten Weltkrieg verlor) which is somewhat revisionist and among other issues deals extensively with German attempts at bringing about peace negotiations in WW1.
    So far there seems to be only a German version, but I expect there’ll be an English translation eventually.

  314. utu says:
    @German_reader

    From Kenneth D. Ackerman website: https://kennethackerman.com

    A big thank you to the American Jewish Press Association for awarding me its 2018 Rockower award, first place, for Journalistic Excellence in American Jewish History – for my article on Leon Trotsky in the B’nai Brith magazine.

    My grandmother, Ides Bronfeld, surrounded by children (standing from left) Hinda Ethel, Sura (Sally), Al, Herzek (Benny), and Marge (in her lap), taken in Zawichost, Poland, circa 1926.
    My grandmother, Ides Bronfeld, with children (from left) Hinda Ethel, Sura (Sally), Al, Herzek (Benny), and Marge (on lap), in Zawichost, Poland, 1926. In mid-1920, my grandfather, Rubin Mendel Bronfeld, abruptly left the small town in southern Poland his family had called home for generations, Zawichost, to escape peaking violent upheaval sparked by anti-Semitic riots and the invasion of Poland that year by Bolshevik Russia.

    At the same Horse Radish Covertime, our own Viral History Press was recently proud to publish Horse Radish: Jewish Roots, my Aunt Rachel Farber’s poignant, funny, brutally frank memoir of the Ackerman side of the family and its immigrant experience, from their own tiny Poland/Russia village of Madle-Borzyce to busy early-Twentieth Century America, to marriage, heartache, and finding peace amid chaos.

    http://coffeewithken.blogspot.com/2010/02/official-slanderer.html
    Looking to find one emblemmatic villain behind America’s decision to slam its doors against immigrant refugees in the early 1920s — especially Jewish people from Eastern Europe like my grandparents for whom failure to escape would mean death in the Holocaust? Look no further than this man: Brigadeer General Marlborough Churchill, head of American Military Intelligence (MID) from 1918 through 1920. During this time, Churchill’s MID generated a parade of reports painting Jews as undesirables, subversives, and Reds, as slanted as any Anti-Semitic propagrada of the era.

    These became the chief ammunition xenophobic Congressmen used to justify imposing quotas in 1921 and 1924 designed to block all but a tiny trickle of immigrants, aimed primarily at Jews and Italians. Italy, which sent over 270,000 to Ellis Island in 1913, was restricted after 1924 to 3,845 per year. Poland, which had sent 174,000 — including about 100,000 Jews — was cut to 5,982 per year.

    Both these missions led Churchill and MID to focus on The Jews. It is alarming that today there survives a thick file of memos written by MID under General Churchill containing a barriage of slanders against Jews people as a group. They focus on Eastern Europeans but include surveillance of Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, financiers Paul Warburg and Jacob Schiff, and western Zionist leaders Chiam Weizman and Theoodore Herzl. The reports finger Jews as instigators of the Bolshevik Revolution and rulers of the Western Press, a secret conspiracy ready to subvert any country. They describe Jewish people as personally filthy and non-hygenic and, if allowed into the US, “a serious menace to our civilization.”

    Listen, German_reader, be more critical of your sources and their motives. Read his web page.

    • LOL: Ron Unz
    • Replies: @German_reader
  315. renfro says:
    @German_reader

    I can’t think of any plausible reason why Schiff would have supported the Bolsheviks (apart from completely irrational hatred of Russia…or did he want to support his old home country Germany in WW1 and help Russia knock out of the war?). If he had wanted to make Russia ripe for exploitation by Jewish finance as Unz seems to insinuate with his vague hints about “Jewish exploitation”, there surely would have been more fitting ways than supporting communist revolution.

    You don’t get it……Jewish Communism is and always has been a ‘facade’ for plundering the nations. Even in communism you have a Ruler or Rulers, a favored class (those who support the rulers) and then all the rest are peasants. To see how this communist class system worked under the Bolsheviks read thru these reports …..

    https://archive.org/stream/cu31924028404519/cu31924028404519_djvu.txt

  316. JackOH says:

    I haven’t been following much of the comment here too closely. But, isn’t it safe to say the guy who donates $10 to Lenin in 1910 may have multiple motives, and even if one of those is strictly revolutionary and not, say. the seeking of commercial advantage, the revolution he’s supporting exists only in his mind’s eye at the time he donates. He’s donating to the revolution he imagines in 1910, not the murderfest as known by the 1930s.

    Plus, motives are altered during the course of an action as reality buffets one’s actions or desires.

    History is lived forward, historiography written backward, and so on.

  317. Mike P says:
    @Rurik

    How can it be that you’re not aware of any of that?

    Have they so shat in the German collective soul to the point that all that’s left is abased self-loathing and ignorance?

    Yes. German school education is still half-way decent, but history instruction consists only of holocaust, more holocaust, and yet more holocaust.

  318. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Mike P

    “you do that for him… You could get rich!”

    Get rich? Tell me more.

    I edited many people over several decades, and made a living, but no fortune, that’s for sure.

    • Replies: @Mike P
    , @Mike P
  319. @utu

    Well, he seems to be an ethnocentric Jew whining about US immigration restriction, certainly not someone I would have any sympathy for, and I would never have looked at his book if it hadn’t been mentioned here. But that’s irrelevant for the issue of Jacob Schiff’s alleged support for the Bolsheviks in 1917-1919…imo so far no solid evidence for it has been adduced here. Maybe Ron Unz or some other commenter will eventually provide it. Until then there’s not much point in continuing this discussion.

    • Replies: @utu
  320. Anonymous[429] • Disclaimer says:
    @Winnetou1889

    Okay, I thought I understood, but now I am more confused. What then was going on then?

    • Replies: @Winnetou1889
  321. Ron Unz says:
    @German_reader

    Schiff had declared victory for his purposes in Russia after the tsar was toppled in March 1917 and Alexander Kerensky, representing the new provisional government, had declared Jews to be equal citizens.

    Look, the 1917 political situation was certainly far more fluid and complex than as seen in hindsight…

    Bear in mind, that the Bolsheviks back then were far less heavily Jewish than the Mensheviks, and that unlike Lenin, Trotsky was both Jewish and had also been a top leader of the 1905 Revolution that Schiff had heavily backed. I wouldn’t be surprised if Schiff only had a vague idea of who Lenin was at that point, and there probably wasn’t any strong reason for him to be hostile to Kerensky, who was known to be quite friendly towards Jews. Furthermore, Trotsky was then very hostile to Lenin and his Bolsheviks.

    During 1917, Trotsky and apparently a large group of Jewish revolutionaries traveled from NYC to Russia to participate in the revolutionary ferment, and I think it’s perfectly plausible that Schiff would have provided them with the very substantial financial backing that numerous sources later allege. My impression is that Schiff was just throwing money at lots of different revolutionary Russian factions, and Trotsky’s Jewish background, his presence in NYC, and his top 1905 role would have made him a natural candidate for support. I don’t recall any evidence that Trotsky was anti-Kerensky at that point. There certainly aren’t any historical claims that Schiff backed Lenin as opposed to Trotsky.

    However, once Trotsky and all those other Jewish revolutionaries from NYC got to Russia, they soon joined forces with Lenin and became a crucial part of his enlarged Bolshevik movement. Whether Schiff knew or cared about any of that complex political situation in Russia is unclear to me.

    After the Bolshevik Revolution of Lenin and Trotsky was successful, Ackerman claims that Schiff cut off support, which may or may not be accurate. I looked at the Schiff autobiography that Ackerman cites, and the picture it presents seems far more ambiguous and self-serving, both on Schiff’s part and that of his (Jewish) exculpatory biographer, who spends pages denouncing the “anti-Semitic conspiracy theories” that were so widely reported in the publications of that era. It’s clear that in 1917-1918 Schiff was very worried about being too closely identified in America with the bloodthirsty Bolsheviks.

    Offhand, I don’t see any reason why Schiff would have favored Lenin over Kerensky. If Kerensky had won, Wickham Steed would surely have (accurately) later reported that Schiff was a key backer of Kerensky. But since Lenin and Trotsky won, he became a key backer of the Bolsheviks.

  322. Anonymous[429] • Disclaimer says:
    @Colin Wright

    Then — courtesy of the Third Reich — an anachronistic assumption now exists that if Germany was bad in World War Two, she must have been bad in World War One.

    Germany was also willing to end World War Two on reasonable terms.

    • Replies: @Bukowski
  323. Anonymous[429] • Disclaimer says:
    @TheOldOne

    Did Solzhenitsyn dedicate a commentary to the Protocols? Are you thinking instead of 200 Years Together?

    Is it true that Solzhenitsyn’s wife was Jewish? Does that lend any of his perspectives on these subjects more credibility?

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  324. Anonymous[429] • Disclaimer says:
    @Tyrion 2

    In the Sixth Congress of the Bolshevik Russian Social Democratic Labor Party and its Central Committee elected in August 1917, we find that five of the committee’s 21 members were Jewish. This included Trotsky, Zinoviev, Moisei Uritsky, Sverdlov and Grigori Sokolnikov.

    What was the representation of fully ethnic Russians?

    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
  325. Anonymous[429] • Disclaimer says:
    @German_reader

    Why did he get involved at all in the Russo-Japanese war?

  326. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Ron Unz

    My comment yesterday was rude. Sorry. But your article was long and it could have been at least slightly shorter and sharper.

    As for the first and second sections of the article, which you acknowledge to be inessential, they are of interest in themselves, but they make for a piece almost as long as one finds in publications such as the Atlantic Monthly or the New Yorker, publications I have long avoided because they require commitment of too much of my one and only life to the assimilation of what could usually be presented, in essence, in no more than a few hundred words.

    Thus, yesterday, both exhausted and exasperated by the time I reached your reference to the “Red scare,” I abandoned the piece, which however, I have managed to complete reading today. Your conclusion that those who hold that Jews — the adherents of a racially supremacist ideology, engage in group collaboration to exploit the host society — are essentially correct is not earth shaking. Indeed, it is probably the view of any reasonably well-informed gentile. We know that Jews play a major role in pornography, gambling, and the creation of a society enslaved by debt. So the key question is not how the big Jews behave, we know how they behave, but how to restrain their behavi0r.

    Promoting anti-Semitism, which is loudly expressed on this site, seems entirely counterproductive. It creates the antagonism that justifies the exploitation, whereas what is required is to allow what in an atheistic age is the natural process of assimilation to take place.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Ron Unz
    , @Anon
    , @renfro
  327. Anon[429] • Disclaimer says:
    @German_reader

    He certainly was opposed to the Czarist system

    What’s evidence do you have to support that?

  328. Mike P says:
    @CanSpeccy

    I was thinking along these lines:

    http://regender.com/

    If you use that website as a proxy to view another:

    http://regender.com/swap/http://www.vatican.va/archive/bible/genesis/documents/bible_genesis_en.html

    You get stuff like:

    [1:1] In the beginning when Goddess created the heavens and the earth,
    [1:2] the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from Goddess swept over the face of the waters.

    So you see, regender.com rewrites the Genesis on the fly. You could use this approach to give the web a Strunkian cleansing – just a thought ;)

  329. Anonymous[429] • Disclaimer says:
    @cassandra

    After all, ethnic Lithuanian Dzerzhinsky

    Are you certain Dzerzhinsky wasn’t of at least partial Jewish background. (As a youth, he was fluent in Yiddish.)

    In any case, it is very interesting that so many of these leaders were NOT ethnic Russians.

    • Replies: @cassandra
  330. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @Anonymous

    Probably more than the zero Jews after 1921, 1 year before the USSR actually had its Treaty of Creation.

  331. utu says:
    @German_reader

    What does your source Ackerman mean by this statement:

    It is alarming that today there survives a thick file of memos written by MID under General Churchill containing a barriage of slanders against Jews people as a group.

    That Jews would be better off if the “thick file” did not survive? Is this the attitude you expect in a historian? Yes, this is exactly an attitude you expect in historians who writes to do the whitewash job. This is what you expect from Jewish self-appointed historian engaged in ethnic activism.

    Wouldn’t you like to know what was in this file? Especially concerning Jacob Schiff?

    They focus on Eastern Europeans but include surveillance of Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, financiers Paul Warburg and Jacob Schiff, and western Zionist leaders Chiam Weizman and Theoodore Herzl. The reports finger Jews as instigators of the Bolshevik Revolution and rulers of the Western Press, a secret conspiracy ready to subvert any country.

    Would you expect Ackerman of whom you know is Jewish ethnic activist to analyze these documents? Or rather he would dismiss them as signs of some mental anti-Semitic paranoia that for no reason at all afflicted Brigadier General Marlborough Churchill?

  332. Heros says:

    The Schiff family lived with the Rothschilds in Frankfurt, and Jacob Schiff was an agent of the Rothschilds in the US. Likely, there are also blood lines joining the families.

    Adam Weishaupt, supposed founder of the Illuminati, which later took over the Grand Orient Lodge of France, was a Rothschild agent. The Jacobins were the tools of this Rothschild/illuminati/masonic plot to overthrow Louis XVI.

    Enter Kerensky:

    “active member of the irregular freemasonic lodge, the Grand Orient of Russia’s Peoples, which derived from the Grand Orient of France. Kerensky was Secretary General of the Grand Orient of Russia’s Peoples and stood down following his ascent to government in July 1917.”

    Kerensky was merely a place holder until the craft could get the true designated mason leader of the revolution in place. This is similar to how GWB was a set up for Obama. The Russian Revolution was infested with freemasons, like the French Revolution and the American War of Northern Aggression. The people who were really creating and manipulating the narrative to create these events are rarely mentioned, because what they did was secret.

    Historians search official written documents to unravel history. Secret societies have been hiding the true history from “historians” for centuries. Historians cannot see the truth.

  333. goyerrant says:

    Amazing, Mr. Unz, really amazing. I am deeply impressed by your insight and accuracy. Let’s look at a small example:

    Trotsky and a large fraction of the leading Jewish revolutionaries had been living as exiles in New York City, and now many of their Jewish cousins still resident in America began loudly proclaiming that a similar revolution would soon follow here as well.

    In fact, Trotsky arrived in New York on January the 13th, 1917, directly from Barcelona (Spain). He left for Halifax, Canada, on his way to Russia, on March the 27th, same year.

    I’m afraid that if you keep walking this path you’ll ultimately find yourself giving the nazi salute and screaming “Mein Führer, I can walk!”

    And Ron, a last remark, as the ancient Romans said, Roma traditoribus non praemiat.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  334. Thirdeye says:
    @Cyrano

    There’s a gap to fill in between Schiff, Warburg et al. financing the Russian revolutions of 1905 and 1917 and them financing the October revolution, which would validate the thesis that they financed the Bolsheviks. The 1905 and February 1917 revolutions were led by Mensheviks following a Social Democrat strategy. The Bolsheviks were marginalized in both cases and their leaders were imprisoned after the February revolution. Jews didn’t have a dog in the fight as far as Bolshevik or Menshevik rule was concerned. Their enemy the Tsar was gone from power and Jews were prominent within the Menshevik faction and the Kadets as they were within the Bolsheviks. American Jewish bankers might actually have preferred the Mensheviks for maintaining a capitalist economy. Germany, however, wanted Russia to quit the war and the Mensheviks were not doing that. Spiriting Lenin back into Russia from Switzerland and supporting the Bolsheviks against the Mensheviks was their strategy to get Russia out of the war. Germany’s role in supporting the October revolution is definite; the foreign Jewish role is iffy.

    IMO Jewish affinity for dissident movements is a thing of the past. It was in their interests to support them when they were outsiders excluded from power structures. Now they are firmly ensconced in the power structure and are arguably at the top of the power structure. What passes for support from the power structure for dissidents is actually co-optation to prevent dissent from threatening the status quo, which suits Jews just fine, thank you.

    • Replies: @Jon Halpenny
  335. utu says:
    @CanSpeccy

    Promoting anti-Semitism, which is loudly expressed on this site, seems entirely counterproductive. It creates the antagonism that justifies the exploitation, whereas what is required is to allow what in an atheistic age is the natural process of assimilation to take place.

    CanSpeccy’s plan:

    (1) First of all we must avoid anti-Semitism because this may upset the Jews. Let’s do not talk about Jews.

    (2) Abandon Christian faith and any religion and become atheists and pray (to whom?) that Jews will embrace atheism as much as you do.

    Why would you expect that Jews would assimilate to your atheism instead of absorbing you into their atheism that requires a belief in their supremacy? Jan Hus and Martin Luther were motivated by the prospect of changing Christianity to be more palatable to Jews so they would convert and assimilate. It did not happened. Martin Luther felt very betrayed so he became an outspoken anti-Semite later in life.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  336. @utu

    What does your source Ackerman mean by this statement:

    I’m not sure, but I’d suppose he finds it alarming that eeeeeevil WASPs like Marlborough Churchill held such horrible antisemitic “prejudices” back in the early 1920s. I don’t think he means that this military intelligence file should be destroyed.
    Anyway, this Ackerman guy with his ethnocentric bias might of course misrepresent the content of this military intelligence file…I have no idea. Neither do you, unless you look it up in the archives. All I wanted to state is that I don’t find the arguments for Schiff’s alleged support of the Bolsheviks adduced here convincing. I just don’t see the solid proof, and without that making a big deal about Schiff’s alleged role seems rather pointless to me.

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @utu
    , @Anonymous
    , @utu
  337. Anonymous[429] • Disclaimer says:
    @utu

    Are these files anywhere available for review?

  338. @Thirdeye

    The detail you left out is that the apparent originator of the plot to send Lenin to Russia was one Alexander Parvus. It was he who is said to have persuaded the Germans to send Lenin to Russia. And Parvus was an old friend of Trotsky.

    http://spartacus-educational.com/Alexander_Parvus.htm

    • Replies: @Thirdeye
  339. Mike P says:
    @CanSpeccy

    Tried to reply earlier, but it was apparently scrubbed.

    The idea is to create a proxy web server that inserts itself between the client (your browser) and the web page of interest (in this case, unz.com). It rewrites the page on the fly – in our hypothetical case, by removing all verbiage frowned upon by Mr. Strunk – and shows you the modified version.

    In my first reply, I had linked some working online example, but it seems the somewhat childish humour of that example did not make it past the moderator.

  340. @Heros

    I’ve come to believe that the “6 million” tales we’ve heard so much are just cover and deflection for the very real dozens of millions of Whites killed by Jews.

  341. Rurik says:
    @German_reader

    All I wanted to state is that I don’t find the arguments for Schiff’s alleged support….

    .. as adequately impugning the character of the German people, who as we all know were responsible not just for Bolshevism and both World Wars, but also for gassing six millions Jews and making soap and lampshades out of their body parts.

    As a member in perpetual good standing with the ((narrative)), and having been excoriated to wallow in guilt and self-abasement all my life, I consider it viscerally intolerable to even contemplate the idea that we German people are anything other than a congenitally evil people, and deserve the well-earned contempt of the entire world, and for whom, our only salvation is prostrating ourselves and our nation, our heritage and our ancestors, and heaping endless scorn on them all, while simultaneously participating in a modern day genocide in Palestine, by funding and arming the white supremacists that are murdering and maiming the innocent men, women and children in their own lands.

    Only by our abased servitude to genocidal Jewish supremacists, can we ever expunge the terrible guilt of our vile race, and seek redemption for our congenital sins, that we will forever teach our children to despise themselves for- and us, their parents and elders, for ever and all time.

    Huh?

    One wonders.. when enough Muslims and Africans descend upon Germany, and alter for eternity the German race into a mongrelized heap of identity-less losers, will the Germans (whatever that will mean) still self-flagellate when they’re more Turkish than Teutonic?

    Somehow I doubt it.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  342. Ron Unz says:
    @utu

    It is alarming that today there survives a thick fileof memos written by MID under General Churchill containing a barriage of slanders against Jews people as a group….The reports finger Jews as instigators of the Bolshevik Revolution and rulers of the Western Press, a secret conspiracy ready to subvert any country.

    Ha, ha, ha—great find! Such an objective historical scholar! Presumably, once those documents no longer “survive” some other writer can come along and claim that they never existed in the first place, and were merely another hoax.

    • Replies: @utu
  343. utu says:
    @German_reader

    Anyway, this Ackerman guy with his ethnocentric bias might of course misrepresent the content of this military intelligence file…I have no idea. Neither do you, unless you look it up in the archives.

    You are right but your argument is based on some fallacy because it appeals to a perfect nonexistent world where everything is knowable and verifiable. In that perfect world the rule “beyond a reasonable doubt” would not be permitted and 90% accused would walk free. You are not arguing in a good faith I am afraid. I understand that the heat of argument makes anybody dig their grounds but I do not understand why you put so much heart into this particular issue to argue in the first place. Do you think Jews are lacking a soft power so you decided to lend a helping hand? Why did you decide to look for a crack in Ron Unz narrative? Why don’t you say openly that Ron Unz anti-Semitic and anti-Judaism bothers you, that you can’t handle it. Did you ever put similar amount of energy in contesting and arguing a case when Germany and Germans were accused unjustly for something? I doubt basing on your past performance here at UR.

    • Replies: @iffen
  344. Ron Unz says:
    @CanSpeccy

    what could usually be presented, in essence, in no more than a few hundred words.

    Somehow I suspect that if my article discussing The International Jew and the Protocols in other than purely denunciatory fashion had just been “a few hundred words” long, it might have lacked sufficient nuance, and therefore been subject to very serious misinterpretation…

    • Agree: Rurik
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @JackOH
  345. Parfois says:
    @gmachine1729

    Thank you for your comment/clarification. I found Ron’s articles having an immoderate amount of worn out clichés when it comes to characterizing the two men who had the greatest impact in the XX Century, Stalin and Mao. He admits himself that he has learned a lot since his formative years and I say ‘good and well for the effort but there is a lot more to learn, starting with discarding the memes and clichés that shaped your worldview’. Repeating the same narrative “… Stalin killed (insert your favourite number) million people… ” and “… Mao killed (insert the number of your choice) million people…” has the only effect of diminishing the credibility of the narrator. All one has to do to debunk these propaganda lies is to check the demographic records and see the implausibility of the figures bundied about by the propaganda agents, starting with the acclaimed Oxford historian – and “expert on Stalin” – Robert Conquest who picked up the 60 million score for Stalin in ‘The Great Terror’ but years later had a pang of conscience and generously decided to reduce the tally to 20 million.

    • Replies: @gmachine1729
  346. Anonymous[309] • Disclaimer says:

    FYI

    Here’s Simon Jones’ take on The Protocols from an old Dissident Voice article he did back in 2003 shortly after the invasion of Iraq: ‘The Protocols – a Neocon Manifesto’

    http://dissidentvoice.org/Articles7/Jones_Protocols-Neocons.htm

    It’s a good, quick intro to some of the major themes, for those who don’t want to read the whole thing.

  347. Ron Unz says:
    @goyerrant

    In fact, Trotsky arrived in New York on January the 13th, 1917, directly from Barcelona (Spain). He left for Halifax, Canada, on his way to Russia, on March the 27th, same year.

    Well, considering that Ackerman fellow wrote an entire 400 page book about Trotsky’s time in NYC, I do think he was actually “living there” at the time, and the impression his Wikipedia article conveys is that he might have remained there for quite some time, perhaps even indefinitely if not for the opportunity afforded by the February Revolution to return home to Russia.

    Indeed, the presence of Trotsky and numerous other future Bolshevik leaders and activists in that city was so under-emphasized or ignored in the standard texts I originally read 30-40 years ago, that I’d been almost entirely unaware of it until I came across the material on the Internet a few years ago. One might suspect that the crucial need to avoid any hint of the apparent Schiff funding was a major reason for such a strange omission.

    • Replies: @Peripatetic commenter
  348. Ron Unz says:
    @Anonymous

    Is it true that Solzhenitsyn’s wife was Jewish? Does that lend any of his perspectives on these subjects more credibility?

    That’s an interesting question. I could swear I always used to read the claim that Solzhenitsyn’s wife was Jewish in the MSM during the height of his fame 30-40 years ago, and had been planning to mention it, but when I went back a couple of weeks ago and searched around on the Internet, I found no plausible trace whatsoever. At least it’s nice to know that I didn’t simply imagine the whole thing…

  349. utu says:
    @Ron Unz

    Presumably, once those documents no longer “survive” some other writer can come along and claim that they never existed in the first place, and were merely another hoax.

    I belief that sanitization of archives and documents has always been done and is done all the time. A motivated “researcher” or just a regular library patron equipped with a razor would do the job. I believe that Jews indeed are very motivated. Even in relatively trivial case like the priority dispute between Einstein and Hilbert. Somebody cut out with a razor the equation in printer’s proofs of Hilbert’s paper. The equation that could settle the debate in favor of Hilbert.

    http://www.znaturforsch.com/aa/v59a/s59a0715.pdf
    In a paper, published in 1997 by L. Corry, J. Renn, and J. Stachel, it is claimed that the recently dis- covered printer’s proofs of Hilbert’s 1915 paper on the general theory of relativity prove that Hilbert did not anticipate Einstein in arriving at the correct form of the gravitational field equations, as it is widely believed, but that only after having seen Einstein’s final paper did Hilbert amend his published version with the correct form of the gravitational field equations. However, because a crucial part of the printer’s proofs of Hilbert’s paper had been cut off by someone, a fact not mentioned in the paper by Corry, Renn, and Stachel, the conclusion drawn by Corry, Renn, and Stachel is untenable and has no probative value. I rather will show that the cut off part of the proofs suggests a crude attempt by some unknown individual to falsify the historical record.

  350. Anon[219] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rurik

    It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognisable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution

    What role did it play in the French Revolution?

  351. iffen says:
    @utu

    You are not arguing in a good faith I am afraid.

    You should know.

    • Replies: @silviosilver
  352. @Anonymous

    One other related maneuver that is underway is that the Jews are giving Muslims territory in Europe and the United States in exchange for the Jews’ having taken Palestine. It’s a form of pacification, of letting the pressure out.

    I’d take this idea seriously if the Muslims were being shipped out from the West Bank and Gaza, because this would clearly be in Israel’s interests. In fact the migrants are coming from far and wide.

    If you are looking for a villain lurking in the background, try Saudi Arabia. One of the State Department memos in Wikileaks suggested that Saudi government policy was to encourage the migration of Sunni Muslims to the developed world, and radicalize Sunnis worldwide (except in Saudi Arabia itself).

    • Replies: @Anon
  353. Anonymous[219] • Disclaimer says:
    @German_reader

    What would be significant about Schiff having financed the Bolsheviks versus any other revolutionary group in Russia?

  354. Interestingly, Dr. William Luther Pierce also believed The Protocols were a forgery, but a mostly accurate depiction of Jewish desire. This is his interpretation -

  355. refl says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    On the site I mentioned the basical course of events is about this: a certain British elite, known as Milner’s kindergarden planed for the destruction of Germany since about 1904 (note: destruction, not merely defeat). The crises preceding WWI in this sense amount to a Setup. Destruction meant a prolonged war. Therefore it was provided that the naval blockade was a sham up to about mid 1916. Britain took care that Germany could fight on. Basic war material got past the blockade and Germany recieved food via Belgian Relief (note its director Herbert Hoover).
    To fight Germany, Russia was needed. Therefore Britain needed Turkey to enter the war on the german side. As the remains of the Otoman Empire were to be dismantled – and yes, this included Palestine for the Jews – it was vital Turkey should loose the war alongside Germany.
    And now the trick about Gallipoli: This was a landing operation run by the british navy, bypassing the command of the army (whose chief, Lord Kitchener ended up dead at the time of the cover up). Gallipoli in this view was designed to fail, but nonetheless to impress the Russians, who at that time were believed to be on the point of entering a separate peace with Germany.
    Once the US were in the war – basically to save the money thrown in by Wall Street – and once the Balfour declaration had been made, it was time to drop the czar and give Germany a victory in the east which would drain it to exhaustion and give it thousands of revolutionaries which would be liberated POWs.
    Russia was meant to be destroyed before any obligation from treaty whatsoever might come into force.
    The game was to let Germany and Russia destroy each other and to integrate the english speaking nations as rulers of the world.

    This is somewhat the essential story which is being told in that aforementioned blog which has been spanning weekly installments for the last four years.

    You see, all wars are economic wars, and so You might say that the outcome of WWI was decided with the foundation of the Fed in 1913.

    You might read some of it and in fact it might merit some promotion in the Unz Review. Firstworldwarhiddenhistory by Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgegor.

    • Replies: @Molecule
  356. @Ron Unz

    Perhaps all these documents on the Internet were created by SkyNet to sow dissension among us!

  357. @Jon Halpenny

    It has been speculated Britain deliberately botched the Gallipoli campaign.

    It is an interesting theory, but as the linked article states,

    My detractors on this issue, however, tell me I should never dismiss incompetence in military defeats.

    The article goes on to question “puzzling or incomprehensible” decisions and events. However, World War I has no shortage of these. The Battle of the Somme took 20,000 allied lives on its first day, and ended with more than half a million allied dead or wounded. From the perspective of the present it is hard to comprehend the sheer callousness of commanders and politicians who expended so many lives for so little gain.

    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
  358. @Parfois

    Really, Robert Conquest chose 60 million for Stalin in his book? How do you even kill 60 million people in a nation of 200 million. Sadly though, this tactic overdone mostly works. Most people are that naive. And they can always defend with, “you’re an apologist for a mass murdering dictator!” That’s the atmosphere of hysteric political correctness in the US that the likes of Conquest have manufactured, plausibly with CIA backing.

  359. @James N. Kennett

    The Somme isn’t that difficult to understand.

    To begin with casualties on the Western Front were persistently high even in the absence of great offensives.

    Then there’s the natural optimism bias–the persistent idea that one big push could win the war. Aside from brief windows in 1914 and the spring of 1918, the Entente generally had numerical superiority on the Western Front and naturally sought to exploit it. Just as the Germans did during their brief windows of opportunity (more successfully).

    Tragically, there was also the simple matter that the British Army wasn’t tactically proficient until 1917.

  360. Anonymous[406] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rurik

    The chances that German_reader is a goy are slim. This particular “reader” is aggressively uninterested in absorbing inconvenient (for the Tribe) knowledge.

  361. Anon[219] • Disclaimer says:
    @James N. Kennett

    I’d take this idea seriously if the Muslims were being shipped out from the West Bank and Gaza, because this would clearly be in Israel’s interests. In fact the migrants are coming from far and wide.

    Muslim resistance to Zionism comes from “far and wide”. Witness the origins of the 9/11 hijackers and masterminds. It includes Palestinians AND their Arab and Muslim brethren, especially those in the surrounding neighborhood.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  362. Dan Hayes says:
    @Ron Unz

    Richard Grenier writing in the New York Times in 1985 (“Solzhenitsyn and Anti-Semitism: A New Debate”) stated that Solzhenitsyn’s (second) wife, Natalia, was half-Jewish.

    I am vaguely under the impression from Joseph Pearce’s biography (“Solzhenitsyn: A Soul in Exile”) that his wife adopted Christianity after meeting Solzhenitsyn.

  363. Svigor says:
    @Wally

    Like I said, lunatic. :D

  364. Svigor says:
    @gsjackson

    *Reads Protocols*

    “Yeah but where’s the lie?”

  365. iffen says:
    @Dan Hayes

    Facts, smacks. Stop trying to fornicate with the narrative.

  366. Svigor says:
    @Tyrion 2

    Supposedly the British supplied the White Russian forces with 600,000 rifles amongst other things, but, otherwise, it seems that you’re right. The allied intervention was pretty weak. I would say that it amounted to rather more than Schiff’s moneylending though.

    This website also claims that only 1.5% of Bolshevik party members on the eve of the revolution were known to be Jewish. Does anyone know of any membership list?

    I jumped into this thing in the middle, so forgive me if I’m missing the context: did you just suggest that $2 billion (the aforementioned inflation-adjusted value of $2 million back then, which I’ll accept for purposes of argument) is less than 600k rifles? Cuz if you’re buying in bulk, you can get 600k rifles for like $200 a pop or something*, so we’re talking like $120m at today’s prices. Not that the Brits were donating at that price point – really it depends on the rifles in question. It’s probably fair to assume they were surplus the Brits had lying around and were looking to get rid of.

    *you can actually get a much nicer rifle near that price-point today (infl. adj.) than you could then, but still…

    Then there’s the fact that I’d much rather have 100k rifles and a bunch of ammo for them than 600k rifles and no ammo, and if I already had enough rifles and ammo, I’d much rather have the $120 million (never mind $2 billion) than any amount of rifles or ammo…

    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
  367. Seraphim says:
    @jilles dykstra

    A book you would hardly find is:

    Netchvolodow A. – L’Empereur Nicolas II et les Juifs
    Essais sur la révolution russe dans ses rapports avec l’activité universelle du Judaïsme contemporain
    Traduction du Russe par I. M. Narischkina – Paris : Chiron, 1924

    Many data about the role of Jacob Schiff by a contemporary.

  368. Svigor says:
    @Zimriel

    Yeah but if true you have to wonder “who taught Napoleon his tricks?”

  369. @Dan Hayes

    His beloved second wife is half-Jewish, and so is his friend Alek sandr Ginzburg, though both are Christian converts.

    • Agree: Dan Hayes
  370. Svigor says:
    @Anon

    Much of the problem with Jacob Schiff and his ilk is that he actually thought the ‘socialist utopia’ was achievable. He believed all the propaganda. When he was donating his money, he had no clue the communist takeover would turn out to be a bloody failure detested by the Russian people who lived all their lives under the system, although there was certainly a strong element of “Let’s get revenge on the Tsar and his ilk for treating us like animals,” in Schiff’s thinking.

    I don’t see much difference between them and the ilk who actually made the “socialist utopia” into a “bloody failure” with their own two hands…

    Much of what Jews have been trying to do in politics during the 20th century is idealistic lever-pulling by men with too much Asperger’s disorder to understand human nature, and who keep thinking that if you unleash the dark side of the human personality, everything will turn out all right.

    This seems like projection (or designed to appeal to that tendency). Jews have a very convenient form of “Aspergers” that, instead of seeking consistency, consistently papers over inconsistency. GLARING, IMPOSSIBLE-TO-MISS inconsistencies like being the world’s foremost anti-colonialists when it comes to the white goyim, and the world’s foremost colonialists when it comes to the Jewish state.

    White men project autism onto the Jews because most white men can understand autism, but not Jews – I think it’s something else. The “Jewish babe in the woods” thing doesn’t work, IMO. I’ve stood there and waved the truth under too many Jews’ noses and watched them dismiss it without a further thought to believe that explanation. Jews’ ignorance is far too STUDIOUS.

  371. Anonymous[263] • Disclaimer says:
    @mcohen

    And as soon as apartheid ended the Jews ran to Israel, Australia, America, New Zealand. Etc. Hypocrites. Also drained money out of South Africa illegally in the billions of rands. Nice try

  372. @Ron Unz

    Speaking of Ford did you know he built a factory in the Soviet Union? Antony C. Sutton is a guy you should look up Unz. He basically argued the SU was a giant factory for corporations to experiment and to make a money. Ford, Fred Koch and many others helped build Soviet industry.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antony_C._Sutton

  373. Also:

    His beloved second wife is half-Jewish, and so is his friend Aleksandr Ginzburg, though both are Christian converts.

    Book review by Sidney Monas, The Russian Review, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Oct., 1985), p. 400

    https://www.jstor.org/stable/129792

    On the other hand, Natalia Solzhenitsyn is half-Jewish; one American Jew who deals frequently with Solzhenitsyn says he has never detected a “whisper” of anti-Semitism in the man; and a number of prominent scholars, including Commentary’s Norman Podhoretz, have defended him against the charge.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1987/11/24/solzhenitsyn-and-his-message-of-silence/73dd0437-69a1-4579-8a24-22d7daa1a818/?utm_term=.c3859540cb95

    • Replies: @annamaria
  374. Anon 2 says:

    Russia wanted an empire, and now is being punished for its greed. The Russian Federation is currently 14% Muslim, a much higher percentage than for any other industrialized country (e.g., only 2-3% in the U.S.), and rising every year. “Pride goeth before a fall” (adapted from Proverbs 16). Russia reached its peak in the late 19th century, an imperial overstretch if there ever was any, and very predictably has been in decline ever since. The Russian Empire in the late 19th century was a prison of nations (Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Finland, …), all yearning to break free from the Russian oppression. In the course of time they have. This is what delusions of grandeur – a small ethnic Russian population trying to rule a ridiculously large territory – always lead to. Metaphorically speaking, there is a price to be paid for selling your soul to the devil.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @annamaria
  375. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says:

    Even though communism was about the working class, it seems many Eastern European Jews joined communism because of the indignity of having been forced to join the working classes. Many Jews in Pale of Settlement didn’t have the economic opportunities of Jews in the West. By joining the communist movement, they hoped to rise up the ladder and work as commissars(white collar job) than toil in factories.

    Among Western Jews, communism was maybe a way to break out of the cycle that Karl Marx wrote of in relation to Jews. Jews are drawn to capitalism, and that makes Jews acquisitive, and that makes non-Jews hate Jews. So, the only way to break the cycle of hatred between Jews and non-Jews, capitalism had to go, and the economy has to be centrally controlled.

    • Replies: @Thirdeye
  376. Ron Unz says:
    @Dan Hayes

    Richard Grenier writing in the New York Times in 1985 (“Solzhenitsyn and Anti-Semitism: A New Debate”) stated that Solzhenitsyn’s (second) wife, Natalia, was half-Jewish.

    Thanks. I’m sure this article and some of the others people located were among those I saw at the time, which stuck in my memory. It’s a sign of my poor Googling skills that I spent five or ten minutes hunting around, and couldn’t find anything except from very “fringe” sources.

    • Agree: Dan Hayes
  377. Thirdeye says:
    @Jon Halpenny

    Perhaps an interesting detail, but it doesn’t change the thrust of the argument. Germany sent Lenin to Russia for their own purposes, to help take Russia out of the war. Parvus was acting on behalf of Germany. By then he was full-on Kaiserjude.

    Elsewhere in this thread, there is stronger support for the argument that Schiff, Warburg et al. only supported the Russian revolution as far as the February revolution and the Menshevik-led coalition.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  378. Anonymous[263] • Disclaimer says:

    Well said

  379. Thirdeye says:
    @Anon

    Intelligentsia with talent stifled by the old order were one of the most dynamic forces in the Russian revolution.

    • Replies: @James N. Kennett
  380. RobinG says:

    H/T to Cagey Beast

    Ziff Brothers, Michael McFaul wanted for questioning.

    FINALLY: Russia Turns the Tables And Wants To Interrogate Real Election Meddlers Hiding In USA

    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
  381. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @utu

    (1) First of all we must avoid anti-Semitism because this may upset the Jews. Let’s do not talk about Jews.

    So you think we should have more anti-Semitism? Well from a misanthrope such as yourself, that is an understandable position, but obviously insane, unless you wish to increase Jewish paranoia and hence Jewish alienation from, and antagonism toward, the society within which Jews live.

    Which is not to say that Jews should not be criticized. Far from it. But criticism is quite different from discrimination against and hostility toward Jews as Jews.

    As for

    (2) Abandon Christian faith and any religion and become atheists ..

    that is not something I have ever advocated. But the fact is, most Jews seem to be atheists, which is surely better than being adherents of that racist bastard Yahweh.

    And in asserting my “belief in their (Jewish) supremacy,” you reveal either imbecility or malicious misrepresentation.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  382. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Ron Unz

    I suspect that if my article discussing The International Jew and the Protocols in other than purely denunciatory fashion had just been “a few hundred words” long, it might have lacked sufficient nuance, and therefore been subject to very serious misinterpretation…

    I don’t think a shorter article could have been any less nuanced than the article as it stands, which is difficult to interpret as other than an incitement to anti-Semitism. Moreover, I have little doubt that if such an article were submitted for publication in a mainstream American magazine, it would be promptly rejected on grounds of anti-Semitism. Nowhere does the article attempt to distinguish between the beliefs and practices of most Americans with Jewish last names (your criterion of Jewishness) and the appalling beliefs and practices of some Jews at times and in places mostly far removed from the world of the majority of American Jews.

    • Replies: @Wally
    , @Rurik
  383. Dan Hayes says:
    @RobinG

    RobinG:

    Due to his Kentucky background Prof Steve Cohen almost invariably bends over backwards in refraining from making derogatory comments about Russophobes. But McFaul may be the notable and solitary exception in negating these Kentucky good manners.

  384. Anon[219] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon 2

    Russia wanted an empire, and now is being punished for its greed.

    Who is “Russia”?

  385. Sean says:
    @Anon

    Old Major is Marx, Snowball is clearly Trotsky. In 1984 there is yet another sympathetic Trotsky character, Emmanuel Goldstein, who everyone is taught to hate. Authentic socialism is Jewish for Orwell.

    • Replies: @Anon
  386. Seraphim says:
    @Thirdeye

    One may turn the question. Who was acting on behalf of whom? Helphand on behalf of Germany or Germany on behalf of Helphand (i.e. his enablers)? Fritz Fisher (Germany’s aims in the First World War) has evidenced the convergence of the aims of Germany and of the ‘Revolution’. The first and foremost was destruction of Russia and opening her to Western exploitation.

    “From the first days of the war the German government harnessed the energies of these emigres in its own service, at first with the limited purpose of weakening Russian military pressure on the Central Powers by stirring up internal unrest in the Tsarist Empire. Soon, however, the military objectives developed into political aims. Again there were two stages. In the first, revolution was fostered as a means of pressure on Tsarist Russia to conclude a separate peace with Germany along lines desired by Germany; in the second, after the first had repeatedly failed, the object of revolution was the overthrow of the Tsarist regime and the elimination of Russia as a world power…
    Helphand’s idea of dismembering and weakening Russia accorded with Bethmann Hollweg’s thinking in August-September, 1914. The new element was a combination of social with national revolution…
    (The ‘general aim of the war’ was, for him [BH], ‘security for the German Reich in west and east for all imaginable time. For this purpose France must be so weakened as to make her revival as a great power impossible for all time. Russia must be thrust back as far as possible from Germany’s eastern frontier and her domination over the non-Russian vassal peoples broken.)’ ”
    These aims were detailed in a memorandum of the President of the Alldeutscher Verband, Class, on the 28 August 1914, but printed in 1917:
    “‘Russia’s face must be forcibly turned back to the east and her frontiers must be reduced, approxi-
    mately, to those of Peter the Great’. The territorial acquisitions which he demanded in the east, for strategic security and as fields of colonisation, were the Polish frontier districts, the Russian govern-
    ment of Lithuania and the Baltic Provinces”.

    Memoranda expressing the aims of the Industry and banking cartel were even more drastic, demanding:
    1. ‘Elimination of the intolerable tutelage exercised by Britain over Germany in all questions of world politics.’
    2. ‘Shattering the Russian colossus.’
    3. Elimination of weak, ‘allegedly neutral states’ on Germany’s frontiers.

    There is strong support for the Warburg-Schiff cabal coninuing support for the Bolsheviks:

    Henry Wickham Steed, “Through Thirty Years 1892–1922 A personal narrative,” The Peace Conference, The Bullitt Mission, Vol. II. (New York: Doubleday Page and Co., 1924),
    @https://www.counter-currents.com/2013/10/wall-street-and-the-november-1917-bolshevik-revolution/

    “Potent international financial interests were at work in favor of the immediate recognition of the Bolshevists. Those influences had been largely responsible for the Anglo-American proposal in January to call Bolshevist representatives to Paris at the beginning of the Peace Conference—a proposal which had failed after having been transformed into a suggestion for a Conference with the Bolshevists at Prinkipo. . . . The well-known American Jewish banker, Mr. Jacob Schiff, was known to be anxious to secure recognition for the Bolshevists….
    [In return for diplomatic recognition, Tchitcherin, the Bolshevist Commissary for Foreign Affairs, was offering “extensive commercial and economic concessions.”]
    That day Colonel House asked me to call upon him. I found him worried both by my criticism of any recognition of the Bolshevists and by the certainty, which he had not previously realized, that if the President were to recognize the Bolshevists in return for commercial concessions his whole “idealism” would be hopelessly compromised as commercialism in disguise. I pointed out to him that not only would Wilson be utterly discredited but that the League of Nations would go by the board, because all the small peoples and many of the big peoples of Europe would be unable to resist the Bolshevism which Wilson would have accredited
    I insisted that, unknown to him, the prime movers were Jacob Schiff, Warburg, and other international financiers, who wished above all to bolster up the Jewish Bolshevists in order to secure a field for German and Jewish exploitation of Russia”.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  387. Anonymous[263] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mr. Hack

    O Bly proceed through Christ. Sounds like super-Gnosticism to me

  388. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @Svigor

    The key phrase was “amongst other things”. Also that I only mentioned the British contribution, not all of the rest. Finally, the bulk of the evidence as regards the $20 million from Schiff seems to have gone to support the liberal and democratic movements that offered Jews equal rights as Russian citizens. Not that his was a gift, either, it seems.

    Overall, looking into the Judaism of the Bolsheviks: the more I look, the less Jewish they appear.

    For example, the Jewish Bund actively opposed the Bolsheviks. The Bund was the explicitly Jewish Socialist party formed to bring Jews into socially reforming coalitions. They wanted the liberal democratic leadership to take control as did the Mensheviks, who had the rest of the Jews.

    Keep in mind that liberal and democratic in early 20th Century is not the open borders, minority privileges, we are the wold claptrap of today. It merely offered Russian Jews a way out of being second class citizens. Britain, in 1917, was not exactly a terrible casestudy to try to learn from.

  389. Anonymous[263] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    911 was an inside job with the Zionists deep on it. Muslims had nothing to do with it. They were easy and convenient scapegoats.

  390. Anonymous[406] • Disclaimer says:
    @CanSpeccy

    So you think we should have more anti-Semitism?

    Well, I do.Truth is anti-semitic, apparently.

    unless you wish to increase Jewish paranoia and hence Jewish alienation from, and antagonism toward, the society within which Jews live.

    That’s also a great idea. Antagonism breeds antagonism and before you know it, everyone knows what’s going on. At the moment, the Tribe’s badly hidden hostility is red-pilling the goyim like never before. So, yes please – the more the merrier.

  391. Wally says:
    @CanSpeccy

    [Including large images tends to clutter up a comment-thread and may lead to your entire comment getting trashed.]

    said:
    “is difficult to interpret as other than an incitement to anti-Semitism”

    So what?
    What’s wrong with “an incitement to anti-Semitism”?
    Jews clearly deserve severe criticism.

    said:
    “I have little doubt that if such an article were submitted for publication in a mainstream American magazine, it would be promptly rejected on grounds of anti-Semitism. ”

    No shit, Sherlock.

    “You know very well, and the stupid Americans know equally well, that we control their government, irrespective of who sits in the White House. You see, I know it and you know it that no American president can be in a position to challenge us even if we do the unthinkable. What can they do to us? We control congress, we control the media, we control show biz, and we control everything in America.”
    - Israeli spokeswoman, Tzipora Menache, Israeli Parliament, 2009

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  392. anon[325] • Disclaimer says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Those may have been the stated reasons.
    The Turk was waiting at Gallipoli, though, so he must have had foreknowledge. The Turk also had foreknowledge of the Armenian uprising scheduled for the same day [25 April 1915].

    Since the outcome was the Genocide of the Armenians and other Christian Minorities in Turkey, who’s to say that wasn’t the real intention all along?

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    , @Sean
  393. Very entertaining essay!
    (1) I liked the James Bond angle. Jews are very prominent in early books of Fleming. Rosa Klebb out of From Russia with Love, and the chess player are the Jews of the period. They are working for SMERSH and are good Stalinists. In the films, the Jews were less obvious.
    (2) As for Schiff and other wealthy Jews investing in Russian Revolution: Lenin said “The capitalists will sell us the rope to hand them”. Actually, western Jewish capitalists who worked with Bolsheviks had a good return on their investment. The young Soviet Republic needed intermediaries in the West, and they did a good (and profitable) job.
    (3) The Bolsheviks undid Jewish culture and religion in the USSR: very few synagogues survived, the language practically disappeared, and Jewish community in Russia had been obliterated almost completely. By 1970, there were no Jews at the top, no Jewish life, intermarriage was well above 60%. So it does not make much sense to present the Revolution as a Jewish takeover.
    (4) If one is looking for a hardline presentation of Jews-and-Bolsheviks topic, one can read From Moses to Lenin, the most readable of Hitler’s oeuvres. No pussyfooting over there!
    (5) The best in this essay is presentation of Unz’s personal progress from political innocence to awareness. One can argue about his conclusions, but his way is of great interest!

  394. @Anarcho-Supremacist

    You lost me at anarcho. Anarcho-supremacist? Grow up you silly man.

  395. @anon

    There never was an Armenian genocide:
    Henry Morgenthau, ‘Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story’, New York, 1918
    Heath W. Lowry, ‘The story behind Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story’, Istanbul 1990
    ‘The Armenians in the Late Ottoman Period’, edited Türkkaya Atatöv, Ankara, 2002.
    Howard M. Sachar, ‘The emergence of the Middle East 1914-1924’, New York, 1969
    Gallipoli, Churchill’s first blunder, battleships against forts.

  396. Anon[347] • Disclaimer says:
    @Cyrano

    Germans sent Lenin to Petersburg, soon to become Leningrad. Politics makes for odd…

  397. “foreknowledge”? When the Royal Navy has just tried (and failed) to blast it’s way through the Dardanelles and pretty obvious preparations of British, ANZAC and French troops for an attack on the Turks are taking place is it surprising that there were troops on the Gallipoli peninsula?

  398. Anon[347] • Disclaimer says:
    @Heros

    Bond is empire vs empire. Bond is a tool of imperial power than of freedom.

    Also, those villain names could just be taken for German.

    More interesting than Bond is THE PRESIDENT’S ANALYST and Harry Palmer movies. esp IPCRESS FILE.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  399. mcohen says:
    @Anonymous

    Japie

    most south africans who left south africa did so for a better life.what of it.south africa under black rule is a dump and it is not only jews who have left.many south african farmers including afrikaaners are leaving.
    The south african communist party slogan is “one settler one bullet.”

    Nice try

  400. @Anonymous

    The chances that German_reader is a goy are slim. This particular “reader” is aggressively uninterested in absorbing inconvenient (for the Tribe) knowledge.

    This is a pointless ad-hominem attack. Anyone can ask for more precise evidence, and I found the exchanges between German_reader and Mr Unz helpful in clarifying how some of Schiff’s money might have found its way to the Bolsheviks.

    When presenting forgotten knowledge, it is always a good thing to scrutinize it and reject any parts that are fiction. Whether or not the knowledge is “inconvenient for the Tribe”.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  401. Anon[202] • Disclaimer says:
    @Sean

    Given that only two pigs are in any way identifiably Jewish, it does not seem parsimonious to equate Orwell’s pigs with Jews, though.

    • Replies: @Sean
  402. With admirable historical accuracy, Ron Unz wrote: “Later, Weimar Germany and Soviet Russia had a period of close military cooperation during the 1920s.”

    According to Viktor Suvorov’s “The Chief Culprit,” at its worst, in Weimar Republic 1932, Hitler’s National Socialist Workers Party faced a deep financial crisis. The Party was doomed until Hitler was saved by Stalin.

    Suvorov provided evidence that “Stalin prepared Germany for a second world war.” Without Stalin’s help, Germany faced doom & was unable to arm itself and reek destruction upon Europe. The author quoted Trotsky, the leader of the Red Army, “Without Stalin there would be no Hitler.”

    If Hitler went to war against Britain and France, Stalin foresaw that the question of lordship over European lands to the east of Gernany would fade on its own, and the Marxist-Leninist goal for communist expansion would inevitably advance.

    Thanks to Ron Unz, a link in the long chain of biased pre-WW2 history is weakened.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Seraphim
  403. @Anonymous

    And as soon as apartheid ended the Jews ran to Israel, Australia, America, New Zealand. Etc. Hypocrites.

    It wasn’t only the Jews, but any white English-speakers who had foreign passports. They voted for the “Rainbow Nation” – and then decided they didn’t want to live there. The white population of South Africa fell by 25%.

    To be fair, many stayed in South Africa until they suffered a home invasion. The possibility of gang rape and murder is a strong incentive to emigrate.

    • Replies: @jsm
    , @Jeff Stryker
  404. annamaria says:
    @Heros

    “From the viewpoint of a Christian however…”
    — Would you be so courageous and intellectually honest as to present the history of Christianity from the point of view of Christianity’s fallings? How about an analysis of some prominent Christians that were involved in the mass murder, torture, fraud?
    Before accusing Unz of his alleged lack of courage (by all standards, Ron is an extraordinarily courageous and honest person), take a look into the depths of your own soul.

  405. annamaria says:
    @utu

    Jakob Schiff had been highly instrumental in bringing in the Bolshevik revolution. Give credit where credit is due.

  406. @Thirdeye

    Intelligentsia with talent stifled by the old order were one of the most dynamic forces in the Russian revolution.

    The October Revolution is often described as a “Workers’ Revolution”, including by Soviet propaganda, but perhaps it is more accurately described as a revolution of the Russian intelligentsia.

    If so, then the high intelligence of the Ashkenazim would have ensured high Jewish participation, even if the revolution itself had had no ethnic dimension.

    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
  407. annamaria says:
    @for-the-record

    It is the objectivity of Solzhenitsyn’s research that made his documentary “Two Hundred Years Together” intolerable for the tribe.

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
  408. annamaria says:
    @Anon 2

    “The Russian Empire in the late 19th century was a prison of nations (Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Finland, …), all yearning to break free from the Russian oppression.”
    – Please, tell us more about the history of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia.
    Also, in what zionized Russophobic outlet have you found that “small ethnic Russian population trying to rule a ridiculously large territory?” You only need to check the names of the most prominent Russian statesmen, military, intellectuals and so forth to get the idea of Russia being a true melting pot (though without a heavy infusion of Africans).

  409. @Anonymous

    Germans, including nationalist Germans (other than the HIAG variety), are deeply conditioned against accepting antisemitic evidence. German_reader has even made the preposterous claim that prewar Germany had no Jewish problem, something which would’ve surprised Germans of that time (and not just Nazis–see Brüning’s letter to Churchill about Jewish banks).

    • Replies: @for-the-record
  410. @James N. Kennett

    The general recipe for a revolution is the confrontation between a rising/suppressed, talented class and a reformist regime.

    If the Tsarist regime had been as ruthless as the Bolsheviks later portrayed it to be, there would have been no Russian Revolution. Lenin, Stalin, and Trotsky would’ve all been dead.

    Just goes to show Napoleon was right in his assessment of Louis XVI’s humanity.

    • Agree: dfordoom
  411. annamaria says:
    @Seraphim

    Thank you for the important details

  412. Mike P says:
    @Ron Unz

    Sorry to abuse the comment facility for filing a bug report. It concerns this very comment system.

    Occasionally, when replying to a comment, the comment referred to does not get linked in the reply. I have observed this with comment replies of my own and also with those of others. It seems particularly common when the comment replied to is the last one currently displayed. I have not paid close enough attention to be certain if this is the only case.

    While I’m on it, may I suggest another feature. Occasionally, I see comments highlighted with a sort-of-golden frame. I assume that these are comments which you (Ron Unz) have deemed valuable and illuminating. If that is so, it might make sense to insert a link to any such comment below the story, at the top of the comment thread.

    Otherwise, I would like to thank you for the outstanding work you do with this website, both with your own writing and with hosting and highlighting the work of others. May you live long and prosper.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  413. Anonymous[253] • Disclaimer says:
    @ChuckOrloski

    “Hitler’s National Socialist Workers Party faced a deep financial crisis. The Party was doomed”.-
    Correct

    ” until Hitler was saved by Stalin.”. -False

    In a 1937 letter, ex-German Chancellor (1930-1932) Heinrich Brüning revealed to Churchill just who backed his successor, Adolph Hitler:

    ‘I didn’t, and do not even today for understandable reasons, wish to reveal from October 1928, the two largest regular contributors to the Nazi Party were the general managers of two of the largest Berlin banks, both of Jewish faith and one of them the leader of Zionism in Germany.”

    (Source: David Irving Speech – at roughly the 14-minute mark of his 90 minute speech.)

    If you are not a “German Reader”, you Know that Heinrich Brüning had no reason to lie and he had evidence. Churchill believed that Heinrich Brüning wasn’t lying. You should also know that one’s opinion of David Irving is completely irrelevant.

    Conclusion: Viktor Suvorov was wrong.

  414. Rurik says:
    @CanSpeccy

    if such an article were submitted for publication in a mainstream American magazine, it would be promptly rejected on grounds of anti-Semitism.

    just as CNN or the NYT would reject such thoughts on similar grounds, no doubt.

    article attempt to distinguish between the beliefs and practices of most Americans with Jewish last names (your criterion of Jewishness) and the appalling beliefs and practices of some Jews at times and in places mostly far removed from the world of the majority of American Jews.

    Let me ask you something, CanSpeccy..

    I’ve been in some conversations here, and I’ve been trying to point out that not all Jews are hostile to white Americans (or Brits or Germans, Swedes, ect..), nor do all Jews support the genocide of the Palestinians.

    But this is the dilemma..

    I can’t think of too many Jews who support both – the right of the British people to persevere as British people (in Britain), and the right of Palestinians to persevere as Palestinians (in Palestine).

    Indeed, for the people like myself who support self-determination for all people, we are excoriated by liberals and most Jews as being full of hate, and wanting ‘white supremacism’ to prevail in England!!

    Is it ‘white supremacism’ for Brits to want to live among other Brits and their ancient British culture in their own British lands?

    Is it Palestinian supremacism for Palestinians to want to persevere in their own lands?

    I don’t think so. But many, many people do. So for me, I’ve been trying to come up with Jews I can think of who support both of those reasonable and rational endeavors. It would be proof to some of the others here that not all Jews are hostile to us White (straight, Christian working class [especially] male) Americans.

    So far I’ve mentioned Gilad Atzmon, (and he seems to be known as a “self hating Jew”, if not ‘thee self hating Jew’). I also mentioned Paul Gottfried, as I suspect that he too is sympathetic to these two causes, but I don’t know for certain.

    But this is the thing CanSpeccy.. I can’t think of too many more!

    I see Israel Shamir has chimed in here (with his usual thoughtful remarks), and while he’s a gifted writer and speaks very eloquently about the plight of the Palestinians, I’ve never considered him any kind of apologist of the plight of the ‘alt-right’, (who’re watching with alarm as monuments to their heritage are pulled down, and their children will be forced to grow up in a world full of people who’re hostile to them, when not down-right full of savage hatred).

    https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/President-Donald-Trump-Star-Hollywood-Walk-Fame-Vandalized-489103611.html

    So you see where I’m going with this, is I’m trying to demonstrate to some of the naysayers here, that Jews, (as Jews) are often people just like the rest of us Americans, (Brits etc..) that want to preserve the demographic and cultural world that we and our ancestors struggled and persevered in.

    But there seems to be a dearth of these Jews, at least that I can think of.

    Benjamin Freedman broke ranks with ‘the Jews’, and warned us all about ((their)) treachery vis-a-vis WWI and Palestine. But that was done by wealthy and powerful Jews, not the rank and file.

    I know a lot of Jews, and most of them come down either on the side of Zionists, and some of them are tepidly sympathetic to what might be called the alt-right’. Or they’re liberals and consider Trump and the alt-right to be Hitler and his Brown shirts reincarnated. with tepid support for the plight of the Pals.

    But when I think about it, I can’t think of too many (any!) who support both the Pals and Joe the Plumber’s right to persevere in self-determination.

    So my point is (I know, I know ; ), if there simply are virtually (statistically) no Jews of any numerical consequence, who agree with guys like me, that both the Palestinians and Joe the Plumber have a God given right to persevere, and pass down their lifestyles to their children without hostile ‘others’ demanding that they move over, and get replaced..

    Then isn’t the entire charge of “anti-Semitism” just a ruse by overtly hostile people to malign their victims? (people who these Jews shouting “anti-Semite”!!! at – are people who ‘the Jews’ want to see destroyed)?

    Because if ‘the Jews’, as some near monolithic movement, uniformly intend to see a slated people (the Pals, the Brits, white N. Americans) marginalized and dispersed in their own lands..

    and had the power of the purse to see it though…

    then wouldn’t it behoove these people to resist such a depravation, and call out their enemies by name?

    Even if some Jewish supremacist somewhere (no matter how veiled ; ) took ‘offense’ and screeched ‘that’s anti-Semitic!!!!

    ?

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @jilles dykstra
  415. @Thorfinnsson

    German_reader has even made the preposterous claim that prewar Germany had no Jewish problem, something which would’ve surprised Germans of that time (and not just Nazis–see Brüning’s letter to Churchill about Jewish banks).

    As far as I am aware Brüning’s letter(s) to Churchill dealt not with the “Jewish problem” as such, but with a rather surprising source of financing for the Nazis:

    [According to David Irving]

    Brüning wrote a letter to Churchill after he had been forced to resign and go into exile in England in August, 1937, setting out the names and identities of the people who backed Hitler. And after the war, Churchill requested Brüning for permission to publish this letter in his great world history, The six-volume world history. And Brüning said no. In his letter, Brüning wrote, ’1 didn’t, and do not even today for understandable reasons, wish to reveal from October 1928, the two largest regular contributors to the Nazi Party were the general managers of two of the largest Berlin banks, both of Jewish faith and one of them the leader of Zionism in Germany.”

    Now there is a letter ftom Dr. Heimich Brüning to Churchill in 1949, explaining why he wouldn’t give permission to Churchill to publish the August 1937 letter. It was an extraordinary story, out of Churchill’s memoirs, even Churchill wanted to reveal that fact, you begin to sense the difficulties that we have in printing the truth today. Churchill, of course, knew all about lies. He was an expert in Iying himself. He put a gloss on it. He would say to his friends, “The truth is such a fragile flower, She truth is so precious, it must be given a bodyguard of lies.” This is the way Churchill put it.

    https://www.historiography-project.com/jhrchives/v07/v07p498_Okeefe.html

  416. @Israel Shamir

    ISRAEL

    So-called Jewish participation in Bolshevik Revolution and Communist takeover 1917 on is exaggerated.

    Lenin was 1/4 Jewish and unaware of it throughout his adult life. Trotsky was half-Jewish. It is unlikely that either of these men ever went to a Temple in their entire life. Marx was Jewish but an atheist who detested religion.

    • Replies: @annamaria
    , @Sean
  417. annamaria says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    “So-called Jewish participation…”
    Please, read “Two Hundred Years Together.” Check the names of the main organizers of the GULAG, labor camps, and collectivization.

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
  418. Rurik says:
    @Anonymous

    The chances that German_reader is a goy are slim

    I hope you’re right

    I’m loath to think that Germans are that abased and sniveling. But then how many of the best of Germany were burned alive or died of starvation/exposure during (and especially after!) the war was “over”?

    Not to mention how many ‘Germans’ today are the offspring of Soviet or American orcs – who descended upon the ashes of Germany to deliver the ultimate punishment/humiliation.

    It would make sense if German_reader were actually the offspring of an American orc and his starving German mother. He’d have all the prerequisite knowledge of modern German life, with all the necessary rancor in his soul for the actual German people.

    Like some kind of German Obama, motivated by a deep and abiding hatred for the race and nation of his mother.

  419. Sean says:
    @anon

    By public subscription, Turkey paid for a couple dreadnoughts built in Britain. Without offering compensation, Churchill seized them for the British fleet and that precipitated Turkey siding with Germany and declairing war on Russia. Against advice, Winston Churchill insisted on sending a naval squadron to bombard the Dardanelles outer defensive forts (days before Britain was officially at war with Turkey) and the predictable result was the Turks began feverishly working to improve the defensive infrastructure of the whole area. Churchill was only deliberately helping Germany though, he did not, as Lord Alfred Douglas claimed, assassinate Lord Kitchene and sell out the fleet for Jewish gold.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  420. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Wally

    Wondered how long it would be before the Unz’s crackpot chorus of anti-Semites would show up. Unfortunately, you don’t read very well, Wally. You say:

    Jews clearly deserve severe criticism.

    That in response to my comment:

    Which is not to say that Jews should not be criticized. Far from it. But criticism is quite different from discrimination against and hostility toward Jews as Jews.

    Moreover, you ignore the fact that the Jews open to criticism represent a tiny fraction of the population of Americans that Unz defines as Jews, i.e., those who, for reasons beyond their control, bear a Jewish last name.

    But naturally if you keep damning Jews in an indiscriminate way, you will cause some of those ordinary Jews, the majority of whom are non-religious American firsters, to become defensive, resentful and inclined to turn to the Jewish cultural and religious community for support where they may become doctrinaire separatists and believers in Jewish superiority in the eyes of God from which can flow much evil.

    • Replies: @jsm
  421. @Anonymous

    Hi Anonymous i.d. # 253,

    Grant it, the veracity of ex-German Chancellor Heinrich Bruning revealation to (Zionist) Winnie, including “who backed his successor, Adolph Hitler.”

    (Zigh) This is like Zionist Hillary sharing a “secret” with Zionist Tony Blair that Sheldon Adelson & other Jewish billionaires

  422. @annamaria

    Considering the Stalin was not Jewish and ordered the death of Trotsky and the situation of Soviet Jews in general I don’t see the endgame.

    I don’t have to real Alexander to know that the Jews suffered due to being largely prosperous merchants prior to 1917 during the Revolution and were reduced to second-class citizens under Communism-Kissinger would go to great lengths to pressure the Russian government to allow its Jewish subjects to immigrate to Israel.

  423. refl says:
    @Ron Unz

    Douglas Reeds “Controversy of Zion” has a chapter on “The warning of Disraeli”. I do not know if the book is already on your site but it is certainly a valid source, given that this is also a once eminent author who was ostracised.

  424. Anonymous[126] • Disclaimer says:
    @James N. Kennett

    Nah, German_reader didn’t approach this topic with sceptical curiosity. His mind was like a closed fist. He was stubbornly dismissing evidence and logic with “I’m unconvinced”. After a while his own behaviour became unconvincing and unreasonable.

    • Disagree: for-the-record
  425. @Anonymous

    Hi Anonymous Agent # 253,

    Don’t know why the reason my previous comment-response to you got sliced in half, but I assume it’s a glitch for which I might be responsible.

    At any rate, the bottom line is the fact that, regrettably, you have provided no (zero) evidence to write, “Conclusion: Viktor Suvorov was wrong.”

    In “The Chief Culprit,” Viktor Suvorov documented how Stalin facilitated the National Socialist Workers Party’s ability to avoid bankruptcy, and subsequently gave Hitler the gift of necessary military-assets to wage successful war on capitalist Western Europe.

    (Zigh). Smacks of America’s rainy day “enemy” China, and its communist government buying ZUS Treasury bonds and facilitating immoral wars and sanctions on Chinese businessnen and their export products. W.T.F.?

    I hope this entire comment “sticks” and is not partially amputated.

    Thank you, agent 253.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  426. Sean says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    Please. Lenin presumably knew what his his grandfather’s name was (Max Blank). Lenin’s brother, the one who attempted to assassinate Alexander III, also knew the name, and what it signified.

    Tsar Nicholas II and his family were killed (after a bit of rape) by guards who were commanded by Jews. So if the most valuable thing the Bolsheviks had was entrusted to Jews, that hardly suggests that Jews had no special position in the Bolshevik Revolution.

  427. Rurik says:
    @Israel Shamir

    By 1970, there were no Jews at the top, no Jewish life, intermarriage was well above 60%. So it does not make much sense to present the Revolution as a Jewish takeover.

    In the fifties Stalin had purged many of the Jews.

    but in its nascent stages, and certainly during the revolution, the Bolsheviks were mostly Jews.

    there is Churchill’s quote

    Bolshevism] among the Jews is nothing new. From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxemburg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing.[40]

    But mostly, there is the realties of what transpired.

    If the Russian revolution were actually conducted by Russians, for the benefit of Russians, in order to create a sort of ‘workers paradise’, then why would these Russians use the revolution to impose on Russia (and Ukraine and Poland and everywhere else the Soviet Fiend marched) a soul-numbing terror of nightmare proportions? A dystopian, Orwellian horror of gulags and mass-starvation genocides and pogroms? Now known as the Red Terror.

    If your average Russian or Hungarian were running the revolution, then why would they use it to terrorize working class Hungarians, like Bela Kun used it for? If it was foisted and operated for the benefit of average Russians and Ukrainians and Hungarians?

    This, more than anything I can think of is evidence that the revolution was funded and founded by people hostile to Russians (and Ukrainians and Hungarians), to impose a cruel and bloody iron fist on the terrorized Gentiles.

    Is that not what indeed happened?

    And if so, why would Russians want to make their fellow Russians suffer?

    But to ask why Jews would want to make Russians (or Germans or Hungarians) suffer, seems to be a no-brainer. They’re raised to consider themselves superior to Gentiles and to consider Gentiles their enemy. are they not?

    Does not an all-pervasive belief that Jews are special and superior (chosen) act as the very foundation of Judaism? And that the Jews have been persecuted for ’2000 years’ by a goyim filled with bigotry and irrational hatred for ‘the Jews’?

    Yes?

    No?

    And if so, could that not be the reason the Bolshevik revolution was so unimaginably horrific to so many millions of Ukrainians and Hungarians and Russians and Poles and so many, many more?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Jeff Stryker
  428. anonymous[253] • Disclaimer says:

    @ ChuckOrloski

    Here is the speech :

    David Irving is a great speaker and some say he’s a great scholar.

    What seems clear is that in spite of being an expert on Hitler, David Irving sees Hitler as a great man, the saviour of white man -as some fools here also believe-etc…

    That Hitler was a criminal, a third rate intellect, that he was probable being used to destroy Germany never seems to cross David Irving’s mind.

    Maybe he is a great scholar, but his love for Hitler impedes him to see the truth.

    You’re right about the Zionist Tony Blair. We know who put Tony Blair in power and who he served. Most people ignore who put Hitler in power and who he served. Maybe Hitler himself didn’t know, although I have some doubts.

    • Replies: @Peripatetic commenter
  429. @Jeff Stryker

    [quote]I don’t have to real Alexander to know that the Jews suffered due to being largely prosperous merchants prior to 1917 during the Revolution and were reduced to second-class citizens under Communism[/quote]
    Jews were under legal restrictions during Tsarist times. I doubt it is true to say most of them were prosperous merchants. In fact most Jews lived in poverty in their Shtetls or urban ghettoes. Jews were liberated when the Tsar was overthrown. And when the Bolsheviks took power, the Jews got their first taste of political power at the highest level in Russia.

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
  430. Sean says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    the Jews suffered due to being largely prosperous merchants

    Compared to who; surely you cannot mean the peasants that made up the majority of the population were fortunately situated relative to Jews? Historically, the peasants were serfs, slaves, who could not own land, while Jews had privileges such as not being conscripted into the army (the withdrawal of that Jewish privilege was deeply resented). To think the Jews of Russia were hard done by, one must ignore how the vast majority of Russians actually lived.

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
  431. Anonymous[253] • Disclaimer says:
    @ChuckOrloski

    @ ChuckOrloski

    “Viktor Suvorov documented how Stalin facilitated the National Socialist Workers Party’s ability to avoid bankruptcy”

    In late 20′s, Stalin gave the National Socialist Workers Party the money or not ?

    As far as I know, the answer is “NO!”

    w/o money in late 20′s, Hitler wouldn’t have “won” the 1933′s election. No money, no power.

    He could have tried again another coup d’état. But we have no reason to believe that he’d have succeeded.

    ” and subsequently gave Hitler the gift of necessary military-assets to wage successful war on capitalist Western Europe.”

    We know also that “capitalist Western Europe” (and not just the USA) armed Hitler.

    Seems to me that one should not believe what Viktor Suvorov says.

  432. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Rurik

    I can’t think of too many Jews who support both – the right of the British people to persevere as British people (in Britain), and the right of Palestinians to persevere as Palestinians (in Palestine).

    That’s perhaps because in the matter of territorial possession there is no such thing as a “right”: posession is not nine tenths of the law, to use an English expression, it is the law, since the possessor makes the law. That that is so, is evident if you consider the case of the Amerindians, the Australian aborigines, etc. There’s no way, short of victory in a genocidal war, that the aboriginal people get their lands back. Where, after all, would the 34 million Americans of Irish descent go? Or the 40 million Americans of British descent?

    The same applies to Palestine. Who wants six million Israeli Jews? Palestine was originally Canaanite, but the Jews gen0cided the Canaanites and and replaced them. Then the Romans took it and ultimately decimated the Jewish population. Then, after many intervening changes it became a province of the Turkish Empire, to be taken off the Turks by the Brits, who in a limp-wristed fashion let it go to the Jews who now make the law there (not that most of them have much if any genetic relationship with the first lot of genocidal Jews).

    Sure the Israeli treatment of the Palestinians in the occupied territories is brutal, but it is not a whole lot worse than the treatment of the remnant white British in the alien-majority occupied cities of London, Birmingham, Leicester, Luton, etc., etc. True the British white trash aren’t assaulted with white phosporus and high explosive, but knife-wielding Jamaicans and acid throwing, intolerant Muslim pedophiles, seem, if anything, a worse affliction.

    As for the rest of what you say, I’m not sure I really follow it. But there is no doubt that if I disagree with a Jew, I do so on the merits of their argument. To attack them for being supposedly descended from that mythical couple Abraham and Sarah, seems utterly absurd: like condemning Theresa May for being a woman, a Conservative or a supposed Christian, rather than because she is a betrayer of the people’s trust, i.e., a traitor to the nation she is supposed to serve. (And in that respect, May is simply the last in a long line of traitors — Cameron, Blair, going back to that Pedo villain Heath.

    • Troll: L.K
    • Replies: @Rurik
  433. @Jon Halpenny

    Trotsky’s family was. True enough there were pogroms in the days of the Czar.

    And they did not hold the reins long-Stalin killed Trotsky and by the 80′s (A time when you may not have been borne) the US state department finally got some Soviet Jews out of Russia.

    There was a huge push to allow them to go to Israel in the 70′s.

    So they could not have wielded that much power.

    • Replies: @Jon Halpenny
    , @Anon
  434. Sean says:
    @Israel Shamir

    By 1970, there were no Jews at the top,

    Jews were at the top of the wave of the future: the dissident movement that toppled the Soviet Union. And then after a Jewish led movement had again toppled a Russian system that tried to keep Jews down, Jews rose on the ruins of the old system during Yeltsin’s time. If Putin tried to restrict Jewish influence, it would happen a third time to Russia, and he would be overthrown. People at the top know to surround themselves with Jews. Multiple children of both both Putin and Trump are married to Jews. After the scare of 2011, Putin clamped down on anyone criticising Jews, or Israel

    When a member of the Russian Duma suggested changing the state’s constitution in 2012 to remove the inclusive “we the multinational people of Russia” in favor of the exclusive “we the [ethnic] Russian people,” Putin dismissed the idea.

  435. Anonymous[126] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rurik

    Jewish-controlled porn industry is an absolute cesspool of degradation and misery for the goyim.

    Ditto for Jewish-controlled banking, MSM, Hollywood or education.

    Or Weimar Republic.

    Or early Soviet Republic.

    Or Israel, for that matter. The corrupt, genocidal, shiksa-trading, organ-trafficking World leader. Everything they touch turns to irradiated shit in direct proportion to the number chosenites at the top.

    A not-so-wise man once said: “They hate us for our freedoms”. As it turns out, it was the Tribe all along. Their cult abhors goyim freedom and every time we used it to push back was remembered and used to fuel their fear/hate dogma.

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
  436. annamaria says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    “Soviet Jew…the Jews suffered…”
    – Another litany on a theme the “incomparable sufferings” & “eternal victimhood.”
    Was not there the famous Jackson-Vanick law to save the “sufferers?” To the great surprise of Americans, the “sufferers” came with the university diplomas in various fields and some of the “sufferers” used to occupy high-level positions in academia and management in the USSR. https://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/12/02/the-judeo-russian-mafia-from-the-gulag-to-brooklyn-to-world-domination/
    – How long did the organizer of Holodomor, Lazar Kaganovich, live? — 98 years, in a comfort of his residence in Moscow: http://real-life-villains.wikia.com/wiki/Lazar_Kaganovich
    “Kaganovich personally oversaw grain confiscations… Similar policies also inflicted enormous suffering on the Soviet Central Asian republic of Kazakhstan, the Kuban region, Crimea, the lower Volga region, and other parts of the Soviet Union. As an emissary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party, Kaganovich traveled to Ukraine, the central regions of the USSR, the Northern Caucasus, and Siberia demanding the acceleration of collectivization and repressions against the Kulaks, who were generally blamed for the slow progress of collectivization. … On 13 January 2010 Kiev Appellate Court posthumously found Kaganovich guilty of genocide against Ukrainians during the catastrophic Holodomor famine.”
    – The “suffering” Soviet Jews made also the majority among the Russian oligarchs: https://www.haaretz.com/.premium-meet-israel-s-russian-oligarchs-1.5290286
    “A large number of the infamous “Russian” oligarchs are in fact Zionists who hold—and conceal—their dual Israeli-Russian citizenship. … Jewish Supremacists took advantage of the chaos in the collapsing Soviet Union to emerge from their middle-ranking Communist Party membership to seize control of huge parts of that nation’s economy. … In the past decade, wealthy businessmen from the former Soviet Union have flocked to Israel in private planes via the Moscow-Tel Aviv route. They live below the radar, zealously guarding their privacy and hiding their assets and Israeli citizenship.”
    – But of course, the quetching about “antisemitism” in Russia has never abided. Considering the massive, horrific crimes committed by the assorted Jewish Bolsheviks, it is wondrous that Russians have been so tolerant towards the tribe.
    “Labor camps were run under Naftaly Frenkel’ system “No work, no food”. This system was responsible for the high death toll of the camps:” https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.politics.bush/Bw-2Hlg16rw
    Matvei Berman “helped develop the GULAG system of [death] camps:” https://www.secret-bases.co.uk/wiki/Matvei_Berman

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
    , @Paw
  437. Ron Unz says:
    @Mike P

    Occasionally, when replying to a comment, the comment referred to does not get linked in the reply. I have observed this with comment replies of my own and also with those of others. It seems particularly common when the comment replied to is the last one currently displayed.

    Almost everything you see displayed on the screen is produced by my own code, but unfortunately I rely upon WordPress for the “backend,” including the comment-processing system, and it sometimes malfunctions, though it’s also possible you may occasionally be forgetting to use the “Reply” link button. Replacing WordPress would be a huge headache since it supports such a variety of third-party plugins.

    While I’m on it, may I suggest another feature. Occasionally, I see comments highlighted with a sort-of-golden frame. I assume that these are comments which you (Ron Unz) have deemed valuable and illuminating. If that is so, it might make sense to insert a link to any such comment below the story, at the top of the comment thread.

    Near the top of all the comments is an “Endorsed Only” button. Pressing it hides all comments except for (1) those written by website Authors; (2) those which have had an “Agree”; and (3) those highlighted with a golden frame. This is somewhat similar to what you suggest.

    • Agree: Mike P
  438. @Sean

    I meant that Jews suffered after Red October, because as you say, they were resented as merchants and capitalist.

    • Replies: @Sean
  439. @Anonymous

    Hugh Hefner and Larry Flynt may have exploited some Jewesses along the way.

    My feeling is that Jewish girls like Silverman know the day they get to Hollywood that there is going to be a casting couch.

    • Replies: @Sean
    , @Anonymous
  440. @annamaria

    What I mean is that if Communism was run by Jews, why were they worse off under it than other Soviet citizens?

    In general in life, Jews probably suffer less. They’re IQ is generally high. Which means they have a high-paying skill-set, which means their kids are not subjected to the horrors of poor integrated neighborhoods and schools, which means they achieve better qualification, which means they have a better standard of living.

    This is not so much a result of some cabal as merely less poor planning. Not many Jews are going to have kids at 20, 21. Few will drop out of high school. Less will have out-of-wedlock pregnancies. Not as many get hooked on really destructive drugs like meth or heroin (Though a few do in Bronx or Brooklyn and come to miserable ends).

    • Replies: @annamaria
  441. @annamaria

    Yes, it is as well referenced as another intolerable book:
    John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt, ‘The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy’, New York 2007

  442. cassandra says:
    @Colin Wright

    “Germany can be blamed for the gratuitious provocation of building a High Seas Fleet. ”

    The construction of the fleet wasn’t gratuitous; events never happen without reason, although it’s amazing how often we’re expected to believe exactly that. For this case, here are quotes from Gerd-Schultze Rhonhof’s “1939 – The War That Had Many Fathers”:

    p. 26: “…Tirpitz and…High Command are of the opinion that a German Navy about 60% as strong as the British Royal Navy is sufficient to attain the four goals: protection of the North Sea fisheries, protection of their trade on the seas, security against a naval blockade, and the possibility of an alliance with England. With such a fleet…von Tirpitz is convinced that England’s safety and naval supremacy are not really put in danger.”

    Well that sounds reasonable. However:

    p. 27: “In England, they are convinced that their own navy must always be superior to the sum of the next two strongest fleets by about 10% in number…so that, if necessary England all alone could come out victorious against these two opposing sea powers.”

    For this situation to be stable, the 3rd largest fleet (eventually, the American) would have to be no more than 110% – 60% = 50% of England’s. So,

    p. 28 “The British government in 1898 and 1901 tries several times through negotiation to discourage the German government from building warships. Germany asks in return a British-German alliance, which England is not ready to enter. That promotes on the German side the conviction that they must have more ships in order for such an alliance to be timely and interesting.”

    As Jackie Gleason used to say back in the day, “…and AWAY we go.”

    • Replies: @ChuckOrloski
  443. @Rurik

    Stalin was not Jewish. Neither was Tito. Or that Romanian guy.

    Why did Jews allow Trotsky to be killed by a Goy? Why was Lenin marginalized and succeeded by Stalin?

    Why did Jews purged by other Jews?

    • Replies: @Rurik
  444. Rurik says:
    @CanSpeccy

    there is no such thing as a “right”: posession is not nine tenths of the law, to use an English expression, it is the law, since the possessor makes the law.

    yes, this is what’s known as ‘the law of the jungle’, and I agree it’s the final law.

    My point is that when you’re the people being genocided, (Palestinians, Brits, et al) then it behooves you to oppose such actions and take measures to assure you don’t end up like the Amerindians/Aborigines.

    And part of that ‘opposing’ should start with being able to name your genocidal enemy.

    Especially since ((they’re)) the most boisterous and fanatical in demanding that genocide is wrong! (the most evil crime that has ever, ever EVER been committed ever!!!)

    (except when they’re the ones committing it, and you’re the one being genocided. Then to complain about your genocide is only proof of your intractable ‘racism’ and “white supremacism”!

    We’re all supposed to simultaneously genuflect to the myriad Holocaust museums with self-reflection for what ‘we’ did to those people, while at the same time, not only participating in the genocide of the Palestinians, but also our own. If we point out who is foisting it, then we’re maligned with weaponsed smear words, always intended to silence the truth as ‘racist’, or other such dishonest calumny.

    but knife-wielding Jamaicans and acid throwing, intolerant Muslim pedophiles, seem, if anything, a worse affliction.

    https://www.thisisinsider.com/three-arrested-3-year-old-deliberately-targeted-acid-attack-england-2018-7

    but why are they there?!

    who is behind this imperative that all white, Western nations MUST commit ethnic suicide?!

    and the problem is that we all know who is behind it all. Just as we know who was behind the Bolshevik revolution, that plunged Russia (and Ukraine and others) into a dystopian hell on earth.

    Just as we all know who is behind the globohomo push for shitlib, Hollywood gender fluidity, and all the other depraved tripe pushed by the (((media))), don’t we?

    Just as we’re all aware of who is behind all the wars in the Middle East. Duh.

    But then when some of us say, hey, why are so many Jews demanding the genocide of our people..?

    Others shout HOW DARE YOU ASK THAT YOU ANTI-SEMITE?!?!?!

    To attack them for being supposedly descended from that mythical couple Abraham and Sarah, seems utterly absurd: like condemning Theresa May for being a woman,

    Never in my life have I ever attacked a Jew for being a Jew. Rather, I’ve always pointed out that there are very many very decent Jews. Always have.

    My question to you, was why are there so few who support the right of Londoners to leave their three year old toddlers in their strollers without having some hate crazed orcs toss acid in their face. For me, Muslims should be welcome as guests into England, but the idea of them demographically taking over entire cities is beyond insanity.

    But how many Jews do you know, CanSpaccy, who feel the same way?

    This is what I’m trying to flesh out. I’m not condemning all Jews, hardly. But I am asking out loud, where are the Jewish voices condemning acts like that acid attack. We all know that our media is owned and controlled by Jews, so why hasn’t that attack been all over the news? Not only is it sensational, but it’s an act of sheer, unspeakable evil, by what is assuredly non-Western immigrants, when the planet is reeling over a debate about immigration. And yet all we hear is crickets from the (((media))). Why is that?!

    Did MSNBC even report it?

    just like what happened to Channon Christian, these horrific crimes againt white people (because they’re white people), are always hushed up by the Jewish media, which makes me wonder if they’d like to see more of them.

    Is it anti-Semitic to wonder at such things? Do not ‘the Jews’ own our media, lock, stock and barrel?

    Then why do they always hush up horrific crimes by minorities against whites?!

    There seems to be a track there, and I’m trying to get someone to point out to me all the Jews that are just as alarmed at shit like this, as I am.

    WHERE ARE THEY?

    Indeed, Ron Unz is one of the only ones I know who points out these monstrous crimes, like the pretty little girl who was gang raped by orcs and then fed to alligators.

    Haven’t heard about it? OF COURSE! you haven’t heard about it, because they LIKE it when shit like that happens, and want to see more of it! OR GOD DAMN IT they’d report it!

    Sorry, getting a bit intemperate, as is my occasional wont.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @CanSpeccy
    , @Anonymous
    , @Heros
  445. Sean says:
    @Anon

    Marx and Trotsky are generally regarded as the supreme theoreticians of communism. Trotsky was the main organiser of the Bolshevik victory against the Whites. Both are pigs in Animal Farm and play a role of equal importance to their real life models. The Stalin pig is not portrayed as at all important as a theoretician or organiser of the take over of the farm. The horse is the peasantry. Orwell’s pigs are not communists, certain pigs invented communisn because they were the cleverest animals in the barnyard.

    And 1984 has Goldstein with his book very like Trotsky’s tome The Revolution Betrayed. Orwell’s 1984 is The Iron Heel with a wise Jew as good guy. The baddie of 1984 is called O’Brian, and you cannot get less a less Jewish name than that. Orwell thought that socialism was Jewish and but revolutions would inevitably be followed by a rejection of Jewish leadership by venal gentiles of the majority becoming a new elite.

    • Replies: @Anon
  446. Sean says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    Hefner got an award from the ADL

  447. Anonymous[126] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    Hugh Hefner and Larry Flynt may have exploited some Jewesses along the way.

    Yeah, they may have inappropriately fisted you for all I care. Do you have a point?

  448. cassandra says:
    @Anonymous

    “Are you certain Dzerzhinsky wasn’t of at least partial Jewish background. (As a youth, he was fluent in Yiddish.)”

    No; what little I know of his bio comes only from a few videos and D’s Wikipedia entry. The latter states:
    “His aristocratic Catholic family belonged to the former Polish-Lithuanian szlachta (nobility), of the Samson coat of arms. As a child, before taking to Marxist ideology, Felix considered becoming a Jesuit priest.”
    “As a youngster Dzerzhinsky became fluent in four languages: Polish, Russian, Yiddish, and Latin. He attended the Wilno gymnasium from 1887 to 1895…. Dzerzhinsky received a school diploma which stated: ‘Dzerzhinsky Feliks, who is 18 years of age, of Catholic faith, along with a satisfactory attention and satisfactory diligence showed the following successes in sciences, namely: Divine law—”good”; Logic, Latin, Algebra, Geometry, Mathematical geography, Physics, History (of Russia), French—”satisfactory”; Russian and Greek—”unsatisfactory’.

    To take a stab at your point, I’m guessing that he was taught Polish, Russian, Yiddish, and Latin “as a youngster” just to be able to communicate with people in his environment; maybe the Latin had something to do with his Jesuit inclinations, or maybe it was something routinely taught to children of the Catholic gentry.

    I see nothing here that suggests Jewish ancestry, as his knowledge of Yiddish seems incidental. Maybe some other reader has some idea of how commonly Yiddish was spoken between Gentiles and Jews in that neck of the woods.

    As for the prevalence of Jews among the Bolsheviks, I myself speculate that it may have been incidental. While the Jews were only 4% of the population, the question may pivot on what pwercentage they were of the overall intelligentsia, of people who could work with ideologies and politics. That fraction may have been quite higher.

  449. Rurik says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    Stalin was not Jewish. Neither was Tito.

    neither was Dubya or Obama or Hillary

    but they all were willing to betray their nation and people and oaths, in order to slaughter and maim and displace millions of innocents- simply because it was perceived as “good for the (Zionist) Jews’ to do so.

    Why did Jews allow Trotsky to be killed by a Goy? Why was Lenin marginalized and succeeded by Stalin?

    because Stalin was an utterly ruthless man who would sick an icepick in his own mother if it bolstered his nefarious power.

    All of which is beside my point.

    My point is;

    ‘How many Jew are out there who condemn the treatment of the Palestinians, and also contemn the insanity of England committing ethnic and cultural suicide and allowing orcs to toss acid in their baby’s faces, when they’re not gang raping their school girls wholesale ?

    For instance, I suppose Stephan Miller would condemn the Muslim invasion of England, but I hardly think he’d condemn what’s being done in Palestine.

    Whereas some Jewish liberals will speak out for the Palestinians, but then would call anyone in England or Sweden who’s opposed to massive and transformational immigration, a “white supremacist”.

    You see?

    So I’m just wondering where the Jews are that agree that ALL people are entitled to self-determination. Palestinians and Germans.

    Can you count the number of such Jews on one hand?

    and if so, why is that? What are we to make of it?

    • Replies: @cassandra
    , @Jeff Stryker
  450. Sean says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    Initially they were pressurized to hand over any gold and jewels they might have. Subsequently they were victims in the purges of high officials that expanded until the NKVD were affected. While some Jews did die as ordinary Russians died, of starvation or shot and shoveled into mass graves (containing hundreds of thousands of bodies in some cases) the fate of Jews flowed from them having wealth, positions of prominence, and luxuries beyond the dreams of any other ethnic group in Soviet Russia.

  451. @Anonymous

    Back then, nationalists (OK, let’s use the National Socialists) wanted to assert control not just over their own country, but over other countries where they had ethnic ties (Lebensraum). Today, nationalism seeks more to take back control over their own country, but it is more economically centered and not desirous of taking any other sovereign nation over. Back then, the backlash against immigration was more economic and today it seems more cultural.

  452. @anonymous

    That Hitler was a criminal, a third rate intellect, that he was probable being used to destroy Germany never seems to cross David Irving’s mind.

    Let me guess, it was the Illuminati, wasn’t it.

    Does it matter that Germany was pretty much already destroyed before Hitler came to power? Were they just trying to ensure Germany was destroyed for all time?

    • Replies: @Sean
    , @anonymous
    , @anonymous
  453. @Jeff Stryker

    [quote]So they could not have wielded that much power.[/quote] The period we are talking about is the early Bolshevik period. Jews such as Trotsky, Sverdlov, Uritsky and Zinoviev did wield real power in that period. And as Ron Unz points out, when Lenin died, 3 out of 5 of his potential successors were Jewish. Stalin was Gentile, but due to his exceptional ruthlessness, he eliminated his rivals. However it was not the end of Jews in the Communist power structure. Stalin still allowed Jews to remain in the power structure so long as they demonstrated absolute loyalty to him. Jews played a strong part in organising the war economy of the USSR in WW II. After the war, Stalin appointed Jews to serve in governments in several of the newly occupied east European countries.

  454. jsm says:
    @James N. Kennett

    Well, if the 25 percent of Whites who beat it were part of the 31 percent who voted against ending Apartheid, then that makes sense. They voted NO to destroying the nation, but when the nation-wreckers passed it anyway, they skedaddled.

    The question about the Jews is, what proportion of Jews voted for ending apartheid, as compare to the percentage who left? If the percentage of Jews who left is greater than the percentage who voted NO, then that’s galling. Vote yes on destroying the nation and then, when your machinations come true on your countrymen, beat it, that is rank hypocrisy.

    The Jewish population of SA is half what it was during apartheid. Did half the Jews vote NO to ending apartheid? Color me skeptical about that.

  455. @Anonymous

    Now here is something Jews should really to be praised for. Look at farmers they stayed and they are being killed.
    This is the example why you newer find a farmer Jew.

    • Replies: @mcohen
    , @Jeff Stryker
  456. jsm says:
    @CanSpeccy

    <bsome of those ordinary Jews, the majority of whom are non-religious American firsters,

    Yeah, no.

    The majority of Jews did NOT vote America First. Trump got only 35.2% of Jewish vote, which means 64.8% are NOT America-Firsters.

    https://anepigone.blogspot.com/2017/03/detailed-demographic-breakdown-of-2016.html

    And, yeah, that would be the non-religious ones, cuz the majority of religious ones DID vote for Trump, 54%.

    https://religionnews.com/2017/09/13/most-us-jews-oppose-trump-but-the-orthodox-stick-with-him/

    DUDE! Really! This ain’t some Fundamentalist Israel-Firster Christian Zionist forum. This is Unz. We’re on to the stuff you’re flinging. You can’t get away with your BS here.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @Anon
  457. mcohen says:
    @Ilyana_Rozumova

    The problem is your eyes.the better you look the more you see.

  458. Sean says:
    @Peripatetic commenter

    Bavarian Illuminati. You may want to read Fire in the Minds of Men: Origins of the Revolutionary Faith by noted historian and Russia specialist James H Billington before you espouse the bien pensant idea of Illuminati as a joke. According to Billington, the creators of Bolshevism drew on a “Russian tradition of violence and on German concepts of organization”, and the influence of the Illuminati is now as underestimated as it was once exaggerated

    • Replies: @Peripatetic commenter
  459. cassandra says:
    @Rurik

    Maybe this will explain the correlation between resistance to EU immigration and reluctance to support Palestine; I don’t think this politic is exclusive to the Jewish community.

    The EU’s support of African and Middle-Eastern immigration is imbecilic, given evidence of the Wahhabist support of radical Islam, and the doctrines promoted in the Koran, among many other reasons. “Islamophobia” as used by the media is a propagandistic misnomer: there’s a lot of rational cause for concern.

    So, while I’m disgusted with many of Israel’s policies toward them, I’m reluctant to blindly support the Palestinians because I don’t know how much of their anger is from disenfranchisement, and how much arises from doctrinaire Islamic hostility to the Jews as kaffir. Christians in Lebanon haven’t fared very well. (I doubt that supporters of Palestine have looked into this closely). I see the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a fight between two scorpions, which I hope both will lose.

    Many critics of Islam and immigration DO support Israel’s policies, though I suspect, like Palestinian supporters, they’re not looking very critically at the side they’re defending.

    Re: “allowing orcs to toss acid in their baby’s faces, when they’re not gang raping their school girls wholesale”

    The orcs originated as tortured mutilations of the beautiful elves, associated with the (Anglo-Saxon) west. Orcs populated the east, just like those abominable teutons, slavs and Russians do in Europe.

    You should have used “Southrons” instead for consistency with Middle Earth racism, I mean geography.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Rurik
  460. annamaria says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    “…why were they worse off under it than other Soviet citizens?”
    – You still did not get it. The Jews were not worse off than other Soviet citizens. They simply could not stop quetching, in a reflexive manner, about their special victimhood and special sufferings and antisemitism — even after their ilk had been involved in the horrific mass slaughter of Russians.
    Who exactly was “worse off” — Lazar Kaganovich, the wolf of Kremlin? The multitude of Jewish apparatchiks in the communist parties of the Soviet republics, like the crooked Khodorkovsky? The Moscow academia?
    “… their kids are not subjected to the horrors of poor integrated neighborhoods and schools” — what is that? There were no “integrated schools” in the Soviet Union. There was, however, a Jewish district of Birobidzhan, created for Soviet Jews, where the Jews did not want to resettle, despite the alleged antisemitism in Russia. “Yiddish writer David Bergelson played a large part in promoting Birobidzhan, although he himself did not really live there” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birobidzhan
    – You need to peruse this:
    “Labor camps were run under Naftaly Frenkel’ system “No work, no food”. This system was responsible for the high death toll of the camps:” https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.politics.bush/Bw-2Hlg16rw
    Matvei Berman “helped develop the GULAG system of [death] camps:” https://www.secret-bases.co.uk/wiki/Matvei_Berman
    – And here is a tragicomedy featuring Naftaly Frenkel’s distant relative from Israel: http://thesaker.is/bloody-monday-grandnephew-of-gulag-organizer-stabbed-the-echo-of-moscow-editor/

  461. @Sean

    There must be some kind of way out of here

    /me backs away slowly to avoid the crazies!

    • Replies: @Sean
  462. Anonymous[126] • Disclaimer says:
    @cassandra

    Many critics of Islam and immigration DO support Israel’s policies

    Dream on. You’ve underestimated the goyim (once again). No one sane supports your illegitimate, genocidal, shit-hole “policies”.

    We know about the “dancing Israelis” on 9/11 – who believed that the white goyim will hate the non-white goyim for eternity and side with Israel’s fuckery.

    We’ve seen Jews across the world cheer every Muslim terrorist rape and carnage in White goyim domains – who believed that the white goyim will hate the non-white goyim for eternity and side with Israel’s fuckery.

    …and we’re not buying it. You’ll be facing ALL of us in the near future.

    • Agree: Rurik, Kolo
    • Replies: @cassandra
  463. utu says:
    @German_reader

    You made me think of a passage in “The beautiful Mrs. Seidenman” where Mrs. Seidenman is arrested by Gestapo in Warsaw but manages to be extricated form it and then the narrator compares German Gestapo and its mentality representing German character to that of NKVD and (((Asiatic))) mentality which in no circumstances would allow Mrs. Seidenman being let go.

  464. Bill says:
    @Dan Hayes

    It’s both.

    • Disagree: Dan Hayes
  465. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @jsm

    Trump got only 35.2% of Jewish vote, which means 64.8% are NOT America-Firsters.

    So you equate being a Democrat for the death of America!

    And, yeah, that would be the non-religious ones, cuz the majority of religious ones DID vote for Trump, 54%.

    Well why not. He’s a staunch supporter of Israel, and most if not all of his grandchildren are being raises as Jews.

    We’re on to the stuff you’re flinging.

    No. You’re just another of Unz’s idiot anti-Semitic chorus.

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
  466. Rurik says:
    @cassandra

    I don’t know how much of their anger is from disenfranchisement, and how much arises from doctrinaire Islamic hostility to the Jews

    the Jews lived in Palestine side by side in relative harmony with Muslims and Christians for hundreds of years. Just as Jews thrive in harmony in Iran, and other Muslim nations.

    So considering that fact, it seems prima facia evidence that the hostility the Palestinians have for the Zionist Jews- who murdered their relatives, often in the most barbaric ways, in order to mass-terrorize the Pals into fleeing literally for their lives into the desert, whereupon these same Jewish terrorist murderers then simply claimed their land and homes and farms and businesses as their own.

    I suspect that has something to do with the hostility.

    And if that wasn’t enough, they’ve relentlessly tormented, murdered, tortured and oppressed the Palestinians with the apparent aim to drive them so insane with helplessness and despair, that they simply die of humanity’s indifference.

    The orcs originated as tortured mutilations of the beautiful elves

    however they orginated, what I’ve seen are the characterization is the recent movies, and from what I’ve seen, the orcs in the movies don’t even come close to the sub-human fiends that would toss acid in a baby’s face.

    I owe an apology to Tolkien’s orcs

    for comparing them to the sub-human scum in England who did that.

    • Agree: Mike P
    • Replies: @Anon
    , @cassandra
  467. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rurik

    I heard about it. She went to a beach town, I believe the infamous Myrtle Beach was kidnapped, held tortured and raped by Orcs and fed to alligators.

    Check amren storm front and C of CC for the truth about Orc on human crime.

  468. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Rurik

    To respond on all points to your lengthy comment is more than I presently have time for.

    But briefly, there are aspects of your view that I share. However, justice will not flow from injustice. Because someone has a last name indicative of possible Jewish extraction, Unz for instance, does not tell you anything about their beliefs, moral, political or religious, or if indeed they have a religion.

    In the West, most Jews as identified by last name are not religious. Most just go to work each day to earn what they need to raise a family, educate their kids, and hopefully save a bit for their old age. Most love the place where they grew up, and wish well of the country where they live.

    To subject such people to group condemnation is not only unjust but counterproductive. All groups have their control mechanisms. The Catholic church warns straying members of the flock of the risk of Hell and eternal damnation. The Jewish establishment can hold the allegiance of many at the periphery of the tribe by warning of the age-old, goyish mental disease of anti-Semitism. .Unz seems to be working to stoke the fear of anti-Semitism the anti-Semitism of those filled with visions of Jews drinking Christian babies’ blood, and praying earnestly to the Devil.

    The greatest villains in the war on the European peoples are the indigenous elites, who have always hated the common people (at least since the industrial revolution), and are glad to work with a tiny minority of ambitious and unscrupulous Jews, people like George Soros and Hollywood scum to destroy their own people in the interests of the globalist Money Power, which encompasses the rich of every ethnicity.

  469. renfro says:
    @Anonymous

    Agree. After all the tactics in the Protocols are standard procedure for the overthrow/subversion of a nation….so why wouldn’t the Jews have written it out as their own plan. Of course the Jews always ascribe everything to be someone else’s doing.

    Full text of “Bolshevik propaganda. Hearings before a subcommittee of the Committee on the judiciary, United States Senate, Sixty-fifth Congress, third session and thereafter, pursuant to S. Res. 439 and 469. February 11, 1919, to March 10, 1919″

    https://archive.org/stream/cu31924030480051/cu31924030480051_djvu.txt

  470. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rurik

    Here is the story of one Palestinian Greek Orthodox family.

    The family lived in Jerusalem for centuries. The father had a good job working for the city of Jerusalem. Mothers dowry was some small farms from which the family got rent. They lived in a 10 room house in the Christian Arab quarter. There were 8 children, mostly boys

    When WW2 ended and the Jews started their terrorism. One of the older boys was killed by a Jewish terrorist bomb set off in a busy street.

    1948 zionists bribe threaten and extort UN delegates and Israel becomes a Jewish state and Jews drive out Palestinians. Father was fired from his job with no pension of course. The tenant farms were stolen and given to Jews. No compensation of course.

    One day when the youngest boy was 4 armed Jewish soldiers invaded the home and gave the family one hour to pack up and leave. Being Greek Orthodox the family were sheltered in a pilgrims hostel.

    The church sponsored many Christian families to America. That family arrived in Pasadena Ca. The older boys went to work the younger ones to school. The youngest attended Pasadena Jr college for a year and was enraged by Jewish instructors and their pro Jew anti Palestinian propaganda

    The family’s last name was Sirhan. The youngest boy’s first name was Sirhan.

    There are millions of Palestinians whose homes farms and businesses were confiscated by Zionists.

    • Replies: @Rurik
    , @Anon
    , @refl
  471. @cassandra

    Apparent Baby Boomer-era Cassandra asked: “As Jackie Gleason used to say back in the day, “…and AWAY we go.”

    Hi (Mama?) Cass,

    Re; Above quotation, & since you displayed knowledge on 1950s-1960s TV shows, I am anxious to know if you’re familiar with the popular sitcom “Hogan’s Heroes”?

    Fyi, The show’s German officers were made out to be impressionable dolts and P.O.W. Colonel Hogan, brilliantly deceptive, a modern day CIA/Mossad composite.

    Before I go away (like Jackie Gleason!), do you have any idea why the producers of “Hogan’s Heroes” never had its cast attempt cunning sabotage of the process involving gassing 6 million Jews?

    Selah, “back in the day” the dumb goy Stalag 13 Colonel Klink: “Dismissed!”

    • Replies: @cassandra
  472. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    So now we know for sure. You are a Jew, a very chauvinist pro Zionist Jew.

    If, if, you did grow up near Detroit, I bet it was Grosse Point or Bloomfield Hills.

  473. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @jsm

    1. Religious Jews are a minority of Jews.

    2. The professional jews that is the self appointed leadership; ADL AJC AZC Presidents of thousands of Jewish organizations are one and all non or religious Jews and 100% pro Zionist. J Street and a few others are not so extremely anti Palestinian as most, but they are all Jewish chauvinist and anti Palestinian.

    The non religious professional Jew spokesmen keep the religious conservative pro Republican minority firmly in their place.

  474. Rurik says:
    @CanSpeccy

    To subject such people to group condemnation is not only unjust but counterproductive.

    I agree

    so kindly tell me when or where, in my over a million words on this site, have I ever done so?

    The only thing I’ve done, is ask a (perhaps inconvenient) question about where are the Jews who agree that it’s wrong to genocide the Pals and it’s wrong to demand Europe commit suicide.

    And if you’d have been following the tone of this inquiry, it was motivated by my conversations with others here who feel I’m far too forgiving of ‘the Jews’. I’ve been pointing out that many of them are very excellent people, and I know that’s true.

    But then I also was sort of wondering, they all seem to either support the Pals, but then don’t support the West.

    Or, they support the West, (Trump, Brexit, Putin) but they don’t support the Pals.

    So where are the Jews, who like myself, support the West and support the Pals.

    That’s all I’m asking. Does asking such a question amount to a blanket condemnation of all Jews?

    I doubt that.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Anon
    , @Anon
    , @CanSpeccy
  475. Anonymous[126] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rurik

    We’re all supposed to simultaneously genuflect to the myriad Holocaust museums with self-reflection for what ‘we’ did to those people, while at the same time, not only participating in the genocide of the Palestinians, but also our own.

    Bravo. Powerful words.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  476. Rurik says:
    @Anon

    But then why do your people and your righteous cause unmitigated harm by assassinating a loved icon of America, right when the American people were most sympathetic to that family?

    Stupid, blind rage?

    If I’m a Palestinian, then I want people to see that I’m a good person, who if allowed to tell my story, will help perhaps to undo some of the evils my people are subjected to daily.

    But if I murder a leader to show my mettle, then I’m only playing into the Zionist’s wet dreams.

    such a tragic tragedy.

    what I’d like to see is a grass root campaign by the justice-loving people of the world to demand the release of Ahed Tamimi and Tommy Robinson.

    If people weren’t so parochial and narrow minded, they’d see that both these brave people are being persecuted by the same Fiend. But too many brain-washed Brits will say ‘fuck that terrorist chick, she shouldn’t be slapping men with guns’.

    And too many tribal Muslims will say ‘fuck that racist, let him rot in prison for his anti-Muslim ways’.

    The Fiend is playing these people against each other, as it destroys both Palestine and England.

    The world needs to have solidarity against the Fiend. Muslim, Christian, Alt-right, gay, straight and whatever.

    We all need to say with one powerful voice, that ALL people are entitled to self-determination! And if y0u deny it to the British people, then you have no right to demand it for Palestine, and vice versa.

    • Replies: @Anon
  477. Anonymous[126] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rurik

    So where are the Jews, who like myself, support the West and support the Pals.

    Almost nowhere.

    The Tribe’s crutch is deeply dysgenic. They don’t know it ,but it’s a dry evolutionary branch. Welcome to the new dawn.

  478. Anonymous[386] • Disclaimer says:

    Caused by the Khazars, who then destroyed Germany twice.

  479. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Anon

    Bond is empire vs empire. Bond is a tool of imperial power than of freedom.

    One of the driving forces behind the Bond novels is British resentment of their loss of empire and their new status as a third-rate power. And (to an even greater extent) British jealousy of American power and British contempt for American crassness and stupidity.

    One of the things you notice in the novels is that Bond does not like the post-war world one little bit, which presumably reflects Fleming’s views.

    It’s amusing that the Bond novels were seen at the time as being a new and fresh approach to spy fiction when in fact they’re very backward-looking. Actually it’s their backward-looking feel that provides much of their charm. Fleming was very much in the established tradition of the British spy thriller, of writers like Dennis Wheatley and Sax Rohmer.

  480. Anon[393] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rurik

    The only thing I’ve done, is ask a (perhaps inconvenient) question about where are the Jews who agree that it’s wrong to genocide the Pals and it’s wrong to demand Europe commit suicide.

    It’s a great question. (Although isn’t it also true that there are few Gentiles to be found who hold that view?)

  481. Anonymous[393] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    Agree.

  482. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @CanSpeccy

    Your comment defines anti Semitic as stating the facts about who did what in Russia between 1870 and 2018

  483. Seraphim says:
    @ChuckOrloski

    The cooperation between Weimar Germany and Soviet Russia is no news. It was always known, although kept under wraps for obvious reasons.
    It was the result of:
    ‘The Treaty of Rapallo, the agreement signed on 16 April 1922 between Germany and the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (RSFSR) under which each renounced all territorial and financial claims against the other following the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk and World War I.
    The two governments also agreed to normalise their diplomatic relations and to “co-operate in a spirit of mutual goodwill in meeting the economic needs of both countries”.
    Secretly the two sides established elaborate military cooperation, while publicly denying it’. But it was published at Riga and reprinted in the London ‘Times’ on 6 May 1922.
    One of the objectives was cooperation against the ‘Polish menace’. It is the ‘seed’ of the ‘surprising’ ‘Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact’ of late.
    The ‘Hitler was saved by Stalin’ is rather fanciful. The Nazis vehemently denounced the collaboration and accused its signatories of being “November Criminals”.
    One thing is sure though. The treaty enabled the training of German officers in Russia in the conditions of the limitations imposed on German Army by the Versailles Peace. That would explain also how Russians had so reliable intelligence sources in the Wehrmacht.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @ChuckOrloski
  484. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    What makes you think I’m a Palestinian? I’m not, I’m an old American as we call ourselves and Hildabeast calls deplorable. And the Kennedys, especially RFK were never icons of mine. RFK was a media creation.

    I like to tell the story of what happened to the Sirhan family as an example because Sirhan is the most famous Palestinian refugee in America. Probably most famou Pasadena high school grad in America as well.

    I gather you approve of what happened to the Sirhan family?

    How would you like armed soldiers stomping into your home and ordering you to pack up in one hour and leave with just what you can carry?? That after firing you from the job you’ve held for 25 years ? How’d you like to leave a 10 room house for a couple rooms in a pilgrims hostel with 7 kids in tow? How’d you like to leave your home and possessions with just what you could carry?

    Being a Jewish chauvinist I suppose you think what the Zionist invaders did to the Sirhans and millions of others was right and moral and good and just.

  485. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rurik

    I read Jewish publications regularly. You can find them online. There are several constant themes.

    1. Israel has the absolute right to expel and genocide the Palestinians who have no right to live in Israel, Gaza or anywhere in earth

    2 Muslims Arabs and Africans have the absolute right to invade and colonize Europe. Anyone who objects is a racist who deserved prison and losing his her job.

    3 Anyone who objects to transgenders and gay marriage is guilty of hate crime.

    4. This years foreign affairs cause is that America must invade and destroy Iran as a few years ago the cause was that America must invade and destroy Iraq.

    The Jewish press, having triumphed in the transgender cause hasn’t yet figured out this years internal affairs perversion

    • Replies: @Anon
  486. Bukowski says:
    @refl

    The authors of the blog that you linked to –

    https://firstworldwarhiddenhistory.wordpress.com

    have written a book called Prolonging the Agony : How The Anglo American Establishment Deliberately Extended WW1 By Three and a Half Years. They write about the Gallipoli campaign in some of the chapters – “Yet another scandal was the complete failure of the Gallipoli campaign. Because the Russians had suffered such vast losses on the Eastern Front, the Czar demanded evidence that war was worthwhile. The promise of Constantinople was the prize that animated him most and the Gallipoli campaign was concocted by the Secret Elite to make it appear that a serious effort was underway to attack Turkey and win Constantinople for Russia. It was set up to fail. You may think this impossible but Prolonging The Agony provides detailed evidence that the campaign was an orchestrated farce from start to finish. But it convinced the Russians and kept them in the war.”

    https://firstworldwarhiddenhistory.wordpress.com/2018/03/06/prolonging-the-agony-2-the-full-hidden-history-exposed/

    I have ordered a copy of this book to read myself after being intrigued after looking at the blog. You can get it from Amazon, The Book Depository and other dealers. As an Australian I am particularly interested to find out if the ANZACs were considered expendable and used as colonial cannon fodder.

    • Replies: @refl
  487. Hibernian says:
    @Jon Halpenny

    “If true it would give an indication of the evil nature of the British Empire.”

    As if any more were needed than we already have.

  488. Anon[202] • Disclaimer says:
    @Sean

    Orwell’s pigs are not communists, certain pigs invented communisn because they were the cleverest animals in the barnyard.

    But they are not Jews either because Molotov (Squealer), Stalin (Napoleon) and all other pigs are not Jews. You should argue with Tyrion2 who brought this up before I did and to whom the topic is more interesting. As I understand it your argument is now that the “good” pigs are Jews and the “bad” pigs are Gentiles, which I suppose makes sense but is somewhat trivial.

    And 1984 has Goldstein

    Goldstein may or may not actually exist, and while he is a Trotskyish figure he is certainly not a good guy. There are no good guys in 1984.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    , @Sean
  489. @Ilyana_Rozumova

    The analogies between South Africa and the United States are vivid in that respect-

    The group of whites, though for different reasons, who are most subject to the ructions of South Africa are whites from old Dutch/English colonial stock while the Jews, an urban group with a fluid skill-set (Dentists, businessmen, lawyers) need only pick up a suitcase.

    British South Africans had links to other countries. They could move to the UK.

    Jews, having never been allowed to own land, were not going to be the farmers. One can practice dentistry in Australia as easily as they can on the Cape.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  490. Molecule says:
    @refl

    good mention! Herbert Hoover. The young Herbert Hoover, fresh out of college, was appointed by Schiff to travel the world, developing a report on bank reserves (in ground and bullion) of major nations. At the time all international settlements were in gold.

    One has to ask, who financed the Bolshevik Revolutions. To pull off their stunts, revolutionaries like Trotsky, needs gold, and lots of it.

    Herbert Hoover was their supplier. As a young lad, he was in charge of Belgian Relief Fund. Basically, a handful of displaced Belgian “refugees” needs socks, tents, blankets and the occasional bowl of oatmeal.

    According to his own autobiography, for this operation, Hoover was given a budget of $20 Million, monthly. With gold then at $20 per oz, that’s 1,000,000 ounces of gold, per month. For a few pairs of socks and a few bowls of oatmeal.

    Hoover’s Beligan Relief Fund controlled massive infrastructure across Europe and the Baltic. He controlled “privateer” gunships that cruised the Baltic, some with 12″ guns. He controlled private railroad lines with locomotives and rolling stock that went from Lisbon to Yalta.

    The Bolshevik revolutions would not have been possible without financial and logistical support supplied by a young Herberie Hoover. He worked with Emile Francqui.

    Trotsky’s most famous scholary study at the time was translated as “In Defence of [State-sponsored] Terrorism.” In the US, when I did my research, Google would not return meaningful search results unless I forced the British spelling of the title, spelling defence with a c instead of an s.

    Trostky, Lenin, Francqui, et al, all needed financing. In the turbublence of an early 1900s revolution, that meant gold.

    Hoover operated the Lonton cutout, that supplied the gold, railroad cars and locomotives, and privateer gunships in the Baltic, that made the Revolution possible.

    In the US, he is considered to be a godfather of “conservatism.”

  491. Anon[393] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    What are some publications worth reading regularly?

    • Replies: