The Left Flank of the Protocols

Peter Myers. Date 22 April 1999; update June 5, 2022.

Write to me at contact.html.

You are at

Added August 11, 2003: Stalin accused of endorsing the Protocols.

The Protocols of Zion is the most tabooed book in the world. Although it is usually associated with Hitler, Nazism only appeared after the German defeat in the First World War, whereas the Protocols was first distributed, in Russia, about 1903, and would have been written about 1897. Its first mass distribution was among the "White" Russians fighting the Bolsheviks during the Civil War.

Critics argue that it is a forgery, cobbled together from various sources. This view is put by Norman Cohn in his book Warrant For Genocide, which studies the relationship between the Protocols and other texts which constitute its precedents. However scholars do not argue that the Gospel of Matthew is a forgery just because it has parallel passages with the Gospels of Mark and Luke; most think instead that the parallels point to a common source in a third document they call "Q" (e.g. see Robert Funk et. al., The Five Gospels). Could this be true of the Protocols too? Cohn fails to even consider such broader textual analysis.

There are two versions of Creation in the Bible. In the first, God creates the animals before the people (Genesis 1:25-26), while in the second (2:18-20) he creates Adam before the animals. Similarly there are two versions of the story about Noah's Ark. In the first version, God tells Noah to save one pair of every species (Genesis 6:19-20), while in the second version (7:2-3) Noah is told to save 7 pairs of every clean species and 1 pair of every unclean species. The Book of Genesis was put together by an editor, from many sources:  bible.html. Despite these contradictions a few lines apart, Genesis is the reason why the state of Israel was created 50 years ago.

Cohn's greatest failing is that he does not ask the question, "Is there any independent evidence that there is a one-world conspiracy; and if so, how might the Protocols be related to it?" H. G. Wells wrote, in his book The Open Conspiracy, later also published under the title What Are We To Do With Our Lives?, that there is indeed such a conspiracy, and that he is part of it. Wells was an admirer of Trotsky but an opponent of Stalin; Stalin, it seems, ruined the plot.

There is a Left interpretation of the one-world-conspiracy which also fits closely with the Protocols. This view is put by Karl Marx (last century), and today by Benjamin Ginsberg, Israel Shahak and Roger Garaudy. Many such people are Jews, and although they dismiss the Protocols as a forgery, they find this a difficult task because they expose the extent of Jewish power in the capital cities of the capitalist world. Benjamin Disraeli made similar disclosures (Lord George Bentinck, ch. 24; and Coningsby, ch XIV).

1. J. L. Talmon

A leading Israeli intellectual, J. L. Talmon wrote

"Particularly horrifying is the Soviet-Arab sponsorship of an updated version of the Protocols of Zion: the Zionist-American-Imperialist world plot, operating not only against Arabs, Asians and Africans, but also against all the Socialist regimes": talmon.html.

2. Karl Marx

The Protocols' description of the secret operation of the capitalist finance system - glossed over by Cohn, though it is the most important part of the Protocols - is comparable to Marx' essays (1) On the Jewish Question, (2) The Jewish Bankers of Europe, and (3) The Russian Loan. If the Protocols is suppressed, they will have to be suppressed too.

In On the Jewish Question, Marx wrote, "Money is the zealous one God of Israel, beside which no other God may stand. ... The God of the Jews has become secularised and is now a worldly God. The bill of exchange is the Jew's real God. His God is the illusory bill of exchange" (tr. Dagobert Runes as A World Without Jews).

The Karl Marx Library Volume 5 On Religion (arranged and edited, with an introd. and new translations, by Saul K. Padover McGraw-Hill Book Company New York 1972):

{p. 219} The Jewish Bankers of Europe*

TAKE Austria, for instance - a country which suffers from chronic scarcity of cash. What is she doing at this moment? She proposes to raise money by negotiating the mortgage bonds of the landowners of the Austrian dominions. But how is such an operation possible?

Through the Jewish houses, who, shut out from all more honorable branches of business, have acquired in this an inevitable degree of aptitude. There are in Vienna the Rothschilds, and Arnsteins, and Eskeles, and the Jew-Greek house of Seria, for whom the management of a loan of $100,000,000 is a matter of most easy accomplishment. The way they start at the loan is to get all their correspondents to canvass their business constituencies, and with the allurements of a particular commission, their correspondents of course do their best to ensnare their customers.

The broad facts we have pointed out have naturally produced all over Europe, especially in its northern, western, and central portions where the indolence which prevails in the southern part (as Italy, Spain, and Portugal) is modified by dimate, all manner and kinds of capitalists, speculators, and jobbers, who have no other business beyond that of dealing in money. Now there are posted in every point of Europe Jewish agents who represent this business and who are the correspondents of other leading Jews. It must here be borne in mind that for one big fish, like Rothschild, there are thousands of minnows. These make play and find food chiefly in Amsterdam, London, Frankfurt, Vienna, Berlin, Hamburg, Paris, and Brussels, and, as a general thing, loans are distributed among them in the following proportion:

* From "The Loanmongers of Europe," published in the New York Daily Tribune, November 22, 1855.

{p. 220} Amsterdam, say $25,000,000 London $25,000,000 Frankfurt $15,000,000 Vienna $10,000,000 Berlin $10,000,000 Hamburg $5,000,000 Paris $5,000,000 Brussels $5,000,000 Total $100,000,000

Beside the regular agents every one of these places swarms with Jews who aid in placing the stock. All over Germany and Holland, in Hanover, Brunswick, Cassel, Carlsruhe, Mannheim, Cologne, Rotterdam, The Hague, Antwerp, and again in Poland and the adjoining countries, in Breslau, Gacow, Warsaw, and so almost throughout Europe, there are to be found in almost every tovn a handful of Jews who deem it an honor to take a little of the new stock on speculation if the Rothschilds or any other of the great Jewish houses are connected with the negotiation. It is this business Free Masonry among the Jewish bankers which has brought the barter trade in government securities to its present height.

It remains to be seen, and the time is not distant, how the chief houses connected with this barter trade will stand when distrust makes their customers disgorge the securities which have heen forced down their throats and the markets become overglutted with unsalable bonds. Bearing in mind the havoc which the first Napoleon's wars created among these loanmongers, we have heretofore pointed out the smash, which from a knowledge of their financial position and connections we have no hesitation in predicting as sure to happen as a consequence of the present war to the representatives of this particular race.

That very compact machinery which is their greatest power of success in times of prosperity is their greatest cause of danger in time of adversity. Let the confidence in the Rothschilds be only once slighdy shaken, and the confidence in the Foulds, the Bischoffsheims, the Stieglitzes, the Arnsteins and Eskeles is gone. The results of despotism and monopolism are precisely similar. Let Louis Napoleon be chopped off, as he may be any moment by some Pianori, and France is in confusion. Let Lionel Rothschild of London, James of Paris stagger under any clever combination of disasters, and the whole loanmongering fabric of Europe will perish.

{p. 221} The Russian Loan*

THE issue of a new Russian loan affords a practical illustration of the system of loanmongenng in Europe, to which we have heretofore called the attention of our readers.

This loan is brought out under the auspices of the house of Stieglitz at St. Petersburg. Stieglitz is to Alexander what Rothschild is to Francis Joseph, what Fould is to Louis Napoleon. The late Czar Nicholas made Stieglitz a Russian baron, as the late Kaiser Franz made old Rothschild an Austrian baron, while Louis Napoleon has made a Cabinet Minister of Fould, with a free ticket to the Tuileries for the females of his family. Thus we find every tyrant backed by a Jew, as is every pope by a Jesuit. In truth, the cravings of oppressors would be hopeless, and the practicability of war out of the question, if there were not an army of Jesuits to smother thought and a handful of Jews to ransack pockets.

The loan is for fifty millions of rubles, to be issued in 5-percent bonds, with dividends payable at Amsterdam, Berlin, and Hamburg, at the exceedingly moderate price of 86 rubles - that is to say, in consideration of paying 86 rubles, in several installments, the paver is entitled to 5 rubles dividend per year, which amounts to nearly 6 percent, and to a bond of 100 rubles endorsed by the Russian Government, as security for his capital, which is redeemable at some remote period between this and doomsday. It is worthy of notice that Russia does not appeal, as Austria has recently done, to the moneyed enthusiasm of her own subjects, stirred up by the stimulus of bayonets and prisons; but this shows only the greater confidence which she has

* Published in the New York Daily Tribune, January 4, 1856.

{p. 222} in her credit abroad, and the greater sagacity which she possesses in raising money without embarrassing and therefore without disappointing the people at home. Baron Stieglitz does not propose to retain one single kopeck of the fifty millions for the Greek, Sicilian, American, Polish, Livonian, Tartarian, Siberian, and Crimean sympathizers with Russia, but distributes seventeen millions of the loan to Hope & Co. of Amsterdam, the same share to Mendelssohn & Co. of Berlin, and sixteen millions to Paul Mendelssohn-Bartholdy of Hamburg. And although British and French houses do not, for obvious reasons, court a direct participation in the loan, we shall presently show that indirectly they contribute largely to furnishing their antagonists with the sinews of war.

With the exception of a small amount of 5- and 6- percent Russian bonds negotiated at London and Hamburg, and of the last Russian loan - which was taken up by the Barings-Stieglitz of St. Petersburg in connection with Hope & Co. of Amsterdam, have been tbe principal agencies for Russian credit with the capitalists of Western and Central Europe. The 4-percent Hope certificates, under the special auspices of Hope, and the 4-percent Stieglitz inscriptions, under the special auspices of Stieglitz, are extensively held in Holland, Switzerland, Prussia, and to some extent even in England. The Hopes of Amsterdam, who enjoy great prestige in Europe from their connection with the Dutch Government and their reputation for great integrity and immense wealth, have well deserved of the Czar for the efforts they have made to popularize his bonds in Holland. Stieglitz, who is a German Jew intimately connected with all his coreligionists in the loanmongering trade, has done the rest. Hope commanding the respect of the most eminent merchants of the age, and Stieglitz being one of the Free Masonry of Jews which has existed in all ages - these two powers combined to influence at once the highest merchants and the lowest jobbing circles, have been turned by Russia to most profitable account. Owing to these two influences, and to the ignorance which prevails about her interior resources, Russia, of all the European continental governments, stands highest in the estimation of 'Change, whatever may be thought of her in other quarters.

But the Hopes lend only the prestige of their name; the real work is done by the Jews, and can only be done by them, as they monopolize the machinery of the loanmongering mysteries by concentrating their energies upon the barter trade in securities, and the changing of money and negotiating of bills in a great measure arising therefrom. Take Amsterdam, for instance, a city harboring many of the worst descendants of the Jews whom Ferdinand and Isabella drove out of Spain, and who, after lingering awhile in Portugal, were driven thence also, and eventually found a safe place of retreat in Holland. In Amsterdam

{p. 223} alone they number not less than 35,000, many of whom are engage in this gambling and jobbing of securities. These men have theil agents at Rotterdam, The Hague, Leyden, Haarlem, Nymegen, Delft, Groningen, Antwerp, Chent, Brussels, and various other places in the Netherlands and surrounding German and French territories. Their business is to watch the moneys available for investment and keenly observe where they lie. Here and there and everywhere that a little capital courts investment, there is ever one of these little Jews ready to make a little suggestion or place a little bit of a loan. The smartest highwayman in the Abruzzi is not better posted up about the locale of the hard cash in a traveler's valise or pocket than those Jews about any loose capital in the hands of a trader.

These small Jewish agents draw their supplies from the big Jewish houses, such as that of Hollander and Lehren, Konigswarter, Raphael, Stern, Sichel, Bischoffsheim of Amsterdam, Ezekiels of Rotterdam. Hollander and Lehren are of the Portuguese sect of Jews, and practice a great ostensible devotion to the religion of their race. Lehren, like the great London Jew, Sir Moses Montefiore, has made many sacrifices for those that still linger in Jerusalem. His office, near the Amstel, in Amsterdam, is one of the most picturesque imaginable. Crowds of these Jews assemble there every day, together with numerous Jewish theologians, and around its doors are congregated all sorts and manners of Armenian, Jerusalem Barbaresque, and Polish beggars, in long robes and Oriental turbans. The language spoken smells strongly of Babel, and the perfume which otherwise pervades the place is by no means of a choice kind.

The next Jewish loanmongering concern is that of Konigswarter, who came from a Jewish colony in Furth in Bavaria, opposite Nuremberg, whose 10,000 inhabitants are all Jews wirh some few Roman Catholic exceptions. The Konigswarters have houses at Frankfurt, Paris, Vienna, and Amsterdam, and all these various establishments will place a certain amount of the loan. Then we have the Raphaels, who also have houses in London and Paris, who belong, like Konigswarter, to the lowest class of loanmongering Jews. The Sterns come from Frankfurt, and have houses at Paris, Berlin, London, and Amsterdam. One of the London Sterns, David, was for some time established at Madrid, but so disgusted tbe chivalrous Spaniards that he was compelled to quit. They have married the daughters of one of the rich London Goldsmiths, and do an immense business in stock. The only man of ability in the family is the Paris Stern.

The Bischoffsheims are, next to the Rothschilds and Hopes, the most influential house in Belgium and Holland. The Belgian Bischoffsheim is a man of great accomplishments and one of the most respected bank directors and railway magnates. They came from

{p. 224} Mayence, and owing to the genius of this Belgian Bischoffsheim, have attained to their present eminence. They have houses at London, Amsterdam, Paris, Brussels, Antwerp, Frankfurt, Cologne, and Vienna, and have recently sent a clerk or agent to New York. They have intermarried with a Frankfurt Jew of the name of Goldschmidt, who, however, is not distinguished either for wealth or genius, although pretending to both. One of these Goldschmidts - and the most insignificant of the firm - presides over the London concern, while one of the Bischoflfsheims rules over that of Amsterdam, and the other over those of Brussels and of Paris.

As far as the seventeen million rubles assigned to Holland are concerned, although brought out under the name of Hope, they will at once go into the hands of these Jews, who will, through their various branch houses, find a market abroad, while the small Jew agents and brokers create a demand for them at home. Thus do these loans, vhich are a curse to the people, a ruin to the holders, and a danger to the governments, become a blessing to the houses of the children of Judah. This Jew organization of loanmongers is as dangerous to the people as the aristocratic organization of landowners. It principally sprang up in Europe since Rothschild was made a baron by Austria, enriched by the money earned by the Hessians in fighting the American Revolution. The fortunes amassed by these loanmongers are immense, but the wrongs and sufferings thus entailed on the people and the encouragement thus afforded to their oppressors still remain to be told.

We have sufficiently shown how the Amsterdam Jews through their machinery at home and abroad, will absorb in a very little time the seventeen millions of rubles put at the disposal of Hope. The arrangements attendant on the placing of the amount in Berlin and Hamburg are of a similar nature. The Mendelssohns of Berlin are descended from the good and learned Moses Mendelssohn, and count among the more modern members of the family the distinguished musical composer. In their case, as in that of the Lessings and a few other Frankfurt, Berlin, and Hamburg families, owing to some peculiar literary tradition or some peculiar influence of refinement, their houses are far superior in character to those of the general clique of loanmongers. Their representauve in Hamburg too, Mr. Beschutz, is a man of high character, and there is little doubt that under their auspices the thirty-three millions put by Stieglitz at their disposal will soon be taken. But, as in the case of Hope of Amsterdam, tbe part taken by the Mendelssohns will only be nominal, and to lend the prestige of their name. Rothschilds' special agent at Berlin, Simon Bleichroder, and their occasional agents, the Veits, will very likely take a portion on speculation, and sell it with a profit to the small Jew fry of Berlin, Hanover, Magdeburg, Brunswick, and Cassel, while the Frankfurt

{p. 225} Jews will supply the small fry of Darmstadt, Mannheim, Carlsruhe, Stuttgart, Ulm, Augsburg, and Munich. This small fry again distribute the stock among still smaller fry, until eventually some honest farmer of Swabia, some substantial manufacturer of Crefeld, or some dowager Countess of Isenburg has the honor of becoming the permanent creditor of the Czar by locking the stock up as a permanent investment. The Jew jobbers of Breslau, Ratisbon, Cracow, and Posen, the Frankels of Warsaw, Benedick of Stockholm, Hambro of Copenhagen, Magnus of Berlin, vith his extensive Polish constituency, Jacobson of the same city, and Ries and Heine of Hamburb - both houses of great influence in Jew financial circles, especially Heine - will each and all disseminate a goodly amount among their multitudinous customers and bring the stock within the reach of all the northern section of Europe. In this wise any amount, hovever large, is soon absorbed. It must be borne in mind that bcsides the local and provincial speculations, there is the immense stock-jobbing machinery between the various European gathering points of the loanmongering confederation now all connected by telegraph communication, which, of course, vastly facilitates all such operations. Moreover, almost all the Jew loanmongers in Europe are connected by family ties. At Cologne, for instance, we find the principal branch house of the Paris Foulds, one of whom married a Miss Oppenheim, whose brothers are the chief railway speculators of Rhenish Prussia and, next to Heistedt and Stein, the principal bankers of Cologne. Like the Rothschilds and the Greeks, the loanmongering Jews derive much of their strenth from these family relations, as these, in addition to their lucre affinities, give a compactness and unity to their operatioons whuch insure their success.

This eastern war is destined at all events to throw some light upon this system of loanmongers as well as other svstems. Meantime the Czar will get his fifty millions and, let the English journals say what they please, if he wants five fifties more, the Jews will dig them up. Let us not be thought too severe upon these loanmongering gentry. The fact that 1855 years ago Christ drove the Jewish moneychangers out of the temple, and that the moneychangers of our age enlisted on the side of tyranny happen again chiefly to be Jews, is perhaps no more than a historical coincidence. The laonmongering Jews of Europe do only on a larger and more obnoxious scale what many others do on one smaller and less significant. But it is only because the Jews are so strong that it is timely and expedient to expose and stigmatize their organization.

* Published in the New-York Daily Tribune, January 4, 1856.


Karl Marx wrote those words in 1856. What have the Trotskyists added, in the last 85 years?

The Trots have changed the meaning of the word "Left". Today, the author of the above would be branded "Far Right".

But we don't have to let the Trots be the arbiters.

More from Karl Marx on Jewish finance: marx-jewish-finance.html .

3. Moses Hess

In his book The Making of Modern Zionism, Schlomo Avineri discloses that the information about the connection between Judaism and capitalism was provided to Marx by none other than Moses Hess, the "red Rabbi" who later became one of the founders of modern Zionism through his book Rome and Jerusalem. Hess died in 1875, but in 1950 his remains were moved to Israel as a tribute to his role in Zionism:

Shlomo Avineri, THE MAKING OF MODERN ZIONISM: The Intellectual Origins of the Jewish State (Basic Books, New York 1981):

[p. 36] CHAPTER 3 Moses Hess: Socialism and Nationalism as a Critique of Bourgeois Society

IN MOSES HESS (18l2-75) two powerful ideological and political forces - socialism and the beginning of Jewish national thought - were integrated into a unique synthesis. When he died after decades of activity in the German and international socialist movement, the inscription on his tomb, near Cologne, read: "Father of German Social Democracy." Seventy-five years later, when the State of Israel was established, its government (then under the leadership of the Labor Party), transferred his remalns from Germany and reinterred them in the cemetery of the first kibbutz, near Lake Tiberias. There he lies now among the other founders of Zionist socialism - Syrkin, Borochov, Katznelson.

[p. 37] He calls for a radical social revolution based on a rejection of bourgeois society as contrary to the universalist postulates of Hegelian thought. These writings were later greatly praised by Marx, who always acknowledged his indebtness to Hess whom he occasionally called "my communist rabbi."

[p. 40] Hess was one of the first writers in the modern era to see Judaism in national terms, even whlle denying it a future. At the same tlme, it was in this period that Hess wrote one of the harshest statements that has ever been made by a Jew about Judaism. It is connected with Marx's essay "On the Jewish Question," which he wrote in 1843 and which appeared in 1844. In the year 1845 Hess's essay,

[p. 41] "On Capital," appeared, which contains very severe pronouncements regarding the Jews and identifying Judaism with capitalism. Only recently has it been shown that Hess' work preceded that of Marx. Hess wrote his essay in 1843 and sent it to Marx for publication. However, it was published a year and a half later. Hence, Hess's work was known to Marx while he wrote his essay, "On the Jewish Question," and most of the images which appear in Marx' works are borrowed from Hess.

{end} More at avineri.html.

But Hess abandoned assimilation, reverting to Jewish identity and religion, with his book Rome and Jerusalem (1962). He wrote there,

" ... Montefiore, Albert Cohn, Rothschild, Fould, and others. These men are Jewish princes such as the Jewish people has not had since the dispersion. These should organize a Society for the colonization of Palestine, a Chebra Eretz Nosheveth. A large number of the rich and respected Jews of all parts of the world will undoubtedly join them." (p. 154) rome-and-jerusalem.html

These were the very same Jewish bankers Marx had castigated in 1855-6.

4. Benjamin Ginsberg

An American Jew and Professor of Political Science, Ginsberg discloses that in the US, "Today, though barely 2% of the nation's population is Jewish, close to half its billionaires are Jews. The chief executive officers of the three major television networks and the four largest film studios are Jews, as are the owners of the nation's largest newspaper chain and most influential newspaper, the New York Times. In the late 1960s, Jews already constituted 20% of the faculty of elite universities and 40% of the professors of elite law schools; today, these percentages doubtless are higher." (The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State, p.1).

He further attests to the dominant role of Jews in the creation of the USSR: "Three of the six members of Lenin's first Politburo - Trotsky, Kamenev, and Zinoviev - were of Jewish origin. ... Kamenev and Zinoviev became members of the triumvirate (along with Stalin) that ruled the Soviet Union immediately after Lenin's death in 1924" (p. 30). In other words, of the three who ruled the USSR after Lenin's death, Stalin was the only non-Jew; when he later secured sole power, he purged the Jews from the leadership (pp. 53-6). More at ginsberg.html.

5. Israel Shahak

A retired Israeli Professor of Chemistry, Shahak is praised for his analysis and his courage by Noam Chomsky, Gore Vidal and Edward Said. Shahak has translated into English, articles originally published in Hebrew in the Israeli press, which expose

* the Jewish domination of the Clinton government; apart from major cabinet positions such as Madeline Allbright (Secretary of State, i.e. Foreign Minister), Robert Rubin (Treasurer), Mickey Kantor (Secretary for Trade, in charge of GATT and WTO), William Cohen (Defence), Sandy Berger (National Security Adviser), Robert Reich (Secretary for Labor), there are many other lesser Jewish appointees as well.

* Israel's hatred for Christianity (converts to Judaism are encourgaged to spit on the cross, in an official program financed by the Israeli government).

More at shahak1.html.

These and other articles of Shahak's, plus his book Jewish History, Jewish Religion, may be downloaded (while free speech remains) from

6. Roger Garaudy

Nahum Goldmann wrote, "A good friend of mine is Roger Garaudy, whose courage and free-ranging opinions I very much admire" (The Jewish Paradox, London, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1978, p. 204).

A leading French Marxist who was later expelled from the Party for cricising the Soviet Union, Garaudy began to research Zionism after Israel's invasion of Lebanon. After he published his findings, he was ostracised from the media. In his book The Founding Myths of Israeli Politics he writes,

' Until 1982 I had free access to the biggest publishing houses, T.V., radio, and press' (p. 185).

'But, from this point, the media asphyxiation begins: no more access to television, my articles refused. I had published forty books in all the great publishing houses, from Gallimard to Seuil, from Plon to Grasset and Laffont. They had been translated into twenty-seven languages. From now on, all the big doors are closed: One of my biggest publishers is heard to say to his adviser: "If you publish a book by Garaudy, you will no longer have the right to translate American works." To have accepted me would have brought the firm down. Another "big wheel", about another work, said to his literary director (who, impassioned by the book, worked for three months to help me to finish it): "I don't want any Garaudy in the house."' (p. 185).

More at garaudy.html.

Garaudy's book may be downloaded from

7. The Protocols on Socialism

The Protocols explicitly admits that Socialism is the only escape from the Capitalist trap, but claims to have subverted the Socialist movement: "The people have raised a howl about the necessity of settling the question of Socialism by way of an international agreement. Division into fractional parties has given them into our hands, for, in order to carry on a contested struggle one must have money, and the money is all in our hands " (Protocol 8).

More at protocol.html.

These sentences would surely not be present in the Protocols if, as the critics say, it was composed by the Czar's secret police. Would they admit that Socialism is the only answer? Would they admit to having taken over the Socialist movement? The terror and totalitarianism of the USSR are not a necessary or intrinsic part of Socialism, and they are not consistent with the philosophy of Karl Marx. There is hope yet.

Civilization developed in dry areas where self-sufficiency is difficult. Today's Greens disparage the Snowy Mountains Scheme, and teach that irrigation works ruined the ancient civilizations, whereas Marx taught that those works depended on the bureaucratic organization of society - the strong state - and decayed when the state itself was destroyed.

Engels wrote to Marx, in a letter of June 6, 1853,

"This artificial fertilization of the land which immediately ceased when the irrigation system fell into decay, explains the otherwise curious fact that whole stretches which were once brilliantly cultivated are now waste and bare (Palmyra, Petra, the ruins in Yemen, districts in Egypt, Persia and Hindustan); it explains the fact that one single devastating war could depopulate a country for centuries and strip it of its whole civilization."

Marx and Engels vs the "Cult of Nature"

"We see that this cult of nature is limited to the Sunday walks of an  inhabitant of a small provinial town who childishly wonders at the cuckoo  laying its eggs in another bird's nest (Vol. II, p. 40), at tears being  designed to keep the surface of the eyes moist (Vol. II, p. 73), and so on,  and finally trembles with reverence as he recites Klopstock's Ode to Spring  to his children. (Vol. II, p. 23 et seqq.) There is no question, of course,  of modern sciences, which, with modern industry, have revolutionized the whole of nature and put an end to man's childish attitute  towards nature as well as to other forms of childishness. But instead we get mysterious hints and astonished philistine notions about Nostradamus's prophecies, second sight in Scotsmen and animal magnetism. For the rest, it would be desirable that Bavaria's sluggish peasant economy, the  ground on which priests and Daumers likewise grow, should at last be ploughed up by modern cultivation and modern machines."

{end} szilard.html.

8. Four Indicators

A reader writes, "I am not prepared to believe that the Elders of Zion sat down in 929BC and decided to carve up the world by sending the symbolic snake of Judaism through its cities and all the other garbage about it. This is not even conspiracy theory, it's mystical crap."

That's not what I believe about it. I believe it genuine, but that does not mean the Protocols is right about everything. I don't know anyone who interprets it that way.

Consider these Four Indicators:

1. A major political event occurs in world history, inaugurating a regime aiming to engulf the world, carried out by organised Jews as documented by Bertrand Russell, Robert Wilton and others. Even though some Jews opposed the new regime, that does not undo the fact that it was created by Jews.



2. The Jewish role is hidden, denied, kept invisible. Many of the Jewish participants came from the West - therefore, some Western Jewish groups knew of the Jewish role, yet kept it hidden from non-Jews (e.g. in the public media, partly owned by Jews). There have also been dissident Jewish groups which tried to warn of what was happening.

3. Non-Jewish supporters of the Socialist movement are led to believe that the new regime is benevolent, and the inauguration of a utopia.

4. In fact it is a despotic dystopia for the very people among whom it is carried out. Non-Jewish Socialists are deceived and manipulated.

Now this pattern of events was predicted in the Protocols of Zion; yet no other type of literature, e.g. the Socialist literature preceding the event, correctly predicted this conjunction of events.

If you know of other literature that correctly predicted this conjunction of events, please let me know at contact.html.

This does not mean that Socialism, in the sense of public ownership or management of the economy, is a bad thing. Rather, it suggests that the Socialist movement was hijacked by vested interests interested in their own power. Future attempts at Socialism will have to guard against such forces.

9. Stalin accused of endorsing the Protocols

9.1 Jewish lobbies accuse their critics of "equating" Jews with Communism.

This overstatement is easy for them to wriggle out of because (a) not all factions of Jews supported the early Bolsheviks (similarly, not all factions of European Christians invaded South America, but the invaders WERE Christians) (b) through Stalin's ascendancy, a non-Jewish (Russian) faction later gained control of Communism, and evicted the Jewish conspirators, congregated in the Trotskyist movement: zioncom.html.

Judaism has an atheistic variant, which rejects the anthroporphic depiction of God of the Bible as a human creation, but which nevertheless holds to the Bible-ordained mission of the Jews to "unify" the world and eliminate "injustice": philos.html.

The correct statement is that the Bolshevik Government was created by Jews of this non-theistic type - in the name of the "working class". Not being "workers" or "peasants" themselves, they could only hold power by pitting the minorities within the empire against the Russian majority: convergence.html.

This was comparable to "Multi-Culturalism" in the West at present. After Stalin got full power, he reversed this, in the name of "Russification": i.e. all the minorities had to learn and speak the Russian language.

Many other factions of Jews around the world, even if opposed to the Bolshevik Jews, suppress this knowledge from among non-Jews.

Similarly, the Anglo-American war against Islam is largely a Jewish war for Greater Israel and the Third Temple (tmf.html), disguised - by Chomsky and the Trotskyist Jews - as a war "for oil". On the contrary, in occupied countries the oil pipelines etc are being sabotaged by the resistance: production will fall, not rise.

There is a strong correlation between those who deny that the Bolshevik Government was created by Jews, and those who denounce the Protocols of Zion as a forgery.

9.2 The Bolshevik reality, and its denial

Bertrand Russell says Bolsheviks were Americanized Jews: russell.html.

Dmitri Volkogonov (Director of the Institute of Military History, in the USSR) and Joseph Nedava (a Jewish Zionist) on the Jewish identities of Lenin and Trotsky: lenin-trotsky.html.

Stuart Kahan, a Zionist, wrote a biography of his uncle Lazar Kaganovich, the most senior Jew in Stalin's government, and the man who later orchestrated the murder of Stalin:

Stuart Kahan, The Wolf of the Kremlin (William Morrow and Company, NY 1987)

{p. 80} Although the Church was left intact, its lands were seized. Even prior religious teaching was forbidden in the schools. Of course, word came down that it was the

{p. 81} Jews who did this. After all, wasn't the revolution prepared and fashioned by Jews? Both of Karl Marx's grandfathers were rabbis, and Lenin's grandfather was also Jewish. And wasn't Yakov Sverdlov, the first chief of state, a Jew, as was Trotsky himself? But most people believed the Jews could be dealt with, as they always had been dealt with before.

That Trotsky, unquestionably the most outstanding man among the Bolsheviks, was a Jew did not seem an insuperable obstacle in a party in which the percentage of Jews, 52 percent, was rather high compared to the percentage of Jews (1.8 per cent) in the total population.

Lazar would have to keep a close eye on this. Would the people accept the revolution orchestrated by the Jews, or would they accept only one aspect and discard the other?

{end quotes} More at kaganovich.html.

9.3 How Stalin stole their conspiracy

Trotsky regarded himself as equal to Lenin; Trotsky's supporters regarded him as the real leader of the revolution.

Trotsky's arrogance led other Jewish Bolsheviks to form coalitions against him. At one time, Lenin offered Trotsky the succession, but Trotsky wanted to concentrate on writing the historical record (to convert intellectuals abroard).

After Lenin's death, power was vested in a triumvirate (Kamenev, Zinoviev and Stalin), of which Kamenev was considered the head; Stalin was the only non-Jew of the three.

Lenin and Trotsky thought that they could not hold Russia unless they extended the revolution to other countries, especially Germany. The Red Army, under Trotsky, moved into Poland in 1920, but were defeated by the Poles under Pidulsky; this put an end to their hopes of reaching Germany. This failure of the "internationalist" brand of Communism led to support for Stalin's "socialism in one country", gradually shifting power to a developing "Russian" (non-Jewish) faction.

Trotsky failed to attend Lenin's funeral, because he was in the south, recuperating from an illness. Having his own private train with him, and motor cars hauled by it, he could have returned, but accepted Stalin's assurances that they could manage the funeral without him. His absence diminished his reputation among the Bolsheviks.

The Bolsheviks saw themselves as following in the steps of the French Revolution, and were wary lest some Napoleon arise among them, to "end" it. Trotsky, as head of the Red Army, was vulnerable to this accusation. To dis-associate himself from this charge, he did not resist when the triumvirate moved him to another position.

During World War II, Stalin had to reinstate Russian culture, and even the Orthodox Church, to gain the support of the people against the Nazis. The Jewish and non-Jewish factions of Communism united against the invaders.

Towards the end of the war, the Jewish faction, overconfident of Stalin's favour, pushed for a separate Jewish republic to be carved out of the USSR, in the Crimea. It was to be open to Jews from anywhere in the world, and to be funded by Jewish capitalists from the West: sudoplat.html.

This so alarmed Stalin, that he turned against the Jewish faction once more.

A little later, the US Government put to Stalin the 1946 Baruch Plan for World Government, drafted by two Jews, David Lilienthal and Bernard Baruch. Lilienthal was head of the Atomic Energy Commission, and Baruch was a Wall Street banker. Stalin's rejection of the plan is one of the markers of the start of the Cold War: baruch-plan.html.

After the creation of the state of Israel in 1949, Jews could choose between two rival centres of government. Stalin was alarmed to see the Jewish allegiance to Israel when Golda Meir visited the USSR. A "Cold War" developed between Moscow and Jerusalem.

The Israeli Government was headed by David Ben-Gurion, an admirer of Lenin but a foe of Stalin - in effect, a Trotskyist. Thus, this unrecognized "Cold War" was between rival visions of Socialism. In Ben-Gurion's version, Eretz Israel was not only part of world socialism, but its centre.

Jews were polarised, split between the two.

In 1953, Stalin was murdered, two months after the "Doctors Plot" was publicised. The coup d'etat was done by a Jewish faction (Kaganovich, Beria), and a "Russian" faction (Khruschev): death-of-stalin.html.

Beria, of the Jewish faction, took over, and enacted anti-Stalinist measures of the kind Gorbachev implemented later. But the "Russian" faction, sensing the fall of the East Bloc, overthrew Beria: beria.html.

Israel's victory in the 1967 war brought many Communist Jews to its side. The Polish Government, run by Jews, sided with Israel against the USSR, and was forced to step down, being replaced by (non-Jewish) Poles: poland.html.

9.4 The meaning of "Convergence" between East and West

Convergence was a Zionist/Trotskyist idea.

The aim was to seize control of the USSR from the Stalinists, while securing the West for "Marxist" values as enacted in the early Bolshevik period: Gay Rights, Feminism, the abolition of Marriage, cultural revolution, minorities against the majority: sex-soviet.html.

This "Marxist Anti-Communism" in the West attacked the Soviet Union for betraying the "ideals" of Marxism: kostel.html.

Beria and Gorbachev attempted to return the Soviet Union to "Western" Marxism. Each emphatically rejected Stalin and looked to a return to early Bolshevism; but this "Western" Marxism is Trotskyism by another name: convergence.html.

David Ben-Gurion predicted World Government by 1987. In 1962, LOOK magazine invited him and other leaders to picture the world 25 years into the future, i.e. in 1987. His article published in the issue of January 16, 1962 shows amazing prescience. Despite the animosities of the Cold War then under way, ben Gurion sees Eastern Europe being torn from the USSR - undoing Stalin's "empire" - and joined with Western Europe; and China (even Mao's China) and Japan joining the US in what seems the first published depiction of APEC.

A World-Government has been created, with regional blocs in Europe, the USSR and the Pacific Rim, and a Supreme Court for Mankind has been established in Jerusalem, as well as a shrine commemmorating the Jewish role in the bringing-together of mankind. David ben Gurion LOOK magazine Jan 16, 1962: bengur62.jpg.

Ben Gurion explained the thinking behind this prediction, in terms of Judaism's mission to unify the world. Note that, even though an atheist, Ben Gurion derived this vision from the Jewish Bible: bengur-bible.html.

9.5 The Doctors Plot: Stalin branded a "Nazi"

It is common for Trotskyist and Zionist writers to liken Stalin to Hitler. Norman Cohn and J. L. Talmon depict Stalin this way.

Cohn writes,

"Stalin in his last years produced a new version of the conspiracy-myth, in which Jews figured as agents of an imperialist plot to destroy the Soviet Union and assassinate its leaders; this was used to secure the execution of Rudolf Slansky and his Jewish colleagues on the Central Committee of the Czechoslovak Communist party in 1952, and it also formed the basis for the story of the 'doctors' plot' in 1953." (Warrant For Genocide, (Penguin edition, 1970, p. 15). More at cohn.html.

Talmon writes,

"Particularly horrifying is the Soviet-Arab sponsorship of an updated version of the Protocols of Zion: the Zionist-American-Imperialist world plot, operating not only against Arabs, Asians and Africans, but also against all the Socialist regimes, causing economic difficulties, student unrest, Catholic intransigence." (Israel Among The Nations, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London 1970, p. 188). More at talmon.html.

Edvard Radzinsky, in his biography, depicts Stalin the same way.

Edvard Radzinsky, STALIN: The First In-Depth Biography Based on Explosive New Documents from Russia's Secret Archives (translated from the Russian By H.T. Willetts, Hodder & Stoughton, London 1996):

{p. 534} Professor Vovsi, for instance, one of the Kremlin doctors, was related to Mikhoels. This prompted the idea of a proliferating Jewish conspiracy utilizing the world's most humane profession. Stalin had vivid memories of the anti-Semitic tracts devoured by the mob in his youth - Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the outpourings of the Union of the Russian People. With his mind always on the Great Dream he knew that there were two emotions which could unite society: fear, and hatred of the Jews.

{p. 535} ... The storyline Stalin concocted went as follows: the sinister Jewish organization Joint was bent on destroying the Russian people. It had probably begun operations in the days of Trotsky, Zinoviev, and Kamenev. Later, its agents, Mikhoels and other loyal instruments of Amencan imperialism, had infiltrated everywhere. ...

Zionists had infiltrated even the highest levels of the political elite. ...

In Czechoslovakia Slansky, the First Secretary of the Communist Party, was put on trial, and several other senior officials were tried with him. They had one thing in common: all of them were Jews. Slansky was shot as an agent of international Zionism.

{p. 565} In 1995 ... Another procession ... dozens of portraits of Stalin ... Communists, monarchists, and Russian fascists marched side by side, at one in their devotion to the Boss.

And rightly so. Was he not a greater national-socialist than Hitler?

{end of quotes} More from Radzinsky at radzinsk.html.

9.6 The "Stalin = Hitler" Syllogism

The syllogism is:

Opposition to Judaism is Evil
Stalin opposes Judaism
therefore, Stalin is Evil

Stalin is Evil
Evil is Hitler (Hitler being the personification of Evil)
therefore, Stalin is Hitler

With regard to the Protocols of Zion, the syllogism is:

Hitler believed the Protocols of Zion to be genuine
Hitler was a Nazi
therefore, anyone who believes the Protocols genuine is a Nazi

I admire the Jewish devotion to scholarship; but does it descend to this?

Here is this logic, expressed in an email I received on 8 Aug 2003, with my comments interspersed:

>> you apparently claim the Protocols of the Elders of Zion were genuine, when their origin with the Czarist Okhranka in 1903, plagiarized from a contemporary French source, is well documented.

comment: I constantly read this view. Documented by who? Names of authors, books, articles please. Page numbers etc.

>> That certainly classes you with Hitler

comment: Hitler thought that the earth is round. Since you and I agree, that "classes us with Hitler" too. The first people to observe that the Bolshevik revolution was a Jewish revolution, were its victims in Russia. It was they who alerted the rest of the world. Various people in other countries said so, including Churchill and Bertrand Russell. Hitler later said so too; but Russell said it before Hitler did. On your logic, all these people are "classed with Hitler".

>> your implication that Troksky playing chess with a (gasp!) Vienna Jew during his first exile from Russia is proof of some vast Jewish conspiracy.

comment: I did not infer such a conspiracy from his chess games; the evidence for that is from other material. And this was not just any "Vienna Jew", but Baron Rothschild. Marx wrote against the Rothschilds, but here's Trotsky playing chess with them. It doesn't imply animosity, does it? It doesn't compare with Trotsky's attitude to the Czar.

>> The moving letter from 1933 Ukraine that I sent you obviously had no effect upon your hate-filled mind.

comment: On the contrary, I believe that the Ukraine famine's 6 million victims are just as important as that other 6 million. Can you explain why we hear about one but not the other? At present, the US is like a bully in a school playground. Stalin was a bully too, but perhaps it would be better to have 2 bullies keeping each other in check, than one. Stalin, at least, had a good side too: one can see that the Russians were better off in the USSR than they have been since.

9.7 Jewish Bolsheviks turn to Neo-Conservatism

The Fraud of Neoconservative "Anti-Communism", by Max Shpak, May 15, 2002:

{quote} Stalin's purges of many of his former Bolshevik colleagues (including Trotsky, who was assassinated while in exile), his 1939 pact with Hitler, and rumors of Stalin's own anti-Jewish prejudices gave many would-be supporters pause. When Hitler invaded the Soviet Union, it became clear the Russian masses would not fight for the sake of Bolshevism, an ideology that brought them so much misery, but rather for the sake of Russian blood and soil. From then on, the Soviet leadership had to court the very Russian nationalist elements that the early Bolsheviks had worked so hard to stamp out. This lead to an increasing tolerance towards the Russian Orthodox Church and a decreased Jewish presence in the Soviet politburo and KGB. Thus, the USSR was "betraying" the very elements that made it attractive to the Jewish establishment to begin with.

Perhaps even more significant a factor in the origins of neoconservatism was the emergence of an independent Israeli state. While many Jewish Marxists eagerly supported the Zionist state, the more intellectually consistent Left opposed Zionism on the grounds that all nationalisms, including Jewish ones, are enemies of global proletarian revolution. Thus, Jewish leftists who once advocated internationalism for gentile nations were forced to come to terms with the implications of this ideology for their own nationalist sentiments. Thus, they needed an ideology which would let them have their cake (opposing gentile nationalism) and eat it too (by supporting Israel), and they found just such a worldview with neoconservatism. ... {endquote} More at cia-infiltrating-left.html.

For more detail, please consult my two major studies of the Protocols of Zion:

1. Hiding Behind Auschwitz (1995): hiding.html

2. The follow-up to the above, the Protocols of Zion Toolkit (2002) - the most complete study of the Protocols of Zion yet, incorporating the major arguments both for and against: toolkit.html.

Write to me at contact.html.