THE INTERNATIONAL JEW

The World's Foremost Problem

Being a Reprint of a Series of Articles Appearing in The Dearborn
Independent from May 22 to October 2, 1920

November, 1920




Preface


Why discuss the Jewish Question? Because it is here, and because its
emergence into American thought should contribute to its solution, and
not to a continuance of those bad conditions which surround the Question
in other countries.

The Jewish Question has existed in the United States for a long time.
Jews themselves have known this, even if Gentiles have not. There have
been periods in our own country when it has broken forth with a sullen
sort of strength which presaged darker things to come. Many signs
portend that it is approaching an acute stage.

Not only does the Jewish Question touch those matters that are of common
knowledge, such as financial and commercial control, usurpation of
political power, monopoly of necessities, and autocratic direction of
the very news that the American people read; but it reaches into
cultural regions and so touches the very heart of American life.

This question reaches down into South America and threatens to become an
important factor in Pan-American relations. It is interwoven with much
of the menace of organized and calculated disorder which troubles the
nations today. It is not of recent growth, but its roots go deep, and
the long Past of this Problem is counterbalanced by prophetic hopes and
programs which involve a very deliberate and creative view of the
Future.

This little book is the partial record of an investigation of the Jewish
Question. It is printed to enable interested readers to inform
themselves on the data published in The Dearborn Independent prior to
Oct. 1, 1920. The demand for back copies of the paper was so great that
the supply was exhausted early, as was also a large edition of a booklet
containing the first nine articles of the series. The investigation
still proceeds, and the articles will continue to appear as heretofore
until the work is done.

The motive of this work is simply a desire to make facts known to the
people. Other motives have, of course, been ascribed to it. But the
motive of prejudice or any form of antagonism is hardly strong enough to
support such an investigation as this. Moreover, had an unworthy motive
existed, some sign of it would inevitably appear in the work itself. We
confidently call the reader to witness that the tone of these articles
is all that it should be. The International Jew and his satellites, as
the conscious enemies of all that Anglo-Saxons mean by civilization, are
not spared, nor is that unthinking mass which defends anything that a
Jew does, simply because it has been taught to believe that what Jewish
leaders do is Jewish. Neither do these articles proceed upon a false
emotion of brotherhood and apology, as if this stream of doubtful
tendency in the world were only accidentally Jewish. We give the facts
as we find them; that of itself is sufficient protection against
prejudice or passion.

This volume does not complete the case by any means. But it brings the
reader along one step. In future compilations of these and subsequent
articles the entire scope of the inquiry will more clearly appear.

October, 1920.




Contents


I. The Jew in Character and Business

II. Germany's Reaction Against the Jew

III. Jewish History in the U. S.

IV. The Jewish Question--Fact or Fancy?

V. Anti-Semitism--Will It Appear In the U. S.

VI. Jewish Question Breaks Into the Magazines

VII. Arthur Brisbane to the Help of Jewry

VIII. Does a Definite Jewish World Program Exist?

IX. The Historic Basis of Jewish Imperialism

X. An Introduction to the "Jewish Protocols"

XI. "Jewish" Estimate of Gentile Human Nature

XII. "Jewish Protocols" Claim Partial Fulfillment

XIII. "Jewish" Plan to Split Society by "Ideas"

XIV. Did the Jews Foresee the World War?

XV. Is the Jewish "Kahal" the Modern "Soviet"?

XVI. How the "Jewish Question" Touches the Farm

XVII. Does Jewish Power Control the World Press?

XVIII. Does this Explain Jewish Political Power?

XIX. The All-Jewish Mark on "Red Russia"

XX. Jewish Testimony in Favor of Bolshevism




"Among the distinguishing mental and moral traits of the Jews may be
mentioned: distaste for hard or violent physical labor; a strong family
sense and philoprogenitiveness; a marked religious instinct; the courage
of the prophet and martyr rather than of the pioneer and soldier;
remarkable power to survive in adverse environments, combined with great
ability to retain racial solidarity; capacity for exploitation, both
individual and social; shrewdness and astuteness in speculation and
money matters generally; an Oriental love of display and a full
appreciation of the power and pleasure of social position; a very high
average of intellectual ability."

--The New International Encyclopedia.

I.

The Jew in Character and Business


The Jew is again being singled out for critical attention throughout the
world. His emergence in the financial, political and social spheres has
been so complete and spectacular since the war, that his place, power
and purpose in the world are being given a new scrutiny, much of it
unfriendly. Persecution is not a new experience to the Jew, but
intensive scrutiny of his nature and super-nationality is. He has
suffered for more than 2,000 years from what may be called the
instinctive anti-Semitism of the other races, but this antagonism has
never been intelligent nor has it been able to make itself intelligible.
Nowadays, however, the Jew is being placed, as it were, under the
microscope of economic observation that the reasons for his power, the
reasons for his separateness, the reasons for his suffering may be
defined and understood.

In Russia he is charged with being the source of Bolshevism, an
accusation which is serious or not according to the circle in which it
is made; we in America, hearing the fervid eloquence and perceiving the
prophetic ardor of young Jewish apostles of social and industrial
reform, can calmly estimate how it may be. In Germany he is charged with
being the cause of the Empire's collapse and a very considerable
literature has sprung up, bearing with it a mass of circumstantial
evidence that gives the thinker pause. In England he is charged with
being the real world ruler, who rules as a super-nation over the
nations, rules by the power of gold, and who plays nation against nation
for his own purposes, remaining himself discreetly in the background. In
America it is pointed out to what extent the elder Jews of wealth
and the younger Jews of ambition swarmed through the war
organizations--principally those departments which dealt with the
commercial and industrial business of war, and also the extent to which
they have clung to the advantage which their experience as agents of the
government gave them.

In simple words, the question of the Jews has come to the fore, but like
other questions which lend themselves to prejudice, efforts will be made
to hush it up as impolitic for open discussion. If, however, experience
has taught us anything it is that questions thus suppressed will sooner
or later break out in undesirable and unprofitable forms.

The Jew is the world's enigma. Poor in his masses, he yet controls the
world's finances. Scattered abroad without country or government, he yet
presents a unity of race continuity which no other people has achieved.
Living under legal disabilities in almost every land, he has become the
power behind many a throne. There are ancient prophecies to the effect
that the Jew will return to his own land and from that center rule the
world, though not until he has undergone an assault by the united
nations of mankind.

The single description which will include a larger percentage of Jews
than members of any other race is this: he is in business. It may be
only gathering rags and selling them, but he is in business. From the
sale of old clothes to the control of international trade and finance,
the Jew is supremely gifted for business. More than any other race he
exhibits a decided aversion to industrial employment, which he balances
by an equally decided adaptability to trade. The Gentile boy works his
way up, taking employment in the productive or technical departments;
but the Jewish boy prefers to begin as messenger, salesman or
clerk--anything--so long as it is connected with the commercial side of
the business. An early Prussian census illustrates this characteristic:
of a total population of 269,400, the Jews comprised six per cent or
16,164. Of these, 12,000 were traders and 4,164 were workmen. Of the
Gentile population, the other 94 per cent, or 153,236 people, there were
only 17,000 traders.

A modern census would show a large professional and literary class added
to the traders, but no diminution of the percentage of traders and not
much if any increase in the number of wage toilers. In America alone
most of the big business, the trusts and the banks, the natural
resources and the chief agricultural products, especially tobacco,
cotton and sugar, are in the control of Jewish financiers or their
agents. Jewish journalists are a large and powerful group here. "Large
numbers of department stores are held by Jewish firms," says the Jewish
Encyclopedia, and many if not most of them are run under Gentile names.
Jews are the largest and most numerous landlords of residence property
in the country. They are supreme in the theatrical world. They
absolutely control the circulation of publications throughout the
country. Fewer than any race whose presence among us is noticeable, they
receive daily an amount of favorable publicity which would be impossible
did they not have the facilities for creating and distributing it
themselves. Werner Sombart, in his "Jew and Modern Capitalism" says, "If
the conditions in America continue to develop along the same lines as in
the last generation, if the immigration statistics and the proportion of
births among all the nationalities remain the same, our imagination may
picture the United States of fifty or a hundred years hence as a land
inhabited only by Slavs, Negroes and Jews, wherein the Jews will
naturally occupy the position of economic leadership." Sombart is a
pro-Jewish writer.

The question is, If the Jew is in control, how did it happen? This is a
free country. The Jew comprises only about three per cent of the
population; to every Jew there are 97 Gentiles; to the 3,000,000 Jews in
the United States there are 97,000,000 Gentiles. If the Jew is in
control, is it because of his superior ability, or is it because of the
inferiority and don't-care attitude of the Gentiles?

It would be very simple to answer that the Jews came to America, took
their chances like other people and proved more successful in the
competitive struggle. But that would not include all the facts. And
before a more adequate answer can be given, two points should be made
clear. This first is this: all Jews are not rich controllers of wealth.
There are poor Jews aplenty, though most of them even in their poverty
are their own masters. While it may be true that the chief financial
controllers of the country are Jews, it is not true that every Jew is
one of the financial controllers of the country. The classes must be
kept distinct for a reason which will appear when the methods of the
rich Jews and the methods of the poor Jews to gain power are
differentiated. Secondly, the fact of Jewish solidarity renders it
difficult to measure Gentile and Jewish achievements by the same
standard. When a great block of wealth in America was made possible by
the lavish use of another block of wealth from across the seas; that is
to say, when certain Jewish immigrants came to the United States with
the financial backing of European Jewry behind them, it would be unfair
to explain the rise of that class of immigration by the same rules which
account for the rise of, say, the Germans or the Poles who came here
with no resource but their ambition and strength. To be sure, many
individual Jews come in that way, too, with no dependence but
themselves, but it would not be true to say that the massive control of
affairs which is exercised by Jewish wealth was won by individual
initiative; it was rather the extension of financial control across the
sea.

That, indeed, is where any explanation of Jewish control must begin.
Here is a race whose entire period of national history saw them peasants
on the land, whose ancient genius was spiritual rather than material,
bucolic rather than commercial, yet today, when they have no country, no
government, and are persecuted in one way or another everywhere they go,
they are declared to be the principal though unofficial rulers of the
earth. How does so strange a charge arise, and why do so many
circumstances seem to justify it?

Begin at the beginning. During the formative period of their national
character the Jews lived under a law which made plutocracy and pauperism
equally impossible among them. Modern reformers who are constructing
model social systems on paper would do well to look into the social
system under which the early Jews were organized. The Law of Moses made
a "money aristocracy," such as Jewish financiers form today, impossible
because it forbade the taking of interest. It made impossible also the
continuous enjoyment of profit wrung out of another's distress.
Profiteering and sheer speculation were not favored under the Jewish
system. There could be no land-hogging; the land was apportioned among
the people, and though it might be lost by debt or sold under stress, it
was returned every 50 years to its original family ownership, at which
time, called "The Year of Jubilee," there was practically a new social
beginning. The rise of great landlords and a moneyed class was
impossible under such a system, although the interim of 50 years gave
ample scope for individual initiative to assert itself under fair
competitive conditions.

If, therefore, the Jews had retained their status as a nation, and had
remained in Palestine under the Law of Moses, they would hardly have
achieved the financial distinction which they have since won. Jews never
got rich out of one another. Even in modern times they have not become
rich out of each other but out of the nations among whom they dwelt.
Jewish law permitted the Jew to do business with a Gentile on a
different basis than that on which he did business with a brother Jew.
What is called "the Law of the Stranger" was defined thus: "unto a
stranger thou mayest lend upon usury; but unto thy brother thou shalt
not lend upon usury."

Being dispersed among the nations, but never merging themselves with the
nations and never losing a very distinctive identity, the Jew has had
the opportunity to practice "the ethics of the stranger" for many
centuries. Being strangers among strangers, and often among cruelly
hostile strangers, they have found this law a compensating advantage.
Still, this alone would not account for the Jew's preeminence in
finance. The explanation of that must be sought in the Jew himself, his
vigor, resourcefulness and special proclivities.

Very early in the Jewish story we discover the tendency of Israel to be
a master nation, with other nations as its vassals. Notwithstanding the
fact that the whole prophetic purpose with reference to Israel seems to
have been the moral enlightenment of the world through its agency,
Israel's "will to mastery" apparently hindered that purpose. At least
such would seem to be the tone of the Old Testament. Divinely ordered to
drive out the Canaanites that their corrupt ideas might not contaminate
Israel, the Jews did not obey, according to the old record. They looked
over the Canaanitish people and perceived what great amount of man-power
would be wasted if they were expelled, and so Israel enslaved them--"And
it came to pass, when Israel was strong, that they put the Canaanites to
tribute, and did not utterly drive them out." It was this form of
disobedience, this preference of material mastery over spiritual
leadership, that marked the beginning of Israel's age-long disciplinary
distress.

The Jews' dispersion among the nations temporarily (that is, for more
than 25 centuries now) changed the program which their scriptures
declare was divinely planned, and that dispersion continues until today.
There are spiritual leaders in modern Judaism who still claim that
Israel's mission to the nations is spiritual, but their assertions that
Israel is today fulfilling that mission are not as convincing as they
might be if accompanied by more evidence. Israel throughout the modern
centuries is still looking at the Gentile world and estimating what its
man-power can be made to yield. But the discipline upon Israel still
holds; he is an exile from his own land, condemned to be discriminated
against wherever he goes, until the time when exile and homelessness
shall end in a re-established Palestine, and Jerusalem again the moral
center of the earth, even as the elder prophets have declared.

Had the Jew become an employe, a worker for other men, his dispersion
would not probably have been so wide. But becoming a trader, his
instincts drew him round the habitable earth. There were Jews in China
at an early date. They appeared as traders in England at the time of the
Saxons. Jewish traders were in South America 100 years before the
Pilgrim Fathers landed at Plymouth Rock. Jews established the sugar
industry in the Island of St. Thomas in 1492. They were well established
in Brazil when only a few villages dotted the eastern coast of what is
now the United States. And how far they penetrated when once they came
here is indicated by the fact that the first white child born in Georgia
was a Jew--Isaac Minis. The Jew's presence round the earth, his
clannishness with his own people, made him a nation scattered among the
nations, a corporation with agents everywhere.

Another talent, however, contributed greatly to his rise in financial
power--his ability to invent new devices for doing business. Until the
Jew was pitted against the world, business was very crudely done. And
when we trace the origins of many of the business methods which simplify
and facilitate trade today, more likely than not we find a Jewish name
at the end of the clue. Many of the indispensable instruments of credit
and exchange were thought out by Jewish merchants, not only for use
between themselves, but to check and hold the Gentiles with whom they
dealt. The oldest bill of exchange extant was drawn by a Jew--one Simon
Rubens. The promissory note was a Jewish invention, as was also the
check "payable to bearer."

An interesting bit of history attaches to the "payable to bearer"
instrument. The Jews' enemies were always stripping them of their last
ounce of wealth, yet strangely, the Jews recovered very quickly and were
soon rich again. How this sudden recovery from looting and poverty?
Their assets were concealed under "bearer" and so a goodly portion was
always saved. In an age when it was lawful for any pirate to seize goods
consigned to Jews, the Jews were able to protect themselves by
consigning goods on policies that bore no names.

The influence of the Jew was to center business around goods instead of
persons. Previously all claims had been against persons; the Jew knew
that the goods were more reliable than the persons with whom he dealt,
and so he contrived to have claims laid against goods. Besides, this
device enabled him to keep himself out of sight as much as possible.
This introduced an element of hardness into business, inasmuch as it was
goods which were being dealt in rather than men being dealt with, and
this hardness remains. Another tendency which survives and which is of
advantage in veiling the very large control which Jews have attained, is
of the same origin as "bearer" bills; it permits a business dominated by
Jewish capital to appear under a name that gives no hint of Jewish
control.

The Jew is the only and original international capitalist, but as a rule
he prefers not to emblazon that fact upon the skies; he prefers to use
Gentile banks and trust companies as his agents and instruments. The
suggestive term "Gentile front" often appears in connection with this
practice.

The invention of the stock exchange is also credited to Jewish financial
talent. In Berlin, Paris, London, Frankfort and Hamburg, Jews were in
control of the first stock exchanges, while Venice and Genoa were openly
referred to in the talk of the day as "Jew cities" where great trading
and banking facilities might be found. The Bank of England was
established upon the counsel and assistance of Jewish emigrants from
Holland. The Bank of Amsterdam and the Bank of Hamburg both arose
through Jewish influence.

There is a curious fact to be noted in connection with the persecution
and consequent wanderings of the Jews about Europe and that is: wherever
they wandered, the center of business seemed to go with them. When the
Jews were free in Spain, there was the world's gold center. When Spain
drove out the Jews, Spain lost financial leadership and has never
regained it. Students of the economic history of Europe have always been
puzzled to discover why the center of trade should have shifted from
Spain, Portugal and Italy, up to the northern countries of Holland,
Germany, and England. They have sought for the cause in many things, but
none has proved completely explanatory. When, however, it is known that
the change was coincident with the expulsion of the Jews from the South
and their flight to the North, when it is known that upon the Jews'
arrival the northern countries began a commercial life which has
flourished until our day, the explanation does not seem difficult. Time
and again it has proved to be the fact that when the Jews were forced to
move, the center of the world's precious metals moved with them.

This distribution of the Jews over Europe and the world, each Jewish
community linked in a fellowship of blood, faith and suffering with
every other group, made it possible for the Jew to be international in
the sense that no other race or group of merchants could be at that
time. Not only were they everywhere (Americans and Russians are
everywhere, too) but they were in touch. They were organized before the
days of conscious international commercial organizations, they were
bound together by the sinews of a common life. It was observed by many
writers in the Middle Ages that the Jews knew more of what was
transpiring in Europe than the governments did. They also had better
knowledge of what was likely to occur. They knew more about conditions
than the statesmen did. This information they imparted by letter from
group to group, country to country. Indeed, they may be said thus to
have originated unconsciously the financial news-letter. Certainly the
information they were able to obtain and thus distribute was invaluable
to them in their speculative enterprises. Advance knowledge was an
immense advantage in the days when news was scarce, slow and unreliable.

This enabled Jewish financiers to become the agents of national loans, a
form of business which they encouraged wherever possible. The Jew has
always desired to have nations for his customers. National loans were
facilitated by the presence of members of the same family of financiers
in various countries, thus making an interlocking directorate by which
king could be played against king, government against government, and
the shrewdest use made of national prejudices and fears, all to the no
small profit of the fiscal agent.

One of the charges most commonly made against Jewish financiers today is
that they still favor this larger field of finance. Indeed, in all the
criticism that is heard regarding the Jew as a business man, there is
comparatively little said against him as an individual merchant serving
individual customers. Thousands of small Jewish merchants are highly
respected by their trade, just as tens of thousands of Jewish families
are respected as our neighbors. The criticism, insofar as it respects
the more important financiers, is not racial at all. Unfortunately the
element of race, which so easily lends itself to misinterpretation as
racial prejudice, is injected into the question by the mere fact that
the chain of international finance as it is traced around the world
discloses at every link a Jewish capitalist, financial family, or a
Jewish-controlled banking system. Many have professed to see in this
circumstance a conscious organization of Jewish power for Gentile
control, while others have attributed the circumstance to Jewish racial
sympathies, to the continuity of their family affairs down the line of
descent, and to the increase of collateral branches. In the old
Scriptural phrase, Israel grows as the vine grows, ever shooting out new
branches and deepening old roots, but always part of the one vine.

The Jew's aptitude for dealing with governments may also be traced to
the years of his persecution. He early learned the power of gold in
dealing with mercenary enemies. Wherever he went there followed him like
a curse the aroused antipathy of other peoples. The Jew was never
popular as a race; even the most fervid Jew will not deny that,
howsoever he may explain it. Individuals have been popular, of course;
many phases of Jewish nature are found to be very lovable when known;
but nevertheless one of the burdens the Jews have had to bear as a race
is this burden of racial unpopularity. Even in modern times, in
civilized countries, in conditions which render persecution absolutely
impossible, this unpopularity exists. And what is more, the Jew has not
seemed to care to cultivate the friendship of the Gentile masses, due
perhaps to the failures of experience, but due more likely to his inborn
persuasion that he belongs to a superior race. Whatever the true reason,
he has always placed his main dependence on cultivating friendship with
kings and nobles. What cared the Jew if the people gnashed their teeth
against him, so long as the king and the court were his friends? Thus
there was always, even through most of the severely trying times, "a
court Jew," one who had bought by loans and held by the strangle-hold of
debt an entrance to the king's chamber. The policy of the Jews has
always been to "go to headquarters." They never tried to placate the
Russian people, but they did endeavor to enlist the Russian court. They
never tried to placate the German people, but they did succeed in
permeating the German court. In England they shrug their shoulders at
the outspoken anti-Jew reactions of the British populace--what care
they? Have they not all of lorddom at their heels, do they not hold the
strings of Britain's purse?

Through this ability of theirs to "go to headquarters" it is possible to
account for the stronghold they got upon various governments and
nations. Added to this ability was, of course, the ability to produce
what the governments wanted. If a government wanted a loan, the Jew at
court could arrange it through Jews at other financial centers and
political capitals. If one government wanted to pay another government a
debt without risking the precious metal to a mule train through a
robber-infested country, the Jew at court arranged that too. He
transferred a piece of paper and the debt was paid by the banking house
at the foreign capital. The first time an army was ever fed in the
modern commissary way, it was done by a Jew--he had the capital and he
had the system; moreover he had the delight of having a nation for his
customer.

And this tendency, which served the race so well throughout the
troublous centuries, shows no sign of abatement. Certainly, seeing to
what an extent a race numerically so unimportant influences the various
governments of the world today, the Jew who reflects upon the disparity
between his people's numbers and their power may be pardoned if he sees
in that fact a proof of their racial superiority.

It may be said also that Jewish inventiveness in business devices
continues to the present time, as well as Jewish adaptability to
changing conditions. The Jew is credited with being the first to
establish branch houses in foreign countries in order that responsible
representatives of the home office might be on the ground taking instant
advantage of every opening. During the war a great deal was said about
the "peaceful penetration" which the "German Government" had effected in
the United States by establishing here branch offices and factories of
German firms. The fact that there were many German branch houses here is
unquestionable. It should be known, however, that they were not the
evidence of German enterprise but of Jewish enterprise. The old German
business houses were too conservative to "run after customers" even in
the hustling United States, but the Jewish firms were not, and they came
straight to America and hustled. In due time the competition forced the
more conservative German firms to follow suit. But the idea was Jewish
in its origin, not German.

Another modern business method whose origin is credited to Jewish
financiers is that by which related industries are brought together, as
for example, if an electrical power company is acquired, then the street
railway company using the electricity would be acquired too, one purpose
being in this way to conserve all the profit accruing along the line,
from the origination of the power down to the delivery of the street car
ride; but perhaps the main purpose being that, by the control of the
power house the price of current could be increased to the car company,
and by the control of the car company the cost of a ride could be
increased to the public, the controllers thus receiving an additional
profit all down the line. There is much of this going on in the world
today, and in the United States particularly. The portion of the
business immediately next to the ultimate consumer explains that its
costs have risen, but it does not explain that the costs were increased
by the owners and not by outsiders who were forced to do so by economic
pressure.

There is apparently in the world today a central financial force which
is playing a vast and closely organized game, with the world for its
table and universal control for its stakes. The people of civilized
countries have lost all confidence in the explanation that "economic
conditions" are responsible for all the changes that occur. Under the
camouflage of "economic law" a great many phenomena have been accounted
for which were not due to any law whatever except the law of the selfish
human will as operated by a few men who have the purpose and the power
to work on a wide scale with nations as their vassals.

Whatever else may be national, no one today believes that finance is
national. Finance is international. Nobody today believes that
international finance is in any way competitive. There are some
independent banking houses, but few strong independent ones. The great
masters, the few whose minds see clearly the entire play of the plan,
control numerous banking houses and trust companies, and one is used for
this while another is used for that, but there is no disharmony between
them, no correction of each other's methods, no competition in the
interests of the business world. There is as much unity of policy
between the principal banking houses of every country as there is
between the various branches of the United States Post Office--and for
the same reason, namely, they are all operated from the same source and
for the same purpose.

Just before the war Germany bought very heavily in American cotton and
had huge quantities of it tied up here for export. When war came, the
ownership of that mountainous mass of cotton wealth changed in one night
from Jewish names in Hamburg to Jewish names in London. At this writing
cotton is selling in England for less than it is selling in the United
States, and the effect of that is to lower the American price. When the
price lowers sufficiently, the market is cleared of cotton by buyers
previously prepared, and then the price soars to high figures again. In
the meantime, the same powers that have engineered the apparently
causeless strengthening and weakening of the cotton market, have seized
upon stricken Germany to be the sweatshop of the world. Certain groups
control the cotton, lend it to Germany to be manufactured, leave a
pittance of it there in payment for the labor that was used, and then
profiteer the length and breadth of the world on the lie that "cotton is
scarce." And when, tracing all these anti-social and colossally unfair
methods to their source, it is found that the responsible parties all
have a common characteristic, is it any wonder that the warning which
comes across the sea--"Wait until America becomes awake to the
Jew!"--has a new meaning?

Certainly, economic reasons no longer explain the condition in which the
world finds itself today. Neither does the ordinary explanation of "the
heartlessness of capital." Capital has endeavored as never before to
meet the demands of labor, and labor has gone to extremes in leading
capital to new concessions--but what has it advantaged either of them?
Labor has heretofore thought that capital was the sky over it, and it
made the sky yield, but behold, there was yet an higher sky which
neither capital nor labor had seen in their struggles one with another.
That sky is so far unyielding.

That which we call capital here in America is usually money used in
production, and we mistakenly refer to the manufacturer, the manager of
work, the provider of tools and jobs--we refer to him as the
"capitalist." Oh, no. He is not the capitalist in the real sense. Why,
he himself must go to capitalists for the money with which to finance
his plans. There is a power yet above him--a power which treats him far
more callously and holds him in a more ruthless hand than he would ever
dare display to labor. That, indeed, is one of the tragedies of these
times, that "labor" and "capital" are fighting each other, when the
conditions against which each one of them protests, and from which each
one of them suffers, is not within their power to remedy at all, unless
they find a way to wrest world control from that group of international
financiers who create and control both these conditions.

There is a super-capitalism which is supported wholly by the fiction
that gold is wealth. There is a super-government which is allied to no
government, which is free from them all, and yet which has its hand in
them all. There is a race, a part of humanity, which has never yet been
received as a welcome part, and which has succeeded in raising itself to
a power that the proudest Gentile race has never claimed--not even Rome
in the days of her proudest power. It is becoming more and more the
conviction of men all over the world that the labor question, the wage
question, the land question cannot be settled until first of all this
matter of an international super-capitalistic government is settled.

"To the victor belongs the spoils" is an old saying. And in a sense it
is true that if all this power of control has been gained and held by a
few men of a long-despised race, then either they are super-men whom it
is powerless to resist, or they are ordinary men whom the rest of the
world has permitted to obtain an undue and unsafe degree of power.
Unless the Jews are super-men, the Gentiles will have themselves to
blame for what has transpired, and they can look for rectification in a
new scrutiny of the situation and a candid examination of the
experiences of other countries.

[Issue of May 22, 1920.]




II.

Germany's Reaction Against the Jew


Humanity has become wise enough to discuss those forms of physical
sickness over which it formerly drew the veil of shame and secrecy, but
political hygiene is not so far advanced. The main source of the
sickness of the German national body is charged to be the influence of
the Jews, and although this was apparent to acute minds years ago, it is
now said to have gone so far as to be apparent to the least observing.
The eruption has broken out on the surface of the body politic, and no
further concealment of this fact is possible. It is the belief of all
classes of the German people that the collapse which has come since the
armistice, and the revolution from which they are being prevented a
recovery, are the result of Jewish intrigue and purpose. They declare it
with assurance; they offer a mass of facts to confirm it; they believe
that history will provide the fullest proof.

The Jew in Germany is regarded as only a guest of the people; he has
offended by trying to turn himself into the host. There are no stronger
contrasts in the world than the pure Germanic and pure Semitic races;
therefore, there has been no harmony between the two in Germany; the
German has regarded the Jew strictly as a guest, while the Jew,
indignant at not being given the privileges of the nation-family, has
cherished animosity against his host. 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. Jewish hands were in almost exclusive
control of the engines of publicity by which public opinion concerning
the German people was molded. The sole winners of the war were Jews.

But assertion is not enough; proof is wanted; therefore, consider the
evidence. What occurred immediately upon the change from the old regime
to the new? The cabinet composed of six men, which substituted the
Minister of State, was dominated by the Jews Haase and Landsberg. Haase
had control of foreign affairs; his assistant was the Jew Kautsky, a
Czech, who in 1918 was not even a German citizen. Also associated with
Haase were the Jews Cohn and Herzfeld. The Jew Schiffer was Financial
Minister of State, assisted by the Jew Bernstein. The Secretary of the
Interior was the Jew Preuss, with the Jew Dr. Freund for his assistant.
The Jew Fritz Max Cohen, who was correspondent of the Frankfurter
Zeitung in Copenhagen, was made government publicity agent.

The kingdom of Prussia duplicated this condition of affairs. The Jews
Hirsch and Rosenfeld dominated the cabinet, with Rosenfeld controlling
the Department of Justice, and Hirsch in the Department of the Interior.
The Jew Simon was in charge of the Treasury Department. The Prussian
Department of Justice was wholly manned and operated by Jews. The
Director of Education was the Jew Furtran with the assistance of the Jew
Arndt. The Director of the Colonial Office was the Jew Meyer-Gerhard.
The Jew Kastenberg was the director of the Department of Art. The War
Food Supply Department was directed by the Jew Wurm, while in the State
Food Department were the Jews Prof. Dr. Hirsch and the Geheimrat Dr.
Stadthagen. The Soldiers' and Workmen's Committee was directed by the
Jew Cohen, with the Jews Stern, Herz, Lowenberg, Frankel, Israelowicz,
Laubenheim, Seligsohn, Katzenstein, Laufenberg, Heimann, Schlesinger,
Merz and Weyl having control of various activities of that committee.

The Jew Ernst is chief of police at Berlin; in the same office at
Frankfurt is the Jew Sinzheimer; in Munich the Jew Steiner; in Essen the
Jew Levy. It will be remembered that the Jew Eisner was President of
Bavaria, his financial minister being the Jew Jaffe. Bavaria's trade,
commerce and industry were in control of the half-Jew Brentano. The Jews
Lipsinsky and Schwarz were active in the government of Saxony; the Jews
Thalheimer and Heiman in Wurtemberg; the Jew Fulda in Hessen.

Two delegates sent to the Peace Conference were Jews and a third was
notoriously the tool of Jewish purposes. In addition Jews swarmed
through the German delegation as experts and advisors--Max Warburg, Dr.
Von Strauss, Merton, Oskar Oppenheimer, Dr. Jaffe, Deutsch, Brentano,
Bernstein, Struck, Rathenau, Wassermann, and Mendelsohn-Bartholdi.

As to the part which Jews from other countries had in the Peace
Conference, German observers declare that any candid student may
discover by reading the accounts of impartial non-Jewish recorders of
that event. Only the non-Jewish historians seem to have been struck by
the fact; the multitude of Jewish writers apparently judged it wise to
conceal it.

Jewish influence in German affairs came strongly to the front during the
war. It came with all the directness and attack of a flying wedge, as if
previously prepared. The Jews of Germany were not German patriots during
the war, and although this will not appear a crime in the eyes of the
nations who were opposed to Germany, it may throw some light on the
Jew's assertion of patriotic loyalty to the land where he lives.
Thoughtful Germans hold that it is impossible for the Jew to be a
patriot, for reasons which will presently be given.

The point to be considered is the general claim that the persons already
named would not have obtained the positions in which they were found had
it not been for the Revolution, and the Revolution would not have come
had not they brought it. It is true that there were unsatisfactory
conditions in Germany, but they could and would have been adjusted by
the people themselves; the conditions which destroyed the people's
morale and were made impossible of reform were in control of the Jews.

The principal Jewish influences which are charged with bringing about
the downfall of German order may be named under three heads: (a) the
spirit of Bolshevism which masqueraded under the name of German
Socialism; (b) Jewish ownership and control of the Press; (c) Jewish
control of the food supply and the industrial machinery of the country.
There was a fourth, "higher up," but these worked upon the German people
directly.

As it is possible that German conclusions upon this matter may be
received doubtfully by peoples whose public opinion has been shaped by
Jewish influence, it may help to quote George Pitter-Wilson, of the
London Globe, who wrote early in April, 1919, "Bolshevism is the
dispossession of the Christian nations of the world to such an extent
that no capital will remain in the hands of the Christians, that all
Jews may jointly hold the world in their hands and reign wherever they
choose." As early as the second year of the war, German Jews were
preaching that Germany's defeat was necessary to the rise of the
proletariat, at which time Strobel declared, "I openly admit that a full
victory of the country would not be in the interest of the Social
Democrats." Everywhere it was preached that "the exaltation of the
proletariat after a won victory is an impossibility." These instances,
out of many, are cited not to reopen the military question but to show
how the so-called German Jew forgot loyalty to the country in which he
lived and joined the outside Jews in accomplishing the collapse of
Germany, and not merely, as we shall see, to rid Germany of militarism,
which every thoughtful German desired, but to throw the country into
such confusion as to permit them to seize control.

The press of Germany echoed this plan of the Jewish spokesmen, at first
faintly, then boldly. The Berliner Tageblatt and the Munchner Neuester
Nachrichten were during the whole war official and semi-official organs
of the government. They were owned and controlled by Jews, as was also
the Frankfurter Zeitung and a host of smaller papers that were their
spiritual dependents. These papers, it is charged, were really German
editions of the Jew-controlled press of the Allied countries, and their
purpose was the same. One of the great pieces of research that ought to
be undertaken for the purpose of showing the world how its thought is
manufactured for it every day, and for what ulterior purposes, is this
union of the Jewish press, which passes for the Public Press, throughout
the world.

The food and supplies of the people quickly passed into Jewish hands as
soon as the war emergency came, and then began a period of dishonesty
which destroyed the confidence of the bravest. Like all other patriotic
people, the German people knew that war meant sacrifice and suffering,
and like other people they were willing to share the common lot. But
they found themselves preyed upon by a class of Jews who had prepared
everything to make profit out of the common distress. Immediately Jews
appeared in banks, war companies, distribution societies, and the
ministries of supplies--wherever the life of the people could be
speculated in or taxed. Articles that were plentiful disappeared, only
to reappear again at high prices. The war companies were exclusively
Jewish, and although the government attempted to regulate the outgo of
food in the interests of all the people, it became notorious that those
with money could get all of anything they wanted, regardless of the food
cards. The Jews simply trebled the price of the goods they let go
without the cards, and so kept a stream of the nation's gold flowing
into their private treasuries. None of the government's estimates of the
food stocks could be depended on, because of the hidden hoards on which
these speculators drew. This began to disturb the morale of the people,
and complaints were made and prosecutions started; but as soon as the
cases came up it was discovered that the prosecutor appointed to charge
and the commissioner appointed to judge were also Jews, and so the cases
usually wore themselves out without results. When, however, a German
merchant was caught, great noise was made about it, and the penalty
placed upon him was equal to what all the others should have had. Go the
length and breadth of Germany today, say the reports, study the temper
of the people, and you will discover that the abuse of power by the Jews
has burned across Germany's memory like a hot iron.

While these influences were undermining the mass of the people, higher
influences of Jewish origin were operating upon the government. The
advisors of the Bethmann-Hollweg government were the great ship magnate
Ballin, a Jew; Theodor Wolff, of the Berliner Tageblatt and member of
the Pan-Jewish press; Von Gwinner, director of the German Bank who is
connected by marriage with the great Jew bankers, the Speyers; and
Rathenau, the leader of Jewish industrial-financial activities. These
men were at the source of things and were bending the government as the
other influences were bending the people.

The rich German Jew could buy the recognition he desired by acquiring
financial power over those interests which most directly affected the
ruling class of Germany, but how was the poor Jew to gain the
recognition he desired?--for all Jews are actuated by the same desire;
it is in them; they feel the spur to mastery. Having explored the
conquest of the higher circles by Jewish money-power, there is yet to
explore the conquest of the body of the nation by Jews who had no money
except what they could seize in the disorder which they caused. The
analysis that is given, follows:

The Jew is not an anarchist. He is not a destructionist. All this is
true, notwithstanding he is the world's Bolshevist and preeminently
Germany's revolutionist. His anarchy is not ingrain, it is a device
which he uses for a purpose. The rich Jew is not an anarchist, because
he can achieve what he desires by more subtle methods. The poor Jew has
no other recourse. But rich and poor go jointly for a long stretch; the
bond of sympathy between them never breaks; for, if the anarchy is
successful, then the poor Jew shall take his place with the rich Jew;
and if the anarchy is not successful, it has nevertheless served to
break up new fields in which the rich Jew may operate.

In Germany it was possible for the poor Jew to thrust himself up through
the wall of Germanism above him only by breaking it up. In Russia the
same was true. The social system had encrusted around the Jew, keeping
him in a position where, as the nations knew by experience, he would be
less harmful. As nature encysts the harmful foreign element in the
flesh, building a wall around it, so nations have found it expedient to
do with the Jew. In modern times, however, the Jew has found a means of
knocking down the walls and throwing the whole national house into
confusion, and in the darkness and riot that follows, seize the place he
has long coveted. When Russia broke, who came first to light? Kerensky,
who is a Jew. But his plans were not radical enough, and then came
Trotsky, another Jew. Trotsky found the system too strong for him to
break in America--he broke through the weak spot in Russia and would
extend that weakness round the world. Every commissar in Russia today is
a Jew. Publicists are accustomed to speak of Russia as if it were in
disorder. It may be that Russia is, but the Jewish government of Russia
is not. From a mass of underlings, the Jews of Russia came up a perfect
phalanx, a flying wedge through the superinduced disorder, as if every
man's place had been previously prepared for him.

That also is the way it was in Germany. The German ceiling had to be
broken, as it were, before the poor Jews could realize their ambition.
When the break was made they swarmed through and settled in places of
control above the nation.

This may explain why Jews the world over supply the energy of disruptive
movements. It is understood that the young Jews of the United States are
propagandists of an ideal that would practically abolish the United
States. The attack is aimed, of course, against "capitalism," which
means the present government of the world by the Gentile. The true
capitalists of the world are Jews, who are capitalists for capital's
sake. It is hard to believe that they wish to destroy capital; they wish
to obtain sole control of it, and their wish has long been in fair way
to fulfillment.

In Germany, therefore, as in Russia, distinction is made between the
methods of the rich and of the poor Jews, because one method affects the
government and the other the morale of the people, but both converge on
the same objective. It is not only desire to escape oppression that
actuates the lower classes of Jews, but desire to gain control--for the
spirit of mastery pulses strong within them. German convictions on this
question have reached the place where they may be expressed thus:
Revolution is the expression of the Jews' will to power. Parties such as
the socialists, democrats and freethinkers are but tools for the Jewish
plan to power. The so-called "dictatorship of the proletariat" is really
and practically the dictatorship of Jews.

So suddenly have German eyes been opened, so stormfully wrathful has
been the reaction, that the word has gone out through German Judaism to
retire to the second trench. There has been a sudden and concerted
abandonment of office wherever the office made direct contact with the
public; there has, however, been no abandonment of power. What will
happen in Germany is not now known. Some regrettable things have already
happened. But the Germans will doubtless prove themselves equal to the
situation by devising methods of control at once unobjectionable and
effective. But as to Russia, it is hardly doubtful any longer what will
happen there. When Russia turns, a shudder will run through the earth.

How Gentile Germany and Russia look at the entire question may be
summarized as follows:

Judaism is the most closely organized power on earth, even more than the
British Empire. It forms a State whose citizens are unconditionally
loyal wherever they may be and whether rich or poor.

The name which is given in Germany to this State which circulates among
all the states is "All-Judaan."

The means of power of the State of All-Judaan are capital and
journalism, or money and propaganda.

All-Judaan is the only State that exercises world government; all the
other States can and may exercise national government only.

The principal culture of All-Judaan is journalistic; the technical,
scientific, literary performances of the modern Jew are throughout
journalistic performances. They are due to the marvelous talent of the
Jews for receptivity of others' ideas. Capital and Journalism are joined
in the Press to create a political and spiritual medium of Jewish power.

The government of this state of All-Judaan is wonderfully organized.
Paris was its first seat, but has now been moved to third place. Before
the war London was its first, and New York its second capital. It
remains to be seen whether New York will now supplant London--the drift
is toward America.

As All-Judaan is not in a position to have a standing army and navy,
other states supply these for it. Its fleet is the British fleet, which
guards from hindrance the progress of all-Jewish world economy, or that
part of it which depends on the sea. In return, All-Judaan assures
Britain an undisturbed political and territorial world rule. All-Judaan
has added Palestine to British control. Wherever there was an All-Judaan
land force (whatever national uniform it might wear), it worked with the
British navy.

All-Judaan is willing to entrust the government of various strips of the
world to the nationalistic governments; it only asks to control the
governments. Judaism is passionately in favor of perpetuating
nationalistic divisions for the Gentile world. For themselves, Jews
never become assimilated with any nation. They are a separate people,
always were and always will be.

All-Judaan's only quarrel with any nation occurs when that nation makes
it impossible for All-Judaan to control that nation's industrial and
financial profits. It can make war, it can make peace; it can command
anarchy in stubborn cases, it can restore order. It holds the sinews of
world power in its hand and it apportions them among the nations in such
ways as will best support All-Judaan's plan.

Controlling the world's sources of news, All-Judaan can always prepare
the minds of the people for its next move. The greatest exposure yet to
be made is the way that news is manufactured and the way in which the
mind of whole nations is molded for a purpose. When the powerful Jew is
at last traced and his hand revealed, then comes the ready cry of
persecution and it echoes through the world press. The real causes of
the persecution (which is the oppression of the people by the financial
practices of the Jews) are never given publicity.

All-Judaan has its vice-governments in London and New York. Having
wreaked its revenge on Germany it will now go forth to conquer other
nations. Britain it already has. Russia it is struggling for, but the
chances are against it. The United States, with its good-natured
tolerance of all races, offers a promising field. The scene of
operations changes, but the Jew is the same throughout the centuries.

[Issue of May 29, 1920.]




"At first sight it would seem as if the economic system of North America
was the very one that developed independently of the Jews . . . .
Nevertheless I uphold my assertion that the United States (perhaps more
than any other land) are filled to the brim with the Jewish spirit. This
is recognized in many quarters, above all in those best capable of
forming a judgment on the subject . . . .

"In the face of this fact, is there not some justification for the
opinion that the United States owe their very existence to the Jews? And
if this be so, how much more can it be asserted that Jewish influence
made the United States just what they are--that is, American? For what
we call Americanism is nothing else, if we may say so, than the Jewish
spirit distilled."

--Werner Sombart, "The Jews and Modern Capital," pp. 38, 43.

III.

Jewish History in the United States


The story of the Jews in America begins with Christopher Columbus. On
August 2, 1492, more than 300,000 Jews were expelled from Spain, with
which event Spain's prestige began its long decline, and on August 3,
the next day, Columbus set sail for the West, taking a group of Jews
with him. They were not, however, refugees, for the prophetic
navigator's plans had aroused the sympathy of influential Jews for a
long period previously. Columbus himself tells us that he consorted much
with Jews. The first letter he wrote detailing his discoveries was to a
Jew. Indeed, the eventful voyage itself which added to men's knowledge
and wealth "the other half of the earth" was made possible by Jews.

The pleasant story that it was Queen Isabella's jewels which financed
the voyage has disappeared under cool research. There were three Maranos
or "secret Jews" who wielded great influence at the Spanish court: Luis
de Santagel, who was an important merchant of Valencia and who was
"farmer" of the royal taxes; his relative, Gabriel Sanchez, who was the
royal treasurer; and their friend, the royal chamberlain, Juan Cabrero.
These worked unceasingly on Queen Isabella's imagination, picturing to
her the depletion of the royal treasury and the likelihood of Columbus
discovering the fabulous gold of the Indies, until the Queen was ready
to offer her jewels in pawn for the funds. But Santagel craved
permission to advance the money himself, which he did, 17,000 ducats in
all, about $20,000, perhaps equal to $160,000 today. It is probable that
the loan exceeded the expedition's cost.

Associated with Columbus in the voyage were at least five Jews: Luis de
Torres, interpreter; Marco, the surgeon; Bernal, the physician; Alonzo
de la Calle, and Gabriel Sanchez. The astronomical instruments and maps
which the navigators used were of Jewish origin. Luis de Torres was the
first man ashore, the first to discover the use of tobacco; he settled
in Cuba and may be said to be the father of Jewish control of the
tobacco business as it exists today.

Columbus' old patrons, Luis de Santagel and Gabriel Sanchez, received
many privileges for the part they played in the work, but Columbus
himself became the victim of a conspiracy fostered by Bernal, the ship's
doctor, and suffered injustice and imprisonment as his reward.

From that beginning, Jews looked more and more to America as a fruitful
field, and immigration set in strongly toward South America, principally
Brazil. But because of military participation in a disagreement between
the Brazilians and the Dutch, the Jews of Brazil found it necessary to
emigrate, which they did in the direction of the Dutch colony of what is
now New York. Peter Stuyvesant, the Dutch governor, did not entirely
approve of their settling among his people and ordered them to leave,
but the Jews had evidently taken the precaution to assure their being
received even if not welcomed, because upon revoking the order of
Stuyvesant, the Directors gave as one of the reasons for the Jews being
received, "the large amount of capital which they have invested in the
shares of the Company." Nevertheless they were forbidden to enter public
service and to open retail shops, which had the effect of driving them
into foreign trade in which they were soon exercising all but a monopoly
because of their European connections.

This is only one of the thousand illustrations which can be given of the
resourcefulness of the Jew. Forbid him in one direction, he will excel
in another. When he was forbidden to deal in new clothes, he sold old
clothes--that was the beginning of the organized traffic in secondhand
clothing. When he was forbidden to deal in merchandise, he dealt in
waste--the Jew is the originator of the waste product business of the
world; he was the originator of the salvage system; he found wealth in
the debris of civilization. He taught people how to use old rags, how to
clean old feathers, how to use gall nuts and rabbit skins. He has always
had a taste for the furrier trade, which he now controls, and to him is
due the multitude of common skins which now pass under various alluring
trade names as furs of high origin. The idea of renovation gained
commercial value through the Jew. In the "rag men" who blow tin horns
through our cities and save the old iron, old bottles, old paper and old
fabrics, we have the commercial descendants of those earlier Jews who
turned adversity into success by converting the rubbish of the earth
into material of value.

Unwittingly, old Peter Stuyvesant compelled the Jew to make New York the
principal port of America, and though a majority of New York Jews had
fled to Philadelphia at the time of the American Revolution, most of
them returned to New York at the earliest opportunity, instinct seeming
to make them aware that in New York was to be their principal paradise
of gain. And so it has proved. New York is the greatest center of Jewish
population in the world. It is the gateway where the bulk of American
imports and exports are taxed, and where practically all the business
done in America pays tribute to the masters of money. The very land of
the city is practically the holdings of the Jews. A list of the property
owners of the metropolis reveals only at rare intervals a Gentile name.
No wonder that Jewish writers, viewing this unprecedented prosperity,
this unchecked growth in wealth and power, exclaim enthusiastically that
the United States is the Promised Land foretold by the prophets, and New
York the New Jerusalem. Some have gone even further and described the
peaks of the Rockies as "the mountains of Zion," and with reason, too,
if the mining and coastal wealth of the Jews is considered.

The new waterways proposal, which will make an ocean port of practically
every great city on the Great Lakes and take from New York the prestige
she has maintained by being the gateway toward which the principal
railways narrowed, is being strongly protested at this time. And the
strongest motive in opposing this most obvious betterment is that so
much wealth counted in New York is not wealth at all, but fictitious
values depending solely on New York remaining New York. When anything
comes which will make New York merely a city on the coast, and not the
city where the great taxers sit to levy their tribute, much Jewish
wealth will decrease. It was fabulous before the war. What it is now the
statisticians will hardly undertake to say.

In fifty years the increase in the Jewish population of the United
States has been from 50,000 to more than 3,300,000. In the British Isles
there are only 300,000, in Palestine only 100,000. It is fortunate for
the Jew himself that in Great Britain his numbers are not greater, for
the large and evident control he exercises in great matters would
sometimes make it inconvenient for the poorer Jew, if he were abroad in
England in large numbers. An unusually well-informed Briton says that
anti-Semitism is always ready to break out in England upon sufficient
cause, but it cannot break out against the inaccessible rich Jews who
control in politics and international finance. It us probably true that
the commonest real cause of anti-Semitism is the action of the
international Jew who is often unknown and always secure, but the
innocent victim of it is the poor Jew. Anti-Semitism, however, will be
considered in the next article.

The figures representing Jewish population in Great Britain and the
United States indicate that the colossal power wielded by international
Jewish financiers is neither consequent nor dependent upon their number.
The arresting fact about the Jew is his world-wide unchallenged power,
coupled with comparative numerical inferiority. There are only about
14,000,000 Jews in the world; they are about as numerous as the Koreans.
This comparison of their numbers with the Koreans will illustrate still
more vividly the phenomenon of their power.

In the time of George Washington there were about 4,000 Jews in the
country, most of them well-to-do traders. For the most part they favored
the American side. Haym Salomon helped the Colonies out with the loan of
his entire fortune at a critical moment. But they never assimilated,
they did not take up the usual employments nor farming, they never
seemed to care for the worry of manufacturing things, but only for the
selling of them after they were made.

It is only of recent years the Jew has shown any capacity for
manufacturing, and most of what he now engages in has grown up as an
adjunct to his merchandising plans. By manufacturing, he saves a profit.
The result has not been a decrease in cost to the public, but an
increase. It is characteristic of Jewish business methods that economies
are for the sake of the business, not for the sake of the public. The
commodities in which there have been the most inexcusable and exorbitant
increases in prices to the public, and the lines of business which have
been most quickly frightened into lower prices without any explanatory
change in the general situation, have been those lines in which Jews
exercise the widest control.

Business to the Jewish mind is money; what the successful Jew may do
with the money after he gets it is another matter, but in the getting of
it he never permits "idealistic slush" to interfere with the dollar. His
dollar of profit is never "clipped" by any of the voluntary reforms by
which a few men are trying to ameliorate the condition of the workers.

This is not by any means due to the hardness of the Jewish heart, but to
the hardness of the Jewish view of business. Business is to it a matter
of goods and money, not of people. If you are in distress and suffering,
the Jewish heart would have sympathy for you; but if your house were
involved in the matter, you and your house would be two separate
entities; the Jew would naturally find it difficult, in his theory of
business, to humanize the house; he would deal with it after a manner
which other people would call "hard," but he would not feel the charge
to be just; he would say that it was only "business."

It is probably this way that the Jewish "sweatshops" of New York may be
explained. When the susceptible people of the nation commiserated the
poor Jews of the New York sweatshops, they for the most part did not
know that the inventors and operators of the "sweatshop" method were
themselves Jews. Indeed, while it is the boast of our country that no
race or color or creed is persecuted here, but liberty is insured to
all, still it is a fact which every special investigator has noted that
the only heartless treatment ever accorded the Jew in the United States
came from his own people, his overseers and masters. And yet there is no
evidence that either the "sweater" or the "sweated" ever thought of it
as inhumanity or as "heartless." It was "business." The "sweated" lived
in the hope of having a roomful of people sewing for him or her some
day. Their endlessly vital interest in "business" and their unflagging
ambition to get further up the ladder and become masters in their own
sweatshop, enabled them to work without the slightest sense of
oppression or injustice which, after all, is the sorest thing about
poverty. The Jews never regard work as a calamity, but neither do they
regard subordinate positions as permanently theirs. Thus, they spend
their energies in getting up and out rather than in lamenting the
inconveniences of the place where they are and trying to improve it.

All this is individually excellent but socially harmful. The result is
that, until recently, the lower ranges of employment were wholly
unsupervised, and the higher circles never felt the necessity of
devising industrial reforms and benefits. The record of the great Jews
in charity is very noble; their record in industrial reforms is nil.
With commendable sympathy toward their own people, they will donate a
part of their profits to rectify some of the human need resulting from
the method by which they made their profits, but as for reforming the
method by which they get their profits in order that the resulting need
might be diminished or prevented, apparently it has never occurred to
them. At least, while there are many charitable names among the
wealthier Jews, there are no names that stand for an actual, practical
humanizing of industry, its methods and its returns.

This, of course, is unfortunate; but it is intelligible; more than that,
it is explanatory of many things for which the Jew is blamed by those
who do not understand his nature. The Jew will go part way in sharing
the results of his prosperity; he has not gone any length, save upon
outer compulsion, in sharing the processes, or sharing wealth in the
making. And while the social effect is the same as if this were done out
of cruel insensibility and inhumanity, still it must be said that mostly
it is done not out of such feelings, but out of the Jew's ingrain
conception of the game of business. Some proposals of industrial reform
appear as crazy to him as would a proposal to credit one baseball
batter's hit to his opponent's score, just as a matter of humanity.

The American Jew does not assimilate. This is stated, not to blame him,
but merely as a fact. The Jew could merge with the people of America if
he desired, but he doesn't. If there is any prejudice existing against
him in America, aside from the sense of inquiry which his colossal
success engenders, it is because of his aloofness. The Jew is not
objectionable in his person, creed, or race. His spiritual ideals are
shared by the world. But still he does not assimilate; he cultivates by
his exclusiveness the feeling that he does not "belong." This is his
privilege, and from one point of view it may indicate excellent
judgement, but he must not make it one of the grounds of his complaint
against Gentiles in general, as he has a tendency to do. It is better
that he should make it clear to Gentiles once and for all where true
Jews stand in the matter, as when a young Jew said--"There is all the
difference in the world between an American Jew and a Jewish American. A
Jewish American is a mere amateur Gentile, doomed to be a parasite
forever."

The ghetto is not an American product but the Jews' own importation.
They have separated themselves into a distinct community. Speaking of
this matter the Jewish Encyclopedia says: "The social organization of
the Jews resident in America has differed little from that in other
countries * * * in the main, and without any compulsion, Jews preferred
to live in close proximity to one another, a peculiarity which still
prevails."

To make a list of the lines of business controlled by the Jews of the
United States would be to touch most of the vital industries of the
country--those which are really vital, and those which cultivated habit
has made to seem vital. The theatrical business, of course, as everyone
knows, is exclusively Jewish. Play-producing, booking, theater operation
are all in the hands of Jews. This perhaps accounts for the fact that in
almost every production today can be detected propaganda, sometimes
glaringly commercial advertisement, which does not originate with
playwrights, but with producers.

The motion picture industry.

The sugar industry.

The tobacco industry.

Fifty per cent or more of the meat packing industry.

Upward of 60 per cent of the shoemaking industry.

Men's and women's ready-made clothing.

Most of the musical purveying done in the country.

Jewelry.

Grain.

More recently, cotton.

The Colorado smelting industry.

Magazine authorship.

News distribution.

The liquor business.

The loan business.

These, only to name the industries with national and international
sweep, are in control of the Jews of the United States, either alone or
in association with Jews overseas.

The American people would be vastly surprised if they could see a
line-up of some of the "American business men" who hold up our
commercial prestige overseas. They are mostly Jews. They have a keen
sense of the value of the American name, and when in a foreign port you
stroll up to the office which bears the sign, "American Importing
Company," or "American Commercial Company," or other similarly
non-committal names, hoping to find a countryman, an American, you
usually find a Jew whose sojourn in America appears to have been all too
brief. This may throw a sidelight on the regard in which "American
business methods" are held in some parts of the world. When 30 or 40
different races of people can carry on business under the name
"American," and do it legally, too, it is not surprising that Americans
do not recognize some of the descriptions of American methods which
appear in the foreign press. The Germans long ago complained that the
rest of the world was judging them by the German-speaking Jewish
commercial traveler.

Instances of Jewish prosperity in the United States are commonplace, but
prosperity, the just reward of foresight and application, is not to be
confounded with control. The prosperity of the Jews can be had by anyone
who is willing to pay the price which the Jews pay for it--a very, very
high price, as a rule, all things considered--but it would be impossible
for any Gentile coalition under similar circumstances to attain the
control which the Jews have won, for the reason that there is lacking in
the Gentile a certain quality of working-togetherness, a certain
conspiracy of objective, and the adhesiveness of intense raciality,
which characterizes the Jew. It is nothing to a Gentile that another man
is a Gentile; it is next to everything to a Jew that the man at his door
is another Jew. So, if instances of Jewish prosperity were needed, the
case of the Temple Emmanu-el, New York, might be cited, which in 1846
could scarcely raise $1,520 for its budget, but in 1868, following the
Civil War, raised $708,755 from the rental of 231 pews. And the rise of
the Jewish clothing monopoly as one of the results of the same Civil War
might be cited as an instance of prosperity plus national and
international control.

Indeed, it might be said that the Jew has succeeded in everything he has
attempted in the United States, except farming. The explanation usually
made in Jewish publications is that ordinary farming is far too simple
to engage the Jew's intellect and therefore he is not enough interested
in it to succeed, but that in dairy and cattle farming where the "brain"
is more necessary he has made a success. Numerous attempts have been
made in various parts of the United States to start Jewish farming
colonies, but their story is a series of failures. Some have blamed the
failures on the Jew's lack of knowledge of scientific farming, others on
his distaste for manual labor, others on the lack of the speculative
element in agriculture. In any case, he stands higher in the
non-productive employments than in this basically productive one. Some
students of the question state that the Jew never was a man of the land,
but always a trader, for which assertion one of the proofs offered is
the Jews' selection of Palestine as their country, that strip of land
which formed a gateway between East and West and over which the overland
traffic of the world passed.

[Issue of June 5, 1920.]




"The Jewish Question still exists. It would be useless to deny it . . .
. The Jewish Question exists wherever Jews live in perceptible numbers.
Where it does not exist, it is carried by Jews in the course of their
migrations. We naturally move to those places where we are not
persecuted, and there our presence produces persecution . . . . The
unfortunate Jews are now carrying anti-Semitism into England; they have
already introduced it into America."

--Theodore Herzl, "A Jewish State," p. 4.

IV.

The Jewish Question--Fact or Fancy?


The chief difficulty in writing about the Jewish Question is the
supersensitiveness of Jews and non-Jews concerning the whole matter.
There is a vague feeling that even to openly use the word "Jew," or to
expose it nakedly to print, is somehow improper. Polite evasions like
"Hebrew" and "Semite," both of which are subject to the criticism of
inaccuracy, are timidly essayed, and people pick their way gingerly as
if the whole subject were forbidden, until some courageous Jewish
thinker comes straight out with the good old word "Jew," and then the
constraint is relieved and the air cleared. The word "Jew" is not an
epithet; it is a name, ancient and honorable, with significance for
every period of human history, past, present and to come.

There is extreme sensitiveness about the public discussion of the Jewish
Question on the part of Gentiles. They would prefer to keep it in the
hazy borderlands of their thought, shrouded in silence. Their heritage
of tolerance has something to do with their attitude, but perhaps their
instinctive sense of the difficulty involved has more to do with it. The
principal public Gentile pronouncements upon the Jewish Question are in
the manner of the truckling politician or the pleasant after-dinner
speaker; the great Jewish names in philosophy, medicine, literature,
music and finance are named over, the energy, ability and thrift of the
race are dwelt upon, and everyone goes home feeling that a difficult
place has been rather neatly negotiated. But nothing is changed thereby.
The Jew is not changed. The Gentile is not changed. The Jew still
remains the enigma of the world.

Gentile sensitiveness on this point is best expressed by the desire for
silence--"Why discuss it at all?" is the attitude. Such an attitude is
itself a proof that there is a problem which we would evade if we could.
"Why discuss it at all?"--the keen thinker clearly sees in the
implications of such a question, the existence of a problem whose
discussion or suppression will not always be within the choice of
easy-going minds.

Is there a Jewish Question in Russia? Unquestionably, in its most
virulent form. Is it necessary to meet that Question in Russia?
Undoubtedly, meet it from every angle along which light and healing may
come.

Well, the percentage of the Jewish population of Russia is just one per
cent more than it is in the United States. The majority of the Jews
themselves are not less well-behaved in Russia than they are here; they
lived under restrictions which do not exist here; yet in Russia their
genius has enabled them to attain a degree of power which has completely
baffled the Russian mind. Whether you go to Rumania, Russia, Austria or
Germany, or anywhere else that the Jewish Question has come to the
forefront as a vital issue, you will discover that the principal cause
is the outworking of the Jewish genius to achieve the power of control.

Here in the United States it is the fact of this remarkable minority--a
sparse Jewish ingredient of three per cent in a nation of
110,000,000--attaining in 50 years a degree of control that would be
impossible to a ten times larger group of any other race, that creates
the Jewish Question here. Three per cent of any other people would
scarcely occasion comment, because we could not meet with a
representative of them wherever we went in high places--in the innermost
secrecy of the councils of the Big Four at Versailles; in the supreme
court; in the councils of the White House; in the vast dispositions of
world finance--wherever there is power to get or use. Yet we meet the
Jew everywhere in the upper circles, literally everywhere there is
power. He has the brains, the initiative, the penetrative vision which
almost automatically project him to the top, and as a consequence he is
more marked than any other race.

And that is where the Jewish Question begins. It begins in very simple
terms--How does the Jew so habitually and so resistlessly gravitate to
the highest places? What puts him there? Why is he put there? What does
he do there? What does the fact of his being there mean to the world?

That is the Jewish Question in its origin. From these points it goes on
to others, and whether the trend becomes pro-Jewish or anti-Semitic
depends on the amount of prejudice brought to the inquiry, and whether
it becomes pro-Humanity depends on the amount of insight and
intelligence.

The use of the word Humanity in connection with the word Jew usually
throws a side-meaning which may not be intended. In this connection it
is usually understood that the humanity ought to be shown toward the
Jew. There is just as great an obligation upon the Jew to show his
humanity toward the whole race. The Jew has been too long accustomed to
think of himself as exclusively the claimant on the humanitarianism of
society; society has a large claim against him that he cease his
exclusiveness, that he cease exploiting the world, that he cease making
Jewish groups the end and all of his gains, and that he begin to
fulfill, in a sense his exclusiveness has never yet enabled him to
fulfill, the ancient prophecy that through him all the nations of the
earth should be blessed.

The Jew cannot go on forever filling the role of suppliant for the
world's humanitarianism; he must himself show that quality to a society
which seriously suspects his higher and more powerful groups of
exploiting it with a pitiless rapacity which in its wide-flung and long
drawn-out distress may be described as an economic pogrom against a
rather helpless humanity. For it is true that society is as helpless
before the well-organized extortions of certain financial groups, as
huddled groups of Russian Jews were helpless against the anti-Semitic
mob. And as in Russia, so in America, it is the poor Jew who suffers for
the delinquencies of the rich exploiter of his race.

This series of articles is already being met by an organized barrage by
mail and wire and voice, every single item of which carries the wail of
persecution. One would think that a heartless and horrible attack were
being made on a most pitiable and helpless people--until one looks at
the letterheads of the magnates who write, and at the financial ratings
of those who protest, and at the membership of the organizations whose
responsible heads hysterically demand retraction. And always in the
background there is the threat of boycott, a threat which has
practically sealed up the columns of every publication in America
against even the mildest discussion of the Jewish Question.

The Jewish Question in America cannot be concealed forever by threats
against publications, nor by the propagandist publication of matter
extremely and invariably favorable to everything Jewish. It is here and
it cannot be twisted into something else by the adroit use of
propaganda, nor can it be forever silenced by threats. The Jews of the
United States can best serve themselves and their fellow-Jews all over
the world by letting drop their far too ready cry of "anti-Semitism," by
adopting a franker tone than that which befits a helpless victim, and by
seeing what the Jewish Question is and how it behooves every Jew who
loves his people to help solve it.

There has been used in this series the term "International Jew." It is
susceptible of two interpretations: one, the Jew wherever he may be; the
other, the Jew who exercises international control. The real contention
of the world is with the latter and his satellites, whether Jew or
Gentile.

Now, this international type of Jew, this grasper after world-control,
this actual possessor and wielder of world-control is a very unfortunate
connection for his race to have. The most unfortunate thing about the
international Jew, from the standpoint of the ordinary Jew, is that the
international type is also a Jew. And the significance of this is that
the type does not grow anywhere else than on a Jewish stem. There is no
other racial nor national type which puts forth this kind of person. It
is not merely that there are a few Jews among international financial
controllers; it is that these world controllers are exclusively Jews.
That is the phenomenon which creates an unfortunate situation for those
Jews who are not and never shall be world-controllers, who are the plain
people of the Jewish race. If world-control were mixed, like the
control, say, of the biscuit business, then the occasional Jews we might
find in those higher financial altitudes would not constitute the
problem at all; the problem would then be limited to the existence of
world-control in the hands of a few men, of whatever race or lineage
they might be. But since world-control is an ambition which has only
been achieved by Jews, and not by any of the methods usually adopted by
would-be world conquerors, it becomes inevitable that the question
should center in that remarkable race.

This brings another difficulty: in discussing this group of
world-controllers under the name of Jews (and they are Jews), it is not
always possible to stop and distinguish the group of Jews that is meant.
The candid reader can usually determine that, but the Jew who is in a
state of mind to be injured is sometimes pained by reading as a charge
against himself what was intended for the upper group. "Then why not
discuss the upper group as financiers and not as Jews?" may be asked.
Because they are Jews. It is not to the point to insist that in any list
of rich men there are more Gentiles than Jews; we are not talking about
merely rich men who have, many of them, gained their riches by serving a
System, we are talking about those who Control--and it is perfectly
apparent that merely to be rich is not to control. The world-controlling
Jew has riches, but he also has something much more powerful than that.

The international Jew, as already defined, rules not because he is rich,
but because in a most marked degree he possesses the commercial and
masterful genius of his race, and avails himself of a racial loyalty and
solidarity the like of which exists in no other human group. In other
words, transfer today the world-control of the international Jew to the
hands of the highest commercially talented group of Gentiles, and the
whole fabric of world-control would eventually fall to pieces, because
the Gentile lacks a certain quality, be it human or divine, be it
natural or acquired, that the Jew possesses.

This, of course, the modern Jew denies. There is a new position taken by
the modernists among the Jews which constitutes a denial that the Jew
differs from any other man except in the matter of religion. "Jew" they
say is not a racial designation, but a religious designation like
"Episcopalian," "Catholic," "Presbyterian." This is the argument used in
newspaper offices in the Jews' protests against giving the Jewish
designation to those of their people who are implicated in crime--"You
don't give the religious classification of other people who are
arrested," the editor is told, "why should you do it with Jews?" The
appeal to religious tolerance always wins, and is sometimes useful in
diverting attention from other things.

Well, if the Jews are only religiously differentiated from the rest of
the world, the phenomenon grows stranger still. For the rest of the
world is interested less in the Jew's religion than in anything else
that concerns him. There is really nothing in his religion to
differentiate the Jew from the rest of mankind, as far as the moral
content of that religion is concerned, and if there were he would have
overcome that by the fact that his Jewish religion supplies the moral
structure for both of the other great religions. Moreover, it is stated
that there are among English speaking nations 2,000,000 Jews who
acknowledge their race and not their religion, while 1,000,000 are
classed as agnostic--are these any less Jews than the others? The world
does not think so. The authoritative students of human differences do
not think so. An Irishman who grows indifferent to the Church is still
an Irishman, and it would seem to be equally true that a Jew who grows
indifferent to the Synagogue is still a Jew. He at least feels that he
is, and so does the non-Jew.

A still more serious challenge would arise if this contention of the
modernists were true, for it would necessitate the explanation of these
world-controlling Jews by their religion. We should have to say, "They
excel through their religion," and then the problem would turn on the
religion whose practice should bring such power and prosperity to its
devotees. But another fact would intervene, namely, that these
world-controlling Jews are not notably religious; and still another fact
would hammer for recognition, namely, the most devout believers and most
obedient followers of the Jewish religion are the poorest among the
Jews. If you want Jewish orthodoxy, the bracing morality of the Old
Testament, you will find it, not among the successful Jews, who have
Unitarianized their religion to the same extent that the Unitarians have
Judaized their Christianity, but among the poor in the side streets who
still sacrifice the Saturday business for their Sabbath keeping.
Certainly their religion has not given them world-control; instead, they
have made their own sacrifices to keep it inviolate against modernism.

Of course, if the Jew differs from the rest of mankind only when he is
in full accord with his religion, the question becomes very simple. Any
criticism of the Jew becomes sheer religious bigotry and nothing else!
And that would be intolerable. But it would be the consensus of
thoughtful opinion that the Jew differs less in his religion than in
anything else. There is more difference between the two great branches
of Christianity, more conscious difference, than between any branch of
Christianity and Judaism.

So that, the contention of certain modernists notwithstanding, the world
will go on thinking of the Jew as a member of a race, a race whose
persistence has defeated the utmost efforts made for its extermination,
a race that has preserved itself in virility and power by the observance
of those natural laws the violation of which has mongrelized so many
nations, a race which has come up out of the past with the two great
moral values which may be reckoned on monotheism and monogamy, a race
which today is before us as the visible sign of an antiquity to which
all our spiritual wealth harks back. Nay, the Jew will go on thinking of
himself as the member of a people, a nation, a race. And all the mixture
and intermixture of thought or faith or custom cannot make it otherwise.
A Jew is a Jew and as long as he remains within his perfectly
unassailable traditions, he will remain a Jew. And he will always have
the right to feel that to be a Jew is to belong to a superior race.

These world-controlling Jews at the top of affairs, then, are there by
virtue of, among other things, certain qualities which are inherent in
their Jewish natures. Every Jew has these qualities even if not in the
supreme sense, just as every Englishman has Shakespeare's tongue but not
in Shakespeare's degree. And thus it is impracticable, if not
impossible, to consider the international Jew without laying the
foundations broadly upon Jewish character and psychology.

We may discount at once the too common libel that this greater form of
Jewish success is built upon dishonesty. It is impossible to indict the
Jewish people or any other people on a wholesale charge. No one knows
better than the Jew how widespread is the notion that Jewish methods of
business are all unscrupulous. There is no doubt a possibility of a
great deal of unscrupulousness existing without actual legal dishonesty,
but it is altogether possible that the reputation the Jewish people have
long borne in this respect may have had other sources than actual and
persistent dishonesty.

We may indicate one of these possible sources. The Jew at a trade is
naturally quicker than most other men. They say there are other races
which are as nimble at a trade as is the Jew, but the Jew does not live
much among them. In this connection one may remember the famous joke
about the Jew who went to Scotland.

Now, it is human nature for the slower man to believe that the quicker
man is too deft by far, and to become suspicious of his deftness.
Everybody suspects the "sharper" even though his sharpness be entirely
honest. The slower mind is likely to conceive that the man who sees so
many legitimate twists and turns to a trade, may also see and use a
convenient number of illegitimate twists and turns. Moreover, there is
always the ready suspicion that the one who gets "the best of the
bargain" gets it by trickery which is not above board. Slow, honest,
plain-spoken and straight-dealing people always have their doubts of the
man who gets the better of it.

The Jews, as the records for centuries show, were a keen people in
trade. They were so keen that many regarded them as crooked. And so the
Jew became disliked for business reasons, not all of which were
creditable to the intelligence or initiative of his enemies.

Take for example, the persecution which Jew merchants once suffered in
England. In older England the merchant class had many easy-going
traditions. One tradition was that a respectable tradesman would never
seek business but wait for it to come to him. Another tradition was that
to decorate one's store window with lights or colors, or to display
one's stock of goods attractively in the view of the public, was a
contemptible and underhanded method of tempting a brother tradesman's
customers away from him. Still another tradition was that it was
strictly unethical and unbusinesslike to handle more than one line of
goods. If one sold tea, it was the best reason in the world why he
should not sell teaspoons. As for advertising, the thing would have been
so brazen and bold that public opinion would have put the advertiser out
of business. The proper demeanor for a merchant was to seem reluctant to
part with his goods.

One may readily imagine what happened when the Jewish merchant bustled
into the midst of this jungle of traditions. He simply broke them all.
In those days tradition had all the force of a divinely promulgated
moral law and in consequence of his initiative the Jew was regarded as a
great offender. A man who would break those trade traditions would stop
at nothing! The Jew was anxious to sell. If he could not sell one
article to a customer, he had another on hand to offer him. The Jews'
stores became bazaars, forerunners of our modern department stores, and
the old English custom of one store for one line of goods was broken up.
The Jew went after trade, pursued it, persuaded it. He was the
originator of "a quick turnover and small profits." He originated the
installment plan. The one state of affairs he could not endure was
business at a standstill, and to start it moving he would do anything.
He was the first advertiser--in a day when even to announce in the
public prints the location of your store was to intimate to the public
that you were in financial difficulties, were about to go to the wall
and were trying the last desperate expedient to which no self-respecting
merchant would stoop.

It was as easy as child's play to connect this energy with dishonesty.
The Jew was not playing the game, at least so the staid English merchant
thought. As a matter of fact he was playing the game to get it all in
his own hands--which he has practically done.

The Jew has shown that same ability ever since. His power of analyzing
the money currents amounts to an instinct. His establishment in one
country represented another base from which the members of his race
could operate. Whether by the natural outworking of innate gifts, or the
deliberate plan of race unity and loyalty, all Jewish trading
communities had relations, and as those trading communities increased in
wealth, prestige and power, as they formed relations with governments
and great interests in the countries where they operated, they simply
put more power into the central community wherever it might be located,
now in Spain, now in Holland, now in England. Whether by intention or
not, they became more closely allied than the branches of one business
could be, because the cement of racial unity, the bond of racial
brotherhood cannot in the very nature of things exist among the Gentiles
as it exists among the Jews. Gentiles never think of themselves as
Gentiles, and never feel that they owe anything to another Gentile as
such. Thus they have been convenient agents of Jewish schemes at times
and in places when it was not expedient that the Jewish controllers
should be publicly known; but they have never been successful
competitors of the Jew in the field of world-control.

From these separated Jewish communities went power to the central
community where the master bankers and the master analysts of conditions
lived. And back from the central community flowed information of an
invaluable character and assistance wherever needed. It is not difficult
to understand how, under such a condition, the nation that did not deal
kindly with the Jews was made to suffer, and the nation that yielded to
them their fullest desire was favored by them. And it is credibly stated
that they have made certain nations feel the power of their displeasure.

This system, if it ever existed, exists in greater power today. It is
today, however, threatened as it has never been. Fifty years ago,
international banking, which was mostly in control of the Jews as the
money brokers of the world, was on top of business. It exercised the
supercontrol of governments and finance everywhere. Then came that new
thing, Industry, which expanded to a degree unguessed by the shrewdest
prophets and analysts. As Industry gathered strength and power it became
a powerful money magnet, drawing the wealth of the world in its train,
not, however, merely for the sake of possessing the money, but of making
it work. Production and profit on production, instead of loans and
interest on loans, became the master method for a time. The war came, in
which the former broker-masters of the world had undoubtedly their large
part. And now the two forces, Industry and Finance, are in a struggle to
see whether Finance is again to become the master, or creative Industry.
This is one of the elements which is bringing the Jewish Question to the
bar of public opinion.

To state this and to prove it may be nothing more than to establish the
superiority of Jewish ability. Certainly it is not a tenable position to
say that the Jew is extraordinarily successful and therefore must be
curbed. It would be equally aside from the truth to say that the
co-ordination of Jewish activity has been, on the whole, a harmful thing
for the world. It may be possible to show that up to this point it has
been useful. Success cannot be attacked nor condemned. If any moral
question arises at all, it must concern the use made of the success
which has been attained. The whole matter centers there, after the
previous fact is established. May the Jew go on as he has gone, or does
his duty to the world require another use of his success?

This inquiry obviously leads to further discussion, as well as a
gathering up of the remaining threads of the present discussion, which
future articles will attempt to do.

[Issue of June 12, 1920.]




"To this end we must organize. Organize, in the first place, so that the
world may have proof of the extent and the intensity of our desire for
liberty. Organize, in the second place, so that our resources may become
known and be made available . . . .

"Organize, organize, organize, until every Jew must stand up and be
counted--counted with us, or prove himself, wittingly or unwittingly, of
the few who are against their own people."

--Louis D. Brandeis, Justice of the United States Supreme Court,
"Zionism," pp. 113, 114.

V.

Anti-Semitism--Will It Appear in the U. S.?


Anyone who essays to discuss the Jewish Question in the United States or
anywhere else must be fully prepared to be regarded as an Anti-Semite,
in high-brow language, or in low-brow language, a Jew-baiter. Nor need
encouragement be looked for from people or from press. The people who
are awake to the subject at all prefer to wait and see how it all turns
out; while there is probably not a newspaper in America, and certainly
none of the advertising mediums which are called magazines, which would
have the temerity even to breathe seriously the fact that such a
Question exists. The press in general is open at this time to fulsome
editorials in favor of everything Jewish (specimens of the same being
obtainable almost anywhere), while the Jewish press, which is fairly
numerous in the United States, takes care of the vituperative end.

Of course, the only acceptable explanation of any public discussion at
present of the Jewish Question is that some one--writer, or publisher,
or a related interest--is a Jew-hater. That idea seems to be fixed; it
is fixed in the Jew by inheritance; it is sought to be fixed in the
Gentile by propaganda, that any writing which does not simply cloy and
drip in syrupy sweetness toward things Jewish is born of prejudice and
hatred. It is, therefore, full of lies, insult, insinuation, and
constitutes an instigation to massacre. These terms are culled at random
from Jewish editorial utterances at hand.

It would seem to be necessary for our Jewish citizens to enlarge their
classification of Gentiles to include the class which recognizes the
existence of a Jewish Question and still is not anti-Semitic.

There are four distinct parties traceable among the Jews themselves.
First, those whose passionate purpose is to keep Jewish faith and life
alive at the cost of any sacrifice of popularity or success; second,
those who are willing to make whatever sacrifice may be needed to
preserve Jewish religion, but are not so particular about the
traditional customs of Jewish life; third, those who have no very strong
convictions either way, but are opportunists, and will always swerve in
the direction of success; and, fourth, those who believe and preach that
the only solution of the differences between the Jew and other men is
the complete absorption of the Jewish race by the other races. The
fourth is the weakest, most unpopular and least to be considered of all
the parties.

With the Gentiles there are only two classes, as far as this special
question is concerned: those who dislike Jews, they cannot tell why; and
those who are disposed to fairness, in spite of the accident of
congeniality or uncongeniality, and who recognize the Jewish Question
as, at least, a problem. Both these attitudes, whenever they become
apparent, are subject to the charge of "anti-Semitism."

Anti-Semitism is a term which is bandied about too loosely. It ought to
be reserved to denote the real anti-Jewish temper of violent prejudice.
If used indiscriminately about all who attempt to discuss Jewish
characteristics and Jewish world-power, it may in time arrive at the
estate of respectability and honor.

Anti-Semitism in almost every form is bound to come to the United
States; indeed, it may be said that it is here now, and has been here
for a long time. If it be mislabeled now, the United States will not be
able to work within it the transformation which has been effected upon
so many other ideas that have arrived here in their journey round the
globe.


I.

It may be a serviceable clearing of the ground to define what
anti-Semitism is not:

1. It is not recognition of the Jewish Question. If it were, then it
could be set down that the bulk of the American people are destined to
become anti-Semites, for they are beginning to recognize the existence
of a Jewish Question and will steadily do so in increasing numbers as
the Question is forced upon them from the various practical angles of
their lives. The Question is here. We may be honestly blind to it. We
may be timidly silent about it. We may even make dishonest denial of it.
But it is here. In time all will have to recognize it. In time the
polite "hush, hush" of over-sensitive or intimidated circles will not be
powerful enough to suppress it. But to recognize it will not mean that
we have gone over to a campaign of hatred and enmity against the Jews.
It will only mean that a stream of tendency which has been flowing
through our civilization has at last accumulated bulk and power enough
to challenge attention, to call for some decision with regard to it, to
call for the adoption of a policy which will not repeat the mistakes of
the past and yet will forestall any possible social menace of the
future.

2. Again, the public discussion of the Jewish Question is not
anti-Semitism. Publicity is sanitary. The publicity given the Jewish
Question, or certain aspects of it, in this country has been very
misleading. It has been discussed more fully in the Jewish press than
elsewhere, but not with candor or breadth of vision. The two dominant
notes--they are sounded over and over again with monotonous regularity
in the Jewish press--are Gentile unfairness and Christian prejudice.
These apparently are the two chief aspects of life which impress Jewish
publicists when they look over the line of their own race. It is said in
all soberness that it is fortunate for Jews generally that the Jewish
press does not circulate very widely among Gentiles, for it is probably
the one established agency in the United States which, without altering
its program in the least, could stir up anti-Jewish sentiment by the
simple expedient of a general reading among non-Jews. Jewish writers
writing for Jewish readers present unusual material for the study of
race consciousness and its accompaniment of contempt for other races. It
is true that in the publications referred to, America is constantly
praised, but not America as the land of the American people; America,
rather, as the land of the Jews' opportunity.

On the side of the daily press, there has been no serious discussion at
all. This is neither surprising nor reprehensible. The daily press deals
with matters that have reached the overheated stage. When it mentions
the Jews at all, it has stock phrases for the purpose; the effort
includes a list of the famous Jews of history, and usually closes with
complimentary references to certain local Jews of commendable qualities,
whose advertisements are not infrequently found in another part of the
paper. Summing up, it may be said that the publicity given the question
in this country consists in misrepresentative criticism of the Gentiles
by the Jewish press and misrepresentative praise of the Jews by the
non-Jewish press. An independent effort to give a constructive publicity
cannot, therefore, be laid to anti-Semitism, even when some of the
statements which are made in the course of it arouse the resentment of
Jewish readers.

3. Nor is it anti-Semitism to say that the suspicion is abroad in every
capital of civilization and the certainty is held by a number of
important men that there is active in the world a plan to control the
world, not by territorial acquisition, not by military aggression, nor
by governmental subjection, not even by economic control in the
scientific sense, but by control of the machinery of commerce and
exchange. It is not anti-Semitism to say that, nor to present the
evidence which supports that, nor to bring the proof of that. Those who
could best disprove it if it were not true are the international Jews
themselves, but they have not disproved it. Those who could best prove
it would be those Jews whose ideals include the good of the whole of
humanity on an equality and not the good of one race only, but they have
not proved it. Some day a prophetic Jew may arise who will see that the
promises bestowed upon the Ancient People are not to be fulfilled by
Rothschild methods, and that the promise that all the nations were to be
blessed through Israel is not to be fulfilled by making the nations the
economic vassals of Israel; and when that time comes we may hope for a
redirection of Jewish energy into channels that will drain the present
sources of the Jewish Question. In the meantime, it is not
anti-Semitism, it may even be found to be a world service to the Jew, to
throw light on what purpose motivates certain higher circles.

If the above propositions are true, then the term "anti-Semitic," so
freely bestowed on this series of articles, betrays a worse spirit in
the critics than in the author. But enough of that. There is much yet to
do, and what is done must stand on what merit remains after friend and
foe alike are through with praise and blame.


II.

Anti-Semitism has unquestionably swayed large sections of humanity at
various times, warping the vision, twisting the characters and staining
the hands of its victims, but the most amazing statement that can be
made of it is that it has never accomplished anything in behalf of those
who used it, and it has never taught anything to the Jews against whom
it was used.

The grades of anti-Semitism are fairly numerous, and a few of them may
be cited here:

1. There is first that degree of anti-Semitism, if it may be so
described, which consists in plain dislike of the Jew as a person, no
matter whom he may be. This is often found in people of all grades. It
is found mostly, however, in those whose contact with Jews has been very
limited. It begins sometimes in childhood with an instinctive dislike
for the word "Jew." It is encouraged by the misuse of the word "Jew" as
an epithet, or as an adjective generally descriptive of unpopular
practices. The feeling is not different from that which exists toward
Gentiles, concerning whom the same notions are held, but it differs in
that it is extended to the race of unknown individual Jews instead of
being restricted to known individuals who may justify such a feeling.

Congeniality is not within our choice, but control of the sentiment of
uncongeniality is. Every fair-minded person is compelled at times to
reflect that it is not impossible that the person for whom he feels a
dislike may be as good and possibly a better person than he. Our dislike
merely registers the result of attraction and repulsion as they operate
between another person and oneself; it does not indicate that the
disliked person is unworthy. Of course, wherever intelligence is joined
with this instinctive withdrawal from social contact with members of the
Jewish race, prejudice is forestalled, except, of course, in those
persons who hold that there are no individuals among the Jews worthy of
respect. This is an extreme attitude and is composed of other elements
beside natural dislike. It is possible for people to dislike Jews and
not be anti-Semitic. Indeed, it is not at all uncommon, it grows more
and more common, that intelligent and refined Jews themselves do not
relish the society of their own people except in cases of exceptional
refinement.

This reality calls for some comment on the manners and characteristics
of the ordinary member of the Jewish race, the accidents of behavior
which stand out most obnoxiously and of which Jews themselves are often
the most unsparing critics, but these comments must fall into place
later.

2. A second stage of the spirit of anti-Semitism may be designated as
hatred and enmity. It should be noted that the antipathy referred to
immediately above was not hatred. Dislike is not hatred, nor is it
necessarily enmity. One may dislike sugar in his tea without troubling
to hate sugar. But undoubtedly there are people who because they have
let their dislikes deepen into prejudice, and perhaps also because of
unpleasant experiences with members of the Jewish race (probably a
million Americans have been brought to the verge of becoming Jew-haters
this winter because of contact with Jewish merchants and landlords) may
be classified as, at least, incipient anti-Semites. This is most of all
unfortunate for the persons who harbor these emotions. It is unfortunate
in that it unfits the mind to consider intelligently the facts which
constitute the Jewish Question, and also unfits it to deal with them in
a fair and constructive way. For one's own sake, whatever the
provocation otherwise, it is better not to let passion deflect the
needle of one's mind. Hatred at the wheel means hazard on the course.
Enmity lives in the vicinity of the Jews more than of any other race,
and the reason for this is one of the puzzles of the ages. The Jewish
nature itself, as shown in ancient and modern history, is not without
its own share of enmity, and it either evokes or provokes enmity where
it comes in contact with those Aryan races which follow their natural
impulses unchecked by cultural and ethical influences. This age-long
conflict of the Jew has puzzled the minds of students for generations.
Some explain it Biblically as the curse of Jehovah upon His Chosen
People for their disobedience to the discipline by which He would have
made them the Prophet Nation of the world. If this offense must come, if
it is part of the Jew's heritage, an old saying--Christian and
Scriptural, by the way--would still remain true: "It must needs be that
offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh."

3. In some parts of the world at various times this feeling of hatred
has broken into murderous violence, which has roused, as wholesale
physical outrage always does, the horror and resentment of humanity.
This is the extreme form in which anti-Semitism has exhibited itself,
and it is the charge of intending to stimulate it here and elsewhere
which every public discussion of the Jewish Question has to bear. There
is, of course, no excuse for these outbreaks, but there is sufficient
explanation of them. The Jews usually explain them as expressions of
religious prejudice, and the Gentiles as rebellion against an economic
yoke which the Jews have woven for the people. It is an astonishing fact
that, to take one country, the parts of Russia where anti-Semitic
violence has been most marked are the most prosperous parts, so
prosperous indeed and with a prosperity so unquestionably due to Jewish
enterprise that the Jews have openly declared that they have the power
to throw those parts of Russia back into commercial lethargy again by
simply withdrawing. It is utterly idle to throw denials at this
statement. It is confirmed time and time again by men who have gone to
Russia full of resentment against the attitude of the Russians toward
the Jews, as that attitude is represented in the Anglo-Saxon press, and
who have come home with a new light on the cause of these outbreaks,
though not excusing their character. Impartial observers have also found
that some of the outbreaks have been precipitated by the Jews
themselves. A correspondent, known the world over for his trenchant
defense of the Jews under Russian persecution, was always bitterly
attacked by the Jews themselves whenever he stated the truth about this,
notwithstanding his protest to them that if he did not tell the truth
when they were in the wrong the world would not be ready to believe him
when he said they were blameless. To this day, in every country, the
Jews are slow to admit blameworthiness for anything. They must be
excused, whoever else may be accused. It is a trait which will have to
be disciplined before they can be brought to assist, if ever they can,
the removal of those characteristics which arouse the antagonism of
other peoples. Elsewhere in the world, it may be said that out-and-out
enmity to the Jews has an economic basis. This, of course, leads to the
question whether the Jew shall have to become a deliberate failure, or
deny his genius, and forego his just meed of prosperity before he can
win the approval of the other races--a question which will arise for
discussion later.

As to the religious prejudice which the Jews are, as a rule, readiest to
affirm, it is safe to say that it does not exist in the United States.
Yet it is charged up to Americans by Jewish writers just as freely as it
is charged up to Russians. Each non-Jew reader is competent to settle
this for himself. He can easily do so by asking himself whether in all
his life he has ever felt a moment's resentment against the Jew on
account of his religion. In an address recently delivered in a Jewish
lodge and reported in the Jewish press, the speaker, a Jew, stated that
if 100 non-Jews on the street were approached at random and casually
asked what a Jew is, the reply of the majority would be, "He is a
Christ-killer." One of the best known and most highly respected rabbis
in the United States said recently in a sermon that children in
Christian Sunday schools were taught to regard the Jew as a
Christ-killer. He repeated it in a conversation several weeks later.

It would probably be the testimony of Christians generally that they
never heard this term until they heard it in a Jewish complaint, and
certainly themselves never used it. The charge is absurd. Let the
20,000,000 now in the Christian Sunday schools of Canada and the United
States testify as to the instruction given. There is no hesitation in
stating that there is no prejudice whatever in the Christian churches
against the Jew on account of his religion. On the contrary, there is
not only a deep sense of indebtedness, but a feeling of sharing with the
Jew in his religion. The Sunday schools of the Christian churches of the
world are spending six months of this year studying the International
Lessons which are appointed for the Books of the Judges, Ruth, First and
Second Samuel and the Books of the Kings, and every year is devoted in
part to the Old Testament.

Here, however, is something for Jewish religious leaders to consider:
there is more downright bitterness of religious prejudice on the part of
the Jews against Christianity than could ever be possible in the
Christian churches of America. Simply take the church press of America
and compare it with the Jewish press in this regard, and there is no
answer. No Christian editor would think it either Christian or
intelligent to attack the Jewish religion, yet any six months' survey of
the Jewish press would yield a mass of attack and prejudice on the other
side. Moreover, no religious bitterness in America attains within
infinite distances to that bitterness visited upon the Jew who becomes a
Christian in his faith. It amounts almost to a holy vendetta. A
Christian may become a Jewish proselyte and his motives be respected; it
is never so when a Jew becomes a Christian. These statements are true of
both the orthodox and liberal wings of Judaism. It is not his religion
that gives prominence to the Jew today; it is something else. And yet,
with undeviating monotony, it is repeated wherever the Jew takes
cognizance of the feeling toward him that it is on account of three
things, first and most prominent of which is his religion. It may be
comforting to him to think that he is suffering for his faith, but it is
not true. Every intelligent Jew must know it.

Every Jew ought to know also that in every Christian church where the
ancient prophecies are received and studied, there is a great revival of
interest in the future of the Ancient People. It is not forgotten that
certain Promises were made to them regarding their position in the
world, and it is held that these prophecies will be fulfilled. The
future of the Jew, as prophetically outlined, is intimately bound up
with the future of this planet, and the Christian church in large
part--at least by the evangelical wing, which the Jews most
condemn--sees a Restoration of the Chosen People yet to come. If the
mass of the Jews knew how understandingly and sympathetically all the
prophecies concerning them are being studied in the Church, and the
faith that exists that these prophecies will find fulfillment and that
they will result in great Jewish service to society at large, they would
probably regard the Church with another mind. They would at least know
that the Church does not believe that it will be the instrument in the
conversion of the Jews--a point on which Jewish leaders are tragically
misled and which evokes more bitterness than anything else--but that it
depends on quite other instruments and conditions, which it is not the
function of this article to point out except to say that it will be the
Jews' very own Messiah which will accomplish it and not the "wild
olive," or the Gentile.

Curiously enough, there is a phase of anti-Semitism having to do with
religion, but not in the way here discussed. There are those, very few
in number and of atheistical tendencies, who assert that all religion is
a sham, being the invention of Jews for the purpose of enslaving the
minds of the people of the world to an enervating superstition. This
position, however, has had no effect on the main issue. It is a far
extreme.


III.

Now, which of these exhibitions of anti-Semitism will show itself in
America? If certain tendencies continue, as they are certain to do, what
form will the feeling toward the Jew take? Not that of mass violence, we
may be sure. The only mass action visible now is that of the Jewish
agencies themselves against any person or institution that dares bring
the Jewish Question to public attention.

1. Anti-Semitism will come to America because of the habit which
emotions and ideas apparently have of making their way westward around
the world. North of Palestine, where the Jews have been longest settled
and where they are now in great numbers, anti-Semitism is acute and
well-defined. Westward, in Germany, it is clearly defined but, until the
seizure of German revolutionary agencies, was devoid of violence. Still
farther westward, in Great Britain, it is defined, but because of the
comparatively small number of Jews in the British Isles and their
coalition with the ruling class, it is more a feeling than a movement.
In the United States it is not so definite, but shows itself in a
restlessness, a questioning, a sensible friction between the traditional
tendency of the American to fair-mindedness and his respect for the cold
facts.

Because the Question will assume more and more pressure in America it
behooves everyone of foresight to disregard the shortsighted protests of
the Jews themselves and see to it that the Question shall not present
itself among us as it has done among other people, in its most
distressing and confusing forms. It is a public duty to seize this
problem at its beginning and train it up, so to speak; that is, so
prepare for it that it may be handled here in a manner which will form a
model for all other countries, which will indeed supply all other
countries with the essential materials for a permanent solution. And
this can be done only by exposing and recognizing and treating with the
serum of publicity the conditions before which, heretofore, the nations
have helplessly floundered because they lacked either the desire or the
means to get at the great root of the difficulty.

2. Another cause of the Question appearing here will be the great influx
of Jews which is planned for America. There will probably be a million
Jews enter the country this year, increasing our Jewish population to
nearly 4,500,000. This does not mean merely an immigration of persons,
but an immigration of ideas. No Jewish writer has ever told us, in
systematic fashion, just what is the Jews' idea of non-Jews, how they
regard the Gentiles in their private minds. But there are indications of
it, although one would not attempt to reconstruct the Jewish attitude
toward Gentiles. A Jew ought to do this for us, but he would probably be
cast out by his own people if he discharged his task with rigorous
jealousy for the exact fact.

These people are coming here regarding the Gentile as an hereditary
enemy, as perhaps they have good ground for doing, and so believing they
are going to model their behavior in a manner that will show it. Nor
will these Jews be so helpless as they appear. In stricken Poland, where
the Jews are represented as having been stripped of everything during
the war, there are hundreds daily appearing before the consulate to
arrange their passage here. The fact is significant. In spite of their
reputed suffering and poverty, they are able to travel a great distance
and to insist on coming. No other people are financially able to travel
in such numbers. But the Jews are. It will readily be seen that they are
not objects of charity. They have been able to keep afloat in a storm
that has wrecked the other people. They know it and they joy in it, as
is natural. And they will bring here the same thoughts toward the
majority which they have harbored in their present lands of domicile.
They may hail America; they will have their own thoughts about the
majority of the American people. They may be in the lists as Russians or
Poles or what not, but they will be Jews with the full Jewish
consciousness, and they will make themselves felt.

All this is bound to have its effect. And it is not race prejudice to
prepare for it, and to invite American Jews themselves to consider the
fact and contribute to the solution of the problem which it presents.

3. Every idea which has ruled Europe has met with transformation when it
was transplanted in America. It was so with the idea of Liberty, the
idea of Government, the idea of War. It will be so with the idea of
anti-Semitism. The whole problem will center here and if we are wise and
do not shirk it, it will find its solution here. A recent Jewish writer
has said: "Jewry today largely means American Jewry . . . . . . . . . .
all former Jewish centers were demolished during the war and were
shifted to America." The problem will be ours, whether we choose it or
not.

And what course will it take? Much depends on what can be accomplished
before it becomes very strong. It may be said, however, that the first
element to appear will be a show of resentment against certain Jewish
commercial successes, more particularly against the united action by
which they are attained. Our people see the spectacle of a people in the
midst of a people, in a sense which the Mormons never were, and they
will not like it. The Mormons made an Exodus; Israel is going back into
Egypt to subjugate it.

The second element which will undoubtedly appear is prejudice and its
incitement. The majority may always be right, but they are not always
initially reasonable. That prejudice which exists now, and which is
freely admitted by both Jew and Gentile, may become more marked, to the
distress of both parties, for neither the subject nor the object of
prejudice can attain that freedom of mind which is happiness.

Then we may most confidently look for a reaction of Justice. It is here
that the whole matter will begin to bend to the genius of Americanism.
The innate justice of the American mind has come to the aid of every
object that ever roused American resentment. The natural reaction with
us is of very brief duration; the intellectual and ethical reaction
swiftly follows. The American mind will never rest with merely resenting
certain individuals. It will probe deeper. Already this deeper probe has
been begun in Great Britain and America. We characteristically do not
stop with persons when principles are in sight.

And upon this there will be an investigation of materials, part of which
may yet be presented in this series and which may possibly be
disregarded for a time, but which at a future date will be found to be
the clue to the maze. Upon this, the root of all the trouble will be
bared to the light, to die as all roots do when deprived of their
concealment of darkness, and then the Jewish people themselves may be
expected to begin an adjustment to the new order of things, not to lose
their identity or to curtail their energy or to dim their brilliance,
but to turn all into more worthy channels for the benefit of all races,
which alone can justify their claim to superiority. A race that can
achieve in the material realm what the Jews have achieved while
asserting themselves to be spiritually superior, can achieve in a less
sordid, a less society-defying realm also.

The Jews will not be destroyed; neither will they be permitted to
maintain the yoke which they have been so skillful in fastening upon
society. They are the beneficiaries of a system which itself will change
and force them to other and higher devices to justify their proper place
in the world.

[Issue of June 19, 1920.]




"We must force the Gentile governments to adopt measures which will
promote our broadly conceived plan already approaching its triumphal
goal by bringing to bear the pressure of stimulated public opinion which
has in reality been organized by us with the help of the so-called
'great power' of the Press. With few exceptions, not worth considering,
it has already fallen into our hands."

--The Seventh Protocol.

VI.

Jewish Question Breaks Into the Magazines


Once upon a time an American faculty member of an American university
went to Russia on business. He was expert in a very important department
of applied science and a keen observer. He entered Russia with the
average American's feeling about the treatment which the government of
that people accorded the Jew. He lived there three years, came home for
a year, and went back again for a similar period, and upon his second
return to America he thought it was time to give the American public
accurate information about the Jewish Question in Russia. He prepared a
most careful article and sent it to the editor of a magazine of the
first class in the Eastern United States. The editor sent for him, spent
most of two days with him, and was deeply impressed with all he
learned--but he said he could not print the article. The same interest
and examination occurred with several other magazine editors of the
first rank.

It was not because the professor could not write--these editors gladly
bought anything he would write on other subjects. But it was impossible
for him to get his article on the Jews accepted or printed in New York.

The Jewish Question, however, has at last broken into a New York
magazine. Rather it is a fragment of a shell hurled from the Jewish camp
at the Jewish Question to demolish, if possible, the Question and thus
make good the assertion that there is no such thing.

Incidentally it is the only kind of article on the Jewish Question that
the big magazines, whose mazes of financial controllers make most
interesting rummaging, would care to print.

Yet, the general public may learn much about the Question even from the
type of article whose purpose is to prove that the Question doesn't
exist.

Mr. William Hard, in the Metropolitan for June, has done as well as
could be expected, considering the use he was supposed to make of such
material as he had at hand. And doubtless the telegraph and letter
brigades, which keep watch over all printed references to the Jews, have
duly congratulated the good editors of the Metropolitan for their
assistance in soothing the public to further sleep.

It is to be hoped, for the sake of the Question, that Mr. Hard's effort
will have a wide reading, for there is very much to be learned from
it--much more than it was anybody's intention should be learned from it.

It may be learned, first, that the Jewish Question exists. Mr. Hard says
it is discussed in the drawing-rooms of London and Paris. Whether the
mention of drawing-rooms was a writer's device to intimate that the
matter was unimportant and frivolous, or merely represented the extent
of Mr. Hard's contact with the Question is not clear. He adds, however,
that a document relating to the Question has "travelled a good bit in
certain official circles in Washington." He also mentions a cable
dispatch to the New York World, concerning the same Question, which that
paper published. His article was probably published too early to note
the review which the London Times made of the first document referred
to. But he has told the reader who is looking for the objective facts in
the article that there is a Jewish Question, and that it does not exist
among the riff-raff either but principally in those circles where the
evidence of Jewish power and control is most abundant. Moreover, the
Question is being discussed. Mr. Hard tells us that much. If he does not
go further and tell us that it is being discussed with great seriousness
in high places and among men of national and international importance,
it is probably because of one of two things, either he does not know, or
he does not consider it consonant with the purpose of the article to
tell.

However, Mr. Hard has already made it clear that there is a Jewish
Question, that it is being discussed, that it is being discussed by
people who are best situated to observe the matter they are talking
about.

The reading of Mr. Hard's article makes it clear also that the Question
always comes to the fore on the note of conspiracy. Of course, Mr. Hard
says he does not believe in conspiracies which involve a large number of
people, and it is with the utmost ease that his avowal of unbelief is
accepted, for there is nothing more ridiculous to the Gentile mind than
a mass conspiracy, because there is nothing more impossible to the
Gentile himself. Mr. Hard, we take it, is of non-Jewish extraction, and
he knows how impossible it would be to band Gentiles together in any
considerable number for any length of time in even the noblest
conspiracy. Gentiles are not built for it. Their conspiracy, whatever it
might be, would fall like a rope of sand. Gentiles have not the basis
either in blood or interest that the Jews have to stand together. The
Gentile does not naturally suspect conspiracy; he will indeed hardly
bring himself to the verge of believing it without the fullest proof.

It is therefore quite easy to understand Mr. Hard's difficulty with
conspiracy; the point is that to write his article at all, he is forced
to recognize at almost every step that whenever the Jewish Question is
discussed, the idea of conspiracy occupies a large part in it. As a
matter of fact, it is the central idea in Mr. Hard's article, and it
completely monopolizes the heading--"Great Jewish Conspiracy."

The search for basic facts in Mr. Hard's article will disclose the
additional information that there are certain documents in existence
which purport to contain the details of the conspiracy, or--to drop a
word that is unpleasant and may be misleading and which has not been
used in this series--the tendency of Jewish power to achieve complete
control. That is about all that the reader learns from Mr. Hard about
the documents, except that he describes one as "strange and horrible."
Here is indeed a regrettable gap in the story, for it is to discredit a
certain document that Mr. Hard writes, and yet he tells next to nothing
about it. Discreditable documents usually discredit themselves. But this
document is not permitted to do that. The reader of the article is left
to take Mr. Hard's word for it. The serious student or critic will feel,
of course, that the documents themselves would have formed a better
basis for an intelligent judgement. But laying that matter aside, Mr.
Hard has made public the fact that there are documents.

And then Mr. Hard does another thing, as well as he can with the
materials at hand, the purpose of the article being what it was, and
that is to show how little the Jews have to do with the control of
affairs by showing who are the Jews that do control certain selected
groups of affairs. The names are all brought forward by Mr. Hard and he
alone is responsible for them, our purpose in referring to them being
merely to show what can be learned from him.

Mr. Hard leans heavily on Russian affairs. Sometimes it would almost
seem as if the Jewish Question were conceived as the Soviet Question,
which it is not, as Mr. Hard very well knows, and although the two have
their plain connections, it is nothing less than well-defined propaganda
to set up Bolshevist fiction and knock it down by Jewish fact for the
purpose of the latter. However, what Mr. Hard offers as fact is very
instructive, quite apart from the conclusion which he draws from it.

Now, take his Russian line-up first. He says that in the cabinet of
Soviet Russia there is only one Jew. But he is Trotsky. There are others
in the government, of course, but Mr. Hard is speaking about the cabinet
now. He is not speaking about the commissars, who are the real rulers of
Russia, nor about the executive troops, who are the real strength of the
Trotsky-Lenin régime. No, just the cabinet. Of course, there was only
one Jew prominent in Hungary, too, but he was Bela Kun. Mr. Hard does
not ask us to believe, however, that it is simply because of Trotsky and
Kun that all Europe believes that Bolshevism has a strong Jewish
element. Else the stupid credibility of the Gentiles would be more
impossible of conception than the idea of a Jewish conspiracy is to Mr.
Hard's mind. Why should it be easier to believe that Gentiles are dunces
than that Jews are clever?

However, it is not too much to say that Trotsky is way up at the top,
sharing the utmost summit of Bolshevism with Lenin, and Trotsky is a
Jew--nobody ever denied that, not even Mr. Braunstein himself (the
latter being Trotsky's St. Louis, U.S.A., name).

But then, says Mr. Hard, the Mensheviks are led by Jews, too! That is a
fact worth putting down beside the others. Trotsky at the head of the
Bolsheviks; at the head of the Mensheviks during their opposition of the
Bolsheviks were Leiber, Martov and Dan--"all Jews," says Mr. Hard.

There is, however, a middle party between these extremes, the Cadets,
which, Mr. Hard says, are or were the strongest bourgeois political
party in Russia. "They now have their headquarters in Paris. Their
chairman is Vinaver--a Jew."

There are the facts as stated by Mr. Hard. He says that Jews, whose
names he gives, head the three great divisions of political opinion in
Russia.

And then he cries, look how the Jews are divided! How can there be
conspiracy among people who thus fight themselves?

But another, looking at the same situation may say, look how the Jews
control every phase of political opinion in Russia! Doesn't there seem
to be some ground for the feeling that they are desirous of ruling
everywhere?

The facts are there. What significance does it bring to the average mind
that the three great parties of Russia are led by Jews?

But that does not exhaust the information which the matter-of-fact
reader may find in Mr. Hard's article. He turns to the United States and
makes several interesting statements.

"There is Otto Kahn," he says. Well, sometimes Otto Kahn is there, and
sometimes he is in Paris on important international matters, and
sometimes he is in London advocating certain alliances between British
and American capital which have to do in a large way with European
political conditions. Mr. Kahn is rated as a conservative, and that may
mean anything. A man is conservative or not according to the angle from
which he is viewed. The most conservative men in America are really the
most radical; their motives and methods go to the very roots of certain
matters; they are radicals in their own field. The men who controlled
the last Republican Convention--if not the last, the most recent--are
styled conservatives by those whose vision is circumscribed by certain
limited economic interests; but they are the most radical of radicals,
they have passed the red stage and are white with it. If it were known
what is in the back of Mr. Kahn's mind, if he should display a chart of
what he is doing and aiming to do, the term which would then most aptly
describe him might be quite different. Anyway, we have it from Mr. Hard,
"There is Mr. Kahn."

"On the other hand," says Mr. Hard, "there is Rose Pastor Stokes." He
adds the name of Morris Hillquit. They are, in Mr. Hard's
classification, radicals. And to offset these names he adds the names of
two Gentiles, Eugene V. Debs and Bill Haywood and intimates that they
are much more powerful leaders than the first two. Students of modern
influences, of which Mr. Hard has long appeared as one, do not think so.
Neither Debs nor Haywood ever generated in all their lives a fraction of
the intellectual power which Mrs. Stokes and Mr. Hillquit have
generated. Both Debs and Haywood live by the others. To every informed
person, as to Mr. Hard in this article, come the Jewish names to mind
when the social tendencies of the United States are passed under
reflection.

This is most instructive indeed, that in naming the leaders of so-called
conservatism and radicalism, Mr. Hard is driven to use Jewish names. On
his showing the reader is entitled to say that Jews lead both divisions
here in the United States.

But Mr. Hard is not through. "The man who does more than any other
man--the man who does more than any regiment of other men--to keep
American labor anti-radical is a Jew--Samuel Gompers." That is a fact
which the reader will place in his list--American labor is led by a Jew.

Well, then, "the strongest anti-Gompers trade union in the country--The
Amalgamated Clothing Workers--and very strong indeed, and very large--is
led by a Jew--Sidney Hillman."

It is the Russian situation over again. Both ends of the movements, and
the movement which operate within the movement, are under the leadership
of Jews. This, whatever the construction put upon it, is a fact which
Mr. Hard is compelled by the very nature of his task to acknowledge.

And the middle movement, "the Liberal Middle" as Mr. Hard calls it,
which catches all between, produces in this article the names of Mr.
Justice Brandeis, Judge Mack and Felix Frankfurter, gentlemen whose
activities since Armistice Day would make a very interesting story.

For good measure, Mr. Hard produces two other names, "Baron Gunzberg--a
Jew" who is "a faithful official" of the Russian Embassy of Ambassador
Bakhmetev, a repesentative of the modified old regime, while the Russian
Information Bureau, whose literary output appears in many of our
newspapers is conducted by another Jew, so Mr. Hard calls him, whose
name is familiar to newspaper readers, Mr. A. J. Sack.

It is not a complete list by any means, but it is quite impressive. It
seems to reflect importance on the documents which Mr. Hard endeavors to
minimize to a position of ridiculous unimportance. And it leads to the
thought that perhaps the documents are scrutinized as carefully as they
are because the readers of them have observed not only the facts which
Mr. Hard admits but other and more astonishing ones, and have discovered
that the documents confirm and explain the observations. Other readers
who have not had the privilege of learning all that the documents
contain are entitled to have satisfaction given to the interest thus
aroused.

The documents did not create the Jewish Question. If there were nothing
but the documents, Mr. Hard would not have written nor would the
Metropolitan Magazine have printed the article here discussed.

What Mr. Hard has done is to bring confirmation in a most unexpected
place that the Question exists and is pressing for discussion. Someone
felt the pressure when "The Great Jewish Conspiracy" was ordered and
written.

[Issue of June 26, 1920.]




"What are you prating about? As long as we do not have the Press of the
whole world in our hands, everything you may do is vain. We must control
or influence the papers of the whole world in order to blind and deceive
the people."

--Baron Montefiore.

VII.

Arthur Brisbane Leaps to the Help of Jewry


Once more the current of this series on the Modern Jewish Question is
interrupted to give notice of the appearance of the Question in another
quarter, the appearance this time consisting of a more than two-column
"Today" editorial in the Hearst papers of Sunday, June 20, from the pen
of Arthur Brisbane. It would be too much to say that Mr. Brisbane is the
most influential writer in the country, but perhaps he is among the
dozen most widely read. It is, therefore, a confirmation of the
statement that the Question is assuming importance in this country, that
a writer of Mr. Brisbane's prominence should openly discuss it.

Of course, Mr. Brisbane has not studied the Question. He would probably
admit in private conversation--though such an admission would hardly be
in harmony with the tone of certainty he publicly adopts--that he really
knows nothing about it. He knows, however, as a good newspaper man, how
to handle it when the exigencies of the newspaper day throw it up to him
for offhand treatment. Every editorial writer knows how to do that.
There is something good in every race, or there have been some notable
individuals in it, or it has played a picturesque part in history--that
is enough for a very readable editorial upon any class of people who may
happen to be represented in the community. The Question, whatever it may
be, need not be studied at all; a certain group of people may be salved
for a few paragraphs, and the job need never be tackled again. Every
newspaper man knows that.

And yet, having lived in New York for a long time, having had financial
dealings of a large and obligating nature with certain interests in this
country, having seen no doubt more or less of the inner workings of the
great trust and banking groups, and being constantly surrounded by
assistants and advisors who are members of the Jewish race, Mr. Brisbane
must have had his thoughts. It is, however, no part of a newspaper man's
business to expose his thoughts about the racial groups of his
community, any more than it is a showman's business to express his
opinion of the patrons of his show. The kinds of offense a newspaper
will give, and the occasions on which it will feel justified in giving
it, are very limited.

So, assuming that Mr. Brisbane had to write at all, it could have been
told beforehand what he would write. The only wonder is that he felt he
had to write. Did he really feel that the Jews are being "persecuted"
when an attempt is made to uncover the extent and causes of their
control in the United States and elsewhere? Did he feel, with good
editorial shrewdness, that here was an opportunity to win the attention
and regard of the most influential group in New York and the nation?
Or--and this seems within the probabilities--was he inclined simply to
pass it over, until secretarial suggestions reached him for a Sunday
editorial, or until some of the bondholders made their wishes known?
This is not at all to impugn Mr. Brisbane's motives, but merely to
indicate on what slender strings such an editorial may depend.

But what is more important--does Mr. Brisbane consider that, having
disposed of the Sunday editorial, he is through with the Question, or
that the Question itself is solved? That is the worst of daily
editorializing; having come safely and inoffensively through with one
editorial, the matter is at an end as far as that particular writer is
concerned--that is, as a usual thing.

It is to be hoped that Mr. Brisbane is not through. He ought not to
leave a big question without contributing something to it, and in his
Sunday editorial he did not contribute anything. He even made mistakes
which he ought to correct by further study. "What about the
Phoenicians?" he asks. He should have looked that up while his mind was
opened receptively toward the subject, and he would not have made so
miserable a blunder as to connect them so closely with the Jews. He
would never find a Jew doing that. It is permissible, however, in Jewish
propaganda intended for Gentile consumption. The Phoenicians themselves
certainly never thought they were connected in any way with the Jews,
and the Jews were equally without light on the subject. If in nothing
else, they differed in their attitude toward the sea. The Phoenicians
not only built boats but manned them; the Jew would rather risk his
investment in a boat than himself. In everything else the differences
between the two peoples were deep and distinct. Mr. Brisbane should have
turned up the Jewish Encyclopedia at that point in his dictation. It is
to be hoped he will resume his study and when he has found something
that is not printed in "simply written" Jewish books will give the world
the benefit of it. It is hardly like the question of the rotundity of
the earth; this Question is not settled and it will be discussed.

Mr. Brisbane is in a position to pursue some investigations of his own
on this subject. He has a large staff, and it is presumed that some of
its members are Gentiles of unbiased minds; he has a world-wide
organization; since his own modification of speech and views following
upon his adventure in the money-making world, he has a "look-in" upon
certain groups of men and certain tendencies of power--why does he not
take the Question as a world problem and go after the facts and the
solution?

It is a task worthy of any newspaper organization. It will assist
America to make the contribution which she must make if this Question is
ever to be turned from the bugbear it has been through all the
centuries. All the talk on earth about "loving our fellow men" will not
serve in lieu of an investigation, because it is asking men to love
those who are rapidly and insidiously gaining the mastery of them.
"What's wrong with the Jew?" is the first question, and then, "What's
wrong with the Gentile to make it possible?"

As in the case of every Gentile writer who appears as the Jew's
good-natured defender, Mr. Brisbane is compelled to state a number of
facts which comprise a part of the very Question whose existence is
denied.

"Every other successful name you see in a great city is a Jewish name,"
says Mr. Brisbane. In his own city the ratio is even higher than that.

"Jews numbering less than one per cent of the earth's population possess
by conquest, enterprise, industry and intelligence 50 per cent of the
world's commercial success," says Mr. Brisbane.

Does it mean anything to Mr. Brisbane? Has he ever thought how it will
all turn out? Is he willing to absolve that "success" from every quality
which humanity has a right to challenge? Is he entirely satisfied with
the way that "success" is used where it is supreme? Would he be willing
to undertake to prove that it is due to those commendable qualities he
has named and nothing less commendable? Speaking of the Jew-financed
Harriman railroad campaign, is Mr. Brisbane ready to write his
endorsement upon that? Did he ever hear of Jewish money backing
railroads that were built for railroad purposes and nothing else?

It would be very easy to suggest to Mr. Brisbane, as editor, a series of
articles which would be most enlightening, both to himself and his
readers, if he would only put unbiased men at work gathering the facts
for them.

One of the articles might be entitled "The Jews at the Peace
Conference." His men should be instructed to learn who were the most
prominent figures at the Peace Conference; who came and went most
constantly and most busily; who were given freest access to the most
important persons and chambers; which race provided the bulk of the
private secretaries to the important personages there; which race
provided most of the sentinels through whom engagements had to be made
with men of note; which race went furthest in the endeavor to turn the
whole proceeding into a festival rout by dances and lavish
entertainment; which civilians of prominence oftenest dined the leading
conferees in private session.

If Mr. Brisbane, with the genius for reporting which his organization
deservedly has, will turn his men loose on that assignment, and then
print what they bring him, he will have a story that will make a mark
even in his remarkable career as an editor.

He might even run a second story on the Peace Conference, entitled,
"Which Program Won at the Peace Conference?" He might instruct his men
to inquire as to the business which brought the Jews in such quality and
quantity to Paris, and how it was put through. Particularly should they
inquire whether any jot or tittle of the Jews' world program was refused
or modified by the Peace Conference. It should also be carefully
inquired whether, after getting what they went after, they did not ask
for still more and get that, too, even though it constituted a
discrimination against the rest of the world. Mr. Brisbane would
doubtless be surprised to learn that of all the programs submitted to
that Conference, not excepting the great program on which humanity hung
so many pathetic hopes, the only program to go through was the Jews'
program. And yet he could learn just that if he inquired. The question
is, having obtained that information, what would Mr. Brisbane do with
it?

There are any number of lines of investigation Mr. Brisbane might enter,
and in any one of them his knowledge of his country and of its relation
to this particular Question would be greatly enlarged.

Does Mr. Brisbane know who owns Alaska? He may have been under the
impression, in common with the rest of us until we learned better, that
it was owned by the United States. No, it is owned by the same people
who are coming rapidly to own the United States.

Is Mr. Brisbane, from the vantage point afforded by his position in
national journalism, even dimly aware that there are elements in our
industrial unrest which neither "capital" nor "labor" accurately define?
Has he ever caught a glimpse of another power which is neither "labor"
nor "capital" in the productive sense, whose purpose and interest it is
to keep labor and capital as far apart as possible, now by provoking
labor, now by provoking capital? In his study of the industrial
situation and its perfectly baffling mystery, Mr. Brisbane must have
caught a flash of something behind the backmost scene. It would be good
journalistic enterprise to find out what it is.

Has Mr. Brisbane ever printed the name of the men who control the sugar
supply of the United States--does he know them--would he like to know
them?

Has he ever looked into the woolen situation in this country, from the
change of ownership in cotton lands, and the deliberate sabotage of
cotton production by banking threats, right on through to the change in
the price of cloth and clothing? And has he ever noted the names of the
men he found on that piece of investigation? Would he like to know how
it is done, and who does it? Mr. Brisbane could find all these things
and give them to the public by using his efficient staff of
investigators and writers on this Question.

Whether Mr. Brisbane would feel free to do this, he himself best knows.
There may be reasons why he would not, private reasons, prudential
reasons.

However that may be, there are no reasons why he should not make a
complete study of the Question--a real study, not a superficial glance
at it with an eye to its "news value"--and arrive at his own considered
conclusion. There would be no intolerance about that. As it is now, Mr.
Brisbane is not qualified to take a stand on either side of the
Question; he simply brushes it aside as troublesome, as the old planters
used brush aside the anti-slavery moralists; and for that reason the
recent defense of the Jew is not a defense at all. It is more like a bid
for favor.

Mr. Brisbane's chief aversion, apparently, is toward what he calls race
prejudice and race hatred. Of course, if any man should fear that the
study of an economic situation would plunge him into these serious
aberrations of mind, he should be advised to avoid that line of study.
There is something wrong either with the investigation or with the
investigator when prejudice and hatred are the result. It is a mighty
poor excuse, however, for an intelligent man to put forward either on
his own behalf or on behalf of those whose minds he has had the
privilege of molding over a course of years.

Prejudice and hatred are the very conditions which a scientific study of
the Jewish Question will forestall and prevent. We prejudge what we do
not know, and we hate what we do not understand; the study of the Jewish
Question will bring knowledge and insight, and not to the Gentile only,
but also to the Jew. The Jew needs this as much, even more than the
Gentile. For if the Jew can be made to see, understand, and deal with
certain matters, then a large part of the Question vanishes in the
solution of ideal common sense. Awaking the Gentile to the facts about
the Jew is only part of the work; awaking the Jew to the facts about the
Question is an indispensable part. The big initial victory to be
achieved is to transform Gentiles from being mere attackers and to
transform Jews from being mere defenders, both of them special pleaders
for partisan views, and to turn them both into investigators. The
investigation will show both Gentile and Jew at fault, and the road will
then be clear for wisdom to work out a result, if there should perchance
be that much wisdom left in the race.

There is a serious snare in all this plea for tolerance. Tolerance is
first a tolerance of the truth. Tolerance is urged today for the sake of
suppression. There can be no tolerance until there is first a full
understanding of what is tolerated. Ignorance, suppression, silence,
collusion--these are not tolerance. The Jew never has been really
tolerated in the higher sense because he has never been understood. Mr.
Brisbane does not assist the understanding of this people by reading a
"simply written" book and flinging a few Jewish names about in a sea of
type. He owes it to his own mind to get into the Question, whether he
makes newspaper use of his discoveries or not.

As to the newspaper angle, it is impossible to report the world even
superficially without coming everywhere against the fact of the Jews,
and the Press gets around that fact by referring to them as Russians,
Letts, Germans, and Englishmen. This mask of names is one of the most
confusing elements in the whole problem. Names that actually name,
statements that actually define are needed for the clarification of the
world's mind.

Mr. Brisbane should study this question for the light such a study would
throw on other matters with which he is concerned. It would be a help to
that study if from time to time he would publish some of his findings,
because such publication would put him in touch with a phase of Judaism
which mere complimentary editorials could not. No doubt Mr. Brisbane has
been deluged by communications which praise him for what he has written;
the real eye-opener would come if he could get several bushels of the
other kind. Nothing that has ever come to him could compare with what
would come to him if he should publish even one of the facts he could
discover by an independent investigation.

Having written about the Jews, Mr. Brisbane will probably have a readier
eye henceforth for other men's pronouncements on the same subject. In
his casual reading he will find more references to the Jew than he has
ever noticed before. Some of them will probably appear in isolated
sentences and paragraphs of his own papers. Sooner or later, every
competent investigator and every honest writer strikes a trail that
leads toward Jewish power in the world. THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT is only
doing with system and detail what other publications have done or are
doing piecemeal.

There is a real fear of the Jew upon the publicity sources of the United
States--a fear which is felt and which ought to be analyzed. Unless it
is a very great mistake, Mr. Brisbane himself has felt this fear, though
it is quite possible he has not scrutinized it. It is not the fear of
doing injustice to a race of people--all of us ought to have that
honorable fear--it is the fear of doing anything at all with reference
to them except unstintedly praising them. An independent investigation
would convince Mr. Brisbane that a considerable modification of praise
in favor of discriminate criticism is a course that is pressing upon
American journalism.

[Issue of July 3, 1920.]




VIII.

Does a Definite Jewish World Program Exist?


In all the explanations of anti-Jewish feeling which modern Jewish
spokesmen make, these three alleged causes are commonly given--these
three and no more: religious prejudice, economic jealousy, social
antipathy. Whether the Jew knows it or not, every Gentile knows that on
his side of the Jewish Question no religious prejudice exists. Economic
jealousy may exist, at least to this extent, that his uniform success
has exposed the Jew to much scrutiny. A few Jewish spokesmen seek to
turn this scrutiny by denying that the Jew is pre-eminent in finance,
but this is loyalty in extremity. The finances of the world are in
control of Jews; their decisions and their devices are themselves our
economic law. But because a people excels us in finance is no sufficient
reason for calling them to the bar of public judgement. If they are more
intellectually able, more persistently industrious than we are, if they
are endowed with faculties which have been denied us as an inferior or
slower race, that is no reason for our requiring them to give an account
of themselves. Economic jealousy may explain some of the anti-Jewish
feeling; it cannot account for the presence of the Jewish Question
except as the hidden causes of Jewish financial success may become a
minor element of the larger problem. And as for social antipathy--there
are many more undesirable Gentiles in the world than there are
undesirable Jews, for the simple reason that there are more Gentiles.

None of the Jewish spokesmen today mention the political cause, or if
they come within suggestive distance of it, they limit and localize it.
It is not a question of the patriotism of the Jew, though this too is
very widely questioned in all the countries. You hear it in England, in
France, in Germany, in Poland, in Russia, in Rumania--and, with a shock,
you hear it in the United States. Books have been written, reports
published and scattered abroad, statistics skillfully set forth for the
purpose of showing that the Jew does his part for the country in which
he resides; and yet the fact remains that in spite of these most zealous
and highly sponsored campaigns, the opposite assertion is stronger and
lives longer. The Jews who did their duty in the armies of Liberty, and
did it doubtless from true-hearted love and allegiance, have not been
able to overcome the impression made upon officers and men and civilians
by those who did not.

But that is not what is here meant as the political element in the
Jewish Question. To understand why the Jew should think less of the
nationalities of the world than do those who comprise them is not
difficult. The Jew's history is one of wandering among them all.
Considering living individuals only, there is no race of people now upon
the planet who have lived in so many places, among so many peoples as
have the Jewish masses. They have a clearer world-sense than any other
people, because the world has been their path. And they think in world
terms more than any nationally cloistered people could. The Jew can be
absolved if he does not enter into national loyalties and prejudices
with the same intensity as the natives; the Jew has been for centuries a
cosmopolitan. While under a flag he may be correct in the conduct
required of him as a citizen or resident, inevitably he has a view of
flags which can hardly be shared by the man who has known but one flag.

The political element inheres in the fact that the Jews form a nation in
the midst of the nations. Some of their spokesmen, particularly in
America, deny that, but the genius of the Jew himself has always put
these spokesmen's zeal to shame. And why this fact of nationhood should
be so strenuously denied is not always clear. It may be that when Israel
is brought to see that her mission in the world is not to be achieved by
means of the Golden Calf, her very cosmopolitanism with regard to the
world and her inescapable nationalistic integrity with regard to herself
will together prove a great and serviceable factor in bringing about
human unity, which the total Jewish tendency at the present time is
doing much to prevent. It is not the fact that the Jews remain a nation
in the midst of the nations; it is the use made of that inescapable
status, which the world has found reprehensible. The nations have tried
to reduce the Jew to unity with themselves; attempts toward the same end
have been made by the Jews themselves; but destiny seems to have marked
them out to continuous nationhood. Both the Jews and the World will have
to accept that fact, find the good prophecy in it, and seek the channels
for its fulfillment.

Theodor Herzl, one of the greatest of the Jews, was perhaps the
farthest-seeing public exponent of the philosophy of Jewish existence
that modern generations have known. And he was never in doubt of the
existence of the Jewish nation. Indeed, he proclaimed its existence on
every occasion. He said, "We are a people--One people."

He clearly saw that what he called the Jewish Question was political. In
his introduction to "The Jewish State" he says, "I believe that I
understand anti-Semitism, which is really a highly complex movement. I
consider it from a Jewish standpoint, yet without fear or hatred. I
believe that I can see what elements there are in it of vulgar sport, of
common trade jealousy, of inherited prejudice, of religious intolerance
and also of pretended self-defense. I think the Jewish Question is no
more a social than a religious one, notwithstanding that it sometimes
takes these and other forms. It is a national question, which can only
be solved by making it a political world-question to be discussed and
controlled by the civilized nations of the world in council."

Not only did Herzl declare that the Jews formed a nation, but when
questioned by Major Evans Gordon before the British Royal Commission on
Alien Immigration in August, 1902, Dr. Herzl said: "I will give you my
definition of a nation, and you can add the adjective 'Jewish.' A nation
is, in my mind, an historical group of men of a recognizable cohesion
held together by a common enemy. That is in my view a nation. Then if
you add to that the word 'Jewish' you have what I understand to be the
Jewish nation."

Also, in relating the action of this Jewish nation to the world, Dr.
Herzl wrote--"When we sink, we become a revolutionary proletariat, the
subordinate officers of the revolutionary party; when we rise, there
rises also our terrible power of the purse."

This view, which appears to be the true view in that it is the view
which has been longest sustained in Jewish thought, is brought out also
by Lord Eustace Percy, and re-published, apparently with approval, by
the Canadian Jewish Chronicle. It will repay a careful reading:

"Liberalism and Nationalism, with a flourish of trumpets, threw open the
doors of the ghetto and offered equal citizenship to the Jew. The Jew
passed out into the Western World, saw the power and the glory of it,
used it and enjoyed it, laid his hand indeed upon the nerve centers of
its civilization, guided, directed and exploited it, and then--refused
the offer * * * Moreover--and this is a remarkable thing--the Europe of
nationalism and liberalism, of scientific government and democratic
equality is more intolerable to him than the old oppressions and
persecutions of despotism * * * In the increasing consolidation of the
western nations, it is no longer possible to reckon on complete
toleration * * *

"In a world of completely organized territorial sovereignties he (the
Jew) has only two possible cities of refuge: he must either pull down
the pillars of the whole national state system or he must create a
territorial sovereignty of his own. In this perhaps lies the explanation
both of Jewish Bolshevism and of Zionism, for at this moment Eastern
Jewry seems to hover uncertainly between the two.

"In Eastern Europe Bolshevism and Zionism often seem to grow side by
side, just as Jewish influence molded Republican and Socialist thought
throughout the nineteenth century, down to the Young Turk revolution in
Constantinople hardly more than a decade ago--not because the Jew cares
for the positive side of radical philosophy, not because he desires to
be a partaker in Gentile nationalism or Gentile democracy, but because
no existing Gentile system of government is ever anything but
distasteful to him."

All that is true, and Jewish thinkers of the more fearless type always
recognize it as true. The Jew is against the Gentile scheme of things.
He is, when he gives his tendencies full sway, a Republican as against
the monarchy, a Socialist as against the republic, and a Bolshevist as
against Socialism.

What are the causes of this disruptive activity? First, his essential
lack of democracy. Jewish nature is autocratic. Democracy is all right
for the rest of the world, but the Jew wherever he is found forms an
aristocracy of one sort or another. Democracy is merely a tool of a word
which Jewish agitators use to raise themselves to the ordinary level in
places where they are oppressed below it; but having reached the common
level they immediately make efforts for special privileges, as being
entitled to them--a process of which the late Peace Conference will
remain the most startling example. The Jews today are the only people
whose special and extraordinary privileges are written into the world's
Treaty of Peace. But more of that at another time.

No one now pretends to deny, except a few spokesmen who really do not
rule the thought of the Jews but are set forth for the sole benefit of
influencing Gentile thought, that the socially and economically
disruptive elements abroad in the world today are not only manned but
also moneyed by Jewish interests. For a long time this fact was held in
suspense owing to the vigorous denial of the Jews and the lack of
information on the part of those agencies of publicity to which the
public had looked for its information. But now the facts are coming
forth. Herzl's words are being proved to be true--"when we sink, we
become a revolutionary proletariat, the subordinate officers of the
revolutionary party"--and these words were first published in English in
1896, or 24 years ago.

Just now these tendencies are working in two directions, one for the
tearing down of the Gentile states all over the world, and the other for
the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine. The latter project has
the best wishes of the whole world, but it is far from having the best
wishes of the whole, or even the larger part, of Jewry. The Zionist
party makes a great deal of noise, but it is really an unrepresentative
minority. It can scarcely be designated as more than an unusually
ambitious colonization scheme. [See note on page 95.] It is doubtless
serving, however, as a very useful public screen for the carrying on of
secret activities. International Jews, the controllers of the world's
governmental and financial power, may meet anywhere, at any time, in war
time or peace time, and by giving out that they are only considering the
ways and means of opening up Palestine to the Jews, they easily escape
the suspicion of being together on any other business. The Allies and
enemies of the Gentile nations at war thus met and were not molested. It
was at a Zionist conference--the sixth, held in 1903--that the recent
war was exactly predicted, its progress and outcome indicated, and the
relation of the Jews to the Peace Treaty outlined.

That is to say, though Jewish nationalism exists, its enshrinement in a
state to be set up in Palestine is not the project that is engaging the
whole Jewish nation now. The Jews will not move to Palestine just yet;
it may be said that they will not move at all merely because of the
Zionist movement. Quite another motive will be the cause of the exodus
out of the Gentile nations, when the time for that exodus fully comes.

As Donald A. Cameron, late British Consul-General at Alexandria, a man
fully in sympathy with Zionism and much quoted in the Jewish press,
says: "The Jewish immigrants (into Palestine) will tire of taking in one
another's washing at three per cent, of winning one another's money in
the family, and their sons will hasten by train and steamer to win 10
per cent in Egypt * * * The Jew by himself in Palestine will eat his
head off; he will kick his stable to pieces." Undoubtedly the time for
the exodus--at least the motive for the exodus--is not yet here.

The political aspect of the Jewish Question which is now engaging at
least three of the great nations--France, Great Britain and the United
States--has to do with matters of the present organization of the Jewish
nation. Must it wait until it reaches Palestine to have a State, or is
it an organized State now? Does Jewry know what it is doing? Has it a
"foreign policy" with regard to the Gentiles? Has it a department which
is executing that foreign policy? Has this Jewish State, visible or
invisible, if it exists, a head? Has it a Council of State? And if any
of these things is so, who is aware of it?

The first impulsive answer of the Gentile mind would be "No" to all
these questions--it is a Gentile habit to answer impulsively. Never
having been trained in secrets or invisible unity, the Gentile
immediately concludes that such things cannot be, if for no other reason
than that they have not crossed his path and advertised themselves.

The questions, however, answered thus, require some explanation of the
circumstances which are visible to all men. If there is no deliberate
combination of Jews in the world, then the control which they have
achieved and the uniformity of the policies which they follow must be
the simple result, not of deliberate decisions, but of a similar nature
in all of them working out the same way. Thus, we might say that as a
love for adventure on the water drove the Britisher forth, so it made
him the world's greatest colonist. Not that he deliberately sat down
with himself and in formal manner resolved that he would become a
colonizer, but the natural outworking of his genius resulted that way.
But would this be a sufficient account of the British Empire?

Doubtless the Jews have the genius to do, wherever they go, the things
in which we see them excel. But does this account for the relations
which exist between the Jews of every country, for their world councils,
for their amazing foreknowledge of stupendous events which break with
shattering surprise on the rest of the world, for the smoothness and
preparedness with which they appear, at a given time in Paris, with a
world program on which they all agree?

The world has long suspected--at first only a few, then the secret
departments of the governments, next the intellectuals among the people,
now more and more the common people themselves--that not only are the
Jews a nation distinct from all the other nations and mysteriously
unable to sink their nationality by any means they or the world may
adopt to this end, but that they also constitute a state; that they are
nationally conscious, not only, but consciously united for a common
defense and for a common purpose. Revert to Theodor Herzl's definition
of the Jewish nation, as held together by a common enemy, and then
reflect that this common enemy is the Gentile world. Does this people
which knows itself to be a nation remain loosely unorganized in the face
of that fact? It would hardly be like Jewish astuteness in other fields.
When you see how closely the Jews are united by various organizations in
the United States, and when you see how with practiced hand they bring
those organizations to bear as if with tried confidence in their
pressure, it is at least not inconceivable that what can be done within
a country can be done, or has been done, between all the countries where
the Jews live.

At any rate, in the American Hebrew of June 25, 1920, Herman Bernstein
writes thus: "About a year ago a representative of the Department of
Justice submitted to me a copy of the manuscript of 'The Jewish Peril'
by Professor Nilus, and asked for my opinion of the work. He said that
the manuscript was a translation of a Russian book published in 1905
which was later suppressed. The manuscript was supposed to contain
'protocols' of the Wise Men of Zion and was supposed to have been read
by Dr. Herzl at a secret conference of the Zionist Congress at Basle. He
expressed the opinion that the work was probably that of Dr. Theodor
Herzl. . . . . He said that some American Senators who had seen the
manuscript were amazed to find that so many years ago a scheme had been
elaborated by the Jews which is now being carried out, and that
Bolshevism had been planned years ago by Jews who sought to destroy the
world."

This quotation is made merely to put on record the fact that it was a
representative of the Department of Justice of the United States
Government, who introduced this document to Mr. Bernstein, and expressed
a certain opinion upon it, namely, "that the work was probably that of
Theodor Herzl." Also that "some American Senators" were amazed to note
the comparison between what a publication of the year 1905 proposed and
what the year 1920 revealed.

The incident is all the more preoccupying because it occurred by action
of the representative of a government who today is very largely in the
hands of, or under the influence of, Jewish interests. It is more than
probable that as soon as the activity became known, the investigator was
stopped. But it is equally probable that whatever orders may have been
given and apparently obeyed, the investigation may not have stopped.

The United States Government was a little late in the matter, however.
At least four other world powers had preceded it, some by many years. A
copy of the Protocols was deposited in the British Museum and bears on
it the stamp of that institution, "August 10, 1906." The notes
themselves probably date from 1896, or the year of the utterances
previously quoted from Dr. Herzl. The first Zionist Congress convened in
1897.

The document was published in England recently under auspices that
challenged attention for it, in spite of the unfortunate title under
which it appeared. Eyre and Spottiswoode are the appointed printers to
the British Government, and it was they who brought out the pamphlet. It
was as if the Government Printing Office at Washington should issue them
in this country. While there was the usual outcry by the Jewish press,
the London Times in a review pronounced all the Jewish counter-attacks
as "unsatisfactory."

The Times noticed what will probably be the case in this country also
that the Jewish defenders leave the text of the protocols alone, while
they lay heavy emphasis on the fact of their anonymity. When they refer
to the substance of the document at all there is one form of words which
recurs very often--"it is the work of a criminal or a madman."

The protocols, without name attached, appearing for the most part in
manuscripts here and there, laboriously copied out from hand to hand,
being sponsored by no authority that was willing to stand behind it,
assiduously studied in the secret departments of the governments and
passed from one to another among higher officials, have lived on and on,
increasing in power and prestige by the sheer force of their contents. A
marvelous achievement for either a criminal or a madman! The only
evidence it has is that which it carries within it, and that internal
evidence is, as the London Times points out, the point on which
attention is to be focused, and the very point from which Jewish effort
has been expended to draw us away.

The interest of the Protocols at this time is their bearing on the
questions: Have the Jews an organized world system? What is its policy?
How is it being worked?

These questions all receive full attention in the Protocols. Whosoever
was the mind that conceived them possessed a knowledge of human nature,
of history and of statecraft which is dazzling in its brilliant
completeness, and terrible in the objects to which it turns its powers.
Neither a madman nor an intentional criminal, but more likely a
super-mind mastered by devotion to a people and a faith could be the
author, if indeed one mind alone conceived them. It is too terribly real
for fiction, too well-sustained for speculation, too deep in its
knowledge of the secret springs of life for forgery.

Jewish attacks upon it thus far make much of the fact that it came out
of Russia. That is hardly true. It came by way of Russia. It was
incorporated in a Russian book published about 1905 by a Professor
Nilus, who attempted to interpret the Protocols by events then going
forward in Russia. This publication and interpretation gave it a Russian
tinge which has been useful to Jewish propagandists in this country and
England, because these same propagandists have been very successful in
establishing in Anglo-Saxon mentalities a certain atmosphere of thought
surrounding the idea of Russia and Russians. One of the biggest humbugs
ever foisted on the world has been that foisted by Jewish propagandists,
principally on the American public, with regard to the temper and genius
of the truly Russian people. So, to intimate that the Protocols are
Russian, is partially to discredit them.

The internal evidence makes it clear that the Protocols were not written
by a Russian, nor originally in the Russian language, nor under the
influence of Russian conditions. But they found their way to Russia and
were first published there. They have been found by diplomatic officers
in manuscript in all parts of the world. Wherever Jewish power is able
to do so, it has suppressed them, sometimes under the supreme penalty.

Their persistence is a fact which challenges the mind. Jewish apologists
may explain that persistence on the ground that the Protocols feed the
anti-Semitic temper, and therefore are preserved for that service.
Certainly there was no wide nor deep anti-Semitic temper in the United
States to be fed or that felt the greed for agreeable lies to keep
itself alive. The progress of the Protocols in the United States can
only be explained on the ground that they supply light and give meaning
to certain previously observed facts, and that this light and meaning is
so startling as to give a certain standing and importance to these
otherwise unaccredited documents. Sheer lies do not live long, their
power soon dies. These Protocols are more alive than ever. They have
penetrated higher places than ever before. They have compelled a more
serious attitude to them than ever before.

The Protocols would not be more worthy of study if they bore, say, the
name of Theodor Herzl. Their anonymity does not decrease their power any
more than the omission of a painter's signature detracts from the art
value of a painting. Indeed, the Protocols are better without a known
source. For if it were definitely known that in France or Switzerland in
the year 1896, or thereabouts, a group of International Jews, assembled
in conference, drew up a program of world conquest it would still have
to be shown that such a program was more than a mere vagary, that it was
confirmed at large by efforts to fulfill it. The Protocols are a World
Program--there is no doubt anywhere of that. Whose program, is stated
within the articles themselves. But as for outer confirmation, which
would be the more valuable--a signature, or six signatures, or twenty
signatures, or a 25-year unbroken line of effort fulfilling that
program?

The point of interest for this and other countries is not that a
"criminal or a madman" conceived such a program, but that, when
conceived, this program found means of getting itself fulfilled in its
most important particulars. The document is comparatively unimportant;
the conditions to which it calls attention are of a very high degree of
importance.

[NOTE: The statements indicated are those of non-Zionist Jews. The real
Jewish program is that program which is executed. It was the Zionist
program that was followed by the Peace Conference. It must therefore be
regarded as the official program.]

[Issue of July 10, 1920.]




"We are a people--One people . . . . When we sink, we become a
revolutionary proletariat, the subordinate officers of a revolutionary
party; when we rise, there rises also our terrible power of the purse."

--Theodore Herzl, "A Jewish State," pp. 5, 23.

IX.

The Historic Basis of Jewish Imperialism


A great unloosening of speech with reference to the Jewish Question and
the Jewish program for world power has occurred in this country since
the beginning of this series of articles. It is now possible to
pronounce the word "Jew" in a perfectly serious discussion, without
timidity, or without intimidation. Heretofore that has been regarded as
the special prerogative of the Jewish publicists themselves and they
have used the name exclusively in well-organized and favorable
propaganda. They can oust portions of Shakespeare from the public
schools on the ground that the Jews are offended; they can demand the
removal of one of Sargent's paintings from the Boston Library because it
represents the Synagogue in a decline. But when anything emanates from
the Gentile side which indicates that the Gentile is also conscious of
the Jew, then the charge of prejudice is instantly and strongly made.
The effect of that in this country has been a ban on speech which has
had few parallels in our history. Recently at a banquet a speaker used
the term "Jews" in reference to the actions of a group of Jewish
bankers. A Jewish guest leaped to his feet demanding to know if the
speaker considered it "American" to single out a race that way. The
speaker replied, "I do, sir," and received the approval of the audience.
In that particular part of the country, business men's tongues had been
tied for years by the unwritten law that Jews must never by singled out
as Jews.

No one would have predicted a year ago that a newspaper like the Chicago
Tribune could have convinced itself that it was good newspaper policy to
print in the first column of its first page a copyrighted article on the
Jewish program for world rule, printing the word "Jew" in large letters
in its headline, and abstaining from editorial retouching of the word
"Jew" in the body of the article. The usual plan is to do what an
eastern newspaper did when dealing with the same subject: wherever the
term "international Jew" occurred in the article which it printed, it
was retouched to "financiers."

The Chicago Tribune, however, on Saturday, June 19, 1920, printed in the
first column of the first page a cable dispatch from John Clayton, its
special correspondent, under the heading: "Trotsky Leads Jew-Radicals to
World Rule. Bolshevism Only a Tool for His Scheme."

The first paragraph reads as follows:

"For the last two years army intelligence officers, members of the
various secret service organizations of the Entente, have been bringing
in reports of a world revolutionary movement other than Bolshevism. At
first these reports confused the two, but latterly the lines they have
taken have begun to be more and more clear."

As previously stated in THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT, our own secret service
is one of these, though there is reason to believe that because of the
influence of Jews upon the government these investigations were not
pursued with the persistency that might otherwise have been given them.
However, we know from Jewish sources, not to mention any other, that the
Department of Justice of the United States was at one time interested
enough to make inquiries.

What the Tribune writer does in the above paragraph is to show that this
interest has been sustained for two years by officials of the Entente, a
fact which ought to be borne in mind by those who declare that the whole
matter is of German instigation. The emergence of the Jewish Question
into American thought was immediately met by a statement from Jewish
sources that it was a German importation, and that the anti-Semitism
which flowed over Germany and resulted in cleaning out the overwhelming
Jewish revolutionary influences from the new German Government, was only
a trick to throw the blame for the defeat of Germany on the Jews.
American rabbis are even now unitedly preaching that history shows that
every great war is followed by a new "attack" on the Jews. It is
undoubtedly a fact that every war newly opens the people's eyes to the
power which international Jewish financiers exert with reference to
war--and it would seem that such a fact is worthy of a better
explanation than that of "prejudice." However, as the Tribune article
shows, and as all the facts confirm, the interest is not confined to the
German side; indeed, it is not even strongest there. It is "the various
secret service organizations of the Entente" that have been most active
in the matter.

The second paragraph further distinguishes between Bolshevism and Jewish
imperialism:

"Bolshevism aims at the overthrow of existing society and the
establishment of an international brotherhood of men who work with their
hands as rulers of the world. The second movement aims for the
establishment of a new racial domination of the world. So far as the
British, French and our own department's inquiry have been able to
trace, the moving spirits in the second scheme are Jewish radicals."

Other statements in the article are:

"Within the ranks of communism is a group of this party, but it does not
stop there. To its leaders, communism is only an incident."

(This will recall the statement of Lord Eustace Percy, quoted last week
from the Canadian Jewish Chronicle--"Not because the Jew cares for the
positive side of radical philosophy, not because he desires to be a
partaker in Gentile nationalism or Gentile democracy, but because no
existing Gentile system of government is anything but distasteful to
him.")

"They are ready to use the Islamic revolt, hatred by the central empires
for England, Japan's designs on India, and commercial rivalry between
America and Japan."

"As any movement of world revolution must be, this is primarily
anti-Anglo-Saxon."

"The organization of the world Jewish-radical movement has been
perfected in almost every land."

"The aims of the Jewish-radical party have nothing of altruism behind
them beyond liberation of their own race."

It will be conceded that these are rather startling statements. If they
were found in a propagandist publication of no responsibility, the
average reader might pass them by as preposterous, so little does the
average reader know of the secret influences which shape his life and
frame his problems. But appearing in a great newspaper, they must
receive a different evaluation.

Nor did the Tribune stop at the news article. On June 21, 1920, an
editorial appeared entitled "World Mischief." The editorial is evidently
an effort to prevent possible misunderstanding of what the news article
was driving at.

"The Jewish phase of the movement, he asserts, aims at a new racial
domination of the world . . ."

The Tribune also says that while it is perhaps natural for the Jews of
other countries to be engaged in this "world mischief," the Jews of
England and the United States "are loyal nationalists and conservative
upholders of the national traditions." It were well if this were true.
Perhaps it is true of tens of thousands of Jews as individuals; it
certainly is not true of those internationalists who pull the strings of
all the governments and who during the last six tragic years have been
meddling with world affairs in a way which must soon be plainly told.
The unfortunate circumstance is that all the American and English Jews
must for a time feel a distress which no one desires them to feel, which
everyone would do much to save them from, but which seems inevitable
until the whole story is told and until the mass of the Jews themselves
cut off from their name and support some who now receive their deepest
homage.

It is worth while observing the contrasts and similarities between the
Gentile and Jewish reaction to this alleged movement to establish a
Jewish imperialism over the world. Jewish publicists first deny it
without qualification. It is all false, all a lie, all hatched up by
enemies of the Jews in order to stir up hatred and murder. As the
evidence accumulates, the Jewish tone changes: "Well, suppose it is
true," the publicists say; "is it any wonder that the poor oppressed
Jews, driven to madness through their sufferings, should dream dreams of
overthrowing their enemies and placing themselves in the seat of
authority?"

The Gentile mind, confronted with the statement, says: "Yes, but they
are Russian Jews. Don't mind them. American Jews are all right. They
would never be taken in by anything like that." Going a little deeper
into the subject, the Gentile mind is forced to admit the existence of
some kind of a subversive world movement, the power of which has shaken
even this country, and that the moving spirits in it are revolutionary
Jews. And then the tendency from that point forward is either to fall in
with the theory that the movement is really Jewish in its origin,
agitation, execution and purpose, or to set up the theory that it is a
"world movement" undoubtedly, but only incidentally Jewish. The end of
both Jewish and Gentile reaction is an admission that something
answering to the movement charged actually exists.

For example, the Christian Science Monitor, whose standard as a
newspaper no one will question, has this to say in a lengthy editorial
on the subject:

"In spite of this, it would be a tremendous mistake to conclude that the
Jewish peril, given another name and atmosphere, does not exist. It
might, indeed, be renamed, out of one of the grandest of the books of
the Old Testament, 'the terror by night,' for it is, essentially, the
Psalmist's concept of the forces of mental evil at which, consciously or
unconsciously, Professor Nilus is aiming. In other words, that a secret
international political organization exists, working unremittingly by
means of its Bureau of Psychology, though the world which should be
awake to it is entirely asleep to it, is, to the man who can read the
signs of the times, a thing unquestionable."

The Monitor gives warning against prejudice and disregard of the laws of
evidence which is exceedingly timely and is, indeed, the desire of
anyone who has ever undertaken to deal with this subject, but too often
it is a disregard of facts and not of evidence that makes the
difficulty. It is safe to say that most of the prejudice today is
against the facts, it has not been caused by them.

There are two preconceptions to be guarded against in making an approach
to this question. One is that the Jewish imperialistic program, if such
a thing exists, is of recent origin. Upon the mere mention of such a
program, Gentiles are likely to think that it was formulated last week,
or last year, or within recent time. That need not be the case at all,
and in Jewish matters it is very likely not to be the case. It is very
easy to see how, if the program were to be formulated today, it would be
wholly different from the one which is to be considered. The kind of
program that would be made today indeed exists too, but it is not to be
compared in extent and profundity with that which has existed for a very
long time. Perfect constitutions of invisible governments are not the
creations of secret conventions; they are the accumulated thought and
experience of centuries. Moreover, no matter how prone a modern
generation may be to disregard such things, the mere fact that they may
have existed as a secret racial ideal for centuries is a powerful
argument for their respectable acceptance, if not active execution, by
the generation that now is. There is no idea deeper in Judaism than that
Jews constitute a Chosen People and that their future is to be more
glorious than their past. A large part of the Christian world accepts
that, too, and it may well be true, but in a moral universe it cannot
come to pass by the methods which have been and are being used.

But to mention the ancient lineage of the idea of the Chosen People is
merely to suggest that of all the programs that may have gathered round
it to assist its full historical realization, it is not strange that
there should be one very old one to which the wisest minds of Israel
have contributed their best of mind and heart to insure its success.
That there is such a plan has been the belief of many deep delvers in
the hidden things of the world, and that such a plan has at times had
its dress rehearsals, so to speak, on a limited stage, as if in
preparation for its grand finale on the universal stage, is another
belief held by men at whose knowledge it is impossible to cavil.

So, then, it may be that we are dealing with something for which
present-day Jews, even the more important internationalists, are not
originally responsible. It may have come to them as part of their
ancient Jewish inheritance. Certainly, if it were a mere modern thing,
hastily conceived and thrown together after the modern fashion, it could
be expected to disappear in the same era which saw it born.

Another preconception to be guarded against is that every Jew one meets
has secret knowledge of this program. That is not the case. With the
general idea of the ultimate triumph of Israel every Jew who has
retained contact with his people is familiar, but with the special plans
which for centuries have existed in formulated form for the attainment
of that triumph, the average Jew is no more familiar than anyone
else--no more so than was the average German with the secret plans of
the Pan-Germanic party whose ideas started and guided the recent war.
The average Jew enters into the plans of the secret group just to this
extent, except in specially selected cases: It is perfectly understood
that the consummation of the Jewish triumph will not be distasteful to
any Jew, and if the methods to be used toward the end are a bit violent,
every Jew can be depended upon to see in that violence a very
insufficient retribution visited upon the Gentile world for the
sufferings which it has caused the sons of Judah throughout the
centuries.

Still, with even these preconceptions guarded against, there is no
escape from the conclusion that if such a program of Jewish world
imperialism exists today, it must exist with the cognizance and active
support of certain individuals, and that these groups of individuals
must have somewhere an official head.

This is, perhaps, the one point at which more investigators stop than at
any other. The idea of a Jewish autocrat is too strange for the mind
which has not been much in contact with the main question. And yet there
is no race which more instinctively supports autocracy than does the
Jewish race, no race which more craves and respects position. It is
their sense of the value of position that explains the main course their
activities take. The Jew is primarily a money-maker for the reason that
up to this time money is the only means he knows by which to gain
position. The Jews who have gained position for any other reason are
comparatively few. This is not a Gentile gibe; it is the position of a
famous Anglo-Jewish physician, Dr. Barnard Von Oven, who wrote: "All
other means of distinction are denied him; he must rise by wealth, or
not at all. And if, as he well knows, to insure wealth will be to insure
rank, respect and attention in society, does the blame rest with him who
endeavors to acquire wealth for the distinction which it will purchase,
or with that society which so readily bows down to the shrine of
Mammon?"

The Jew is not averse to kings, only to the state of things which
prevents a Jewish king. The future autocrat of the world is to be a
Jewish king, sitting upon the throne of David, so ancient prophecies and
the documents of the imperialistic program agree.

Is such a king in the world now? If not, the men who could choose a king
are in the world. There has been no king of the Jews since before the
Christian Era, but until about the eleventh century there were Princes
of the Exile, those who represented the headship of the Jews who were
dispersed through the nations. They were and still are called
"exilarchs," or Princes of the Exile. They were attended by the wise men
of Israel, they held court, they gave the law to their people. They
lived abroad wherever their circumstances or convenience dictated, in
Christian or Mohammedan countries. Whether the office was discontinued
with the last publicly known exilarch or merely disappeared from the
surface of history, whether today it is entirely abandoned or exists in
another form, are questions which must wait. That there are offices of
world jurisdiction held by Jews is well known. That there are world
organizations of Jews--organizations, that is, within the very strong
solidarity of the Jewish nation itself--is well known. That there is
world unity on certain Jewish activities, defensive and offensive, is
well known. There is nothing in the condition or thought of the Jews
which would render the existence today of an exilarch distasteful to
them; indeed, the thought would be very comfortable.

The Jewish Encyclopedia remarks: "Curiously enough, the exilarchs are
still mentioned in the Sabbath services of the Ashkenazim ritual * * *
The Jews of the Sephardic ritual have not preserved this anachronism,
nor was it retained in most of the Reform synagogues of the nineteenth
century."

Is there, then, a Jewish Sanhedrin?--a governing or counseling body of
Jews who take oversight of the affairs of their people throughout the
world?

The Jewish Sanhedrin was a most interesting institution. Its origin and
method of constitution are obscure. It consisted of 71 members, with the
president, and performed the functions of a political senate. There is
nothing to show whence the Sanhedrin derived its authority. It was not
an elective body. It was not democratic. It was not representative. It
was not responsible to the people. In these qualities, it was typically
Jewish. The Sanhedrin was chosen by the prince or priest, not with the
purpose of safeguarding the people's interest, but to assist the ruler
in the work of administration. It was thus assembled by call, or it was
self-perpetuating, calling its own members. The arrangement seems to
have been that well-known device by which an aristocracy can maintain
itself in power whatever the political construction of the nation may
be. The Jewish Encyclopedia says: "The Sanhedrin, which was entirely
aristocratic in character, probably assumed its own authority, since it
was composed of members of the most influential families of the nobility
and priesthood."

This body was flanked by a similar body, which governed the religious
interests of the nation, the members being drawn apparently from classes
nearer the common people.

The Sanhedrin exercised authority not only over the Jews of Palestine,
but wherever they were scattered throughout the world. As a senate
exercising direct political authority, it ceased with the downfall of
the Jewish State in the year 70, but there are indications of its
continuance as an advisory body down to the fourth century.

In 1806, in order to satisfy the mind of Napoleon upon some questions
which had arisen concerning the Jews, an Assembly of Notables was
called, whose membership consisted of prominent Jews of France. They, in
turn, to bring the sanction of all Jewry to the answers which they
should give Napoleon, convoked the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin assembled in
Paris on February 9, 1807. It followed the prescribed ancient forms; it
was comprised of Jews from all parts of Europe; it was assembled to put
the whole authority of Jewry behind any compact the French Jews may have
been able to make with Napoleon.

In putting forth its decisions, this Sanhedrin of 1807 declared that it
was in all respects like the ancient Sanhedrin, "a legal assembly vested
with power of passing ordinances in order to promote the welfare of
Israel."

The significance of these facts is this: Whatever the leaders of the
Jews may do today in the way of maintaining the policy and constitution
of Israel, would not constitute a new departure. It would not signify a
new attitude. It would not be evidence of a new plan.

It would be entirely natural, Jewish solidarity being what it is, that
the Sanhedrin should still be continued. The ancient Sanhedrin appears
to have had a group of ten who were somewhat exalted in importance above
the rest; it would be perfectly natural if the leaders of the Jews were
today divided into committees, by countries or by objects.

There are always being held, year by year, world meetings of the
principal Jews of all lands. They come together whenever called, to the
disregard of everything else. Great judges from the high courts of the
various countries, international financiers, Jewish orators of the
"liberal type" who have the ear of the Gentiles, political maneuverers
from all the parties represented in the world, they assemble wherever
they will, and the subjects of their deliberations are made known only
to the extent they will. It is not to be supposed that all of the
attendants on these conventions are members of the inner circle. The
list of delegates will show scores of persons with whom no one would
associate Lord Reading and Judge Brandeis. If the modern Sanhedrin
meets, and it would be the most natural thing in the world if it should,
we may be sure it meets within the closed circle of those persons which
the Jewish aristocracy of money, intellect and power approves.

The machinery of a Jewish world government exists ready-made. The Jew is
convinced that he has the best religion, the best morality, the best
method of education, the best social standards, the best ideal of
government. He would not have to go outside the circle of that which he
considers best to get anything which he may need to advance the welfare
of his people, or to execute any program which may have to do with the
outside world.

It is the ancient machinery that the international Jew uses in all those
activities which he permits the world to see in part. There are
gatherings of the financial, political and intellectual chief rulers of
the Jews. These gatherings are announced for one or another
thing--sometimes. Sometimes there is a gathering of Jews in a world
capital, with no announced purpose. They all appear in one city, confer
and depart.

Whether there is a recognized head to all of this is yet to be
disclosed. There can be little doubt, however, as to the existence of
what may be called a "foreign policy," that is, a definite point of view
and plan of action with reference to the Gentile world. The Jew feels
that he is in the midst of enemies, but he also feels that he is a
member of a people--"one people." He must have some policy with regard
to the outer world. He cannot help but consider present conditions, he
cannot consider them without being stirred to speculate upon what the
outcome must be, and he cannot speculate on the outcome without in some
manner endeavoring to make it as he would like it to be.

The invisible government of the Jews, its attitude toward the Gentile
world, its policy with regard to the future, are not, then, the abnormal
things that some would make them appear. Given the Jewish position, they
are of all things most natural. Jewish existence in this world is not
such as woos the Jew into sleepy contentment; it is such as stirs him
into organization against future contingencies and into programs which
may shape those contingencies to the benefit of his race. That there
should be a Sanhedrin of the Jews, a world body of the leading men of
all countries; that there should even be an exilarch, a visible and
recognized head of the Sanhedrin, mystically foreshadowing the autocrat
to come; that there should even be a world program, just as every
government has its foreign policy, are not strange, uncanny
suppositions. They grow normally out of the situation itself.

And it is also natural that not every Jew should know this. The
Sanhedrin always was the aristocracy, and would be today. When rabbis
cry from their pulpits that they know nothing about this thing, they are
doubtless telling the truth. What the international Jew depends upon is
the likelihood of every Jew approving that which brings power and
prestige to his people. At any rate, it is well enough known that
however little the ordinary Jewish leader may have been told about world
programs, he regards with the greatest respect and confidence the very
men who must put these programs through, if these exist at all.

The twenty-fourth Protocol of the Learned Elders of Zion has this to
say:

"Now I will discuss the manner in which the roots of the house of King
David will penetrate to the deepest strata of the earth. This dynasty,
even to this day, has given the power of controlling world affairs to
our wise men, the educational directors of all human thought."

This would indicate, if reliable, that, as the Protocol goes on to
recite, the Autocrat himself has not appeared, but the dynasty, or the
Davidic line in which he must appear, have entrusted the work of
preparing for him to the Wise Men of Zion. These wise men are
represented not only as preparing those who exercise rulership over
Judaism's affairs, but also as framing and influencing the world's
thought toward ends which shall be propitious to these plans. Whatever
may be hidden in the program, it is certain that its execution or the
effects of its execution cannot be hidden. Therefore, it may be possible
to find in the outer world the clues which, traced back to their source,
reveal the existence of a program, whose promise for the world, good or
bad, ought to be widely known.

[Issue of July 17, 1920.]




X.

An Introduction to the "Jewish Protocols"


The documents most frequently mentioned by those who are interested in
the theory of Jewish World Power rather than in the actual operation of
that power in the world today, are those 24 documents known as "The
Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion."

The Protocols have attracted much attention in Europe, having become the
center of an important storm of opinion in England only recently, but
discussion of them in the United States has been limited. These are the
documents concerning which the Department of Justice was making
inquiries more than a year ago, and which were given publication in
London by Eyre and Spottiswoode, the official printers to the British
Government.

Who it was that first entitled these documents with the name of the
"Elders of Zion" is not known. It would be possible without serious
mutilation of the documents to remove all hint of Jewish authorship, and
yet retain all the main points of the most comprehensive program for
world subjugation that has ever come to public knowledge.

Yet it must be said that thus to eliminate all hint of Jewish authorship
would be to bring out a number of contradictions which do not exist in
the Protocols in their present form. The purpose of the plan revealed in
the Protocols is to undermine all authority in order that a new
authority in the form of autocracy may be set up. Such a plan could not
emanate from a ruling class which already possessed authority, although
it might emanate from anarchists. But anarchists do not avow autocracy
as the ultimate condition they seek. The authors might be conceived as a
company of French Subversives such as existed at the time of the French
Revolution and had the infamous Duc d'Orleans as their leader, but this
would involve a contradiction between the fact that those Subversives
have passed away, and the fact that the program announced in these
Protocols is being steadily carried out, not only in France, but
throughout Europe and very noticeably in the United States.

In their present form which bears evidence of being their original form,
there is no contradiction. The allegation of Jewish authorship seems
essential to the consistency of the plan.

If these documents were the forgeries which Jewish apologists claim them
to be, the forgers would probably have taken pains to make Jewish
authorship so clear that their anti-Semitic purpose could easily have
been detected. But only twice is the term "Jew" used in them. After one
has read much further than the average reader usually cares to go into
such matters, one comes upon the plans for the establishment of the
World Autocrat, and only then it is made clear of what lineage he is to
be.

But all through the documents there is left no doubt as to the people
against whom the plan is aimed. It is not aimed against aristocracy as
such. It is not aimed against capital as such. It is not aimed against
government as such. Very definite provisions are made for the enlistment
of aristocracy, capital and government for the execution of the plan. It
is aimed against the people of the world who are called "Gentiles." It
is the frequent mention of "Gentiles" that really decides the purpose of
the documents. Most of the destructive type of "liberal" plans aim at
the enlistment of the people as helpers; this plan aims at the
degeneration of the people in order that they may be reduced to
confusion of mind and thus manipulated. Popular movements of a "liberal"
kind are to be encouraged, all the disruptive philosophies in religion,
economics, politics and domestic life are to be sown and watered, for
the purpose of so disintegrating social solidarity that a definite plan,
herein set forth, may be put through without notice, and the people then
molded to it when the fallacy of these philosophies is shown.

The formula of speech is not, "We Jews will do this," but "The Gentiles
will be made to think and do these things." With the exception of a few
instances in the closing Protocols, the only distinctive racial term
used is "Gentiles."

To illustrate: the first indication of this kind comes in the first
Protocol in this way:

"The great qualities of the people--honesty and frankness--are
essentially vices in politics, because they dethrone more surely and
more certainly than does the strongest enemy. These qualities are
attributes of Gentile rule; we certainly must not be guided by them."

And again:

"On the ruins of the hereditary aristocracy of the Gentiles we have set
up the aristocracy of our educated class, and over all the aristocracy
of money. We have established the basis of this new aristocracy on the
basis of riches, which we control, and on the science guided by our wise
men."

Again:

"We will force up wages, which however will be of no benefit to workers,
for we at the same time will cause a rise in the prices of prime
necessities, pretending that this is due to the decline of agriculture
and of cattle raising. We will also artfully and deeply undermine the
sources of production by instilling in the workmen ideas of anarchy and
encourage them in the use of alcohol, at the same time taking measures
to drive all the intellectual forces of the Gentiles from the land."

(A forger with anti-Semitic malice might have written this any time
within the last five years, but these words were in print at least 14
years ago according to British evidence, a copy having been in the
British Museum since 1906, and they were circulated in Russia a number
of years prior.)

The above point continues: "That the true situation shall not be noticed
by the Gentiles prematurely we will mask it by a pretended effort to
serve the working classes and promote great economic principles, for
which an active propaganda will be carried on through our economic
theories."

These quotations will illustrate the style of the Protocols in making
reference to the parties involved. It is "we" for the writers, and
"Gentiles" for those who are being written about. This is brought out
very clearly in the Fourteenth Protocol:

"In this divergence between Gentiles and ourselves in ability to think
and reason is to be seen clearly the seal of our election as the chosen
people, as higher human beings, in contrast with the Gentiles who have
merely instinctive and animal minds. They observe, but they do not
foresee, and they invent nothing (except perhaps material things). It is
clear from this that nature herself predestined us to rule and guide the
world."

This, of course, has been the Jewish method of dividing humanity from
the earliest times. The world was only Jew and Gentile; all that was not
Jew was Gentile.

The use of the word Jew in the Protocol may be illustrated by this
passage in the eighth section:

"For the time being, until it will be safe to give responsible
government positions to our brother Jews, we shall entrust them to
people whose past and whose characters are such that there is an abyss
between them and the people."

This is the practice known as using "Gentile fronts" which is
extensively practiced in the financial world today in order to cover up
the evidences of Jewish control. How much progress has been made since
these words were written is indicated by the occurrence at the San
Francisco convention when the name of Judge Brandeis was proposed for
President. It is reasonably to be expected that the public mind will be
made more and more familiar with the idea of Jewish occupancy--which
will be really a short step from the present degree of influence which
the Jews exercise--of the highest office in the government. There is no
function of the American Presidency in which the Jews have not already
secretly assisted in a very important degree. Actual occupancy of the
office is not necessary to enhance their power, but to promote certain
things which parallel very closely the plans outlined in the Protocols
now before us.

Another point which the reader of the Protocols will notice is that the
tone of exhortation is entirely absent from these documents. They are
not propaganda. They are not efforts to stimulate the ambitions or
activity of those to whom they are addressed. They are as cool as a
legal paper and as matter-of-fact as a table of statistics. There is
none of the "Let us rise, my brothers" stuff about them. There is no
"Down with the Gentiles" hysteria. These Protocols, if indeed they were
made by Jews and confided to Jews, or if they do contain certain
principles of a Jewish World Program, were certainly not intended for
the firebrands but for the carefully prepared and tested initiates of
the higher groups.

Jewish apologists have asked, "Is it conceivable that if there were such
a world program on the part of the Jews, they would reduce it to writing
and publish it?" But there is no evidence that these Protocols were ever
uttered otherwise than in spoken words by those who put them forth. The
Protocols as we have them are apparently the notes of lectures which
were made by someone who heard them. Some of them are lengthy; some of
them are brief. The assertion which has always been made in connection
with the Protocols since they have become known is that they are the
notes of lectures delivered to Jewish students presumably somewhere in
France or Switzerland. The attempt to make them appear to be of Russian
origin is absolutely forestalled by the point of view, the reference to
the times and certain grammatical indications.

The tone certainly fits the supposition that they were originally
lectures given to students, for their purpose is clearly not to get a
program accepted but to give information concerning a program which is
represented as being already in process of fulfillment. There is no
invitation to join forces or to offer opinions. Indeed it is
specifically announced that neither discussion nor opinions are desired.
("While preaching liberalism to the Gentiles, we shall hold our own
people and our own agents in unquestioning obedience." "The scheme of
administration must emanate from a single brain * * * Therefore, we may
know the plan of action, but we must not discuss it, lest we destroy its
unique character * * * The inspired work of our leader therefore must
not be thrown before a crowd to be torn to pieces, or even before a
limited group.")

Moreover, taking the Protocols at their face value, it is evident that
the program outlined in these lecture notes was not a new one at the
time the lectures were given. There is no evidence of its being of
recent arrangement. There is almost the tone of a tradition, or a
religion, in it all, as if it had been handed down from generation to
generation through the medium of specially trusted and initiated men.
There is no note of new discovery or fresh enthusiasm in it, but the
certitude and calmness of facts long known and policies long confirmed
by experiment.

This point of the age of the program is touched upon at least twice in
the Protocols themselves. In the First Protocol this paragraph occurs:

"Already in ancient times we were the first to shout the words,
'Liberty, Equality, Fraternity,' among the people. These words have been
repeated many times by unconscious poll-parrots, flocking from all sides
to this bait, with which they have ruined the prosperity of the world
and true personal freedom * * * The presumably clever and intellectual
Gentiles did not understand the symbolism of the uttered words; did not
observe their contradiction in meaning; did not notice that in nature
there is no equality * * *"

The other reference to the program's finality is found in the Thirteenth
Protocol:

"Questions of policy, however, are permitted to no one except those who
have originated the policy and have directed it for many centuries."

Can this be a reference to a secret Jewish Sanhedrin, self-perpetuating
within a certain Jewish caste from generation to generation?

Again, it must be said that the originators and directors here referred
to cannot be at present any ruling caste, for all that the program
contemplates is directly opposed to the interests of such a caste. It
cannot refer to any national aristocratic group, like the Junkers of
Germany, for the methods which are proposed are the very ones which
would render powerless such a group. It cannot refer to any but a people
who have no government, who have everything to gain and nothing to lose,
and who can keep themselves intact amid a crumbling world. There is only
one group that answers that description.

Again, a reading of the Protocols makes it clear that the speaker
himself was not seeking for honor. There is a complete absence of
personal ambition throughout the document. All plans and purposes and
expectations are merged in the future of Israel, which future, it would
seem, can only be secured by the subtle breaking down of certain world
ideas held by the Gentiles. The Protocols speak of what has been done,
what was being done at the time these words were given, and what
remained to be done. Nothing like them in completeness of detail, in
breadth of plan and in deep grasp of the hidden springs of human action
has ever been known. They are verily terrible in their mastery of the
secrets of life, equally terrible in their consciousness of that
mastery. Truly they would merit the opinion which Jews have recently
cast upon them, that they were the work of an inspired madman, were it
not that what is written in the Protocols in words is also written upon
the life of today in deeds and tendencies.

The criticisms which these Protocols pass upon the Gentiles for their
stupidity are just. It is impossible to disagree with a single item in
the Protocols' description of Gentile mentality and veniality. Even the
most astute of the Gentile thinkers have been fooled into receiving as
the motions of progress what has only been insinuated into the common
human mind by the most insidious systems of propaganda.

It is true that here and there a thinker has arisen to say that science
so-called was not science at all. It is true that here and there a
thinker has arisen to say that the so-called economic laws both of
conservatives and radicals were not laws at all, but artificial
inventions. It is true that occasionally a keen observer has asserted
that the recent debauch of luxury and extravagance was not due to the
natural impulses of the people at all, but was systematically
stimulated, foisted upon them by design. It is true that a few have
discerned that more than half of what passes for "public opinion" is
mere hired applause and booing and has never impressed the public mind.

But even with these clues here and there, for the most part disregarded,
there has never been enough continuity and collaboration between those
who were awake, to follow all the clues to their source. The chief
explanation of the hold which the Protocols have had on many of the
leading statesmen of the world for several decades is that they explain
whence all these false influences come and what their purpose is. They
give a clue to the modern maze. It is now time for the people to know.
And whether the Protocols are judged as proving anything concerning the
Jews or not, they constitute an education in the way the masses are
turned about like sheep by influences which they do not understand. It
is almost certain that once the principles of the Protocols are known
widely and understood by the people, the criticism which they now
rightly make of the Gentile mind will no longer hold good.

It is the purpose of future articles in this series to study these
documents and to answer out of their contents all the questions that may
arise concerning them.

Before that work is begun, one question should be answered--"Is there
likelihood of the program of the Protocols being carried through to
success?" The program is successful already. In many of its most
important phases it is already a reality. But this need not cause alarm,
for the chief weapon to be used against such a program, both in its
completed and uncompleted parts, is clear publicity. Let the people
know. Arousing the people, alarming the people, appealing to the
passions of the people is the method of the plan outlined in the
Protocols. The antidote is merely enlightening the people.

That is the only purpose of these articles. Enlightenment dispels
prejudice. It is as desirable to dispel the prejudice of the Jew as of
the Gentile. Jewish writers too frequently assume that the prejudice is
all on one side. The Protocols themselves ought to have the widest
circulation among the Jewish people, in order that they may check those
things which are bringing suspicion upon their name.

[Issue of July 24, 1920.]




XI.

"Jewish" Estimate of Gentile Human Nature

"Upon completing this program of our present and future actions, I will
read to you the principles of these theories."--Protocol 16.

"In all that I have discussed with you hitherto, I have endeavored to
indicate carefully the secrets of past and future events and of those
momentous occurrences of the near future toward which we are rushing in
a stream of great crises, anticipating the hidden principles of
future relationships with the Gentiles and of our financial
operations."--Protocol 22.


The Protocols, which profess themselves to be an outline of the Jewish
World Program, are found upon analysis to contain four main divisions.
These, however, are not marked in the structure of the documents, but in
the thought. There is a fifth, if the object of it all is included, but
this object is assumed throughout the Protocols, being only here and
there defined in terms. And the four main divisions are great trunks
from which there are numerous branches.

There is first what is alleged to be the Jewish conception of human
nature, by which is meant Gentile nature. It is inconceivable that such
a plan as that which the Protocols set forth could have been evolved by
a mind that had not previously based the probability of success on a
certain estimate of the ignobility and corruptibility of human
nature--which all through the Protocols is referred to as Gentile
nature.

Then, secondly, there is the account of what has already been
accomplished in the realization of the program--things actually done.

Thirdly, there is a complete instruction in the methods to be used to
get the program still further fulfilled--methods which would themselves
supply the estimate of human nature upon which the whole fabric is
based, if there were nothing else to indicate it.

Fourth, the Protocols contain in detail some of the achievements which,
at the time these words were uttered, were yet to be made. Some of these
desired things have been achieved in the meantime, for it should be
borne in mind that between the year 1905 and the year 1920 there has
been time to set many influences in motion and attain many ends. As the
second quotation at the head of this article would indicate, the speaker
knew that events were "rushing in a stream of great crises," a knowledge
which is amply attested by Jewish sources outside the Protocols.

If this series of articles represented a special pleading upon the
Jewish Question, the present article would seek to win the reader's
confidence by presenting first the set of facts which are described
under "secondly" in the above list of main divisions. To begin with the
estimate of human nature here disclosed is to court alienation of the
reader's interest, especially if the reader be a Gentile. We know from
abundant sources what the Jewish estimate of human nature is, and it
tallies in all respects with what is disclosed in the Protocols, but it
has always been one of the fallacies of Gentile thought that human
nature is, now, full of dignity and nobility. There is little question,
when the subject is considered in all its lights, that the Jewish
conception is right. And so far as these Protocols are concerned, their
low estimate of mankind, though harsh to human pride and conceit, are
very largely true.

Just to run through the Protocols and select the salient passages in
which this view is expressed is to find a pretty complete philosophy of
the motives and qualities of human beings.

Take these words from the First Protocol:

"It should be noted that people with evil instincts are more numerous
than those with good ones; therefore, the best results in governing them
are attained by intimidation and violence, and not by academic argument.
Every man aims for power; everyone desires to be a dictator, if
possible; moreover, few would not sacrifice the good of others to attain
their own ends."

"People in masses and people of the masses are guided by exceptionally
shallow passions, beliefs, customs, traditions and sentimental theories
and are inclined toward party divisions, a fact which prevents any form
of agreement, even when this is founded on a thoroughly logical basis.
Every decision of the mob depends upon an accidental or prearranged
majority, which, owing to its ignorance of the mysteries of political
secrets, gives expression to absurd decisions that introduce anarchy
into government."

"In working out an expedient plan of action, it is necessary to take
into consideration the meanness, the vacillation, the changeability of
the crowd * * * It is necessary to realize that the force of the masses
is blind, unreasoning and unintelligent, prone to listen now to the
right, and now to the left * * *"

"Our triumph has also been made easier because, in our relations with
the people necessary to us, we have always played upon the most
sensitive strings of the human mind--on calculation, greed, and the
insatiable material desires of men. Each of these human weaknesses,
taken separately, is capable of paralyzing initiative and placing the
will of the people at the disposal of the purchaser of their
activities."

In the Fifth Protocol, this shrewd observation on human nature is to be
found:

"In all times, nations as well as individuals, accepted words for acts.
They have been satisfied by what is shown them, rarely noticing whether
the promise has been followed by fulfillment. For this reason we will
organize 'show' institutions which will conspicuously display their
devotion to progress."

And this from the Eleventh Protocol:

"The Gentiles are like a flock of sheep * * * They will close their eyes
to everything because we will promise them to return all the liberties
taken away, after the enemies of peace have been subjugated and all the
parties pacified. Is it worth while to speak of how long they will have
to wait? For what have we conceived all this program and instilled its
measures into the minds of the Gentiles without giving them the
possibility of examining its underside, if it is not for the purpose of
attaining by circuitous methods that which is unattainable to our
scattered race by a direct route?"

Notice also this very shrewd observation upon the "joiners" of secret
societies--this estimate being made by the Protocols to indicate how
easily these societies may be used to further the plan:

"Usually it is the climbers, careerists and people, generally speaking,
who are not serious, who most readily join secret societies, and we
shall find them easy to handle and through them operate the mechanism of
our projected machine."

The remarks under this head are curtailed by the present writer, because
the Protocols make reference to a very important secret order, the
mention of whose name in this connection might lead to misunderstanding,
and which is therefore reserved for future and fuller attention. It
will, however, be of interest to the members of that order to see what
the Protocols have to say of it, and then check up the facts and see how
far they correspond with the words.

To continue: "The Gentiles join lodges out of curiosity or in the hope
that through them they may worm their way into social distinction * * *
We therefore give them this success so that we can take advantage of the
self-conceit to which it gives birth and because of which people
unconsciously accept our suggestions without examination * * * You
cannot imagine to what an extent the most intelligent Gentiles may be
brought to a state of unconscious naivete under conditions of
self-deceit, and how easy it is to discourage them by the least failure,
even the stopping of applause, or to bring them into a state of servile
subjection for the sake of regaining it. The Gentiles are as ready to
sacrifice their plans for the sake of popular success as our people are
to ignore success for the sake of carrying out our plans. This
psychology of theirs facilitates the task of directing them."

These are a few of the passages in which this estimate of human or
Gentile nature is made out in words. But even if it were not so baldly
stated, it could be easily inferred from various items in the program
which was depended upon to break up Gentile solidarity and strength.

The method is one of disintegration. Break up the people into parties
and sects. Sow abroad the most promising and utopian of ideas and you
will do two things: you will always find a group to cling to each idea
you throw out; and you will find this partisanship dividing and
estranging the various groups. The authors of the Protocols show in
detail how this is to be done. Not one idea, but a mass of ideas are to
be thrown out, and there is to be no unity among them. The purpose is
not to get the people thinking one thing, but to think so diversely
about so many different things that there will be no unity among them.
The result of this will be vast disunity, vast unrest--and that is the
result aimed for.

When once the solidarity of the Gentile society is broken up--and the
name, "Gentile society" is perfectly correct, for human society is
overwhelmingly Gentile--then this solid wedge of another idea which is
not at all affected by the prevailing confusion can make its way
unsuspectedly to the place of control. It is well enough known that a
body of 20 trained police or soldiers can accomplish more than a
disordered mob of a thousand persons. So the minority initiated into the
plan can do more with a nation or a world broken into a thousand
antagonistic parties, than any of the parties could do. "Divide and
rule" is the motto of the Protocols.

The division of society is perfectly easy, according to the estimate of
human nature made in these documents. It is human nature to take
promises for acts. No one who considered the list of dreams and vagaries
and theories that have swayed the people through the centuries can doubt
this. The more utopian, the more butterfly-like the theory, the more it
commands public adherence. Just as the Protocols say, Gentile society
does not scrutinize the origin or the consequences of the theories it
adopts. When a theory makes its appeal to the mind, the tendency is to
believe that the mind which receives it always had it in essence, and
therefore the experience has all the glow of original discovery.

In this manner, theory after theory has been exploited among the masses,
theory after theory has been found to be impracticable and has been
discarded, but the result is precisely that which the program of the
Protocols aims for--with the discarding of each theory, society is a
little more broken than it was before. It is a little more helpless
before its exploiters. It is a little more confused as to where to look
for leadership. As a consequence society falls an easy victim again to a
theory which promises it the good it seeks, and the failure of this
theory leaves it still more broken. There is no longer any such thing as
public opinion. Distrust and division are everywhere. And in the midst
of the confusion everyone is dimly aware that there is a higher group
that is not divided at all, but is getting exactly what it wants by
means of the confusion that obtains all around. It will be shown, as
claimed by the Protocols, that most of the disruptive theories abroad in
the world today are of Jewish origin; it will also be shown that the one
solid unbroken group in the world today, the group that knows where it
wants to go and is going there regardless of the condition of society,
is the Jewish group.

The most dangerous theory of all is that which explains the rise of
theories and the social break-up which follows them. These are all
"symptoms of progress" we are told. If so, then "progress" is toward
dissolution. No one can predicate the fact of "progress" on the ground
that, whereas our fathers made wheels to go round with the blowing wind
or the running water, we make them go round by successive small
explosions of gasoline. The question of "progress" is, Where are the
wheels taking us? Was windmill and water wheel society better or worse
than the present society? Was it more unified in its morality? Did it
more highly respect law, did it produce a higher and sturdier type of
character?

The modern theory of "ferment," that out of all the unrest and change
and transvaluation of values a new and better mankind is to be evolved
is not borne out by any fact on the horizon. It is palpably a theory
whose purpose is to make a seeming good out of that which is undeniable
evil. The theories which cause the disruption and the theory which
explains the disruption as good, come from the same source. The whole
science of economics, conservative and radical, capitalistic and
anarchistic, is of Jewish origin. This is another of the announcements
of the Protocols which the facts confirm.

Now, all this is accomplished, not by acts, but by words. The
word-brokers of the world, those who wish words to do duty for things,
in their dealings with the world outside their class, are undoubtedly
the Jewish group--the international Jews with which these articles
deal--and their philosophy and practice are precisely set forth in the
Protocols.

Take for illustration these passages: The first is from the First
Protocol:

"Political freedom is an idea, not a fact. It is necessary to know how
to apply this idea when there is need of a clever bait to gain the
support of the people for one's party, if such a party has undertaken to
defeat another party already in power. This task is made easier if the
opponent has himself been infected by principles of freedom or so-called
liberalism, and for the sake of the idea will yield some of his own
power."

Or consider this from the Fifth Protocol:

"To obtain control over public opinion, it is first necessary to confuse
it by the expression from various sides of so many conflicting opinions
that the Gentiles will lose themselves in the labyrinth and come to
understand that it is best to have no opinion on political questions,
which it is not given to society at large to understand but only to the
ruler who directs society. This is the first secret.

"The second secret consists in so increasing and intensifying the
shortcomings of the people in their habits, passions and mode of living
that no one will be able to collect himself in the chaos, and,
consequently, people will lose all their mutual understanding. This
measure will serve us also in breeding disagreement in all parties, in
disintegrating all those collective forces which are still unwilling to
submit to us and in discouraging all personal initiative which can in
any way interfere with our undertaking."

And this from the Thirteenth Protocol:

"* * * and you may also notice that we seek approval, not for our acts,
but for our words uttered in regard to one or another question. We
always announce publicly that we are guided in all our measures by the
hope and the conviction that we are serving the general good.

"To divert over-restless people from discussing political questions, we
shall now bring forward new problems apparently connected with the
people--problems of industry. In these, let them lose themselves as much
as they like. Under such conditions we shall make them think that the
new questions have also a political bearing."

(It is to be hoped that the reader, as his eye passes over these details
of the Program, is also permitting his mind to pass over the trend of
events, to see if he may detect for himself these very developments in
the life and thought of the past few years.)

"To prevent them from really thinking out anything themselves, we shall
deflect their attention to amusements, games, pastimes, excitements and
people's palaces. Such interests will distract their minds completely
from questions on which we might be obliged to struggle with them.
Becoming less and less accustomed to independent thinking, people will
express themselves in unison with us because we alone offer new lines of
thought--of course, through persons whom they do not consider as in any
way connected with us."

In this same Protocol it is plainly stated what is the purpose of the
output of "liberal" theories, of which Jewish writers, poets, rabbis,
societies and influences are the most prolific sources:

"The role of the liberal Utopians will be completely played out when our
government is recognized. Until that time they will perform good
service. For that reason we will continue to direct thought into all the
intricacies of fantastic theories, new and supposedly progressive.
Surely we have been completely successful in turning the witless heads
of the Gentiles by the word 'progress.'"

Here is the whole program of confusing, enervating, and trivializing the
mind of the world. And it would be the most outlandish thought to put
into words, were it not possible to show that this is just what has been
done, and is still being done, by agencies which are highly lauded and
easy to be identified among us.

A recent writer in a prominent magazine has pointed out what he calls
the impossibility of the Jewish ruling group being allied in one common
World Program because, as he showed, there were Jews acting as leading
minds in all the divisions of present-day opinion. There were Jews at
the head of the capitalists, Jews at the head of the labor unions, and
Jews at the head of those more radical organizations which find even the
labor unions too tame. There is a Jew at the head of the judiciary of
England and a Jew at the head of Sovietism in Russia. How can you say,
he asked, that they are united, when they represent so many points of
view?

The common unity, the possible common purpose of it all, is thus
expressed in the Ninth Protocol:

"People of all opinions and of all doctrines are at our service,
restorers of monarchy, demagogues, Socialists, communists and other
Utopians. We have put them all to work. Every one of them from his point
of view is undermining the last remnant of authority, is trying to
overthrow all existing order. All the governments have been tormented by
these actions. But we will not give them peace until they recognize our
super-government."

The function of the idea is referred to in the Tenth Protocol also:

"When we introduced the poison of liberalism into the government
organism, its entire political complexion changed."

The whole outlook of these Protocols upon the world is that the idea may
be made a most potent poison. The authors of these documents do not
believe in liberalism, they do not believe in democracy, but they lay
plans for the constant preaching of these ideas because of their power
to break up society, to divide it into groups, to destroy the power of
collective opinion through a variety of convictions. The poison of an
idea is their most relied-on weapon.

The plan of thus using ideas extends to education:

"We have misled, stupefied and demoralized the youth of the Gentiles by
means of education in principles and theories, patently false to us, but
which we have inspired."--Protocol 9.

It extends also to family life:

"Having in this way inspired everybody with the thought of his own
importance, we will break down the influence of family life among the
Gentiles, and its educational importance."--Protocol 10.

And in a passage which might well provide the material for long
examination and contemplation by the thoughtful reader, this is said:

"Until the time is ripe, let them amuse themselves * * * Let those
theories of life which we have induced them to regard as the dictates of
science play the most important role for them. To this end we shall
endeavor to inspire blind confidence in these theories by means of our
Press * * *

"Note the successes we have arranged in Darwinism, Marxism, and
Nietzscheism. The demoralizing effect of these doctrines upon the minds
of the Gentiles should be evident at least to us."--Protocol 2.

That this disintegration and division of Gentile society was proceeding
at a favorable rate when the Protocols were uttered is evident from
every line of them. For it must be remembered that the Protocols are not
bidding for support for a proposed program, but are announcing progress
on a program which has been in process of fulfillment for "centuries"
and "from ancient times." They contain a series of statements regarding
things accomplished, as well as a forelook at things yet to be
accomplished. The split of Gentile society was very satisfactorily
proceeding in 1896, or thereabouts, when these oracles were uttered.

It is to be noticed that the purpose is nowhere stated to be the
extermination of the Gentiles, but their subjugation, at first under the
invisible rule which is proposed in these documents, at length under the
rule of one whom the invisible forces would be able to put in control of
the world through political changes which would create an office of
World President or Autocrat. The Gentiles are to be subdued, first
intellectually, as here shown, and then economically. Nowhere is it
hinted that they are to be deprived of the earth, but only of their
independence of those whom the Protocols represent to be Jews.

How far the division of society had proceeded when these Protocols were
given may be gathered from the Fifth Protocol:

"A world coalition of Gentiles could cope with us temporarily, but we
are assured against this by roots of dissension among them so deep that
they cannot be torn out. We have created antagonism between the personal
and national interests of the Gentiles by arousing religious and race
hatreds which we have nourished in their hearts for twenty centuries."

As far as that concerns the dissensions of the Gentiles or Christian
world, it is absolutely true. And we have seen in our own nation how
"the antagonism between personal and national interests" have rested on
"religious and race hatreds." But whoever suspected a common source for
these? More amazing still, who would expect any man or group to avow
themselves the source? Yet it is thus written in the Protocols--"we have
created the antagonism--we thus assure ourselves against the possibility
of a Gentile coalition against us." And whether these Protocols are of
Jewish origin or not, whether they represent Jewish interests or not,
this is exactly the state of the world, of the Gentile world, today.

But a still deeper division is aimed for, and there are signs of even
this coming to pass. Indeed, in Russia it has already come to pass, the
spectacle of a Gentile lower class led by Jewish leaders against a
Gentile upper class! In the First Protocol, describing the effects of a
speculative industrial system upon the people, it is said that this sort
of economic folly--

"* * * has already created and will continue to create a society which
is disillusioned, cold and heartless. Such a society is completely
estranged from politics and religion. Lust of gold will be the only
guide of the people * * * THEN, not for the sake of good, nor even for
the sake of riches, but solely on account of their hatred of the
privileged classes, the lower classes of the Gentiles will follow us in
the struggle against our rivals for power, the Gentiles of the
intellectual classes."

"The lower classes of the Gentiles will follow us * * * against * * *
the Gentiles of the intellectual classes."

If that struggle were to occur today, the leaders of the Gentile
insurgents against Gentile society would be Jewish leaders. They are in
the leader's place now--not only in Russia, but also in the United
States.

[Issue of July 31, 1920.]




"There is all the difference in the world," said a young Jewish
philosopher, "between an American Jew and a Jewish American. A Jewish
American is a mere amateur Gentile, doomed to be a parasite forever."

--"The Conquering Jew," p. 91.

XII.

"Jewish Protocols" Claim Partial Fulfillment

"With the present instability of all authority, our power will be more
unassailable than any other, because it will be invisible until it has
gained such strength that no cunning can undermine it."--Protocol 1.

"It is indispensable for our purposes that, as far as possible, wars
should bring no territorial advantages. This will shift war to an
economic footing . . . . Such a condition of affairs will place both
sides under the control of our international agents with their million
eyes, whose vision is unhampered by any frontiers. Then, our
international rights will eliminate national rights in the narrow
sense, and will govern the governments as they govern their
subjects."--Protocol 2.


As a mere literary curiosity, these documents which are called "The
Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion" would exercise a fascination by
reason of the terrible completeness of the World Plan which they
disclose. But they discourage at every turn the view that they are
literature; they purport to be statesmanship, and they provide within
their own lines the clue by which their status may be determined.
Besides the things they look forward to doing, they announce the things
they have done and are doing. If, in looking about the world, it is
possible to see both the established conditions and the strong
tendencies to which these Protocols allude, it will not be strange if
interest in a mere literary curiosity gives way to something like
alertness, and it may be alarm.

A few general quotations will serve to illustrate the element of present
achievement in the assertions of these documents, and in order that the
point may be made clear to the reader the key words will be emphasized.

Take this from Protocol Nine:

"In reality there are no obstacles before us. Our super-government has
such an extra-legal status that it may be called by the energetic and
strong word--dictatorship. I can conscientiously say that, at the
present time, we are the lawmakers. We create courts and jurisprudence.
We rule with a strong will because we hold in our hands the remains of a
once strong party, now subjugated by us."

And this from the Eighth Protocol:

"We will surround our government with a whole world of economists. It is
for this reason that the science of economics is the chief subject of
instruction taught by the Jews. We shall be surrounded by a whole galaxy
of bankers, industrialists, capitalists, and especially by millionaires
because, actually, everything will be decided by an appeal to figures."

These are strong claims, but not too strong for the facts that can be
marshaled to illustrate them. They are, however, but an introduction to
further claims that are made and equally paralleled by the facts. All
through the Protocols, as in this quotation from the Eighth, the
pre-eminence of the Jews in the teaching of political economy is
insisted upon, and the facts bear that out. They are the chief authors
of those vagaries which lead the mob after economic impossibilities, and
they are also the chief teachers of political economy in our
universities, the chief authors of those popular textbooks in the
subject, which hold the conservative classes to the fiction that
economic theories are economic laws. The idea, the theory, as
instruments of social disintegration are common to both the university
Jew and the Bolshevik Jew. When all this is shown in detail, public
opinion upon the importance of academic and radical economics may
undergo a change.

And, as claimed in the quotation just given from the Ninth Protocol, the
Jewish world power does today constitute a super-government. It is the
Protocol's own word, and none is more fitting. No nation can get all
that it wants, but the Jewish World Power can get all that it wants,
even though its demands exceed Gentile equality. "We are the lawmakers,"
say the Protocols, and Jewish influences have been lawmakers in a
greater degree than any but the specialists realize. In the past ten
years Jewish international rule, or the power of the group of
International Jews has quite dominated the world. More than that, it has
been powerful enough to prevent the passage of salutary laws, and where
one law may have slipped through to a place on the statute books, it has
been powerful enough to get it interpreted in a sense that rendered it
useless for its purpose. This, too, can be illustrated by a large
collection of facts.

Moreover, the method by which this is done was outlined long ago in the
program of which the Protocols purport to be an outline. "We create
courts," continues the quotation, and it is followed in other Protocols
by numerous references to "our judges." There is a Jewish court sitting
in a public building in the city of New York every week, and other
courts, for the sole advantage and use of this people whose spokesmen
deny that they are a "separate people," are in formation everywhere. The
Zionist plan has already been used in some of the smaller European
countries to confer an extra-citizenship upon Jews who already enjoy
citizenship in the lands of their residence, and in addition to that a
degree of self-rule under the very governments which they demand to
protect them. Wherever Jewish tendencies are permitted to work
unhindered, the result is not "Americanization," or "Anglicization" nor
any other distinctive nationalism, but a strong and ruling reversion
back to essential "Judaization."

The "agents" referred to in the first quotation will receive attention
in another article. To resume the claims of the Protocols: This from the
Seventeenth Protocol:

"We have taken good care long ago to discredit the Gentile clergy and
thereby to destroy their mission, which at present might hamper us
considerably. Their influence over the people diminishes daily.

"Freedom of conscience has been proclaimed everywhere. Consequently it
is only a question of time when the complete crash of the Christian
religion will occur. It will be easier to handle the other religions,
but it is too early to discuss this phase of the subject."

This will be of considerable interest, perhaps, to those clergymen who
are laboring with Jewish rabbis to bring about some kind of religious
union. Such a union would of necessity dispose of Christ as a
well-meaning but wholly mistaken Jewish prophet, and thus distinctive
Christianity would cease to exist insofar as the "union" was effective.
The principal religious aversion of the Protocols, however, so far as it
is expressed, is against the Catholic church in general and the
pontifical office in particular.

A curious paragraph in this Protocol claims for the Jewish race a
particular skill in the art of insult:

"Our contemporary press will expose governmental and religious affairs
and the incapacity of the Gentiles, always using expressions so
derogatory as to approach insult, the faculty of employing which is so
well known to our race."

This from the Fifth Protocol:

"Under our influence the execution of the laws of the Gentiles is
reduced to a minimum. Respect for the law is undermined by the liberal
interpretation we have introduced in this sphere. The courts decide as
we dictate, even in the most important cases in which are involved
fundamental principles or political issues, viewing them in the light in
which we present them to the Gentile administration through agents with
whom we have apparently nothing in common, through newspaper opinion and
other avenues.

"In Gentile society where we have planted discord and protestantism * *
* *"

The word "protestantism" is evidently not used in the religious or
sectarian sense, but to denote a temper of querulous fault-finding
destructive of harmonious collective opinion.

This from the Fourteenth Protocol:

"In countries called advanced, we have created a senseless, filthy and
disgusting literature. For a short time after our entrance into power we
shall encourage its existence so that it may show in greater relief the
contrast between it and the written and spoken announcements which will
emanate from us."

Discussing in the Twelfth Protocol the control of the Press--a subject
which must be treated more extensively in another article--the claim is
made:

"We have attained this at the present time to the extent that all news
is received through several agencies in which it is centralized from all
parts of the world. These agencies will then be to all intents and
purposes our own institutions and will publish only that which we
permit."

This from the Seventh Protocol bears on the same subject:

"We must force the Gentile governments to adopt measures which will
promote our broadly conceived plan, already approaching its triumphant
goal, by bringing to bear the pressure of stimulated public opinion,
which has been organized by us with the help of the so-called 'great
power' of the press. With a few exceptions not worth considering, it is
already in our hands."

To resume the Twelfth Protocol:

"If we have already managed to dominate the mind of Gentile society to
such a point that almost all see world affairs through the colored
lenses of the spectacles which we place before their eyes, and if now
there is not one government with barriers erected against our access to
that which by Gentile stupidity is called state secrets, what then will
it be when we are the recognized masters of the world in the person of
our universal ruler?"

The Jewish nation is the only nation that possesses the secrets of all
the rest. No nation long protects a secret which directly concerns
another nation, but even so, no nation has all the secrets of all the
other nations. Yet it is not too much to say that the International Jews
have this knowledge. Much of it, of course, amounts to nothing and their
possession of it does not materially add to their power, but the fact
that they have the access, that they can get whatever they want when
they want it is the important point--as many a secret paper could
testify if it could talk, and many a custodian of secret papers could
tell if he would. The real secret diplomacy of the world is that which
hands over the world's so-called secrets to a few men who are members of
one race. The surface of diplomacy, those activities which get written
down in the memoirs of comfortably aging statesmen, those coups and
treaties which are given high-sounding fame as if they really were
important--that is incomparable with the diplomacy of Judah, and its
matchless enginery for worming out the hidden knowledge of every ruling
group. The United States is included in all these statements. Perhaps
there is no government in the world so completely at their service as
our own at present, their control having been gained during the past
five or six years.

The Protocols do not regard the dispersal of the Jews abroad upon the
face of the earth as a calamity, but as a providential arrangement by
which the World Plan can be more certainly executed, as see these words
of the Eleventh Protocol:

"God gave to us, His Chosen People, as a blessing, the dispersal, and
this which has appeared to all to be our weakness has been our whole
strength. It has now brought us to the threshold of universal rule."

The claims to accomplishment which are put forth in the Ninth Protocol
would be too massive for words were they too massive for concrete
realization, but there is a point where the word and the actuality meet
and tally.

"In order not to destroy prematurely the Gentile institutions, we have
laid our efficient hands on them, and rasped the springs of their
mechanism. They were formerly in strict and just order, but we have
replaced them with a liberal disorganized and arbitrary administration.
We have tampered with jurisprudence, the franchise, the press, freedom
of the person, and, most important of all, education and culture, the
corner stone of free existence.

"We have misled, stupefied and demoralized the youth of the Gentiles by
means of education in principles and theories patently false to us, but
which we have inspired.

"Above existing laws, without actual change but by distorting them
through contradictory interpretations, we have created something
stupendous in the way of results."

Everyone knows that, in spite of the fact that the air was never so full
of theories of liberty and wild declarations of "rights," there has been
a steady curtailment of "personal freedom." Instead of being socialized,
the people, under a cover of socialistic phrases, are being brought
under an unaccustomed bondage to the state. The Public Health is one
plea. Various forms of Public Safety are other pleas. Children are
hardly free to play nowadays except under play-masters appointed by the
State, among whom, curiously enough, an astonishing proportion of Jews
manage to find a place. The streets are no longer as free as they were;
laws of every kind are hedging upon the harmless liberties of the
people. A steady tendency toward systemization, every phase of the
tendency based upon some very learnedly stated "principle," has set in,
and curiously enough, when the investigator pursues his way to the
authoritative center of these movements for the regulation of people's
life, he finds Jews in power. Children are being lured away from the
"social center" of the home for other "centers"; they are being led away
(and we are speaking of Gentile children--no Gentiles are ever allowed
to regulate the lives of Jewish children) from their natural leaders in
home, church and school, to institutionalized "centers" and scientific
"play spots," under "trained leaders" whose whole effect, consciously or
unconsciously, is to lead the modern child to look to the State, instead
of its natural environment, for leadership. All this focuses up to the
World Plan for the subjugation of the Gentiles, and if it is not the
Jewish World Plan it would be interesting to know why the material for
it is so largely Gentile children and the leaders of it so often of the
Jewish race.

Jewish liberties are the best safeguarded in the United States. Gentiles
take their chance with public matters, but every Jewish community is
surrounded by special protectors who gain special recognition by various
devices--political and business threats not the least of them. No public
spirited Gentiles are welcomed to the task of regulating the lives of
Jewish children. The Jewish community in every city is all-sufficient in
itself as far as such activities go. The most secret of all parochial
schools are the Jewish schools, whose very locations are not all known
to the officials of large cities. The Jew is almost anxious in his
efforts to mold the Gentile mind; he insists on being permitted to tell
the Gentile what to think, especially about the Jew; he is not averse to
influencing general Gentile thought in a manner which, though it come
about by wide circles, works ultimately into the Jewish scheme of
things. The anxiety and the insistence, so well known to all who have
observed them, are only reflections of the Jew's conviction that his is
the superior race and is capable of directing the inferior race--of
which there is but one, including the whole non-Jewish world.

Every influence that leads to lightness and looseness in Gentile youth
today heads up in a Jewish source. Did the young people of the world
devise the "sport clothes" which have had so deleterious an effect on
the youth of the times that every publicist has thought it worthy of
mention? Those styles come out of Jewish clothing concerns, where
certainly art is not the rule nor moral influence the main
consideration. The moving picture is an interesting development of
photography allied with the show business, but whose is the
responsibility for its development along such lines as make it a menace
to the minds of millions--so serious a menace that it has not escaped
observation and condemnation everywhere? Who are the masters of musical
jazz in the world? Who direct all the cheap jewelry houses, the
bridge-head show parks, the "coney islands," the centers of nervous
thrills and looseness? It is possible to take the showy young man and
woman of trivial outlook and loose sense of responsibility, and tag them
outwardly and inwardly from their clothing and ornaments to their hectic
ideas and hopes, with the same tag, "Made, introduced and exploited by a
Jew."

There is, therefore, something most sinister in the light which events
cast upon that paragraph:

"We have misled, stupefied, and demoralized the youth of the Gentiles by
means of education in principles and theories, patently false to us but
which we have inspired."

"Principles and theories" do not necessarily imply lofty or even modest
intellectual qualities. The youngster who spends his noon hours and
evenings at the movies is getting his "principles and theories" just as
the more intellectual youngster from a higher grade of society who
listens to a Jewish "liberal" expound "sex liberty" and the "control of
population" is getting his. The looseness which inheres in these
"principles and theories" does not emanate from the Gentile home, or the
Gentile church, or from any line of money-making which is filled
principally with Gentiles, but from theories, movements and lines of
money-making mostly fancied by Jews. This line of accusation could be
run much deeper, but it is preferred to restrict it to what is
observable by decent eyes everywhere.

And that "the youth of the Gentiles" are the principal victims, and not
the youth of the Jews, is also observable. While a certain percentage of
Jewish youth itself is overcome by this social poison, the percentage is
almost nothing compared with the results among the youth of the
Gentiles. It is a significant fact that Jews who link this process of
enervation of Gentiles with large profits are not themselves, nor are
their sons and daughters, the victims of this enervation. Jewish youth
comes through more proudly and more cleanly than the mass of Gentile
youth.

Many a father and mother, many a sound-minded, uncorrupted young person,
and thousands of teachers and publicists have cried out against luxury.
Many a financier, observing the manner in which the people earned and
flung away their money, has warned against luxury. Many an economist,
knowing that the nonessential industries were consuming men and
materials that were necessary to the stabilizing of essential
industries; knowing that men are making knick-knacks who should be
making steel; knowing that men are engaged in making gew-gaws who should
be working on the farm; that materials are going into articles that are
made only to sell and never to use, and that materials are thus diverted
from the industries that support the people's life--every observer
knowing this crazy insistence on luxurious nonessentials has lifted up a
strong voice against it.

But, according to these Protocols, we have been starting at the wrong
end. The people, it is true, buy these senseless nonessentials which are
called luxuries. But the people do not devise them. And the people grow
tired of them one by one. But the stream of varieties continues--always
something else being thrust at the people, dangled before their eyes,
set bobbing down the avenue on enough mannikins to give the impression
that it is "style"; newspaper print and newspaper pictures; movie
pictures; stage costumes enough to force the new thing into "fashion"
with a kind of force and compulsion which no really worthy essential
thing can command.

Where does it come from? What power exists whose long experience and
deliberate intent enable it to frivolize the people's minds and tastes
and compel them to pay most of their money for it too? Why this spasm of
luxury and extravagance through which we have just passed? How did it
occur that before luxury and extravagance were apparent, all the
material to provoke and inflame them had been prepared beforehand and
shipped beforehand, ready for the stampede which also had been prepared?

If the people of the United States would stop to consider, when the
useless and expensive thing is offered them--if they would trace its
origin, trace the course of the enormous profits made out of it, trace
the whole movement to flood the market with uselessness and extravagance
and thus demoralize the Gentile public financially, intellectually, and
socially--if, in short, it could be made clear to them that Jewish
financial interests are not only pandering to the loosest elements in
human nature, but actually engaged in a calculated effort to render them
loose in the first place and keep them loose--it would do more than
anything else to stop this sixfold waste--the waste of material, the
waste of labor, the waste of Gentile money, the waste of Gentile mind,
the waste of Jewish talent, and the worse than waste of Israel's real
usefulness to the world.

We say the Gentile public is the victim of this stimulated trade in
useless luxuries. Did you ever see Jewish people so victimized? They
might wear very noticeable clothing, but its price and its quality
agree. They might wear rather large diamonds, but they are diamonds. The
Jew is not the victim of the Jew, the craze for luxuries is just like
the "coney island" crowd to him; he knows what attracts them and the
worthlessness of it.

And it is not so much the financial loss that is to be mourned, nor yet
the atrocities committed upon good taste, but the fact that the silly
Gentile crowds walk into the net willingly, even gaily, supposing the
change of the fashion to be as inevitable as the coming of spring,
supposing the new demand on their earnings to be as necessary and as
natural as taxes. The crowds think that somehow they have part in it,
when their only part is to pay, and then pay again for the new
extravagance when the present one palls. There are men in this country
who know two years ahead what the frivolities and extravagances of the
people will be, because they decree what they shall be. These things are
strictly business, demoralizing to the Gentile majority, enriching to
the Jewish minority.

Look at the Sixth Protocol for a sidelight on all this:

This is an excerpt from a longer passage dealing with the plans by which
the people's interest could be swung from political to industrial
questions, how industry could be made insecure and unfair by the
introduction of speculation into its management, and finally how against
this condition the people could be rendered restless and helpless.
Luxury was to be the instrument:

"To destroy Gentile industry, we shall, as an incentive to this
speculation, encourage among the Gentiles a strong demand for
luxuries--all enticing luxuries."

And in the First Protocol:

"Surely we cannot allow our own people to come to this. The people of
the Gentiles are stupefied with spirituous liquors * * *"

--incidentally, the profits of spirituous liquors flow in large amounts
to Jewish pockets. The history of the whiskey ring in this country will
show this. Historically, the whole prohibition movement may be described
as a contest between Gentile and Jewish capital, and in this instance,
thanks to the Gentile majority, the Gentiles won.

The amusement, gambling, jazz song, scarlet fiction, side show,
cheap-dear fashions, flashy jewelry, and every other activity that lived
by reason of an invisible pressure upon the people, and that exchanged
the most useless of commodities for the prices that would just exhaust
the people's money surplus and no more--every such activity has been
under the mastery of the Jews.

They may not be conscious of their participation in any wholesale
demoralization of the people. They may only be conscious of "easy
money." They may sometimes yield to surprise as they contrast the silly
Gentiles with their own money-wise and fabric-wise and metal-wise Jews.
But however this may be, there is the conception of a program by which a
people may be deliberately devastated materially and spiritually, and
yet kept pleasant all the time--and there also is the same program
translated into terms of daily transactions and for the most part,
perhaps altogether under control of the members of one race.

[Issue of August 7, 1920.]




XIII.

"Jewish" Plan to Split Society by "Ideas"


The method by which the Protocols work for the breakdown of society
should now be fairly evident to readers of these articles. An
understanding of the method is necessary if one is to find the meaning
of the currents and cross-currents which make so hopeless a hodge-podge
of the present times. People who are confused and discouraged by the
various voices and discordant theories of today, each seeming to be
plausible and promising, may find a clear clue to the value of the
voices and the meaning of the theories if they understand that their
confusion and discouragement comprise the very objective which is
sought. The uncertainty, hesitation, hopelessness, fear; the eagerness
with which every promising plan and offered solution is grasped--these
are the very reactions which the program outlined in the Protocols aims
to produce. The condition is proof of the efficacy of the program.

It is a method that takes time, and the Protocols declare that it has
taken time, indeed, centuries. Students of the matter find the identical
program of the Protocols, announced and operated by the Jewish race,
from the first century onward.

It has taken 1900 years to bring Europe to its present degree of
subjugation--violent subjugation in some countries, political
subjugation in some, economic subjugation in all--but in America the
same program, with almost the same degree of success, has required about
50 years. Certain mistaken ideas of liberalism, certain flabby ideas of
tolerance, all of them originating at European sources which the
Protocolists had completely polluted, were transported to America, and
here under cover of the blindness and innocence of a false liberalism
and tolerance, together with modern appliances for the swift
acceleration of opinion, there has been worked a subjugation of our
institutions and public thought which is the amazement of European
observers. It is a fact that some of the important students of the
Jewish Question, whom Jewish publicists are pleased to damn with the
term "Anti-Semites," have been awakened to the existence of the Question
not by what they have observed in Europe, but by what they have seen in
the swift and distinct "close-up" which has been afforded in American
affairs.

The center of Jewish power, the principal sponsors of the Jewish
program, are resident in America, and the leverage which was used at the
Peace Conference to fasten Jewish power more securely upon Europe, was
American leverage exercised at the behest of the strong Jewish pressure
which was brought from the United States for that purpose. And these
activities did not end with the Peace Conference.

The whole method of the Protocols may be described in one word,
Disintegration. The undoing of what has been done, the creation of a
long and hopeless interim in which attempts at reconstruction shall be
baffled, and the gradual wearing down of public opinion and public
confidence, until those who stand outside the created chaos shall insert
their strong calm hand to seize control--that is the whole method of
procedure.

Putting together the estimate of human nature which obtains in these
Protocols, and their claims to a rather definite though as yet
incomplete fulfillment of the World Program (these two comprising the
themes of the previous two articles), some of the aspects of this
propaganda of disintegration have become clear. But not all of them.
There are yet other aspects of these methods, which will be dealt with
in the present article, and there are yet future reaches of the program
which will be considered later.

The first point of attack is Collective Opinion, that body of ideas
which through men's agreement with them, holds large groups together in
political, racial, religious, or social unity. Sometimes we call them
"standards," sometimes we call them "ideals"; whatever they may be
called, they are the invisible bonds of unity, they are the common
faith, they are the great overarching reason for group unity and
loyalty.

The Protocols assert that here the first attack has been made. The
history of Jewish propaganda in the world shows that also.

The first wave of attack is to corrupt Collective Opinion. Now, to
"corrupt" in the real sense does not mean anything unsavory or unclean.
The whole power of every heresy is its attractiveness to the good mind.
The whole explanation of the strong hold which untruth has gained upon
the world of our day, is that the untruth is reasonable, inspiring and
apparently good. It is only after a long discipline in false
ideals--which are reasonable, inspiring and good--that the evil fruits
appear in acts and conditions which are unreasonable, destructive and
wholly evil. If you will trace the idea of Liberty as it has appeared in
Russian history, from its philosophic beginning (a Jewish beginning, by
the way) to its present ending (a Jewish ending also), you will see the
process.

The Protocols claim that the Gentiles are not thinkers, that attractive
ideas have been thrown at them so strategically and persistently that
the power of thought is almost destroyed out of them. Fortunately this
is a matter on which any Gentile may apply his own test. If he will
segregate his ruling ideas, especially those that center round the
thought of "democracy," he will discover that he is being ruled in his
mind by a whole company of ideas into whose authority over him he has
not inquired at all. He is ruled by "say so" whose origin he has not
traced. And when, pursuing those ideas, he finds that they are not
practicable, he is received by the explanation that "we are not yet
sufficiently advanced." Yet when he does see men who are sufficiently
"advanced" to put these very ideas into operation, he recoils from what
he sees them do, because he knows that "advancement" such as that is
deterioration--a form of disintegration. Yet every one of the ideas were
"good," "reasonable," "inspiring," "humane," to begin with. And, if this
Gentile will observe a little further, he will see that they are the
most persistently preached ideas in the world; he will also see who the
preachers are.

The Protocols distinctly declare that it is by means of the set of
ideals which cluster around "democracy," that their first victory over
public opinion was obtained. The idea is the weapon. And to be a weapon
it must be an idea at variance with the natural trend of life. It must
indeed be a theory opposed to the facts of life. And no theory so
opposed can be expected to take root and become the ruling factor,
unless it appeals to the mind as reasonable, inspiring and good. The
Truth frequently seems unreasonable; the Truth frequently is depressing;
the Truth sometimes seems to be evil; but it has this eternal advantage,
it is the Truth, and what is built thereon neither brings nor yields to
confusion.

This first step does not give the control of public opinion, but leads
up to it. It is worthy of note that it is the sowing of "the poison of
liberalism," as the Protocols name it, which comes first in order in
those documents. Then, following upon that, the Protocols say:

"To obtain control over public opinion it is first necessary to confuse
it."

Truth is one and cannot be confused, but this false, appealing
liberalism which has been sown broadcast, and which is ripening faster
under Jewish nurture in America than ever it did in Europe, is easily
confused because it is not truth. It is error, and error has a thousand
forms. Take a nation, a party, a city, an association in which "the
poison of liberalism" has been sown, and you can split that up into as
many factions as there are individuals simply by throwing among them
certain modifications of the original idea. This is a piece of strategy
well known to the forces that invisibly control mass-thought. Theodor
Herzl, the arch-Jew, a man whose vision was wider than any statesman's
and whose program paralleled the Protocols, knew this many years ago
when he said that the Zionist (cryptic for "Jewish") state would come
before the Socialist state could come; he knew with what endless
divisions the "liberalism" which he and his predecessors had planted
would be shackled and crippled.

The process of which all Gentiles have been the victims, but never the
Jews--never the Jews!--is just this--

First, to create an ideal of "broad-mindedness." That is the phrase
which appears in every Jewish remonstrance against public mention of the
Jew and his alleged World Program: "We thought you were too broad-minded
a man to express such thoughts;" "we thought Mr. So-and-So was too
broad-minded a man to suspect the Jews of this;" "we thought the daily
or weekly or monthly such-and-such a paper was too broad-minded
editorially to consider such material." It is a sort of keyword,
indicative of the state of mind in which it is desired that the Gentles
be kept. It is a state of flabby tolerance. A state of mind which mouths
meaningless phrases about Liberty, phrases which act as an opiate on the
mind and conscience and which allow all sorts of things to be done under
cover. The phrase, the slogan, is a very dependable Jewish weapon. ("In
all times people have accepted words for acts."--Protocol 5.) The
reality behind the phrase the Protocols frankly admit to be
non-existent.

Nothing has served to create "broad-mindedness," a state of mind whose
breadth indicates its lack of depth, so much as the ideas of liberalism
which the Jews are constantly teaching to Gentiles and on which they
never themselves act. We need a new sort of allegiance to the reality of
life, to the facts as they are, which will enable us to stand up under
all cajoling to "broad-mindness" and assert a new intolerance of
everything but truth. The terms "narrow" and "broad" as they are used
today represent lies. The liberal man ought to believe more, he ought to
be deep and wide in his beliefs in order to merit that name; but as a
usual thing he believes nothing. He is not liberal at all. When you seek
belief, belief with a foundation, belief with vitality, you must seek it
among men who are sneered at, under this false Jewish-propagated notion
of liberality, as "narrow men." Jewish propaganda, in common with the
Protocols, is against men who have dug down to the rock; they want
"broad-minded men" who can easily be shifted about the surface and thus
serve the invisible scheme in any manner desired. This type of men, on
their part, never imagine but that their "broad-mindedness" is a mark of
their superiority and independence.

Now, see what follows. Men are born believers. For a time they may
believe in "broad-mindedness" and under the terrific social pressure
that has been set up in its favor they will openly espouse it. But it is
too shallow to satisfy any growing roots of life. They must believe,
deeply, something. For proof of this, notice the undeniable strength of
the negative beliefs which are held by men who fancy that they believe
nothing. Therefore, some who are highly endowed with independence of
spirit, root down into those prohibited matters which at some point
touch Jewish concerns--these are the "narrow" men. But others find it
more convenient to cultivate those departments which promise a highway
whereon there shall be no clashes of vital opinion, no chance of the
charge of "intolerance"; in short they transfer all their contemplative
powers to the active life, even as it is written in the Protocols--

"To divert Gentile thought and observation, interest must be deflected
to industry and commerce."

It is amazing to look around and see the number of men who have been
actually browbeaten into committing their whole lives to these secondary
or even tertiary things, while they look with great timidity and
aversion at the vital things which really rule the world and upon the
issue of which the world really depends.

But it is just this deflection to the materialistic base that offers the
Protocolists, and similarly Jewish propagandists, their best hold.
"Broad-mindedness" today consists in leaving vital matters severely
alone. It descends quickly to material-mindedness. Within this lower
sphere all the discord which distresses the world today is to be found.

First, there is the ruin of the upper circles of industry and commerce:

"To make it possible for liberty definitely to disintegrate and ruin
Gentile society, industry must be placed on a speculative basis."

No one needs to be told what this means. It means, as everything about
us shouts, the prostitution of service to profits and the eventual
disappearance of the profits. It means that the high art of management
degenerates into exploitation. It means reckless confusion among the
managers and dangerous unrest among the workmen.

But it means something worse; it means the splitting up of Gentile
society. Not a division between "Capital" and "Labor," but the division
between the Gentiles at both ends of the working scheme. Gentile
managers and manufacturers are not the "capitalists" of the United
States. Most of them have to go to the "capitalists" for the funds with
which they work--and the "capitalists" are Jewish, International Jews.

But with Jewish capital at one end of the Gentile working scheme putting
the screws on the manufacturers, and with Jewish agitators and
disruptionists and subversives at the other end of the Gentile working
scheme putting the screws on the workmen, we have a condition at which
the world-managers of the Protocol program must be immensely satisfied.

"We might fear the combined strength of the Gentiles of vision with the
blind strength of the masses, but we have taken all measures against
such a possible contingency by raising a wall of mutual antagonism
between these two forces. Thus, the blind force of the masses remains
our support. We, and we alone, shall serve as their leaders. Naturally,
we will direct their energy to achieve our end."--Protocol 9.

The indication that they are highly satisfied is that they are not only
not doing anything to relieve the situation, but are apparently willing
to have it made worse, and if it be at all possible for them to do so
they would like to see this coming winter, and the privations which are
scheduled for it (unless Gentile flabbiness before the Jewish power,
high and low, receives a new backbone), bring the United States to the
verge of, if not across the very line of Bolshevism. They know the whole
method of artificial scarcity and high prices. It was practiced in the
French Revolution and in Russia. All the signs of it are in this country
too.

Industrial problems for their mental food and light amusement for their
leisure hours, these are the Protocols' method with regard to the
Gentile mind, and under cover of these the work is to be done--the work
which is best expressed by the motto, "Divide and Rule."

Read this:

"To divert over-restless people from discussing political questions, we
shall now bring forward new problems apparently connected with
them--problems of industry."--Protocol 13.

Has not everyone been struck by the divorcement which exists in this
country between the mass-thought which is almost exclusively devoted to
industrial questions, and the party-thought which is endeavoring to keep
the field of pure politics? And is it not a fact that our friends, the
Jews, are strongly entrenched in both fields--in politics to keep it
reactionary, and in industrial circles to keep it radical--and so widen
the split? And what is this split but a split of the Gentiles?--for
society is Gentile, and the disruptive influences are Jewish.

Read this:

"We have included in the constitution rights for the people that are
fictitious and not actual rights. All those so-called 'rights of the
people' can only exist in the abstract and can never be realized in
practice * * * The proletarian gains no more from the constitution than
the miserable crumbs thrown from our table in return for his votes to
elect our agents and pass our measures. Republican rights are a bitter
irony to the poor man, for the pressure of daily labor prevents him from
using them, and at the same time, deprives him of the guaranty of a
permanent and certain livelihood by making him dependent upon strikes,
organized either by his employers or his comrades."--Protocol 3.

This remark about strikes is not at all puzzling to anyone who has
studied the different types of strikes in this country. The number
fomented from above the working class is astoundingly large.

Read this also:

"We will force up wages, which, however, will be of no benefit to the
workers, for we will at the same time cause a rise in the prices of
necessities, pretending that this is due to the decline of agriculture
and of cattle raising. We will also artfully and deeply undermine the
sources of production by instilling in the workmen ideas of
anarchy."--Protocol 6.

And this:

"We will represent ourselves as the saviours of the working class who
have come to liberate them from this oppression by suggesting that they
join our army of socialists, anarchists, communists, to whom we always
extend our help under the guise of the fraternal principles of universal
human solidarity."--Protocol 3.

"Broad-mindedness" again! In this connection it is always well to
remember the words of Sir Eustace Percy, heretofore quoted, words which
are sponsored by Jews themselves--"Not because the Jew cares for the
positive side of radical philosophy, not because he desires to be a
partaker in Gentile nationalism or Gentile democracy, but because no
existing Gentile system of government is ever anything but distasteful
to him."

Or, as the author of "The Conquering Jew" says: "He is democratic in his
sentiments, but not in his nature. When he proclaims the common
brotherhood of man, he is asking that the social gate now closed against
him in so many quarters shall be open to him; not because he wants
equality, but because he desires to be master in the social world, as he
is showing himself in so may other spheres. Many an honorable Jew will,
I doubt not, dispute the accuracy of this distinction; but if he does it
will be because he has lived so long in the atmosphere of the West that
he is unconscious of what is bred in the bone of his Eastern race."

It is not difficult, therefore, to see the genealogy of the Jewish ideas
of liberalism from their origin to their latest effects upon Gentile
life. The confusion aimed for is here. There is not a reader of these
lines who has not felt in his own life the burden of it. Bewilderment
characterizes the whole mental climate of the people today. They do not
know what to believe. First one set of facts is given to them, then
another. First one explanation of conditions is given to them, and then
another. The fact-shortage is acute. There is a whole market-full of
explanations that explain nothing, but only deepen the confusion. The
government itself seems to be hampered, and whenever it starts on a line
of investigation finds itself mysteriously tangled up so that procedure
is difficult. This governmental aspect is also set forth in the
Protocols.

Add to this the onslaught on the human tendency toward religion, which
is usually the last barrier to fall before violence and robbery
unashamed stalk forth. In order to bring the condition about at which
this World Program aims, the Fourth Protocol says:

"It is for this reason that we must undermine faith, eradicate from the
minds of the Gentiles the very principles of God and Soul, and replace
these conceptions by mathematical calculations and material desires."

"When we deprived the masses of their belief in God, ruling authority
was thrown into the gutter, where it became public property, and we
seized it."--Protocol 5.

"We have taken good care long ago to discredit the Gentile
clergy."--Protocol 17.

"When we become rulers we shall regard as undesirable the existence of
any religion except our own, proclaiming One God with Whom our fate is
tied as The Chosen People, and by Whom our fate has been made one with
the fate of the world. For this reason we must destroy all other
religions. If thereby should emerge contemporary atheists, then, as a
transition step, this will not interfere with our aims."--Protocol 14.

This will probably offer matter for reflection by the "broad-minded."

It is curious to note how this religious program has worked out in
Russia where Trotsky (as loudly heralded in the American Jewish Press)
is said to have no religion, and where Jewish commissars tell dying
Russians who ask for priests, "We have abolished the Almighty." Miss
Katherine Dokoochief is reported, under a Philadelphia date, to have
told the Near East Relief that Russian Christian churches have been
subjected to the vilest indignities by the Bolsheviki, details of which
she gives; but "the synagogues remain untouched, meeting with no
damage."

All these lines of attack, whose object is the destruction of the
natural rallying points of Gentile thought, and the substitution of
other rallying points of an unwholesome and destructive nature, are
assisted, as we saw in the last article, by the propaganda for luxury.
Luxury is recognizedly one of the most enervating influences. Its course
runs from ease, through softness, to flabbiness, to degeneracy, mental,
physical and moral. Its beginnings are attractive, its end is
lasciviousness in some form, testifying to the complete breakdown of all
the strong fiber of the life. It may make a theme for a more complete
study some day, this lure to lasciviousness through luxury, and the
identity of the forces that set the lure.

But now, to conclude this general view of the method, rather this part
of the method, the confusion itself, which all these influences converge
to produce, is expected to produce another more deeply helpless state.
And that state is, Exhaustion.

It needs no imagination to see what this means. Exhaustion is today one
of the conditions that menace the people. The recent political
conventions and their effect upon the public fully illustrate it. Nobody
seemed to care. Parties might make their declarations and candidates
their promises--nobody cared. The war and its strain began the
exhaustion; the "peace" and its confusion have about completed it. The
people believe little and expect less. Confidence is gone. Initiative is
nearly gone. The failure of movements falsely heralded as "people's
movements" has gone far to make the people think that no people's
movement is possible.

So say the Protocols:

"To wear everyone out by dissensions, animosities, feuds, famine,
inoculation of diseases, want, until the Gentiles see no other way of
escape except an appeal to our money and power."--Protocol 10.

"We will so wear out and exhaust the Gentiles by all this that they will
be compelled to offer us an international authority, which by its
position will enable us to absorb without disturbance all the
governmental forces of the world and thus form a super-government.

"We must so direct the education of Gentile society that its hands will
drop in the weakness of discouragement in the face of any undertaking
where initiative is needed."--Protocol 5.

The Jews have never been worn out or exhausted. They have never been
nonplused. This is the true psychic characteristic of those who have a
clue to the maze. It is the unknown that exhausts the mind, the constant
wandering around among tendencies and influences whose source is not
known and whose purpose is not understood. Walking in the dark is
wearing work. The Gentiles have been doing it for centuries. The others,
having a pretty accurate idea what it was all about, have not succumbed.
Even persecution is endurable if it is understandable, and the Jews of
the world have always known just where it fitted in the scheme of
things. Gentiles have suffered from Jewish persecutions than have the
Jews, for after the persecutions were over, the Gentile was as much in
the dark as ever; whereas Judaism simply took up again its century-long
march toward a goal in which it implicitly believes, and which, some say
who have deep knowledge of Jewish roots in the world and who too may be
touched with exhaustion, they will achieve. However this may be, the
revolution which would be necessary to unfasten the International Jewish
system from its grip on the world, would probably have to be just as
radical as any attempts the Jews have made to attain that grip. There
are those who express serious doubts that the Gentiles are competent to
do it at all. Maybe not. Let them at least know who their conquerors
are.

[Issue of August 14, 1920.]




XIV.

Did the Jews Foresee the World War?


Before proceeding to a more detailed study of the connection between the
written program of the documents which are called "The Protocols of the
Learned Elders of Zion," and the actual program as it can be traced in
real life, we shall now view those plans which were future when the
Protocols were uttered. It must be borne in mind, however, that what was
future in 1896 and 1905, may be past today, that what was plan then may
be fulfillment now. To bear this in mind will be in exact accord with
the expression of Protocol 22--"I have endeavored to indicate carefully
the secrets of past and future events, and of those momentous
occurrences of the near future toward which we are rushing in a stream
of great crises." Some of those "momentous occurrences" have come to
pass, and with them a brighter light on the Question which we are
studying.

An illustration of this which is fresh in the minds of all was furnished
by the Great War. Jewish comment on this series of articles has made
much of the fact that one of the articles was devoted to the then
prominence of the Jewish Question in Germany, and it was sought to
mislead the people to think that this series was really a part of subtle
German after-the-war propaganda. The fact is that articles on the
Question in a number of countries were set aside in order to bring the
Question itself prominently before the minds of Americans with the least
delay. The postponed articles will appear in due season, though out of
their order. Germany is today, with perhaps the possible exception of
the United States, the most Jew-controlled country in the
world--controlled within and from without--and a much stronger set of
facts could be presented now than was presented in the original article
(the facts of which were at first denied and later admitted by the
Jewish spokesmen in the United States). For, since that article was
written, public sentiment in Germany has swept the Jews largely out of
public office. German public opinion exerted itself to the utmost to put
German political administration back into German hands. But did that
liberate Germany from the Jews? Not at all. For their entrenchments
stretched further and deeper than mere display of official power. Their
hold on the basic industries, the finances, the future of Germany has
not been loosened in the least. It is there, unmovable. In what that
hold consists, the reader will be told at some convenient time.

Germany is mentioned now, in connection with the Jews, for this purpose:
It will be remembered that it was from Germany that the first cry of
"annexations" came, and it came at a time when all German war activities
and war sentiment were admittedly in Jewish control. "Annexations" was
the cry that flashed across the world one day. And back across the
world, from the United States, a nation that was not even a party to the
war at that time, the word flashed back, "No Annexations." Thus by a
dramatic play the whole question was thrust before the world.

Soon the people of all countries had forgotten the blood of battle, the
war profiteers and every other vital point, and were discussing a matter
which belonged to the end of the war and not the beginning, the question
of "annexations." Now, when it is known who were controlling the
formulation of war-aims in Germany and who were the chief counselors of
the foreign policy of the United States at the same time, the projection
of this question of "annexations" into the world's mind becomes
interesting; interesting but not wholly intelligible.

Not until you read the Protocols do you get a full light on this--and
this report of the Protocols which is now given the world probably dates
from 1896; there is absolutely ironclad proof of the date 1905.

The Second Protocol begins on the note of war, and its opening words are
these:

"It is indispensable for our purpose that as far as possible, wars
should bring no territorial advantages. This will shift war to an
economic footing, and nations will perceive the strength of our
superiority in the aid we render."

Who was thinking, between 1896 and 1905, of the new "no annexations"
rule to be applied to war? Were you? Do you know of any statesman who
was? We know that military men were concerned about the appliances and
operations of any future war that might occur. We know that statesmen,
of the more responsible sort, were working to consolidate a balance of
interests that would make war extremely improbable. Who had outdistanced
them all in foresight and planning sufficiently to lay down a definite
program of "no annexations?"

Fortunately the clue to the answer is supplied to us by unquestionable
Jewish sources. The American Jewish News of September 19, 1919, had an
advertisement on its front page which read thus:

"WHEN PROPHETS SPEAK

By Litman Rosenthal

Many years ago Nordau prophesied the Balfour Declaration. Litman
Rosenthal, his intimate friend, relates this incident in a fascinating
memoir.

The article, on page 464, begins: "It was on Saturday, the day after the
closing of the Sixth Congress, when I received a telephone message from
Dr. Herzl asking me to call on him."

This fixes the time. The Sixth Zionist Congress was held at Basle in
August, 1903.

The memoir continues: "On entering the lobby of the hotel I met Herzl's
mother who welcomed me with her usual gracious friendliness and asked me
whether the feelings of the Russian Zionists were now calmer.

"'Why just the Russian Zionists, Frau Herzl?' I asked. 'Why do you only
inquire about these?'

"'Because my son,' she explained, 'is mostly interested in the Russian
Zionists. He considers them the quintessence, the most vital part of the
Jewish people.'"

At this Sixth Congress the British Government ("Herzl and his agents had
kept in contact with the English Government"--Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol.
12, page 678) had offered the Jews a colony in Uganda, East Africa.
Herzl was in favor of taking it, not as a substitute for Palestine, but
as a step toward it. It was this which formed the chief topic of
conversation between Herzl and Litman Rosenthal in that Basle hotel.
Herzl said to Rosenthal, as reported in this article: "There is a
difference between the final aim and the ways we have to go to achieve
this aim."

Suddenly Max Nordau, who seems at the conference held last month in
London to have become Herzl's successor, entered the room, and the
Rosenthal interview was ended.

Let the reader now follow attentively the important part of this
Rosenthal story:--(the italics are ours)

"About a month later 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, and I, naturally,
interrupted my journey to be present at this meeting and to hear Dr.
Nordau's report. 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,
because you surely think that we have betrayed it and forgotten it. Yet
listen to what I have to say to you. I spoke in favor of Uganda after
long and careful consideration; deliberately I advised the Congress to
consider and to accept the proposal of the English Government, a
proposal made to the Jewish nation through the Zionist Congress, and my
reasons--but instead of my reasons let me tell you a political story as
a kind of allegory.

"'I want to speak of a time which is now almost forgotten, a time when
the European powers had decided to send a fleet against the fortress of
Sebastopol. At this time Italy, the United Kingdom of Italy, did not
exist. Italy was in reality only a little principality of Sardinia, and
the great, free and united Italy was but a dream, a fervent wish, a far
ideal of all Italian patriots. The leaders of Sardinia, who were
fighting for and planning this free and united Italy, were the three
great popular heroes: Garibaldi, Mazzini, and Cavour.

"'The European powers invited Sardinia to join in the demonstration at
Sebastopol and to send also a fleet to help in the siege of this
fortress, and this proposal gave rise to a dissension among the leaders
of Sardinia. Garibaldi and Mazzini did not want to send a fleet to the
help of England and France and they said: "Our program, the work to
which we are pledged, is a free and united Italy. What have we to do
with Sebastopol? Sebastopol is nothing to us, and we should concentrate
all our energies on our original program so that we may realize our
ideal as soon as possible."

"'But Cavour, who even at this time was the most prominent, the most
able, and the most far-sighted statesman of Sardinia, insisted that his
country should send a fleet and beleaguer with the other powers
Sebastopol, and, at last, he carried his point. Perhaps it will interest
you to know that the right hand of Cavour, his friend and adviser, was
his secretary, Hartum, a Jew, and in those circles, which were in
opposition to the government, one spoke fulminantly of Jewish treason.
And once at an assembly of Italian patriots one called wildly for
Cavour's secretary, Hartum, and demanded of him to defend his dangerous
and treasonable political actions. And this is what he said: "Our dream,
our fight, our ideal, an ideal for which we have paid already in blood
and tears, in sorrow and despair, with the life of our sons and the
anguish of our mothers, our one wish and one aim is a free and united
Italy. All means are sacred if they lead to this great and glorious
goal. Cavour knows full well that after the fight before Sebastopol
sooner or later a peace conference will have to be held, and at this
peace conference those powers will participate who have joined in the
fight. True, Sardinia has no immediate concern, no direct interest in
Sebastopol, but if we will help now with our fleet, we will sit at the
future peace conference, enjoying equal rights with the other powers,
and at this peace conference Cavour, as the representative of Sardinia,
will proclaim the free and independent, united Italy. Thus our dream for
which we have suffered and died, will become, at last, a wonderful and
happy reality. And if you now ask me again, what has Sardinia to do at
Sebastopol, then let me tell you the following words, like the steps of
a ladder: Cavour, Sardinia, the siege of Sebastopol, the future European
peace conference, the proclamation of a free and united Italy.'"

"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, to quote Herzl's own words. But Herzl knows full
well that nothing is so valuable to the cause of Zionism as amicable
political relations with such a power as England is, and so much more
valuable as England's main interest is concentrated in the Orient.
Nowhere else is precedent as powerful as in England, and so it is most
important to accept a colony out of the hands of England and create thus
a precedent in our favor. Sooner or later the Oriental question will
have to be solved, and the Oriental question means, naturally, also the
question of Palestine. England, who had addressed a formal, political
note to the Zionist Congress--the Zionist Congress which is pledged to
the Basle program, England will have the deciding voice in the final
solution of the Oriental question, and Herzl has considered it his duty
to maintain valuable relations with this great and progressive power.
Herzl knows that we stand before a tremendous upheaval of the whole
world. Soon, perhaps, some kind of a world-congress will have to be
called, and England, the great, free and powerful England, will then
continue the work it has begun with its generous offer to the Sixth
Congress. And if you ask me now what has Israel to do in Uganda, then
let me tell you as the answer the words of the statesmen of Sardinia,
only applied to our case and given in our version; 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.'

"Like a mighty thunder these last words came to us, and we all were
trembling and awestruck as if we had seen a vision of old. And in my
ears were sounding the words of our great brother Achad Haam, who said
of Nordau's address at the First Congress:

"'I felt that one of the great old prophets was speaking to us, that his
voice came down from the free hills of Judea, and our hearts were
burning in us when we heard his words, filled with wonder, wisdom and
vision.'"

The amazing thing is that this article by Litman Rosenthal should ever
have been permitted to see print. But it did not see print until the
Balfour Declaration about Palestine, and it never would have seen print
had not the Jews believed that one part of their program had been
accomplished.

The Jew never betrays himself until he believes that what he seeks has
been won, then he lets himself go. It was only to Jews that the 1903
"program of the Ladder"--the future world war--the peace conference--the
Jewish program--was communicated. When the ascent of that ladder seemed
to be complete, then came the public talk.

A similar illustration of this is to be found in the fall of the Czar.
When that event transpired it was an occasion of great rejoicing in New
York, and a Gentile of world-wide fame made a speech in which he lauded
an American Jew of national reputation for having begun the downfall of
the Czar by providing the money with which propaganda had been made
among Russian prisoners in Japan during the Russo-Japanese war. The
story came out only after the success of the plot. It is not at all out
of keeping that the last men to see the last act of the plot carried
out, the actual murder of Nicholas Romanovitch, his wife, his young
daughters and his invalid boy, were "five Soviet deputies, the latter
five all Jews." What began with the assistance of an American financier,
finished with Soviet deputies.

Did International Jews in 1903 foresee the war? This Rosenthal
confession is but one bit of evidence that they did. And did they do
nothing but foresee it? It were well if the facts stopped at foresight
and did not run on to provocation.

For the present the reader is invited to retain in his mind two points
in this Rosenthal article: "Perhaps it will interest you to know that
the right hand of Cavour, his friend and adviser, was his secretary,
Hartum, a Jew." This is the way the Jewish press speaks of its own. If
this paper, or a Chicago paper, or a New York paper should go through
the list of the secretaries of the men of power in the world today and
make the note after the names--"His secretary, a Jew," the
Anti-Defamation Society would send letters of protest. There is one rule
for the Gentile and one for the Jew, in the Jewish mind. Writing in the
public prints about Hartum, he would be described as an "Italian."

Were the Jewish secretaries who abounded before the war, during the war
and throughout the Peace Conference of less brilliance than Hartum? Were
there not Hartums in England, France, Germany, yes and in Russia too (in
the United States there were many) who saw the "program of the Ladder"?
Did Max Nordau who saw it so clearly in 1903 forget it in 1914 and 1918?

We know this: the Jews in their Congress at Basle in 1903 foresaw "the
future world war." How did they know it was to be a "world war"?

We know this also: the Protocols, perhaps as early as 1896, certainly
not later than 1905, foresaw the policy of "no annexations."

The World War came to pass.

"No annexations" came to pass. What was then future in the Jewish world
program, is now past.

In the Protocols there are two forms of declaration. One is, "we have."
The other is, "we shall." If somewhere in the world this summer the high
secret spokesman of the World Program is addressing his class of
International Initiates, he will have to say "we have" in many places
where this spokesman of 1896 said "we shall." Things have been
accomplished.

"We will represent ourselves as the saviors of the laboring classes."
That has been and is being done. "We will deflect the thoughts of the
Gentiles to industry and commerce." That has been done. "We will create
a strongly centralized administration so as to grasp all the social
forces strongly in our hands." That has been done. "We will adopt for
ourselves the liberal side of all parties and all movements and provide
orators." That has been done. "We will force up wages." That has been
done. "We will at the same time cause a rise in the price of prime
necessities." That has been done. "We will also undermine the sources of
production by instilling in the workmen ideas of anarchy." That has been
done.

"To demonstrate our enslavement of the Gentile governments of Europe, we
shall show our power to one by crimes of violence, that is, by a reign
of terror."--Protocol 7.

Who that sees Russia and beholds the attitude of the premiers of
England, France, and Italy toward the Soviets, the "enslavement" of
statesmanship by a condition that tangles more gnarledly the more it is
dealt with--who that sees the prostration of Europe before a wound that
is deliberately kept from healing, can forbear to say: That too has been
done!

"Our plans will not upset contemporary institutions immediately. Their
management will only be altered and consequently the whole procedure of
their activity will thus be directed according to plans laid down by
us." That has been done.

"We shall saddle the press and keep a tight reign upon it." That has
been done. The rein is being strongly pulled in the United States at
this moment, as many an editor can testify.

"Even if there should be those who desire to write against us, no one
will print their writings." In large part, that has been done. It has
been done completely with the profit-making press.

"We shall, as an incentive to speculation, encourage among the Gentiles
a strong demand for luxuries--all-enticing luxuries." That has been
done.

"To each act of opposition we must be in a position to respond by
bringing on war through the neighbors of any country that dares to
oppose us, and if these neighbors should plan to stand collectively
against us, we must let loose a world war." (Protocol 7). The term
"world war" is the same as that used by Rosenthal and Nordau. "Herzl
knows," said Nordau in 1903, "that we stand before a tremendous upheaval
of the whole world."

"We must create unrest, dissension and mutual animosities throughout
Europe and, with the help of her relationships, on other continents."
This has been done. This passage continues: "There is a double advantage
in this. First, we shall command the respect of all countries by this
method, for they will realize that we have the power to create disorder
or establish order at will." This too has been done.

Truly did the spokesman of 1896 speak of "those momentous occurrences of
the near future toward which we are rushing in a stream of great
crises."

Not only was "no annexations" achieved "as far as possible," just as the
Protocols outlined it, but a host of other plans have matured in
achievement along with it. "No annexations" as a matter of political
morality is one thing; and "no annexations" for the reason that "this
will shift war to an economic footing and nations will perceive the
strength of our superiority in the aid we render" is quite another
thing. The world was with the "no annexations" program as a matter of
political morality; the other program, which used this morality as its
vehicle, was hidden.

There are still other matters in this group which must receive
attention, but another article will be necessary to do it. In the
meantime, it is natural to wonder whether, with the program as outlined
in this report of the Protocols having received fulfillment in so many
particulars, a new Protocol, or a further unfolding of the Ladder has
been made by the Wise Men to their Initiates; and whether any additional
unveiling will ever come to the knowledge of the world. It would seem
that a proper estimate of the knowledge now available would lead to such
an awakening as to nullify the present program and make all future ones
impossible. But Gentiles like their ease, and Judah is beckoned on by a
bright star.

[Issue of August 21, 1920.]




XV.

Is the Jewish "Kahal" the Modern "Soviet"?


The Soviet is not a Russian but a Jewish institution. Nor is it the
invention of Russian Jews of the present time, a new political device
which has been set up as a vehicle of the ideas of Lenin and Trotsky; it
is of ancient Jewish origin, a device which the Jews themselves invented
to maintain their distinctive racial and national life after the
conquest of Palestine by the Romans.

Modern Bolshevism, which is now known to be merely the outer cloak of a
long-planned coup to establish the domination of a race, immediately set
up the Soviet form of government because the Jews of all countries who
contributed to Russian Bolshevism had long been schooled in the nature
and structure of the Soviet.

The Soviet appears in the "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion"
under the ancient name of KAHAL. In the Seventeenth Protocol this
passage occurs:

"Even now our brothers are under obligation to denounce apostates of
their own family or any person known to be opposed to the Kahal. When
our kingdom comes, it will be necessary for all subjects to serve the
state in a similar manner."

Anyone who is acquainted with contemporary Jewish life knows what this
denunciation of apostates means. The bitterness of the persecution which
falls upon a convert to Christianity or upon the Jewish son or daughter
of an orthodox family who chooses to marry a Gentile, is without
parallel among men. Very recently in a western state a fine Jewish girl
chose to marry a Gentile, who was a newspaperman. From the time of her
announcement of intention, the girl was treated as an apostate. Had she
died a most wretched death, had she descended to a status of most
ignominious shame, the feelings which her fate would have aroused could
not have been more terrible. A darkly solemn funeral service was held
for her, and on her bridal day she was declared to be dead to her
people.

The case is very far from being unusual. Perhaps one of the most moving
descriptions of it is to be found in the life of Spinoza, the great
philosopher whom modern Jews are fond of holding up for exhibition as a
great ornament of their people. Spinoza's studies led him to question
many of the dogmas the rabbis taught, those "commandments of men" of
which the New Testament speaks, and as Spinoza was already a person of
influence the very common Jewish tactic of bribery was tried upon him.

There would be some hesitation in using the words just set down--"the
very common Jewish tactic of bribery"--if they were not known to be
true. There is no desire to cast aspersions which grow out of malice.
But Jewish history as written by Jews provides mountains of proof that
bribery was, while present knowledge amply testifies that it still is,
the favorite and most dependable weapon of the Jews. A Jewish writer,
Jacob Israel De Haan, a Dutch lawyer resident in Jerusalem, has recently
stated that one hope of a settlement of the Arab agitation in Palestine
is the ease with which the Arab press can be bribed. His words are:
"There is a strong agitation here among the Arabs against what they call
the Zionist peril. But the Arabs, especially the Arabian papers, are
open to bribe. This weakness will cause them, in the long run, to lose
out against us."

So, young Spinoza was offered an annual stipend of 1,000 florins if he
would be silent upon his convictions and from time to time show himself
at the synagogue. This he refused with high-minded scorn. He made ready
to earn his bread by polishing lenses for optical instruments. Upon
this, he was excommunicated, a proceeding which is thus described:

"The day of excommunication at length arrived, and a vast concourse
assembled to witness the awful ceremony. It began by the silent and
solemn lighting of a quantity of black wax candles and by opening the
tabernacle wherein were deposited the books of the Law of Moses. Thus
were the imaginations of the faithful prepared for all the horror of the
scene. The chief rabbi, the ancient friend and master, now the fiercest
enemy, of the condemned, was to order the execution. He stood there
pained, but implacable; the people fixed their eager eyes upon him. High
above, the chanter rose and chanted forth in loud lugubrious tones the
words of execration; while from the opposite side another mingled with
these curses the thrilling sounds of the trumpet. And now the black
candles were reversed and were made to melt drop by drop into a huge tub
filled with blood." (Lewes: Biographical History of Philosophy.)

Then came the final anathema. "'With the judgment of the angels and of
the saints, we excommunicate, cut off, curse and anathematize Baruch de
Espinoza, with the consent of the elders and all this holy congregation,
in the presence of the holy books: by the 613 precepts which are written
therein, with the anathema wherewith Joshua cursed Jericho, with the
curse which Elisha laid upon the children, and with all the curses which
are written in the law. Cursed be he by day, and cursed be he by night.
Cursed be he in sleeping, and cursed be he in waking, cursed in going
out, and cursed in coming in. The Lord shall not pardon him, the wrath
and the fury of the Lord shall henceforth be kindled against this man,
and shall lay upon him all the curses written in the Book of the Law.
The Lord shall destroy his name under the sun, and cut him off for his
undoing from all the tribes of Israel, with all the curses of the
firmament which are written in the Law * * * And we warn you that none
may speak with him by word of mouth nor by writing, nor show any favor
unto him, nor be under one roof with him, nor come within four cubits of
him, nor read any paper composed by him.'" (Pollock: Life of Spinoza.)

"As the blasting words were uttered, the lights were all suddenly
immersed in the blood, a cry of religious horror and execration burst
from all; and in that solemn darkness, and to those solemn curses, they
shouted Amen, Amen!" (Professor J. K. Hosmer: The Jews.)

That is a commentary on the decree of denunciation. It also throws a
very strong light on the pressure which is brought against many Jews who
would cry out against the anti-social ideas of their people, but who
dare not because of the penalties it would bring.

This denunciation, as Protocol Seventeen orders, is to be made against
anyone who is "known to be opposed to the Kahal" or ancient Soviet
system of the Jews.

After the destruction of the Jewish state by the Romans, the Jews
maintained a center in the Patriarch; and after the dispersion of the
Jews out of Palestine this center of nationality was preserved in the
Prince of the Exile, or Exilarch, an office which is believed to persist
to the present time, and which some believe to be held now by an
American Jew. In spite of all assertions to the contrary, the Jews have
never ceased to be "a people"; that is, a consciously united racial
group, different from all others, and with purposes and ideals which are
strictly of the Jews, by the Jews, and for the Jews in distinction from
the rest of the world. That they constitute a nation within the nations,
the most responsible Jewish thinkers not only declare but insist upon.
And this is wholly in accord with the facts as observed. The Jew not
only desires to live apart from other people, but he works with his own
people as against others, and he desires as much as possible to live
under his own laws. In the city of New York today, the Jews have
succeeded in establishing their own court for the settlement of their
own questions according to their own laws. And that is precisely the
principle of the Soviet-Kahal.

From the first century forward, as any reader can see by consulting the
Jewish Encyclopedia, the "community," "assembly" or "Kahal" has been the
center of Jewish life. It was so earlier, in the time of the Babylonian
captivity. And the last official appearance of it was at the Peace
Conference, where the Jews, in accordance with their World Program, the
only program that passed successfully and unchanged through the Peace
Conference, secured for themselves the right to the Kahal for
administrative and cultural purposes in addition to many other
privileges in countries where their activities had been a matter of
protest. The Polish question is purely a Jewish question, and
Paderewski's failure as a statesmen was entirely due to his domination
by Jewish influences. The Rumanian question is likewise a Jewish
question, and all Rumanians speak of the United States as "The Jews'
Country" because they know through their statesmen the terrific pressure
which was exerted by American Jews against their country, a pressure
extending to the very necessities of life, and which compelled Rumania
to sign agreements which are as humiliating as those that Austria asked
of Serbia, out of which the World War grew. The Jewish Question is
written all over the forces that provoked the war, and over all the
hindrances to peace which the world has since seen.

Under the Kahal or ancient Soviet, the Jews lived by themselves and
governed themselves, doing business with the government solely through
their representatives. It was communism in a more drastic form than has
been seen anywhere in the world outside Russia. Education, health,
taxes, domestic affairs, all were under the absolute control of a few
men who constituted the ruling board. This board, as the present-day
Jewish hierarchy is supposed to be, was self-perpetuating, the office
often passing in an unbroken line of hereditary succession through many
generations. All property was in common, which however did not prevent
the leaders becoming rich. These Kahals or Soviets existed in Rome,
France, Holland, Germany, Austria, Russia, Denmark, Italy, Rumania,
Turkey and England. In the United States the idea has developed around
the synagogue and around national and international secret societies of
Jews, of which more will be said in succeeding articles.

The Kahal is the traditional Jewish political institution during the
dispersal of the race among the nations. Its international aspect is to
be seen in the higher councils. These councils enlarged as the Jews
spread over the world. The Jewish Encyclopedia cites the Council of
Three Lands, the Council of Four Lands, and the Council of Five Lands,
showing an international relationship in earlier years. But like all
such records, public view of them is not easily accessible so far as
they relate to modern times. The recent Zionist Congress in London,
where doubtless much business was done that pertained to the Jewish
people throughout the world, though not in public halls by any means,
may be called the Council of Thirty-Seven Lands, for the delegates to
that congress came from all parts of the world, from points remote as
Lapland and South Africa, Persia and New Zealand. The purpose of these
World Councils was the unification of the Jews, and the records of their
assemblages run back through the centuries.

It is therefore no new thing that has arisen in Russia. It is the
imposition by the Jewish revolutionists upon Gentile Russia of a form of
control in which Judaism has been schooled from the earliest times of
its contact with the world. Soviet Russia could not have been possible
had not 90 per cent of the commissars been Jewish. Soviet Hungary could
not have been possible had not Bela Kun, the chief Red, been a Jew, and
had not 18 of his 24 commissars been Jews. The Jews are the only group
schooled in the erection and administration of the Kahal.

An Associated Press dispatch under date of August 12 throws a light on
the congeniality of the Soviet system and the Jewish mind. Speaking of
the Polish towns and villages occupied by Bolshevik forces in their
recent drive, the dispatch says:

"The local Jewish parish populations already are said to be setting up
Soviet and Communist governments."

Of course. Yet this is in strange contrast with what we are constantly
told through the press of the sufferings of the Jews under the Soviet
form and of their abhorrence of the Reds. However, most of what we read
concerning this in the public press is Jewish propaganda, pure and
simple, and the reports of men on the spot contradict it all. One relief
worker testifies that relief work in Poland is frequently "hung up
because some Jew landlord asks an exorbitant rent for his premises,"
while another testifies that though railroad fares in the supposedly
famine-stricken districts have gone up 1,000 per cent, the best and
highest-fare trains are "exclusively occupied by Jews." He adds, of his
trip through Hungary, "The Hungarians have no money any more, but the
Jews have."

"But American Jews abhor Trotsky and Sovietism" is the plea sometimes
made.

Do they?

On page 9 of the American Jewish World, of July 30, a letter signed
"Mrs. Samuel Rush" appears. It is headed: "Are We Really Ashamed of
Trotsky?" Read a few excerpts from it:

"I have read of late several laments from editors of Jewish publications
that the Jew is now libeled as a radical.

"It is true that many Jews are radicals. It is also true that some of
the radical leaders are Jews.

"But before weeping over the downfall of the race, let's think a bit.

"Trotsky himself has never been represented as anything but a cultured
man, a student of world economics, a powerful and efficient leader and
thinker who will surely go down in history as one of the great men our
race has given the world.

"* * * Very few of us doubt any longer that behind the absurdities
written about Russia is the great truth that Russia is in that unsettled
state which attends reconstruction. There is a plan behind this seeming
disorder, and out of the upheaval will come order. It will not be
utopia, but as good a government as the undoubtedly high-minded
practical idealists who are building for Russia can build with the
necessarily imperfect materials--human beings--with which they must
work.

"And one of the leaders is Leon Trotsky!

"Are we really ashamed of Trotsky?"

The lady is evidently not ashamed of Trotsky, or Mr. Braunstein, as his
real name is.

Or take Judge Harry Fisher, of Chicago. While drawing a salary for work
in the court, Judge Fisher went abroad on Jewish relief work. His plans
were changed somewhat after his departure and he landed in Russia. He
asserts in several interviews that he was permitted to arrive in Russia
on condition that he leave political matters alone. There has been no
such restriction placed upon him since his return to the United States,
for he appears as an open advocate of full trade relations with the
Soviet Government of Russia.

The Chicago Tribune thus quotes him:

"'We must leave Russia alone' he said in summarizing his views. 'We
should resume trade with the Soviet. The Bolshevist Government is
permanent. * * * While there are only 700,000 members of the Communist
party, the peasants, who represent almost 100,000,000 people, are
solidly back of the Lenin regime.'"

Among the Soviet devices which the 100,000,000 peasants of Russia are
said to be "solidly back of," is the following (it is particularly
interesting in view of the fact that Judge Fisher is judge of the Morals
Court of Chicago):

"'Some time ago, it was published that the women of Russia had become
national property,' he said. 'That is untrue, but the ease with which
marriage and divorce may be effected makes for rapid changes. Everyone
wanting to marry goes to what we would call the city hall and registers.

"'Inducements to marry are great. When people are hard pressed for
clothes and food they sometimes make a pact to wed for a day.

"'The next day they go down to the city hall and register again. This
time their names are put side by side in the divorce book. That is all
that is necessary to be divorced, and they have had a good feed in the
bargain.'"

Judge Harry Fisher, of Chicago, who has returned from Jewish relief work
abroad, evidently is one with the others in not being ashamed of
Trotsky.

Also Max Pine, for many years secretary of the United Hebrew Trades of
New York, had been abroad in Soviet Russia as "a labor delegate." He too
had many good things to say of the Soviets, among other things the
strange contradiction that the Jews are doing very well in Russia but
are not pro-Bolshevik!

Here are three persons from widely different spheres of life, yet each
one of them indicates a natural liking for the Kahal or Soviet, an
admiration of its methods, and a distinct good feeling towards its
rulers. For Sovietism is the rankest form of autocracy, and the marriage
laws of Soviet Russia are in full harmony with the program stated in the
Protocols--

"We will break down the influence of family life among the Gentiles."

Whether the Soviet-Kahals of Russia will succeed in completely
undermining Russian family life is extremely doubtful. The weakness of
Soviet rule is the same as that of the Protocols--a moral weakness that
must eat like a cancer until it destroys the institutions which it
infests.

Russia today, viewed in the light of the Protocols, does not represent
the Judaic state, but it represents the Gentile state seized by Jewish
forces. There are three degrees of action set forth in the Protocols.
There is first the secret process of breaking up the integrity of
society by the admixture of alluring but disruptive ideas. This is a
work in which Gentile agitators are used. When the ideas have worked
sufficiently to break up society and explode in a crisis, then as in
Germany, the forces that have worked in secret swiftly come to the front
to take the reins and guide the riot. In Germany this immediately
occurred upon the collapse which followed the armistice, but the Germans
were wise enough to know the meaning of the influx of Jews into all the
official positions of the former empire, and it was not long before they
were politically ousted. In Russia, however, the Jews sprang immediately
into official positions and have succeeded in remaining there. It began
with Kerensky compelling the Czar to lay aside his crown; it continues
with Trotsky and his armies at the throat of Europe.

But this seizure of a country, as was attempted in Germany, and as was
not only attempted but succeeded in Russia, is not the end of the
Program. It is only the beginning of its open or public phase. The
Soviet-Kahal makes for the complete breaking up of society, the entire
cutting off of co-operation and communication, the ruling of each little
section in the way desired, until the whole country lies helpless in
isolated bits. The process includes, of course, the disintegration of
industry also, the massing of Gentiles into an army, and a general
destruction of morality and order. It is the Protocol program in its
last stage before the reconstruction begins which shall make the
conquered country a Jewish state.

The world has not seen that last stage yet. It has not come, even in
Russia. If the Russian people waken from the daze into which they have
been thrust, it will not come. Jewish voices loudly proclaim that Soviet
Russia has come to stay. The only authoritative voice on that subject is
the voice of Russia, and Russia has not yet spoken. Today the world is
trembling on the very verge of Real Russia's awakening, and with it a
retribution most terrible upon the Sovietists.

The program of the Protocols once came near succeeding in the French
Revolution, but its essential immorality overreached itself. It has come
a step nearer success in Russia, but there too its defiance of the moral
law will be its undoing. The Jewish Question of today is being fought
out in Russia and Poland, and the strength of the Jewish forces is
largely and mostly supplied from the United States of America. No wonder
those small East European independencies which are fighting for their
lives refer to our country as "The Land of the Jews."

"We will show our power to one," say the Protocols. "In order to
demonstrate our enslavement of the Gentile governments of Europe, we
shall show our power to one of them by crimes of violence, that is, by a
reign of terror." (Protocol Seven.)

One by one the Gentile nations of Europe have been compelled to withdraw
their troops from Russia. One by one the premiers of Europe have
submitted to heavy shackling of their official hands with regard to the
Russian question. And today the world looks on while little Poland,
apparently the second country on the list of Soviet victims, is made to
feel heavy vengeance for her daring to be independent of Jewish power.
Russia has been made to pay for her attempted independence of the Jew;
Poland is now being made to pay. It is a flame, the Jews of Eastern
Europe hope, and many Jews of America also, which will sweep round the
world.

If the ruling Jews of the world wished the Russian people freed, if they
wished the flames of Bolshevism to be quenched, if they wished Jewish
participation in revolutionary movements to be withdrawn, they could
accomplish it in a week. What is going on today is going on by
permission of the Jewish world powers.

There is apparently no desire to curtail a movement which largely
originated in American Jewry. This is the program of "showing our power
to one," and the program will be followed out. The "showing," however,
is twofold; it is a showing of power, but it is also a showing of the
people who wield the power, and in the end it might have been just as
well had the power never been coveted, attained, or used.

Anyone who desires to test the exactitude of the Protocols' estimate of
human nature may do so by observing his own reactions to the Russian
Bolshevist situation. It is undeniable that there exists among all
classes of Gentiles in America a kind of admiration for the coup which
Lenin and Trotsky have managed on such a massive scale. The audacity of
it, the ability to stay afloat thus long in defiance of so many laws,
have conspired to draw out unwilling applause.

Consider then this passage from the Tenth Protocol:

"The people feel an especial love and respect toward the genius who
wields political power, and they say of all his high-handed actions: 'It
is base, but clever! It is a trick, but how he played it! So majestic!
So impudent!'

"We count on attracting all nations to the constructive work of laying
the foundations for the structure planned by us. It is necessary for us
first of all to acquire the services of bold and fearless agents, who
will overcome all obstacles in our pathway.

"When we accomplish our governmental coup d'etat, we will say to the
people: 'Everything has gone badly, all have suffered. We will eliminate
the cause of your sufferings--nationality, frontiers and diversity of
coinage. Of course you are free to pronounce sentence upon us, but that
can scarcely be just if you do so before giving a trial to that which we
offer you.'"

This is very well conceived, and this is the way in which, up to this
time, it has worked out. But there will be a strong reaction set in.
False promises like chickens come home to roost. The real originators,
the real purpose of the movement hidden behind Bolshevism will become
evident. And then the world will crush out again the World Program which
at times has seemed so near success.

There will probably be more light upon this World Program as a result of
the Russian Kahal-Soviet system than from any other attempt to realize
it. For five generations the world has lived in a false light supposed
to be shed by the French Revolution. It is now known that that
revolution was not the Revolution of the French People, but the
disorders of a minority who sought to impose upon the French People the
very Plan which is now being considered. It was the French People who
ultimately put down the so-called French Revolution. And France, as a
result of that upheaval of a well-organized minority, has been bound by
Jewish control ever since.

The Russian Revolution will go down in history with no such false halo
of romance around it. The world now knows it for what it is. The world
will soon know whose was the money and whose were the brains that
fostered it, and from what part of the world the principal impetus came.
The Russian upheaval is racial, not political nor economic. It conceals
beneath all its false socialism and its empty mouthings of "human
brotherhood" a clear-cut plan of racial imperialism, which is not
Russian, and which the common sense and interest of the world will
speedily stamp out.

[Issue of August 28, 1920.]




XVI.

How the "Jewish Question" Touches the Farm


The real estate speculations of the Jews are familiar to all, but
unfortunately do not constitute their entire land program. Many American
cities have changed their characters entirely during the past 15 years
by reason of Jewish speculation in residence property, and it is a fact
established in the larger eastern cities that the recent exorbitant and
extortionate rise in rents was largely a matter of the Jewish landlord.
The governor of one of the most important of our commonwealths was loath
to sign a bill regulating rents. His hesitancy was encouraged by very
heavy pressure brought to bear upon him by the weightiest Jewish
financial interests in his own and neighboring states. He finally
decided that he would sign the bill and give the law effect, and the
fact that decided him was his personal investigation and the
investigation of his personal agents into hundreds of cases of abuse
where he discovered that it was a common practice among Jewish landlords
to transfer the same piece of property round and round to every member
of the family in turn, each "transfer" being the excuse for a new
increase in the rent. Men have their eyes opened to the Jewish Question
in various ways: this was the way a governor had his eyes opened.

That, however, is not the peculiarity of Jewish landlords alone; Gentile
landlords have played the same trick. But landlordism is peculiarly a
Jewish ambition and distinction; the Jew is the Landlord of America. Any
group of tenants almost anywhere in America, except the West, could
testify to this.

Nor is landlordism itself reprehensible, things being what they are,
unless it is anti-social and anti-American. And just here is where it
gets point. Some of the oldest and most sacred shrines of Americanism in
the East have entirely lost their character as such by the invasion--not
of "foreigners"--but of Jews.

The more one sees of the invasion, the more one utterly distrusts the
statistics given out by Jews as to the Jewish population of the United
States.

Do you know that the one nationality on which the Government of the
United States is estopped from asking questions, either for immigration
or census statistics, is the Jewish?

Do you know that when the Government of the United States wants to know
anything about the Jews it must go to statisticians which the Jews
themselves support?

If a nation claims that it is no nation with respect to the United
States Government, as the Jews claim, and has no national statistics
which it will permit to government to collect in the official way, why
should it treat itself as a nation and keep its own records?

The Jews of the United States, like the Jews of every European country,
are a nation among themselves, with their own government, their own
policy, their own records; and the United States Government does
business with the Jewish Government in America through chosen Jews--no
doubt of that.

It is, however, a digression. The matter of Jewish statistics will come
up again. In the meantime a glance at the rapid changing of so many
American cities in all parts of the land leads to the belief that the
Jewish statistics furnished by the Jews for Gentile consumption entirely
misstate the facts, and this belief is strengthened by the knowledge
that the statistics given by the Jews for Jewish consumption are very
different from those supplied for the outside world.

Landlordism may be explained by the inclination of the Jew toward
speculation, and we know that real estate has been made one of the most
speculative of occupations, disgracefully, almost disastrously so. The
Jew cannot be condemned for becoming a landlord, for becoming the most
conspicuous landlord in America; he cannot be condemned apart from his
Gentile co-offenders for the abuse he has made of his advantage as
landlord. But it is a matter for American concern that the cities to
which, in the schoolbooks, our children are taught to look as the
birthplaces of liberty and as still the spokesmen of Americanism, should
become Semite cities, financially and politically, and the recruiting
grounds of the world's Bolshevism.

Until recently, however, the Jew in America has not cared for the land.
It is a characteristic. The Jew is not an agriculturist. Lavish fortunes
have been expended to make him so, but the productive work of farming
has not had, and does not now have, any appeal to him. His choice in
land is this: land that produces gold from the mine, and land that
produces rents. Land that produces mere potatoes and wheat has not
directly interested him.

It is true, of course, that the land question has been distinctly Jewish
in countries like Poland and Rumania. No law against Jews owning land in
those countries has ever been effective in preventing their control of
whole provinces. Not that the Jews demanded the right to farm the land,
their choice was to farm the farmers. By devious methods and the use of
"Gentile fronts" they could always secure control of the land, and thus
dominating the peasants they could create almost any condition they
wished. That is what they actually did. That is the Jewish Question in
those parts of the world. Not for farming purposes, it must be
understood, but for the purpose of controlling the main source of wealth
in agricultural countries and for taking the control of people away from
their natural Gentile leaders.

These two things always go together in countries where there is
intellectual or landed aristocracy to which the people look for
leadership: the Jewish program is to destroy that leadership by gaining
control of the land. It is profitable, of course, but when you survey
the outworking of the plan you always see something other than profits
involved. The consummate perfection of the Jewish plan for World Control
is that it does not involve sacrifice as have other plans, it is
immensely profitable at every stage, and the greater the profitableness
the more surely the purpose is being achieved.

In America there was no aristocracy to be cut under by the gaining of
land control. Jewish activity in the United States until recently has
confined itself to the control of land products after they have been
produced: that is, so to say, Jewish interests do not engage in
trapping, but they control the fur trade.

Speaking of furs, it is very funny to see how some affairs turn out.
During the war there was a great to-do made about the German control of
the American fur trade. It was true that the fur trade was controlled
from Germany, but not by Germans--by Jews! And then a great to-do was
made about seizing, confiscating and absolutely selling out that
"German" fur business to Americans, and the "Americans" who bought it
were--Jews! The actual control has never changed; the profits still find
their way to the "International" purse.

But furs is just an example. Jewish interests do not engage in raising
grain, but control the grain that others produce. The need of the United
States is a "Who's Who of Jewish Financiers" that the people may
identify the men about whom they read as having made this "corner" or
sprung that "coup." These interests, which have simply grabbed
American-produced wealth and made American consumers pay and pay and
pay, have been able to operate almost openly because of the sheer
blindness of the American people as they read their newspapers. And, of
course, while the American newspaper will gladly inform you that this
man is an Italian and that man a Pole and the other man a Briton, it
will never tell you that the fourth man is a Jew. There is a Jewish
organization in every city, large and small, to prevent it--and they
prevent it by methods that are violent and wholly subversive of the
American ideal of liberty.

So, until recently, the plan in the United States has been to seize the
commodity at just that point in its passage from the producer to the
consumer where the heaviest weight of profit can be extracted from
it--at the neck of the bottle, so to speak--and control it there. It is
not service that the people pay for; they pay for seizure.

But a new movement has begun in the United States. Jewish millions are
now being used to secure immense tracts of American lands. Formerly it
was enough to control the cotton, as the bread was controlled, but now
the movement is toward controlling the cotton lands. The operations are
carefully guarded; "Gentile fronts" are used almost exclusively; but
follow the trail through all the "blinds" and "false scents," and you
come at last to the International Jew, whose throne is set up in London.

Many Jews have written THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT saying that they do not
know about these racial plans for world control. It may well be believed
that they do not. One purpose of these articles is to tell them about
it. But this every Jew rejoices in--the movement of his people toward
power. And it is this sentiment that the International Jew implicitly
trusts, and because this sentiment exists the International Program
secures a maximum of success at a minimum risk of exposure. Jewry is not
a democracy but an autocracy. Of course the ordinary Jew does not know!
The question is, Why should he revile the Gentile who tries to tell him?
If a Jew will not seal his mind against the statements made in these
articles, he will find in his own knowledge sufficient corroboration of
their principal features, and he will be in a better position to assist
in the solution of the Jewish Question.

It is with amazement at certain men's conception of editorial honesty
that THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT has read some of the reports made of these
articles. Under cover, principally of the Yiddish, alleged translations
of these articles have been flung broadcast among non-English speaking
Jews, translations which not only bear no resemblance to the original,
but actually insert whole paragraphs of matter which never appeared in
the original at all. Is there a fear of permitting the average Jew to
read this series? Nothing is more desired by those whose purpose is to
lay foundations for the solution of the Jewish Question in America than
that every Jew in the United States should know exactly what is being
printed here week by week. The Jew has been deceived by his leaders long
enough.

The fact is, then, that there is a definite and already well forwarded
movement toward the control of the cotton lands of the United States.
The first step was to depreciate the market value of these lands as much
as possible. Pressure was brought through certain banks to limit the
cotton farmers' efforts. They were told that if they planted more
acreage to cotton than they were told to, they would not be financed.
Cotton production was to go down while cotton prices were to go up, and
the profits were not the farmers' but those who controlled the course of
cotton from the first market to the wearer. Cotton farming was to be
made less profitable, while cotton speculation was to become more
profitable. The public was being compelled to supply the money by which
the Jewish controllers were to buy the land. In brief, it was to be made
more profitable to sell cotton lands than to sell cotton.

These statements are being deliberately restricted to the traffic in
cotton lands. Jewish financiers in New York and London know these
things, even if Jewish editors and rabbis do not.

This movement has been within the knowledge of certain classes of
business men for a long time, indeed some have been forced by what used
to be called "the pressure of circumstances," to serve the movement. But
they were not able to interpret its meaning. It is only recently that
the more important Gentile business men of the United States have been
able to interpret certain things. The war was a potent eye-opener.

Those wonderful documents known as the "Protocols," with their strong
grasp of every element of life, have not overlooked Land. The Land
Program found in the Sixth Protocol, which is one of the briefest of
these documents and may be quoted in full to show now the relation it
bears to certain excerpts made in previous articles:

Protocol VI.

"We shall soon begin to establish huge monopolies, colossal reservoirs
of wealth, upon which even the big Gentile properties will be dependent
to such an extent that they will all fall together with the government
credit on the day following the political catastrophe. The economists
here present must carefully weigh the significance of this combination.
We must develop by every means the importance of our super-government,
representing it as the protector and benefactor of all who voluntarily
submit to us.

"The aristocracy of the Gentiles as a political force has passed away.
We need not take them into consideration. But, as owners of the land,
they are harmful to us in that they are independent in their sources of
livelihood. Therefore, at all costs, we must deprive them of their land.

"The best means to attain this is to increase the taxes and mortgage
indebtedness. These measures will keep land ownership in a state of
unconditional subordination. Unable to satisfy their needs by small
inheritances, the aristocrats among the Gentiles will burn themselves
out rapidly.

"At the same time it is necessary to encourage trade and industry
vigorously and especially speculation, the function of which is to act
as a counterpoise to industry. Without speculation, industry will cause
private capital to increase and tend to improve the condition of
Agriculture BY FREEING THE LAND FROM INDEBTEDNESS FOR LOANS by the land
banks. It is necessary for industry to deplete the land both of laborers
and capital, and, through speculations, transfer all the money of the
world into our hands, thereby throwing the Gentiles into the ranks of
the proletariat. The Gentiles will then bow before us to obtain the
right to existence.

"To destroy Gentile industry, we shall, as an incentive to this
speculation, encourage among the Gentiles a strong demand for luxuries,
all-enticing luxuries.

"We will force up wages, which however, will be of no benefit to
workers, for we will at the same time cause a rise in the prices of
prime necessities, pretending that this is due to the decline of
agriculture and of cattle raising. We will also artfully and deeply
undermine the sources of production by instilling in the workmen ideas
of anarchy, and encourage them in the use of alcohol, at the same time
taking measures to drive all the intellectual forces of the Gentiles
from the land.

"That the true situation shall not be noticed by the Gentiles
prematurely, we will mask it by a pretended effort to serve the working
classes and promote great economic principles, for which an active
propaganda will be carried on through our economic theories."

The local and passing element in this is "the aristocracy of the
Gentiles." That is to say, the program is not entirely fulfilled by the
passing of aristocrats. Jewry goes on just the same. Its program
stretches far. Jewry will retain such kings as it desires as long as it
desires them. Probably the last throne to be vacated will be the British
throne because what to the British mind is the honor of being Jewry's
protector and therefore the inheritor of the blessing which that
attitude brings, is to the Jewish mind the good fortune of being able to
use a world-wide empire for the furtherance of Jewry's purpose. Each has
served the other and the partnership will probably last until Jewry gets
ready to throw Britain over, which Jewry can do at almost any time.
There are indications that it has already started in this last task.

But the permanent elements in the Protocol are the Land, the Jews, and
the Gentiles. A word of explanation may be necessary on this inclusion
of the Gentiles as permanent: the Protocols do not contemplate the
extermination of the Gentiles, nor the making of this world a completely
Jewish populated world. The Protocols contemplate a Gentile world ruled
by the Jews--the Jews as masters, the Gentiles as hewers of wood and
drawers of water, a policy which every Old Testament reader knows to be
typically Jewish and the source of divine judgement upon Israel time and
again.

Now, look at this whole Program as it concerns the Land.

"Owners of the land * * * are harmful to us in that they are independent
in their sources of livelihood."

That is a foundation principle of the Protocols. It matters not whether
the owners are the "Gentile aristocracy," the peasants of Poland, or the
farmers of the United States--land ownership makes the owners,
"independent in their sources of livelihood." And any form of
independence is fatal to the success of the World Program which is
written so comprehensively in the Protocols and which is advancing so
comprehensively under Jewish guidance in the world of actual affairs
today.

Not "tillers" of the land, not "dwellers" on the land, not "tenants,"
not an "agricultural peasantry," but "owners of the land"--this is the
class singled out for attention in this Sixth Protocol, BECAUSE they are
"independent in their sources of livelihood."

Now, there has been no time in the history of the United States when
apparently it was more easy for the farmer to own his land than now.
Mortgages should be a thing of the past. Everywhere the propaganda of
the question tells us that the farmers are growing "rich." And yet there
were never so many abandoned farms!

"Therefore, at all costs we must deprive them of their land."

How? "The best means to attain this is to increase land taxes and
mortgage indebtedness." High taxes to keep the land at all, borrowed
money to finance the tilling of it.

"These measures will keep land ownership in a state of unconditional
subordination."

We will leave it to the farmers of the United States to say whether this
is working out or not.

And in a future reference to this subject we will show that whenever an
attempt is made to enable farmers to borrow money at decent rates,
whenever it is proposed to lighten the burden of "mortgage indebtedness"
on the farm, Jewish financial influence in the United States steps in to
prevent it, or failing to prevent it, mess it all up in the operation.

By increasing the farmer's financial disability on the one hand, and by
increasing industrial allurements on the other, a very great deal is
accomplished. The Protocol says: "It is necessary for industry to
deplete the Land both of laborers and capital."

Has that been done? Have the farms of the United States been depleted
both of laborers and capital? Certainly. Money is harder for the farmer
to get than it is for any other man; and as for labor, he cannot get it
on any terms.

What is the result of these two influences, the one working on the farm,
and the other in the cities? It is precisely what the Protocol says it
will be: Increased wages that buy less of the materials of life--"We
will at the same time cause a rise in the prices of prime necessities,
pretending that this is due to the decline of agriculture and cattle
raising."

The Jew who set these Protocols in order was a financier, economist and
philosopher of the first order. He knew what he was talking about. His
operations in the ordinary world of business always indicated that he
knew exactly what he was doing. How well this Sixth Protocol has worked
and is still working out in human affairs is before the eyes of everyone
to see.

Here in the United States one of the most important movements toward
real independence of the financial powers has been begun by the farmers.
The farmer's strong advantage is that, owning the land, he is
independent in his sources of livelihood. The land will feed him whether
he pleases International Jewish Financiers or not. His position is
impregnable as long as the sun shines and the seasons roll. It was
therefore necessary to do something to hinder this budding independence.
He was placed under a greater disadvantage than any other business man
in borrowing capital. He was placed more ruthlessly than any other
producer between the upper and nether stones of a thievish distribution
system. Labor was drawn away from the farm. The Jew-controlled melodrama
made the farmer a "rube," and Jew-made fiction presented him as a
"hick," causing his sons to be ashamed of farm life. The grain
syndicates which operate against the farmer are Jew-controlled. There is
no longer any possibility of doubting, when the facts of actual affairs
are put alongside the written Program, that the farmer of the United
States has an interest in this Question.

What would this World Program gain if the wage-workers were enslaved and
the farmers were allowed to go scot-free? Therefore the program of
agricultural interference which has been only partially outlined here.

But this is not all.

Any writer who attempts fully to inform the Gentile mind on the Jewish
Question must often feel that the extent of the Protocols' Conspiracy is
so great as to stagger the Gentile mind. Gentiles are not conspirators.
They cannot follow a clue through long and devious and darkened
channels. The elaborate completeness of the Jewish Program, the perfect
co-ordination of its mass of details wearies the Gentile mind. This,
really more than the daring of the Program itself, constitutes the
principal danger of Program being fulfilled. Gentile mental laziness is
the most powerful ally the World Program has.

For example: after citing the perfectly obvious coincidence and most
probable connection between the Protocols and the observable facts with
reference to the farm situation, the writer is compelled to say, as
above, "But this is not all." And it is a peculiarity of Gentile
psychology that the Gentile reader will feel that it ought to be all
because it is so complete. This is where the Jewish mind out-maneuvers
the Gentile mind.

Gentiles may do a thing for one reason: the Jew often does the same
thing for three or four reasons. The Gentile can understand thus far why
Jewish financiers should seek control of the land in order to prevent
widespread Agricultural Independence which, as Protocol Six says, would
be "harmful to us." That reason is perfectly clear.

But there is another. It is found in the Twelfth Protocol. It
contemplates nothing less than the playing of City against Country in
the great game now being exposed. Complete control over the City by the
industrial leverage, and over the Country by the debt leverage, will
enable the Hidden Players to move first the Country by saying that the
City demands certain things, and then move the City by saying that the
Country demands certain things, thus splitting Citizens and Farmers
apart and using them against one another.

Look at the plainness and the boldness, yet the calm assurance, with
which this plan is broached:

"Our calculations reach out, especially into the country districts.
There we must necessarily arouse those interests and ambitions which we
can always turn against the city, representing them to the cities as
dreams and ambitions for independence on the part of the provinces. It
is clear that the source of all this will be precisely the same, and
that it will come from us. It will be necessary for us before we have
attained full power to so arrange matters that, from time to time, the
cities shall come under the influence of opinion in the country
districts, that is, of the majority prearranged by our agents * * *"

The preliminaries of the game are here set forth--to jockey City and
Farm against each other, that in the end the Conspirators may use
whichever proves the stronger in putting the Plan over. In Russia, both
schemes have been worked. The old regime, established in the Cities, was
persuaded to lay down power because it was made to believe that the
peasants of Russia requested it. Then, when the Bolshevists seized
power, they ruled the peasantry on the ground that the Cities wanted it.
The Cities listened to the Country, now the Country is listening to the
Cities.

If you see any attempt made to divide City and Farm into antagonistic
camps, remember this paragraph from the Twelfth Protocol. Already the
poison is working. Have you never heard that Prohibition was something
which the backwoods districts forced upon the cities? Have you never
heard that the High Cost of Living was due to extravagant profits of the
farmer?--profits which he doesn't get.

One big dent in this Program of World Control could be made if the
Citizen and the Farmer could learn each other's mind, not through
self-appointed spokesmen, but directly from each other. City and Farm
are drifting apart because of misrepresentation of outsiders, and in the
widening rift the sinister shadow of the World Program appears.

Let the Farmers look past the "Gentile fronts" in their villages or
principal trading points, past them to the real controllers who are
hidden.

[Issue of September 4, 1920.]




XVII.

Does Jewish Power Control the World Press?


The purpose of this article is twofold: to set forth what the Protocols
have to say about the relation of the Press to the World Program, and to
make an introduction to a study of Jewish influence on the Press.

The Jewish race has always been aware of the advantages to be derived
from news. This was one of the factors in its control of European
commerce from the earliest Christian times. To be informed beforehand,
to know what was coming before the Gentiles among whom they lived knew
it, was a special privilege of the Jews, made possible by the close
communication in which widely separated Jewish groups kept themselves.
From the first they were inveterate correspondents. They were the
inventors of the news-letter.

This does not imply, however, that the Jews were the forerunners or even
the sponsors of the modern Press. It was no part of their purpose to
distribute news among the people, but to keep it for themselves as a
secret advantage. The political, economic and commercial news which sped
with really remarkable facility throughout Europe, from Jewish community
to Jewish community, was in reality the official budget by which each
community informed all the others of what was transpiring, as to war,
trade currents, rising emergencies, or whatever the matter may have
been. For centuries the Jews were the best informed people on the
continent; from their secret sources in courts and chancellories, from
privileged Jews who were placed in every position of vantage, the whole
race was informed of the state of the world.

Scouts were kept in motion everywhere. Far down in South America, before
the British or Dutch colonies in North America had hardly secured a
foothold, there were Jews who served as outposts for European trade
interests. The world was spied out in the interests of their race, just
as today the entire planet is under the watchful eyes of Jewish
agents--mostly Gentiles, it must be said--for any hint of new gold
discoveries.

An interesting and historic illustration of the Jews' appreciation of
news is to be found in the career of Nathan Rothschild. Rothschild had
laid all his plans on the assumption that the Emperor Napoleon, then
banished to Elba, was finally eliminated from European affairs. Napoleon
unexpectedly returned, and in the "Hundred Days" it seemed as if the
Rothschild financial edifice might collapse. Feverishly the financier
aided both Prussia and England, and as the Battle of Waterloo
approached, no one was more interested in the outcome than he.

Rothschild was a man who shrank from the sight of blood; he was
physically a coward, and any sign of violence unnerved him; but so
intense was his interest in the battle on which his whole fortune seemed
to depend, that he hastened to France, followed the British Army, and
when the battle began he hid himself in "some shot-proof nook near
Hougomont" where he watched all day the ebb and flow of battle. Just
before Napoleon ordered the last desperate charge Rothschild had made up
his mind. He said afterward that his exclamation at this point was, "The
House of Rothschild has won the battle."

He hurried from the field, galloped wildly to Brussels, communicating
not a word of what he knew to the anxious people he met by the way.
Hiring a carriage at an exorbitant price, he galloped away to Ostend.
Here a fierce storm was raging on the ocean and no sailor was willing to
set out for England, about 20 miles away. Rothschild himself, always
afraid of danger, forgot his fear in his visions of the stock market. He
offered 500, 800, and at length 1,000 francs to the man who would take
him across. But no one dared. Finally one sailor proposed that if
Rothschild would pay 2,000 francs into his wife's hands, he would
attempt it.

Half dead the two men reached the English coast, but without rest
Rothschild ordered express post and hurried away to London. Whip and
spur were not spared on that journey.

There were no telegrams in those days, no swift communication. England
was anxious. The rumors were bad. And on the morning of June 20, 1815,
when Nathan Rothschild appeared in his usual place at the Stock Exchange
and leaned against the column, England knew nothing of what he knew. He
was pale and broken. The sight of his face led the other financiers to
believe that he had received bad news from the front. Then it was seen
that he was quietly selling his securities. What? Rothschild unloading?
The market dropped disastrously, a very panic seized the financiers, the
market was flooded with consols offered for sale--and all that was
offered, Rothschild's agents bought!

So it went on, all day the 20th, and all day the 21st. At the close of
business the second day, Rothschild's heavy chests were crammed with
securities. Then in the evening a courier galloped into London with the
news that Wellington had won and Napoleon was a fugitive. But Nathan
Rothschild had made $10,000,000 and the men he did business with had
lost that much--all as an affair of news!

There was a little incident in Washington during the war--a "leak" of
news, it was called. The wise men of Wall Street sometimes whisper that
even between 1914-1918 there were men of Rothschild's race who showed
his same appreciation of "news," with the same profitable results. And
not only the men of "Rothschild's race," but some of their "Gentile
fronts," also.

There were times during the war when no Gentile knew what was going on
in certain countries. The Jewish leaders always knew. Some very
interesting testimony can be presented on that point.

Aside from its own interest, this Rothschild narrative fully illustrates
the statement that while the Jews were very early news-gatherers, they
were not publicists. They used the news for their own benefit; they did
not disseminate it. If it had depended on their influence, there would
have been no public Press at all. It was in France, which had no
newspapers outside the capital, that the French Revolution was possible.
There being no reliable exchange of news and opinion, the people were
kept in ignorance. Paris itself did not know that the Bastille had
fallen until next day. Where there is no Press, minorities easily gain
control--as the Jewish-Bolshevist revolution in Russia illustrates.

One of the most dangerous developments of the time is public distrust of
the Press. If the day ever comes when swift, reliable and authoritative
communication with the entire people shall be necessary for public
action in the interests of public safety, the nation may find itself
sadly crippled unless a new confidence in the daily Press can be built
up. If for no other reason than that the free press is a safeguard
against minority seizure of control, such laws as the zone laws, or any
restrictions on the freest and fullest communication between various
parts of the country, should be absolutely abolished.

But, the Press being in existence, and being largely an Anglo-Saxon
creation, it is a force not to be treated lightly, and that is the point
where the World Program and Jewish Control come in contact with it.

The Protocols, which overlook nothing, propose a very definite plan with
regard to the Press. As in the multitude of other matters with which
these remarkable documents deal, there are the two phases--"what we have
done," and "what we will do."

As early as the Second Protocol, the Press comes in for attention. It is
significant that it makes its appearance in the same Protocol in which
the "No Annexations" program was announced 20 years before the World
War, in the same Protocol in which it is announced that Gentile rulers
will be allowed to appear before the people for a short period, while
Jewish influences were organizing themselves behind the seats of power,
and in the same Protocol where Darwinism, Marxism and Nietzscheism are
claimed among the most "demoralizing" doctrines which Jewish influence
has disseminated. These are very curious statements, but not stranger
than the actuality that has come to pass.

Says the Second Protocol:

"There is one great force in the hands of modern governments which
creates thought movements among the people, that is, the Press. The
presumed role of the Press is to indicate supposedly indispensable
needs, to register popular complaints, and to create discontent. The
triumph of 'free speech' (babbling) rests in the Press. But governments
are unable to profit by this power, and it has fallen into our hands.
Through it we have attained influence while remaining in the shadow.
Thanks to it, we have amassed gold, though it has cost us torrents of
blood and tears."

In the same Protocol, "our Press" is spoken of as the agency through
which are disseminated "those theories of life which we have induced
them (the Gentiles) to regard as the dictates of science."

"To this end we shall certainly endeavor to inspire blind confidence in
these theories by means of our Press."

Then follows the claim made concerning the three most revolutionary
theories in the physical, economic and moral realms, namely Darwinism,
Marxism and Nietzscheism.

In the Third Protocol the claim is made that this control of the Press
is being used to break down respect for authority:

"Daring journalists and audacious pamphleteers make daily attack upon
the personnel of the administration. This abuse of authority is
definitely preparing the downfall of all institutions, and everything
will be overturned by blows coming from the infuriated populace."

Again, in the Seventh Protocol, discussing the progress which the World
Program has already made, the part played by the Press is indicated:

"We must force the Gentile governments to adopt measures which will
promote our broadly conceived plan already approaching its triumphal
goal, by bringing to bear the pressure of stimulated public opinion,
which has in reality been organized by us with the help of the so-called
'great power' of the Press. With few exceptions not worth considering,
it is already in our hands."

Thus twice is the claim made to control of the Press. "It has fallen
into our hands," says the Second Protocol. "It is already in our hands,"
says the Seventh. In the Second Protocol the Press is represented as
furthering revolutionary physical, economic and moral philosophies;
while in the Seventh it is used to create the "pressure of stimulated
public opinion" for the purpose of "forcing Gentile governments to adopt
measures which will promote our broadly conceived plan, already
approaching its triumphal goal."

A word of comment may be made here upon the claim of the Second Protocol
that "thanks to it (the Press), we have amassed gold, though it has cost
us torrents of blood and tears."

This is a statement which can be illustrated in many ways. "Though it
has cost us torrents of blood and tears" is an admission upon which the
Protocols throw light, a light which also shines upon the Jewish
argument regarding responsibility for the recent war, namely, that
Jewish World Financial Power could not have willed the war seeing that
Jews suffered so heavily in Eastern Europe. The Protocols frankly
recognize the possibility of Jews suffering during the establishment of
the World Program, but it consoles them with the thought that they fall
as soldiers for the good of Israel. The death of a Jew, we are told in
the Protocols, is more precious in the sight of God than the death of a
thousand "seed of cattle," which is one of the delicate names applied to
the Gentiles.

The reference to the amassment of gold is very clear. It does not apply
to ownership of publications and a share in their profits only, but also
the use that may be made of them through silence or outcry to promote
International Jewish Financiers' schemes. The Rothschilds bought editors
as they bought legislators. It was a preliminary of nearly every scheme
they floated to first "fix" the newspapers, either for silence or claque
boosting. In matters of war and peace; in the removal of administrations
inimical to Jewish financial or political plans; in the elimination by
public exposure of "Gentile fronts" whom their Jewish masters wished to
be rid of; in the gradual building up of reputation and influence for
"rising men" who had been chosen for work in the future--in these and
like matters the Press very greatly aided the International Cabal in
attaining its end.

All the details of the foregoing paragraph can be illustrated at length
by instances which have occurred in the United States within the past 15
years.

There was once a Senator of the United States who--but that story
illustrates another point also, and will be reserved until that point is
reached in this series of discussions.

The Twelfth Protocol, however, contains the entire plan of Control of
the Press, reaching from the present time into the future when the
Jewish World Government shall be established. The reader is invited to
read carefully and thoughtfully the deep and wide outreaching of this
plan.

Keep also in mind the boast that has been made for generations that no
publication that has handled the Jewish Question in a manner distasteful
to the Jewish powers has been allowed to live.

"What role is played at present by the Press? It serves to inflame the
passions of selfish partisanship which our interests require. It is
shallow, lying and unfair, the most people do not understand what end it
serves."

In that quotation we have the same low estimate which was noted when we
studied "the estimate of human nature" which the Protocols contain.

Now, for the Plan of Press Control: We separate the points for
convenience:

"We shall handle the Press in the following manner:

1. "We shall saddle it and keep tight rein upon it. We shall do the same
also with other printed matter, for of what use is it to rid ourselves
of attacks in the Press, if we remain exposed to criticism through
pamphlets and books?"

2. "Not one announcement will reach the people save under our
supervision. We have attained this at the present time to the extent
that all news is received through several agencies in which it is
centralized from all parts of the world."

A sidelight on the first sentence above may be had from the Jewish
statement regarding the British Declaration relating to Palestine: "This
Declaration was sent from the Foreign Office to Lord Walter Rothschild.
* * * It came perhaps as a surprise to large sections of the Jewish
people * * * But to those who were active in Zionist circles, the
declaration was no surprise. * * * The wording of it came from the
British Foreign Office, but the text had been revised in the Zionist
offices in America as well as in England. The British Declaration was
made in the form in which the Zionists desired it. * * *" pp. 85-86,
"Guide to Zionism," by Jessie E. Sampter, published by the Zionist
Organization of America.

3. "Literature and journalism are two most important educational forces,
and consequently our government will become the owner of most of the
journals. * * * If we permit ten private journals, we shall organize
thirty of our own, and so on. This must not be suspected by the public,
for which reason all the journals published by us will be EXTERNALLY of
the most contrary opinions and tendencies thus evoking confidence in
them and attracting our unsuspecting opponents, who thus will be caught
in our trap and rendered harmless."

This is most interesting in view of the defense now being made for so
many Jewish journals. "Look at the newspapers owned and controlled by
Jews," they say; "see how they differ in policy! See how they disagree
with each other!" Certainly, "externally," as Protocol 12 says, but the
underlying unity is never hard to find.

Besides, one way of discovering who are the people that have knowledge
of the Jewish World problem, of who can be convinced of it, or who will
write about it is just to start a paper which "externally" seems to be
independent of the Jewish Question. So deeply is this thought shared by
even uneducated Jews that a rumor is today widespread in the United
States that the reason for the present series of articles in THE
DEARBORN INDEPENDENT is the desire of its owner to forward the Jewish
World Program! Unfortunately, this scheme of starting a fake opposition
in order to discover where the real opposing force is, is not confined
to the Jewish Internationalists, although there is every indication that
it was learned from them.

This idea of a misrepresentative front for certain secret purposes is
expressed at length not only with reference to the Press, but throughout
the Protocols in other relations. But in Protocol 12 it is fully
developed with regard to the Press, as the following quotations show.

(a) In order to force writers into such long productions that no one
will read them, a tax on writing is proposed--"on books of less than 30
pages a double tax." Small articles are most feared. Therefore doubly
tax the pamphlets of less than 30 pages. The longer articles fewer will
read, so the Protocols argue, and the double tax will thus "force
writers into such long productions that they will be little read,
especially as they will be expensive."

BUT--

"That which we ourselves shall publish for directing the public mind
will be cheap and widely read. The tax will discourage mere literary
ambition, whereas the fear of punishment will make the writers
subservient to us. Even if there should be those who may desire to write
against us, no one will publish their writings." (How many American
writers know this!)

"Before accepting any work for printing, the publisher or printer must
obtain permission from the authorities. Thus we will know in advance
what attacks are being prepared against us and shall be able to
counteract them by coming out beforehand with explanations on the
subject."

That is largely the situation today. They do know in advance what is
being done, and they do seek to disarm it beforehand.

(b) Here are the Three Degrees of Jewish Journalism, which are not only
stated in the Protocols but are observable in the everyday world of the
present.

"The leading place will be held by organs of an official character. They
will always stand guard over our interests and consequently their
influence will be comparatively small.

"The second place will be held by semi-official organs whose aim it will
be to attract the indifferent and lukewarm.

"In the third category we shall place organs of apparent opposition. At
least one will be extremely antagonistic. Our true opponents will
mistake this seeming opposition as belonging to their own group and will
thus show us their cards.

"I beg you to notice that among those who attack us there will be organs
founded by us, and they will attack exclusively those points which we
plan to change or eliminate.

"All our papers will support most diverse opinions: aristocratic,
republican, even anarchist, so long of course as the Constitution lives.
* * These fools who believe they are repeating the opinions expressed by
their party newspapers will be repeating our opinions or those things
which we wish them to think.

"By always discussing and contradicting our writings superficially, and
without touching upon their essence, our press will keep up a blank fire
against the official newspapers, only to give us opportunity to express
ourselves in greater detail than we could in our first declaration. This
will be done when useful to us.

"These attacks will also convince the people of the full freedom of the
press, and it will give our agents the opportunity of declaring that the
papers opposing us are mere wind-bags, since they cannot find any real
arguments to oppose our orders."

Undoubtedly that would be the case were all the papers controlled. In
the case of the present series of articles, however, the tables appear
to be turned. It is the Jewish Press which has so signally failed to
bring forward disproof either by fact or argument.

"When necessary, we shall promulgate ideas in the third section of our
Press as feelers, and then refute them vigorously in the semi-official
press.

"We shall overcome our opponents without fail because they will not have
organs of the Press at their disposal.

"The pretext for suppressing a publication will be that it stirs up the
public mind without basis of reason"--a pretext which has already been
urged time and again, but without the legal power to effect suppression,
although without legal power the Jewish interests in the United States
have effected a pretty complete suppression of everything they do not
desire.

How far does Jewish influence control the Newspapers of the United
States?

In so far as the use of the word "Jew" is concerned, the Press is almost
completely dominated. The editor who uses it is certain to hear from it.
He will be visited and told--contrary to everything the Jew is
told--that the word "Jew" denotes a member of a religious denomination
and not a member of a race, and that its use with reference to any
person spoken of in the public prints is as reprehensible as if
"Baptist," "Catholic," or "Episcopalian" were used.

The Jew is always told by his leaders that regardless of religion or
country of birth, he is a Jew, the member of a race by virtue of blood.
Pages of this paper could be filled with the most authoritative Jewish
statements on this point. But what the Jew is told by his leaders, and
what the Gentile editor is told by the Jewish committee are two
different and antagonistic things. A Jewish paper may shriek to the
skies that Professor So-and-So, or Judge So-and-So, or Senator So-and-So
is a Jew, but the secular newspaper that should do that would be visited
by an indignant committee bearing threats.

A certain newspaper, as a mere matter of news, published an excerpt from
one of THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT articles. Next day a number of
advertising accounts dropped for lack of copy. Inquiry developed the
fact that the reticent advertisers were all Jewish firms and the cause
of their action was the really unimportant excerpt which the paper
published. It developed also that the advertising agent who handled all
the advertising for those Jewish firms was himself a Jew who also held
an office in a Jewish secret society, which office was concerned
exclusively with the control of newspapers in the matter of Jewish
publicity. It was this man who dealt with the editor. A lame editorial
retraction followed which faintly praised the Jews. The advertising was
returned to the paper, and it is just a question whether that editor was
rightly handled or not. Certainly he has been made to feel the power.
But the diplomacy of it was bad. The editor, along with hundreds of
others, has only been given the proper background for estimating the
Jewish power in its wider reaches.

This is not to say that every editor should enter upon a campaign to
expose the secret power. That is a matter for personal decision. Every
editor, however, is so situated that he can see certain things, and he
ought to see them, note them, and inwardly digest them.

Jewish publicity in response to these articles is very easy to get in
almost any newspaper. Some have fallen most lamentably for lying
statements. Others have opened their columns to propaganda sent out from
Jewish sources. That is all very well. But the Gentile interest in the
question has been largely ignored, even in cases where the editors are
awake to the whole Question. This too affords a vantage from which the
average editor can view what is transpiring in this country.

If a list of the Jewish owners, bondholders and other interests in our
newspapers should be published the list would be impressive. But it
would not account for the widespread control of the Press as observed in
this country. Indeed, it would be unfair in such a connection as this to
list some of the Jewish-owned newspapers of the United States, because
their owners are fair and public-spirited servants of the people.

Actual ownership does not often account for much in a newspaper.
Ownership in the newspaper business in not always synonymous with
control.

If you wish to know the control of the newspaper, look to its attorney
and the interests he serves; look to the social connections of its chief
editors; look to the advertising agents who handle the bulk of Jewish
advertising; and then look to the matter of the paper's partisanship or
independence in politics.

Newspaper control of the Press by the Jews is not a matter of money. It
is a matter of keeping certain things out of the public mind and putting
certain things into it.

One absolute condition insisted upon with the daily Press is that it
shall not identify the Jew, mention him, or in any but the most
favorable way call the public's attention to his existence.

The first plea for this is based on "fairness," on the false statement
that a Jew is not a Jew but a church member. This is the same statement
which Jewish agents in the United States Government have used for years
to prevent the United States Government from listing the Jews in any
racial statistics. It is in direct contradiction to what the Jews
themselves are told. A flabby "fairness," a sloppy "broad-mindedness," a
cry of "religious prejudice," is the first plea. The second is a sudden
cessation of Jewish patronage. The third is withdrawal of patronage by
every Gentile concern that is under the grip of Jewish financiers. It is
a mere matter of brutal bludgeoning. And the fourth act, in a community
thoroughly blinded to the Jewish Question, is the collapse of the
offending publication.

Read the Jewish Encyclopedia for a list of some of the papers which
dared open up the Question, and ceased!

When old Baron Moses Montefiore said at Krakau:

"What are you prating about? As long as we do not have the press of the
whole world in our hands, everything you may do is vain. We must control
or influence the papers of the whole world in order to blind and deceive
the people."

--he knew what he was saying. By "blinding" the people he only meant
that they should not see the Jew, and by "deceiving" them he only meant
that the people should think certain world movements meant one thing
when they really meant another. The people may be told what happens:
they may not be told what was behind it. The people do not yet know why
certain occurrences which have affected their whole lives, should have
occurred at all. But the "why" of it is very definitely known in certain
circles whose news service never sees print, and sometimes not even
writing.

Statistics as to the space given the Jews by newspapers concerning
things they want to get into print would also be an eye-opener. A
minority nation, they get more publicity than any ten of the important
minor nations of Europe--of the kind of publicity they want!

The number of Jewish contributors to the Press of the United States
makes another interesting statistical bit. It would be sheer prejudice
to make objectionable mention of many Jewish journalists and writers,
and they come within the scope of this study only as they have shown
themselves to be the watchful agents and active servants of the System.
This is what many of them are. Not the ambitious young Jewish reporter
who runs around the streets gathering news, perhaps, but the journalist
at the seat of the news and at the necks of those two or three important
international runways through which the news of the world flows.

The whole matter, as far as extent of control is concerned, could be
visualized on a map of the United States, by means of colored pins
showing the number of Jewish-owned, provably Jewish-controlled papers,
and the number of Jewish writers who are directing the majority thought
of the various sections of the country.

The Jewish journalist who panders to unrest, whose literary ambition is
to maintain a ferment in his readers, whose humor is sordid and whose
philosophy is one of negation; as well as the Jewish novelist who extols
his or her own people even while the story sows subtle seeds of
disruption in Gentile social or economic life must be listed as the
agents of that World Program which would break down society through the
agency of "ideas." And it is very striking how many there are, and how
skillfully they conceal their propaganda in their work.

Here and there in the United States it is now becoming possible to print
the word "Jew" in the headlines of an article, and tell the Jewish
committee which calls the next day that this is yet a free country.
Quietly a number of newspapers have tested the strength of this assumed
control in their communities, and have discounted it.

There is no reason for fear on the part of the editor who has his facts.
But the editor who backs down will more and more feel the pressure upon
him. The man who courageously and fairly holds his ground will soon
learn another thing that is not so generally known, namely, that with
all the brilliance there is a lot of bluff, and that the chain of
control once broken is felt throughout the whole system as a blow.

There is nothing that the International Jew fears so much as the truth,
or any hint of the truth about himself or his plans. And, after all, the
rock of refuge and defense, the foundation of endurance for Jew or
Gentile must be the Truth.

[Issue of September 11, 1920.]




XVIII.

Does This Explain Jewish Political Power?


Little has yet been said in this commentary on the Protocols about the
political program contained in them. It is desirable that the points be
taken separately in order that when our study turns to actual conditions
in this country, the reader may be in a position to judge whether the
written program agrees with the acted program as it may be seen all
about us. The World Program as outlined in these strange documents turns
upon many points, some of which have already been discussed. Its success
is sought (a) by securing financial control of the world, this having
already been secured by the overwhelming indebtedness of every nation
through wars, and by the capitalistic (not the manufacturing or
managerial) control of industry; (b) by securing political control,
which is easily illustrated by the condition of every civilized country
today; (c) by securing control of education, a control which has been
steadily won under the blinded eyes of the people; (d) by trivializing
the public mind through a most complete system of allurement which has
just brought us into a period which requires the new word "jazz" to
describe it; and (e) by the sowing of seeds of disruption
everywhere--not the seeds of progress, but of economic fallacies and
revolutionary temper. All of these main objectives entail various
avenues of action, none of which has been overlooked by the Protocols.

In leading up to what the Protocols have to say about the selection and
control of Presidents, it will be enlightening to take the views which
these documents express about other phases of politics.

It may be very interesting to those Jewish apologists, who in all their
pronouncements never discuss the contents of the Protocols, to know that
so far from their being a plea for monarchy, they are a plea for the
most drastic and irresponsible liberalism in government. The powers
behind the Protocols appear to have absolute confidence in what they can
do with the people once the people are made to believe that popular
government has really arrived.

The Protocols believe in frequent change. They like elections; they
approve frequent revisions of constitutions; they counsel the people to
change their representatives often.

Take this from the First Protocol:

"The abstract conception of Liberty made it possible for us to convince
the crowd that government is only the management for the owner of the
country, the people, and that the steward can be changed like a pair of
worn-out gloves. The possibility of changing the representatives of the
people has placed them at our disposal and, as it were, has placed them
in our power as creatures of our purposes."

Note also how this Use of Change is buried in this paragraph from the
Fourth Protocol, which describes the evolution of a Republic:

"Every republic passes through several stages. The first is that of
senseless ravings, resembling those of a blind man throwing himself from
right to left. The second is that of demagogy, which breeds anarchy and
inevitably leads to despotism, not of a legal, open and consequently
responsible character, but an unseen and unknown despotism, felt none
the less because exercised by a secret organization. Such a despotism
acts with even less scruple because it is hidden under cover and works
behind the backs of various agents, the shifting and changing of which
will not harm its secret power, but serve it, since such changes will
relieve the organization from the necessity of expending its resources
on rewards for long service."

This "changing" of servants is not unknown in the United States. A
former Senator of the United States could easily testify to this if he
only knew who did the "changing." Time was when he was the tool of every
Jewish lobbyist in the Senate. His glib tongue lent charm and
plausibility to every argument they wished to advance against the
government's intentions. Secretly, however, the Senator was receiving
"favors" from a very high source, "favors" of a financial character. The
time came when it was desirable to "detach" the Senator. The written
record of his "favors" was abstracted from its place of supposed
secrecy, a newspaper system that has always been the ready organ of
American Jewry made the exposure, and an indignant public did the rest.
It could not have been done had not the man been compromised first; it
could not have been done without certain newspaper connivance; it would
never have been done had not the Senator's masters wished it. However,
it was done.

In the Fourteenth Protocol, which begins "When we become rulers," it is
pictured how hopeless the Gentile peoples will have become of any
betterment of conditions through changes of government, and therefore
will accept the promise of stability which the Protocolists of that time
will be prepared to offer:

"The masses will become so satiated with the endless changes of
administration which we instigated among the Gentiles when we were
undermining their governmental institutions, that they will tolerate
anything from us * * *"

The official who is changed most quickly in this country is the man who
questions certain matters which come from Jewish sources. There must be
a small army of such men in the United States today. Some of them do not
know even now how it happened. Some are still wondering why perfectly
legitimate and patriotic information should have been lost in an icy
silence when they sent it in, and why they should have lost favor for
sending it.

Protocol Nine is full of the most amazing claims, of which these may
serve as illustration:

"At the present time, if any government raises a protest against us, it
is only for the sake of form, it is under our control, and it is done by
our direction, for their anti-Semitism is necessary for keeping in order
our lesser brothers. I will not explain this further as already it has
been the subject of numerous discussions between us."

This doctrine of the usefulness of anti-Semitism and the desirability of
creating it where it does not exist are found in the words of Jewish
leaders, ancient and modern.

"In reality there are no obstacles before us. Our super-government has
such an extra-legal status that it may be called by the energetic and
strong word--dictatorship. I can conscientiously say that at the present
time we are the lawmakers."

In that Protocol this claim is made:

"De facto, we have already eliminated every government except our own,
although de jure there are still many others left."

That is simple: the governments still exist, under their own names,
having authority over their own people; but the super-government has
unchallenged influence over all of them in matters pertaining to the
Jewish Nation and particularly in matters pertaining to the purpose of
The International Jew.

The Eighth Protocol shows how this can be:

"For the time being, until it will be safe to give responsible
government positions to our brother Jews, we shall entrust them to
people whose past and whose character are such that there is an abyss
between them and the people; to people, for whom, in case of
disobedience to our orders, there will remain only trial or exile (from
public life), thus forcing them to protect our interest to their last
breath."

In the Ninth Protocol again is this reference to party funds:

"The division into parties has placed them all at our disposal, inasmuch
as in order to carry on a party struggle it is necessary to have money,
and we have it all."

There have been many investigations of campaign funds. None has ever yet
gone deep enough to inquire into the "international" sources of these
funds.

Now, in the United States during the last five years we have seen an
almost complete Judaized administration in control of all the war
activities of the American people. The function of the regularly
organized United States Government during that time was practically
confined to the voting of money. But the administration of the business
end of the war was in charge of a government within a government, and
this inner, extra government was Jewish.

It is, of course, often asked why this was so. The first answer given is
that the Jews who were immediately placed in charge of the business
administration of the war were competent men, the most competent men who
could be found. This was actually the answer given to an inquiry as to
the reason for so large a part of the foreign policy of the United
States depending on the counsel of a certain group of Jews--they were
the men who knew, no one else knew so much, the officials chosen by the
people had a right to select the most efficient and able counsel they
could find.

Very well, let that stand. Let the explanation be that in all the United
States, Jews were the only persons to be found who could handle the
emergency with masterly ease. We shall see more of this phase of the
matter at another time. The war is not under discussion in this article,
merely the fact that in an emergency the government became distinctly
Jewish.

But the Second Protocol would appear to throw a little light on the
matter.

"The administrators chosen by us from the masses for their servility
will not be persons trained for government, and consequently they will
easily become pawns in our game, played by our learned and talented
counsellors, specialists educated from early childhood to administer
world affairs. As we know, our specialists have been acquiring the
necessary knowledge for governing * * *"

The language is a trifle raw, as it usually is when Gentiles are under
discussion. But the same fact, namely, that Jewish specialists have come
to the aid of Gentile administrators in an emergency, when uttered for
the consideration of the general public, may be very beautifully
phrased.

The untrained Gentile administrator must have help; his unpreparedness
makes it necessary. And who knows it better than those who have the help
to offer? The Gentile public has been taught to suspect the man who has
had experience in politics or government. This, of course, makes the
whole situation doubly easy for those whose speciality it is to give
"aid." Just what interests they aid most will give, when discovered, a
strong light upon their zeal.

But in all that the Protocols have to say about the political angle of
the World Program, nothing is of so great interest as that which
concerns the selection and control of Presidents. The whole plan is
outlined in the Tenth Protocol. The fact that the President of France
seems to have been in mind is a localism; the plan is applicable
elsewhere; indeed has elsewhere its most perfect illustration.

This Tenth Protocol, then, leads gradually up to the subject, tracing
the evolution of rulers from Autocrat to President, and of nations from
Monarchies to Republics.

The language of this passage is particularly objectionable, but no more
so than can be found in current Jewish literature where boasting of
power is indulged in. Unpleasant as the whole attitude is, it is
valuable as showing in just what light the supporters of the Protocol
Program view the Gentiles and their dignities. It must be born in mind
that the Jewish ideal is not a President, but a Prince and a King. The
Jewish students of Russia marched the streets in 1918 singing this
hymn--

"We have given you a God; Now we will give you a King."

The new flag of Palestine, now permitted to fly without hindrance, bears
insignia, as does every synagogue, of a Jewish King. The Jewish hope is
that the Throne of David shall be set up again, as doubtless it will be.
None of these things is to be decried in the least, nor to be regarded
with anything but a decent respect, but they should be borne in mind as
a side light on the expressed contempt for Gentile Presidents and
Legislatures.

The Tenth Protocol reaches the theme of President thus:

"Then the rise of the republican era became possible, and then in the
place of a sovereign we substituted a caricature of him, a President
picked from the crowd * * * Such was the foundation of the mine we laid
underneath the Gentile people, or more accurately, the Gentile peoples."

It is with something of a shock that one reads that men with a "past"
are specially favored for the presidential office. Men with a "past"
have become President in various countries, including the United States,
there is no doubt of that. In some instances, the particular scandal
that constituted the "past" has been publicly known; in other cases it
has been hushed up and lost in a maze of rumor. In at least one case it
was made the special property of a syndicate of men who, while
protecting the official from public knowledge, compelled him to pay
rather stiffly for their service. Men with a "past" are not uncommon,
and it is not always the "past" but the concealment of it that concerns
them most, and in this lack of frankness, this distrust of the
understanding and mercy of the people, they usually fall into another
slavery, namely, the slavery of political or financial blackmail.

"We will manipulate the election of Presidents whose past contains some
undisclosed dark affair, some 'Panama,' then they will be faithful
executors of our orders from fear of exposure and from the natural
desire of every man who has attained a position of authority to retain
the privileges, emoluments and the dignity associated with the position
of President."

The use of the word "Panama" here refers to the various scandals which
arose in French political circles over the original efforts to construct
the Panama Canal. If the present form of the Protocols had been written
at a later date they might have referred to the "Marconi wireless"
scandals in England--though on second thought, they would not have done
so because certain men were involved who were not Gentiles. Herzl, the
great Jewish Zionist leader, uses the expression in "The Jewish State."
Speaking of the management of the business of Palestine he says that the
Society of the Jews "will see to it that the enterprise does not become
a Panama but a Suez." That the same expression should occur in Herzl and
in the Protocols is significant; it has also another significance, which
will be described at another time. It must be clear to the reader,
however, that no one writing for the general public at this day would
refer to a "Panama" in a man's past. The reference would not be
understood.

It is this practice of holding a man under obligation which makes it
needful on the part of the true publicist to tell the truth and the
whole truth about aspirants for public office. It is not enough to say
of a candidate that he "began as a poor boy" and then became
"successful." How did he become successful? How explain the "rise" of
his fortunes? Sometimes the clue leads deep into the domestic life of
the candidate. It may be told of a man, for example, that he helped
another out of a scrape by marrying the woman involved, and received a
sum of money for doing so. It may be told of another that he was
implicated by his too friendly relations with another's wife, but was
relieved of his predicament by the astute diplomacy of powerful friends,
to whom thereafter he felt himself in debt of honor. It is strange that,
in American affairs at least, the woman-note is predominant. In our
higher offices that has more frequently occurred than any other, oftener
than the money-note.

In European countries, however, where the fact of a man's being
entangled illegitimately with a woman does not carry so heavy a stamp of
shame with it, the controlled men have been found to have "pasts" of
another character.

The whole subject is extremely distasteful, but truth has its surgical
duties to perform, and this is one of them. When, for example, a pivotal
assemblage like that of the Peace Conference is studied, and the men who
are most subject to the Jewish influence are isolated, and their past
history is carefully traced, there is almost no difficulty whatever in
determining the precise moment when they passed over into that fateful
condition which, while it did not hinder them of public honors for one
hour, made them unchangeably the servants of a power the public did not
see. The puzzling spectacle which the observer sees of the great leaders
of Anglo-Saxon races closely surrounded and continuously counseled by
the princes of the Semitic race, is explained only by knowledge of those
leaders' "past" and those words of the Protocols--"We will manipulate
the election of Presidents whose past contains some undisclosed dark
affair."

And where this Jewish domination of officials is glaringly apparent, it
may be safely assumed that the custody of the secret is almost entirely
with that race. When necessity arises, it may be a public service for
those in possession of the facts to make them public--not for the
purpose of destroying reputations, but for the purpose of damning for
all time a most cowardly practice.

Politically, so the Jewish publicists tell us, Jews do not vote as a
group. Because of this so we are told, they have no political influence.
Moreover, we are told, they are so divided among themselves that they
cannot be led in one direction.

It may be true that when it is a question of being for anything, the
Jewish community may show a majority and minority opinion--a small
minority, it is likely to be. But when it becomes a question of being
against anything, the Jewish community is always a unit.

These are facts to which any ward politician can testify. Any man in
political life can test it for himself by announcing that he will not
permit himself to be dominated by Jews or anybody else. Just let him
mention Jews in that manner; he will no longer have to read about Jewish
solidarity; he will have felt it. Not that, in a vote, the Jewish
solidarity can accomplish anything it wishes; the Jew's political
strength is not in his vote, but in the "pull" of, say, seven men at the
seat of government. The Jews, a political minority so far as votes are
concerned, were a political majority so far as influence was concerned,
during the last five years. They ruled. They boast that they ruled. The
mark of their rule is everywhere.

The note which everyone observes in politics, as in the Press, is the
fear of the Jews. This fear is such that nowhere are the Jews discussed
as are, say, the Armenians, the Germans, the Russians, or the Hindoos.
What is this fear but reflection of the knowledge of the Jews' power and
their ruthlessness in the use of it? It is possibly true, as many Jewish
publicists say, that what is called anti-Semitism is just a panic-fear.
It is a dread of the unknown. The uncanny spectacle of an apparently
poor people who are richer than all, of a very small minority which is
more powerful than all, creates phantoms before the mind.

It is very significant that those who most assume to represent the Jews
are quite content that the fear should exist. They wish it to exist. To
keep it delicately poised and always there, though not too obtrusively,
is an art they practice. But once the balance is threatened, their
crudeness instantly appears. Then comes the threat, by which it is hoped
to re-establish the fear again. When the threat fails, there comes the
wail of anti-Semitism.

How strange this is, that the Jews should not see that the most abject
form of anti-Semitism is just this fear which they are willing to have
felt toward them by their neighbors. This fear is "Semitophobia" in its
worst form. To inspire fear--what is more dreaded by the normal man, and
yet what more delights an inferior race?

Now, a great service is done when the people are emancipated from this
fear. It is the process of emancipation that Jewish publicists attack.
It is this they call anti-Semitism. It is not anti-Semitism at all; it
is the only course that can prevent anti-Semitism.

The process involves several steps. The extent of the Jewish power must
be shown. To this, of course, strong Jewish objection is made, though no
strong disproof can be made.

Then the existence of this power must be explained. It can be explained
only by the Jewish Will to Power, as it may be called, or by the
deliberate program which is followed in the attainment of the power.
When the method is explained, half the damage is undone. The Jew is not
a superman. He is bright, he is intense, his philosophy of material
things leaves him free to do many things from which his neighbor draws
back; but, given equal advantages, he is not a superman. The Yankee is
more than his equal any time, but the Yankee has an inborn inclination
to observe the rules of the game. When the people know by what means
this power is gained--when they are informed how, for example, political
control is seized, as it has been in the United States, the very method
takes all the glamour from the power, and shows it to be a rather sordid
thing after all.

This series of articles is attempting to take these orderly steps, and
it is believed the complete effort will justify itself to reasonable
minds, both Jewish and Gentile.

In the present article one important means of power has been described
on the authority of the Protocols. Whether the method laid down by the
Protocols is worth considering or not depends entirely on whether it can
be found in actual affairs today. It can be found. The two tally. The
parallel is complete. It were well for the Jew, of course, if no trace
of him could be found in either the written or the actual program. But
he is there, and it is illogical for him to blame anyone but himself for
being there. Certainly, it is small defense against the fact to heap
abuse upon the one who discloses the fact. We have agreed that the Jews
are clever, but they are not so clever as to be able to cover their
work. There is a certain element of weakness in them which reveals the
whole matter in the end. And even the revelation would not mean much if
the thing revealed were not wrong. But that is the weakness of the
Jewish program--it is wrong. The Jews have never gained any measure of
success so great that the world cannot check it. The world is engaged in
a great checking tactic now, and if there are still prophets among the
Jews they should lead their people in another path.

The proof and the fruit of any exposure of the World Program is the
removal of the element of fear from the peoples among whom the Jews
live.

[Issue of September 18, 1920.]




"In a world of completely organized territorial sovereignties he (the
Jew) has only two possible cities of refuge; he must either pull down
the pillars of the whole national state system, or he must create a
territorial sovereignty of his own . . . . In Eastern Europe, Bolshevism
and Zionism seem to grow side by side . . . . not because the Jew cares
for the positive side of radical philosophy, not because he desires to
be a partaker in Gentile nationalism or Gentile democracy, but because
no existing Gentile system is ever anything but distasteful to him."

XIX.

The All-Jewish Mark on "Red Russia"


We shall now briefly interrupt the commentary which we have been making
on the Protocols to set at rest once and for all certain misstatements
which are made for Gentile consumption.

To learn what the Jewish leaders of the United States or any other
country think, do not read their addresses to the Gentiles; read their
addresses to their own people. On such matters as these--Whether the Jew
regards himself as destined to rule the world; whether he regards
himself as belonging to a nation and race distinct from every other
nation and race; whether he regards the Gentile world as the legitimate
field of his exploitation by a lower moral method than is permissible
among his own people; whether he knows and shares the principles of the
Protocols--on such matters as these, the only safe guide is to be found
in the words which Jewish leaders speak to Jews, not in the words they
speak to Gentiles.

The notable Jewish names which appear oftenest in the Press do not
represent the spokesmen of Judaism at all, but only a selected few who
represent the Department of Propaganda Among the Gentiles. Sometimes
that propaganda is in the form of donations for Christian charitable
organizations; sometimes it is in the form of "liberal" opinion on
religious, social and political questions. In whatever form it comes,
you may depend upon it that the real activities of the Jewish hierarchy
proceed under cover of that which the Gentile is invited to observe and
approve.

The statements offered in this series are never made without the
strictest and fullest proof, confirmation and corroboration in the
utterances of Jewish leaders. This is one of the strange features of the
multitude of Jewish attacks on this series: they are attacking what they
themselves stand for, and their only reason for the attack must be their
belief that this investigation has not been able to penetrate through to
that which has been kept hidden from the world.

The most persistent denials have been offered to the statement that
Bolshevism everywhere, in Russia or the United States, is Jewish. In
these denials we have perhaps one of the most brazen examples of the
double intent referred to above. The denial of the Jewish character of
Bolshevism is made to the Gentile; but in the confidence and secrecy of
Jewish communication, or buried in the Yiddish dialect, or obscurely
hidden in the Jewish national press, we find the proud assertion
made--to their own people!--that Bolshevism is Jewish.

Jewish propaganda has only two straws to grasp in the terrible tale of
murder, immorality, robbery, enforced starvation and hideous humanism
which make the present Russian situation impossible to describe and all
but impossible to comprehend.

One of these straws is that Kerensky, the man who eased in the opening
wedge of Bolshevism, is not a Jew. Indeed, one of the strongest
indications that Bolshevism is Jewish is that the Jewish press
emphasizes so fiercely the alleged Gentilism of a least two of the
revolutionary notables. It may be cruel to deny them two among hundreds,
but merely saying so cannot change Kerensky's nationality. His name is
Adler. His father was a Jew and his mother a Jewess. Adler, the father,
died, and the mother married a Russian named Kerensky, whose name the
young child took. Among the radicals who employed him as a lawyer, among
the forces that put him forward to drive the first nail into Russia's
cross, among the soldiers who fought with him, his Jewish descent and
character have never been doubted.

"Well, but there is Lenin," our Jewish publicists say--"Lenin the head
of it all, the brains of it all, and Lenin is a Gentile! We've got you
there--Lenin is a Gentile!"

Perhaps he is, but why do his children speak Yiddish? Why are his
proclamations put forth in Yiddish? Why did he abolish the Christian
Sunday and establish by law the Jewish Saturday Sabbath?

The explanation of all this may be that he married a Jewess. The fact is
that he did. But another explanation may be that he himself is a Jew.
Certainly he is not the Russian nobleman he has always claimed to be.
The statements he has made about his identity thus far have been lies.
The claim that he is a Gentile may be unfounded too.

No one has ever doubted Trotsky's nationality--he is a Jew. His name is
Braunstein. Recently the Gentiles were told that Trotsky had said he
wasn't much of anything--in religion. That may be. But still he must be
something--else why are the Russian Christian churches turned into
stables, slaughter houses and dancing halls, while the Jewish synagogues
remain untouched? And why are Christian priests and ministers made to
work on roads, while Jewish rabbis are left their clerical privileges?
Trotsky may not be much of anything in religion, but he is a Jew
nevertheless. This is not mere Gentile insistence that he shall be
considered a Jew whether or no; it is straight Jewish teaching that he
is. In a future discussion on "religion or race?" we shall show that
even without religion, Trotsky is, and is considered by all Jewish
authorities to be, a Jew.

An apology must be made here for repeating well-known facts. Yet, so
many people are not even now aware of the true meaning of Bolshevism,
that at the risk of monotony, we shall cite a few of the salient facts.
The purpose, however, is not alone to explain Russia, but to throw a
warning light on conditions in the United States.

The Bolshevik Government, as it stood late this summer when the latest
report was smuggled through to certain authorities, shows up the Jewish
domination of the whole affair. It has changed very slightly since the
beginning. We give only a few items to indicate the proportion. It must
not be supposed that the non-Jewish members of the government are
Russian.

Very few Russians have anything to say about their own country these
days. The so-called "Dictatorship of the Proletariat," in which the
proletariat has nothing whatever to say, is Russian only in the sense
that it is set up in Russia; it is not Russian in that it springs from
or includes the Russian people. It is the international program of the
Protocols, which might be "put over" by a minority in any country, and
which is being given a dress-rehearsal in Russia.

Table Showing Jewish Control of Russia

                                | Number  | Number of | Jewish
                                |   of    |  Jewish   |  Per-
                                | Members |  Members  | centage
--------------------------------+---------+-----------+--------
The Council of the Commissaries |         |           |
  of the People                 |   22    |    17     |  77.2%
The Commissariat of War         |   43    |    33     |  76.7%
The Commissariat of Foreign     |         |           |
  Affairs                       |   16    |    13     |  81.2%
The Commissariat of Finance     |   30    |    24     |  80.0%
The Commissariat of Justice     |   21    |    20     |  95.2%
The Commissariat of Public      |         |           |
  Instruction                   |   53    |    42     |  79.2%
The Commissariat of Social      |         |           |
  Assistance                    |    6    |     6     | 100.0%
The Commissariat of Work        |    8    |     7     |  87.5%
Delegates of the Bolshevik Red  |         |           |
  Cross to Berlin, Vienna,      |         |           |
  Varsovie, Bucharest, Copen-   |         |           |
  hagen                         |    8    |     8     | 100.0%
Commissaries of the Provinces   |   23    |    21     |  91.3%
Journalists                     |   41    |    41     | 100.0%

These are enlightening figures. The reader will note that the Jewish
percentage is high at all times, never lower than 76 per cent in any
case. (Curiously enough, the lowest percentage of Jews is found in the
Commissariat of War.) But in those committees which deal most closely
with the mass of the people, as well as in the committees of defense and
propaganda, Jews fill literally all the places.

Remember what the Protocols say about Press control: remember what Baron
Montefiore said about it, and then look at the Government Journalists.
That committee comprises 41 men, and the 41 are Jews. Only Jewish pens
are trusted with Bolshevist propaganda.

And then the so-called "Red Cross delegates," which are merely Red
Revolutionary delegates to the cities named--of the 8, there are 8 Jews.

The Commissariat of Social Assistance, upon whose word the life and
privilege of tens of thousands hang--there are 6 members, and the 6 are
Jews. And so on through the list.

Out of the 53 members of the Commissariat of Public Instruction, 11 are
noted as non-Jews. But what kind of non-Jews is not stated. They may be
"non-Jews like Lenin" whose children speak the Yiddish as their native
tongue. Whatever they are, there is a sidelight upon their attitude in
the fact that the Bolsheviki immediately took over all the Hebrew
schools and continued them as they were and laid down a rule that the
ancient Hebrew language should be taught in them. The ancient Hebrew
language is the vehicle of the deeper secrets of the World Program.

And for the Gentile Russian children--? "Why," said these gentle Jewish
educators, "we will teach them sex knowledge. We will brush out of their
minds the cobwebs. They must learn the truth about things!"--with
consequences that are too pitiable to narrate. But this can be said:
unquestionably there were deaths among innocent Jews when Hungary
wrested itself free from the Red Bolshevism of Bela Kun (or Cohen). The
Jews may well call it the "White Terror" that followed their failure to
re-enact the tragedy of Russia in Hungary. But there are mountains of
evidence to show that nothing had so potent an effect in producing the
bloodshed of the "White Terror" as the outraged minds of parents whose
children had been compulsorily drawn through sloughs of filth during the
short time the Jewish Bolsheviki had charge of the schools.

American Jews do not like to hear this. Their shrinking from it would be
greatly to their honor did they not immediately return to the defense of
the people who do these things. It is well enough known that the
chastity of Christians is not so highly regarded by the orthodox male
Jew as is the chastity of his own people, but it would be pleasant to be
certain that all of them condemn what went on in Russia and Hungary in
the matter of education. However, as most of the influences which
destroy Gentile youth today--in America--are in the hands of the Jews,
and as it is plainly stated in the Protocols that one of the lines of
campaign is "to corrupt the youth of the Gentiles," the situation is one
that calls for something more than mere hard feelings and angry denials
whenever these facts are referred to.

It is not the economic experiment, so-called, that one objects to in
Russia; it is not the fallacies, the sad delusion of the people. No. It
is the downright dirty immorality, the brutish nastiness of it all; and
the line which the immorality and nastiness draws between Jew and
Gentile. The horrible cruelty involved we will not deal with, leaving it
merely with the explanation which has found utterance in the Jewish
press that "it may be that the Jew in Russia is taking an unconscious
revenge for his centuries of suffering."

"But," asks some reader, "how may we know that all this is true?"

Bearing in mind that we are speaking of Russia, not for the interest of
the Russian situation at all, but to indicate the international
character of those who are responsible for conditions there, and to
identify them for the protection of the United States, we shall look at
the evidence.

There is, of course, the evidence brought to light by our own United
States Senate and printed in a Report of the Committee on the Judiciary.
We do not wish to spend much time on this, because we prefer in these
articles to use Jewish testimony instead of Gentile. But we shall pause
long enough to show the nature of the testimony brought out by our own
government.

Dr. George A. Simons, a clergyman in charge of an American congregation
in Petrograd at the time the Bolshevik terror broke out, was a witness.
Parts of his testimony are given here:

"'There were hundreds of agitators who followed in the trail of
Trotsky-Bronstein, these men having come over from the lower East Side
of New York * * * A number of us were impressed by the strange Yiddish
element in this thing right from the start, and it soon became evident
that more than half the agitators in the so-called Bolshevik movement
were Yiddish.'

"Senator Nelson--'Hebrews?'

"Dr. Simons--'They were Hebrews, apostate Jews. I do not want to say
anything against the Jews, as such. I am not in sympathy with the
anti-Semitic movement, never have been, and do not ever expect to be * *
* But I have a firm conviction that this thing is Yiddish, and that one
of its bases is found in the East Side of New York.'

"Senator Nelson--'Trotsky came over from New York during that summer,
did he not?'

"Dr. Simons--'He did.'

"Later Dr. Simons said: 'In December, 1918 * * * under the presidency of
a man known as Apfelbaum * * * out of 388 members, only 16 happened to
be real Russians, and all the rest Jews, with the exception possibly of
one man, who is a Negro from America, who calls himself Professor Gordon
* * * and 265 of this northern commune government that is sitting in the
Old Smolny Institute came from the lower East Side of New York--265 of
them. * * *

"'I might mention this, that when the Bolsheviki came into power, all
over Petrograd we at once had a predominance of Yiddish proclamations,
big posters, and everything in Yiddish. It became very evident that now
that was to be one of the great languages of Russia; and the real
Russians, of course, did not take very kindly to it.'"

William Chapin Huntington, who was commercial attache of the United
States Embassy at Petrograd, testified:

"The leaders of the movement, I should say, are about two-thirds Russian
Jews * * * The Bolsheviks are internationalists, and they were not
interested in the particular national ideals of Russia."

William W. Welch, an employee of the National City Bank, New York,
testified:

"In Russia it is well known that three-fourths of the Bolshevik leaders
are Jewish * * * There were some--not many, but there were some--real
Russians; and what I mean by real Russians is Russian-born, and not
Russian Jews."

Roger E. Simmons, Trade Commissioner connected with the United States
Department of Commerce, also testified. An important anonymous witness,
whom the committee permitted to withhold his name, told the same things.

The British White Book, Russia, No. 1--"A Collection of Reports on
Bolshevism in Russia, presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty,
April, 1919," contains masses of the same testimony from many sources,
all of them eyewitnesses.

In that very highly respected magazine Asia for February-March, 1920, is
an article which contains, among other important ones, these statements:
(the italics are ours)

"In all the Bolshevist institutions the heads are Jews. The Assistant
Commissar for Elementary Education, Grunberg, can hardly speak Russian.
The Jews are successful in everything and obtain their ends. They know
how to command and get complete submission. But they are proud and
contemptuous toward everyone, which strongly excites the people against
them * * * At the present time there is a great national religious
fervor among the Jews. They believe that the promised time of the rule
of God's elect on earth is coming. They have connected Judaism with a
universal revolution. They see in the spread of revolution the
fulfilling of the Scriptures: 'Though I make an end of all the nations
whither I have scattered thee, yet will I not make an end of thee.'"

Now if Gentile proof were wanted, the files of the THE DEARBORN
INDEPENDENT for a whole year would not begin to contain it. But Jewish
proof is better.

There has been a strange vacillation in Jewish opinion concerning
Bolshevism. At first it was hailed with delight. There was no
concealment whatever in the early days of the new regime as to the part
which Jewry had in it. Public meetings, interviews, special articles
poured forth in which very valuable elements of truth were mingled.
There was no attempt at concealment of names.

Then the horror of the thing began to take hold upon the world, and for
just a breathing space Jewish opinion fell silent. There was a spasmodic
denial or two. Then a new burst of glorification. The glorification
continues within Judaism itself, but it now carries on the Gentile side
of its face a very sad expression labeled "persecution."

We have lived to see the day when to denounce Bolshevism is to
"persecute the Jews."

In the American Hebrew, for September 10, 1920, an article appears which
not only acknowledges and explains the part which the Jew plays in the
present unrest and upheaval, but justifies it--and justifies it,
curiously enough, by The Sermon on the Mount.

The writer says that "the Jew evolved organized capitalism with its
working instrumentality, the banking system."

This is very refreshing, in view of the numerous Jewish denials of this
economic fact.

"One of the impressive phenomena of the impressive time is the revolt of
the Jew against the Frankenstein which his own mind conceived and his
own hand fashioned * * *" If this is true, why is Jewish "organized
capital with its working instrumentality, the banking system" supporting
the revolt?

"That achievement (referring to the Russian overthrow), destined to
figure in history as the overshadowing result of the World War, was
largely the outcome of Jewish thinking, of Jewish discontent, of Jewish
effort to reconstruct."

"This rapid emergence of the Russian revolution from the destructive
phase and its entrance into the constructive phase is a conspicuous
expression of the constructive genius of Jewish discontent."

(This, of course, requires proof that the constructive phase has
appeared. The implication here is sheer propaganda. The Protocols,
however, have a reconstructive program. We have not reached it as yet in
this series of articles, but it is clearly outlined in the
Protocols--destroy the Gentile society, and then reconstruct it
according to "our" plans.)

Now read carefully:

"What Jewish idealism and Jewish discontent have so powerfully
contributed to accomplish in Russia, the same historic qualities of the
Jewish mind and heart ARE TENDING TO PROMOTE IN OTHER COUNTRIES."

Read that again. "What Jewish idealism and Jewish discontent have so
powerfully contributed to accomplish in Russia!" Just what was that? And
just how did it "powerfully contribute?" And why are "Jewish idealism"
and "Jewish discontent" always linked together? If you read the
Protocols it is all very clear. Jewish idealism is the destruction of
Gentile society and the erection of Jewish society. Was it not so in
Russia?--Yiddish proclamations on the walls, the ancient Hebrew in the
schools, Saturday substituted for Sunday, and the rabbis respected while
the priests were put to work on the roads! All "powerfully contributed"
to by murder, rapine, theft and starvation.

Our author is more candid than he realizes. He calls this linked
idealism and discontent "the historic qualities of the Jewish mind." THE
DEARBORN INDEPENDENT is indebted to him for this clear confirmation of
what it has been saying for some time.

But even that is not all. "These same historic qualities of the Jewish
mind" which "contributed so powerfully to accomplish in Russia" the Red
Terror still existing there, are declared by this author to be tending
to promote the same sort of thing in other countries. He says so in so
many words--"tending to promote in other countries."

But we knew that. The only difference is that when Gentiles said it,
they were overwhelmed with the wildest abuse; but now a pro-Jewish
writer says it in a leading Jewish publication. And he says it
apologetically--listen to him:

"It was natural that * * * discontent in other parts of the world should
find expression in overemphasis of issues and overstatement of aims."

What discontent? Jewish discontent, of course. Discontent with what?
With any form of Gentile rule. And how did it find expression? "In
overemphasis of issues and overstatement of aims." What were these
issues and aims? To bring the Bolshevik revolution to the United States.

No, they did not overstate their aims; they exactly stated them--they
simply selected the wrong country, that's all.

There are Russian Bolshevists in this country now, hawking about the
streets of New York the gold cigaret cases which they stole from Russian
families, and the family jewels, the wedding and birthday rings, which
they filched from Russian women. Bolshevism never got further than the
pawnshop and burglar's "fence" idea. The proof of this traffic in stolen
property is going to drive some people into hiding before long. It will
be a long, long time before America will be taking orders in Yiddish, or
American women will be giving up their jewels to "the chosen race."

However, that happens to be only the most recent acknowledgement that
has come to hand. It is significant for its confession that "Jewish
discontent" was "tending to promote" in "other countries" what it has
"so powerfully contributed to accomplish in Russia."

And with such a link between the American Hebrew, Russian Bolshevism and
the Protocols, there are still Jewish publicists with the crust to say
that only crazy people could see the connection. Only blind people will
not see it. But that is only a minor connection. This series of articles
does not rest on anything so accidental as the Jewish New Year's apology
for Bolshevism in the great Hebrew weekly of the United States.

[Issue of September 25, 1920.]




"Out of the economic chaos, the discontent of the Jew evolved organized
capital with its working instrumentality, the banking system . . . .

"One of the impressive phenomena of the impressive time is the revolt of
the Jew against the Frankenstein which his own mind conceived and his
own hand fashioned. . . .

"That achievement (Russian Bolshevik revolution--Ed.), destined to
figure in history as the over-shadowing result of the World War, was
largely the outcome of Jewish thinking, of Jewish discontent, of Jewish
effort to reconstruct . . . .

"What Jewish idealism and Jewish discontent have so powerfully
contributed to accomplish in Russia, the same historic qualities of the
Jewish mind and heart are tending to promote in other countries . . . .

"Shall America, like the Russia of the Czars, overwhelm the Jew with the
bitter and baseless reproach of being a destroyer, and thus put him in
the position of an irreconcilable enemy?

"Or shall America avail itself of Jewish genius as it avails itself of
the peculiar genius of every other race? . . . .

"That is the question for the American people to answer."

--From an article in The American Hebrew, Sept. 10, 1920.

XX.

Jewish Testimony in Favor of Bolshevism


The American people will answer that question, and their answer will be
against the disruptive genius of dissatisfied Jews.

It is very well known that "what Jewish idealism and Jewish discontent
have so powerfully contributed to accomplish in Russia" is also being
attempted in the United States. Why did not the writer in the American
Hebrew say the United States, instead of saying "the same historic
qualities of the Jewish mind and heart are tending to promote in other
countries."

"Jewish idealism and Jewish discontent" are not directed against
capital. Capital is enlisted in their service. The only governmental
order the Jewish effort is directed against is Gentile governmental
order; and the only "capital" it attacks is Gentile capital.

Lord Eustace Percy who, if one may judge by the full and appreciative
quotations of his words in the Jewish press, has the sanction of
thinkers among the Jews, settles the first point. Discussing the Jewish
tendency to revolutionary movements he says:

"In Eastern Europe Bolshevism and Zionism often seem to grow side by
side, just as Jewish influence molded Republican and Socialist thought
throughout the nineteenth century down to the Young Turk revolution in
Constantinople hardly more than a decade ago--not because the Jew cares
for the positive side of radical philosophy, not because he desires to
be a partaker in Gentile nationalism or Gentile democracy, but because
no existing Gentile system of government is ever anything but
distasteful to him."

And that analysis is absolutely true. In Russia, the excuse was the
czar; in Germany, the kaiser; in England it is the Irish question; in
the numerous South American revolutions, where the Jews always had a
ruling hand, no particular reason was thought necessary to be given; in
the United States it is "the capitalistic class;" but always and
everywhere it is, by the confession of their own spokesman, a distaste
for any form whatsoever of Gentile government. The Jew believes that the
world is his by right; he wants to collect his own, and the speediest
way of doing so is the destruction of order by revolution--a destruction
which is made possible by a long and clever campaign of loose and
destructive ideas.

As to the second point, every reader can verify the fact from his own
experience. Let him recall to his mind the capitalists who have been
held up to public scorn in the Jew-controlled press of the United
States--and whom does he find them to be? Whose forms have you seen
caricatured with the dollar-mark in Hearst's papers? Are they Seligman,
Kahn, Warburg, Schiff, Kuhn, Loeb & Company, or any of the others? No.
These are Jewish bankers. The attack is never made on them. The names
made most familiar to you by newspaper denunciation are the names of
Gentile industrial and banking leaders--and Gentile leaders only--the
principal ones being Morgan and Rockefeller.

It is a well-known fact that during the French Commune when men of
wealth suffered severe losses in property, the Jewish Rothschilds were
not injured to the extent of one pennyworth. It is also a well-known
fact, capable of proof satisfactory to any ordinary mind, that the
connections between Jewish financiers and the more dangerous
revolutionary elements here in the United States are such that it is
most unlikely that the former stand to lose anything in any event. Under
cover of the disorder in Russia at the present time, Jewish financiers
are taking advantage of the stress of the people to gain control of all
the strategic natural resources and municipal property, by methods which
they fully expect to be legalized by Jewish courts when the present
"Bolshevik regime" announces that it will give way to a "modified
communism." The world hasn't seen the end of Bolshevism yet. Like the
World War, Bolshevism cannot be interpreted until it is seen who profits
most by it, and the profiteering is in full sway now. The enemy is
Gentile capital. Not any other. And "all the wealth of the world is in
our hands" is the unspoken slogan of every Jewish outbreak in the world
today.

The quotation at the head if this article represents the position which
the Jews are now ready to take with reference to the Russian Revolution.
They have always been charged with responsibility for what has occurred
in that unhappy country, but at first their spokesmen denied it. The
denials were most indignant, and were usually accompanied by the typical
plaint that the charge was "persecution." But the facts have been so
overwhelming, and the government investigations have been so revealing,
that denials have been abandoned.

For a while an attempt was made to distract attention from Russia by a
tremendously powerful propaganda concerning the Jews in Poland. There
are many indications that the Polish propaganda was undertaken as a
"cover" for the immense immigration of Jews into the United States. It
may be that some of our readers do not know it, but an endless stream of
the most undesirable immigrants pours daily into the United States, tens
of thousands of the same people whose presence has been the problem and
menace of the governments of Europe.

Well, the Polish propaganda and the immigration movement are sailing
along smoothly, and the United States Government is assured by the
Jewish ring at Washington that everything is quiet along the Potomac (it
is quiet there, quiet as the Jewish ring could wish), but still the
Russian fact persists in calling for explanation.

And here is the explanation: The Jews created capitalism, we are told.
But capitalism has proved itself ill-behaved. So now, the Jewish
creators are going to destroy their creation. They have done so in
Russia. And now, will the American people be good and let their Jewish
benefactors do the same in America?

That is the new explanation, and typically Jewish again, it is coupled
with a proposal for the United States--and a threat! If America refuses
this particular service of the Jew, we "put him in a position of an
irreconcilable enemy." See quotation at the head of this article.

But the Jews have not destroyed capitalism in Russia. When Lenin and
Trotsky make their farewell bow and retire under the protective
influence of the Jewish capitalists of the world, it will be seen that
only Gentile or Russian capital has been destroyed, and that Jewish
capital has been enthroned.

What is the record? Documents printed by the United States Government
contain this letter: Please note the date, the Jewish banker and the
Jewish names:

"Stockholm, Sept. 21, 1917.

"To Mr. Raphael Scholan:

"Dear Comrade:--The banking house, M. Warburg, opened an account for the
enterprise of Comrade Trotsky upon receipt of a telegram from the
Chairman of the 'Rhein-Westphalian Syndicate.' A lawyer, probably Mr.
Kestroff, obtained ammunition and organized the transportation of same,
together with that of the money * * * to whom the sum demanded by
Comrade Trotsky is to be handed.

"Fraternal Greetings!

"Furstenberg."

Long before that, an American Jewish financier was supplying the funds
which carried revolutionary propaganda to thousands of Russian prisoners
of war in Japanese camps.

It is sometimes said, by way of explaining the Bolshevik movement, that
it was financed from Germany, a fact which was seized upon to supply war
propaganda. It is true that part of the money came from Germany. It is
true that part of the money came from the United States. It is the whole
truth that Jewish finance in all the countries was interested in
Bolshevism as an All-Jewish investment. For the whole period of the war,
the Jewish World Program was cloaked under this or that national
name--the blame being laid on the Germans by the Allies, and on the
Allies by the Germans, and the people kept in ignorance of who the real
personages were.

It was stated by a French official that two millions of money was
contributed by one Jewish banker alone.

When Trotsky left the United States to fulfill his appointed task, he
was released from arrest at Halifax upon request of the United States,
and everyone knows who constituted the War Government of the United
States.

The conclusion, when all the facts are considered, is irresistible, that
the Bolshevik revolution was a carefully groomed investment on the part
of International Jewish Finance.

It is easy to understand, then, why the same forces would like to
introduce it to the United States. The real struggle in this country is
not between labor and capital; the real struggle is between Jewish
capital and Gentile capital, with the I.W.W. leaders, the Socialist
leaders, the Red leaders and the labor leaders almost a unit on the side
of the Jewish capitalists.

Again recall which financiers these men most attack. You cannot recall a
single Jewish name.

The main purpose in these two articles, however, is to introduce the
Jewish testimony which exists as to the Jewish nature of Bolshevism.

The Jewish Chronicle, of London, said in 1919:

"There is much in the fact of Bolshevism itself, in the fact that so
many Jews are Bolsheviks, in the fact that the ideals of Bolshevism at
many points are consonant with the finest ideals of Judaism."

In the same paper, of 1920, is a report of an address made by Israel
Zangwill, a noted Jewish writer, in which he pronounced glowing praise
on "the race which has produced a Beaconsfield, a Reading, a Montagu, a
Klotz, a Kurt Eisner, a Trotsky." Mr. Zangwill, in his swelling Semitic
enthusiasm, embraced the Jews in the British Government in the same
category with the Jews of the Hungarian and Russian Bolshevik
governments. What is the difference? They are all Jewish, and all of
equal honor and usefulness to "the race."

Rabbi J. L. Magnes, in an address at New York in 1919, is reported to
have said:

"When the Jew gives his thought, his devotion, to the cause of the
workers and of the dispossessed, of the disinherited of the world, the
radical quality within him goes to the roots of things, and in Germany
he becomes a Marx and a Lassalle, a Haas and an Edward Bernstein; in
Austria he becomes a Victor Adler and a Friedrich Adler; in Russia, a
Trotsky. Just take for a moment the present situation in Russia and in
Germany. The revolution set creative forces free, and see what a large
company of Jews was available for immediate service. Socialist
Revolutionaries and Mensheviki, and Bolsheviki, Majority and Minority
Socialists--whatever they be called--Jews are to be found among the
trusted leaders and the routine workers of all these revolutionary
parties."

"See," says the rabbi, "what a large company of Jews are available for
immediate service." One ought to see where he points. There are as many
Jewish members of revolutionary societies in the United States, as there
were in Russia; and here, as there, they are "available for immediate
service."

Bernard Lazare, a Jewish writer who has published a work on
anti-Semitism, says:

"The Jew, therefore, does take a part in revolutions, and he
participates in them in so far as he is a Jew, or more correctly, in so
far as he remains a Jew."

He says also--"The Jewish spirit is essentially a revolutionary spirit,
and consciously or otherwise, the Jew is a revolutionist."

There is hardly any country in the world, except the United States,
where denials of this could be made in such a way as to require proof.
In every other country the fact is known. Here we have been under such a
fear of mentioning the word "Jew" or anything pertaining to it, that the
commonest facts have been kept from us--facts which even a superficial
knowledge of Jewish writing would have given us. It was almost a
pathetic spectacle to see American audiences go to lectures about the
Russian situation, and come away from the hall confused and perplexed
because the Russian situation is so un-Russian, all because no lecturer
thought it politic to mention "Jew" in the United States, for, as some
day we shall see, the Jew has contrived to gain control of the platform
too.

Not only do the literary lights of Jewry acknowledge the Jew's
propensity to revolution generally, and his responsibility for the
Russian situation particularly, but the lower lights also have a very
clear idea about it. The Jew in the midst of the revolution is conscious
that somehow he is advancing the cause of Israel. He may be a "bad Jew"
in the synagogue sense, but he is enough of a Jew to be willing to do
any thing that would advance the prestige of Israel. Race is stronger
than religion in Jewry.

The Russian paper, On to Moscow, in September, 1919, said:

"It should not be forgotten that the Jewish people, who for centuries
were oppressed by kings and czars, are the real proletariat, the real
Internationale, which has no country."

Mr. Cohan, in the newspaper, Communist, in April, 1919, said:

"Without exaggeration, it may be said that the great Russian social
revolution was indeed accomplished by the hands of the Jews. Would the
dark, oppressed masses of the Russian workmen and peasants have been
able to throw off the yoke of the bourgeoisie by themselves? No, it was
precisely the Jews who led the Russian proletariat to the dawn of the
Internationale and not only have led, but are also now leading the
Soviet cause which remains in their safe hands. We may be quiet as long
as the chief command of the Red Army is in the hands of Comrade Leon
Trotsky. It is true that there are no Jews in the ranks of the Red Army
as far as privates are concerned, but in the committees and Soviet
organizations, as commissars, the Jews are gallantly leading the masses
of the Russian proletariat to victory. It is not without reason that
during the elections to all Soviet institutions the Jews are winning by
an overwhelming majority * * * The symbol of Jewry, which for centuries
has struggled against capitalism, has become also the symbol of the
Russian proletariat, which can be seen even in the adoption of the Red
five-pointed star, which in former times, as it is well known, was the
symbol of Zionism and Jewry. With this sign comes victory, with this
sign comes the death of the parasites of the bourgeoisie * * * Jewish
tears will come out of them in sweat of drops of blood."

This confession, or rather boast, is remarkable for its completeness.

The Jews, says Mr. Cohan, are in control of the Russian masses--the
Russian masses who have never risen at all, who only know that a
minority, like the czar's minority, is in control at the seat of
government.

The Jews are not in the Red Army, Mr. Cohan informs us, that is, in the
ranks where the actual fighting is done; and this is strictly in line
with the Protocols. The strategy of the World Program is to set Gentiles
to kill Gentiles. This was the Jewish boast during the various French
social disasters, that so many Frenchmen had been set killing each
other.

In the World War just passed, there were as many Gentiles killed by
Gentiles as there are Jews in the world. It was a great victory for
Israel. "Jewish tears will come out of them in sweat of drops of blood."

But the Jews are in the places of control and safety, says Mr. Cohan,
and he is absolutely right about it. The wonder is that he was so honest
as to say it.

As to the elections, so-called, at which the Jews are so unanimously
chosen, the literature of Bolshevism is very explicit. Those who voted
against the Jewish candidates were adjudged "enemies of the revolution"
and executed. It did not require many executions at a voting place to
make all the elections unanimous.

Mr. Cohan is especially instructive on the significance of the Red Star,
the five-pointed emblem of Bolshevism. "The symbol of Jewry," he says,
"has become also the symbol of the Russian proletariat."

The Star of David, the Jewish national emblem, is a six-pointed Star,
formed by two triangles, one standing on its base, the other on its
apex. Deprived of their base lines, these triangles approximate the
familiar Masonic emblem of the Square and Compass. It is this Star of
David of which a Jewish observer in Palestine remarks that there are so
few among the graves of the British solders who won Palestine in the
recent war; most of the signs are the familiar wooden Cross. These
Crosses are now reported to be objectionable to the new rulers of
Palestine, because they are so plainly in view of the visitor who
approaches the new Jewish university. As in Soviet Russia, so in
Palestine, not many Jews laid down their lives for the cause: there were
plenty of Gentiles for that purpose.

As the Jew is a past master in the art of symbolism, it may not be
without significance that the Bolshevik Star has one point less than the
Star of David. For there is still one point to be fulfilled in the World
Program as outlined in the Protocols--and that is the enthronement of
"our leader." When he comes, the World Autocrat for whom the whole
program is framed, the sixth point may be added.

The Five Points of the Star now apparently assured are the Purse, the
Press, the Peerage, Palestine and Proletarianism. The sixth point will
be the Prince of Israel.

It is very hard to say, it is hard to believe, but Mr. Cohan has said
it, and revolutions especially since the French Revolution confirm it,
that "with this sign comes the death of the parasites of the bourgeoisie
* * * Jewish tears will come out of them in sweat of drops of blood."
The "bourgeoisie," as the Protocols say, are always Gentile.

The common counterargument to the invincible fact of the Jewish
character of the Russian revolution--an argument which is destined to
disappear now that Jewish acknowledgement is coming thick and fast--is
that the Jews in Russia suffer too. "How can we favor a movement which
makes our own people suffer?" is the argument put up to the Gentile.

Well, the fact is this: they are favoring that movement. Today, this
very moment, the Bolshevik Government is receiving money from Jewish
financiers in Europe, and if in Europe, then of course from the
International Jewish bankers in America also. That is one fact.

Another fact is this: the Jews of Russia are not suffering to anywhere
near the extent we are told by the propagandists. It is now a fact
admitted by Jews themselves that upon the first sweep of the Bolshevists
across Poland, the Polish Jews were friendly with the invaders and
helped them. The fact was explained by American Jews in this manner:
since Bolshevism came to Russia, the condition of the Jews there has
greatly improved--therefore the Polish Jews were friendly. And it is
true--the condition of Russian Jews is good.

One reason is: they have Russia. Everything there belongs to them.

The other reason is: The Jews of Russia are the only ones receiving help
there today.

Did that second statement ever strike you as significant? Only the Jews
of Russia have food and money sent to them. It is one form, of course,
of the support which the Jewish world is giving Bolshevism. But if the
suffering among the Jews is what the propagandists say it is, what must
it be among the Russians? Yet no one is sending food or money to them.
The probable truth of the whole situation is that Jewish Bolshevism is
laying a tax on the world. Any time it may be required, there is plenty
of evidence as to the good condition of the Jews in Russia. They have
all there is.

Another source of confusion is revealed in the question: "How can Jewish
capitalists support Bolshevism when Bolshevism is against capitalism?"

Bolshevism, as before stated, is only against Gentile capitalism. Jewish
financiers who remained in Russia are very useful to the Bolsheviki.
Read this description by an eyewitness: "A Jew is this Commissary of the
Bank, very elegant, with a cravat of the latest style, and a fancy
waistcoat. A Jew is this District Commissary, former stockbroker, with a
double bourgeois chin. Again a Jew, this inspector of taxes: he
understands perfectly how to squeeze the bourgeoisie."

These agents of Jewry are still there. Other agents are among the
Russians who fled, getting their lands away from them on mortgage loans.
When the curtain lifts, most of the choice real estate will be found to
have passed into Jewish control by perfectly "legal" means.

That is one answer to the question, Why the Jewish capitalists support
Bolshevism. The Red Revolution is the greatest speculative event of
human history. Besides, it is for the exaltation of Israel; it is a
colossal revenge, which the Jews always take where they can, for wrongs
real or imaginary.

Jewish capitalism knows exactly what it is doing. What are its gains?

1. It has taken a whole rich country, without the cost of war.

2. It has demonstrated the necessity of gold. Jewish power rests on the
fiction that gold is wealth. By the premeditated clumsiness of the
Bolshevik monetary system, the unthinking world has been made to believe
still more strongly that gold is necessary, and this belief gives Jewish
capitalism another hold on the Gentile world. If the Bolshevists had
been honest, they could have dealt Jewish capitalism its death blow. No!
Gold is still on its throne. Destroy the fiction that gold has value,
and you leave the Jewish International Financiers sitting forlorn on
heaps of useless metal.

3. It has demonstrated its power to the world. Protocol Seven says: "To
demonstrate our enslavement of the Gentile governments of Europe, we
will show our power to one of them by crimes of violence, that is, a
reign of terror." Has Europe been sufficiently "shown"? Europe has, and
is afraid! That is a great gain for Jewish capitalists.

4. Not the least of the gains is the field practice in the art of
revolution which Russia has offered. Students of that Red school are
coming back to the United States. The technique of revolution has been
reduced to a science according to the details laid down in the
Protocols. To use Rabbi Magnes's words again: "See what a large company
of Jews was available for immediate service." The available company is
now much larger.

[Issue of October 2, 1920.]