Making Sense of Stalin

by Peter Myers

Date October 20, 2000; major revision December 19, 2002; update November 2, 2020.

Write to me at contact.html.

You are at .

Before the creation of Israel, Jews overwhelmingly supported the Soviet Union; it had been created by atheistic Jews, and many Jews were in top positions.

Stalin stole it from them, but he used the same covert methods that Jews used, so it was not clear whether he or they were in charge; and as long as Trotsky was alive, there was a chance of his restoration.

The assassination of Trotsky on August 20, 1940 might have caused Jewish disaffection, but they deemed Hitler the greater threat, and backed the USSR as the only power that could defeat him.

Once Israel was created, and Stalin observed that large crowds of Soviet Jews rallied around Golda Meir when she visited Moscow synagogue, Jews were gradually removed from top positions in politically sensitive areas. A Cold War broke out between Moscow and Jerusalem.

(1) Brief History of the USSR
(2) How Stalin overthrew the Jewish Bolsheviks
(3) Stalin Versus the World Government
(4) Punishing Russians after the Cold War
(5) Correspondence with Jacob Jugashvili, a great grandson of Stalin

The significance of Stalin is, not that he was a "good guy", but that he gave to Jewish Bolsheviks a taste of their own medicine, and, over time, made Communism a less Jewish and more Russian system, reflected in the name for World War II, "the Great Patriotic War".

Many people who believe that we need a world based on common ownership of the major parts of the economy (and this is my own view) were deceived by the Bolsheviks and their supporters in the West, who hid the terrible stifling of freedom of thought in the new regime. Further, they hid the fact that at the start, Bolshevism was based not on equality of classes, but on Jewish domination (in league with other aggrieved minorities) of the majority Russians.

Western sympathisers were particularly attracted to Trotsky and deceived by him, because of his skill in writing the story of the Revolution. His version became the accepted account for many naive socialists in the West: new-left.html. In their view, Stalin "buggered it up"; but, in truth, he stole the Jewish conspiracy.

His cruelty was, in part, aimed at the Jewish forces he had ousted; but the Soviet Union tried to keep its Jews IN, unlike Nazi Garmany, which tried to keep them OUT.

In the wake of the betrayal of Eastern Europe - its impoverishment through bad economic advice (from the West) after the fall of Communism, and the West's opportunism in re-establishing Empire - a good side of Stalin is once again being seen.

This paper was inspired by a reading of Rabbi Harry Waton's book A Program FOR THE JEWS: An Answer TO ALL ANTI-SEMITES: A PROGRAM FOR HUMANITY (New York, 1939) (watonpgm.doc or watonpgm.pdf).

The USSR was created by atheistic Jews, but Stalin overthrew them. Stalin overthrwew the Jewish Bolsheviks, but this was not something he set out to do; rather it was a by-product of his power-struggle with Trotsky: stalin-overthrew-jews.html .

(1) Brief History of the USSR - by Peter Myers

Bertrand Russell visited Russia in 1920. He had been sympathetic to the new regime, but in a letter to Ottoline Morel written that year, reproduced in The Autobiography of Bertrand Russell, he wrote:

" ... Bolshevism is a closed tyrannical bureaucracy, with a spy system more elaborate and terrible than the Tsar's, and an aristocracy as insolent and unfeeling, composed of Americanised Jews. No vestige of liberty remains, in thought or speech or action." (George Allen & Unwin, London 1975 paperback, p. 354): russell.html.

In the hardback edition, Volume II (Brown & Co., Boston 1968), it's on p. 172.

In 1920 the Red Army, at Lenin's behest, entered Poland, hoping to link up with revolutionaries in Germany. Defeat in Poland led to the victory of Stalin's "national Bolshevism" over Trotsky's international version: lenin-trotsky.html.

Trotsky, despite his brilliance, was feared by other Bolsheviks, who banded against him. When Lenin died, power passed to a triumvirate (Kamenev, Zinoviev and Stalin), of whom Stalin was the only non-Jew: soviet-union-early.html.

In 1928 Stalin gained full power; he sent Trotsky into exile at Alma-Ata in Central Asia on January 17 that year, and deported him in February 1929.

Beginning with the purges of the 1930s, Stalin overthrew Jewish Bolshevism and installed a Russian version.

Jewish Bolsheviks now coalesced about Trotsky, but too late: deutscher.html. Stalin's pact with Hitler was the last straw for Arthur Koestler, who was one of many to became a Neo-Con: koestler.html.

In 1946, the Baruch Plan for World Government was put to Stalin by the American government, using the slogan "One World or None". The Plan was drafted by David Lilienthal and Bernard Baruch, both Jews. Bertrand Russell, a supporter, wrote about it in his book Has Man a Future? Stalin's rejection of it was a marker of the start of the Cold War: baruch-plan.html.

Stalin was murdered in 1953, less than 2 months after the Doctors' Plot was announced . On January 13 Tass announced the arrest of 9 poisoning doctors (6 being Jewish); on February 8 Pravda published the names of Jewish saboteurs; on February 11 the USSR severed diplomatic relations with Israel (Yosef Govrin, Israeli-Soviet Relations 1953-1967, pp. 3-4). At the end of February rumors spread that Jews were to be deported to Siberia.

On March 5 Stalin was declared dead; on March 6th Beria's tanks surrounded Moscow. After a few weeks Stalin's name disappeared from the newspapers; after March 20, articles against Jews ceased. On April 3rd the Kremlin doctors were freed; on April 7, the Constitution ceased to be called "Stalinist". The murderers belonged to a Jewish faction (Kaganovich, Beria) and a Russian faction (Khruschev): death-of-stalin.html.

Malenkov ruled nominally, with the support of Beria and Molotov (whose wife was Jewish), but real power lay with Beria. He was ousted a few months later by Khrushchev; Beria's fall marked the end of Jewish Bolshevism: beria.html.

In the 1967 and 1973 Mid-East wars, Jews overwhelmingly sided with Israel against the USSR. This led to the replacement of the Jewish-Communist government of Poland by a non-Jewish one, and to a wave of Jewish emigration from the USSR. The people who created the USSR had finally abandoned it: jewish-emigration-ussr.html.

Communism has fallen, yet reigns in our universities and courts, with Open Borders, Gay Marriage, the World Court, and Political Correctness. What has fallen is Stalinism; in its place "Marxist Anti-Communism" has arisen: kostel.html.

Its components are variously called Trotskyist, New Left, the Frankfurt School, Postmodernist, Feminist, Green and "New Age": new-left.html. They are all broadly in Trotsky's camp.

Convergence between Communism and Capitalism was promoted by H. G. Wells, David Ben Gurion (in 1962 he predicted World Government by 1987: tmf.html), Sakharov and Gorbachev (via his talk of a single "World Civilization"). In each case, they wanted to get rid of Stalinism in the USSR, and "Anti-Semitism" in the West: convergence.html.

(2) How Stalin overthrew the Jewish Bolsheviks

The information below is from Behind Communism, by Frank L Britton.

This book is of the "Communism is Jewish" vein, denying that Stalin or the postwar Soviet Union established a non-Jewish Communism. It does agree that not all Jews are Communists, and that Zionists are often quite anti-Communist.

I think that "Stalinism" did establish a non-Jewish or Goy Communism, and that Gorbachev was trying to destroy its vestiges to return to what he saw as original purity. However, Britton's book is useful for providing many small details, e.g. of how Stalin came to power.

- Peter Myers


circa 1953

by Frank L Britton

Reprinted 1994 by Criminal Politics Book Club, Cincinnati, Ohio.

{p. 40} The Troika

In 1909 the Lenin-Zinoviev-Kamenev "troika" was formed. It was to endure until Lenin's death in 1924. Zinoviev and Kamenev were Lenin's inseparable companions. Later, when the Bolsheviks were in power, Trotzky would become co-equal with Lenin, and even something of a competitor, but Kamenev and Zinoviev were never Lenin's

{p. 41} equals nor his competitors - they were his right and left hand. They would argue with him, and fight with him, and oppose him in party councils, but the "troika" was broken only when Lenin died.

{p. 53} This Central Committee was to rule the Bolshevik Party through the critical days of the October Revolution. Who were the principal members of the "October Central Committee"? Let us take the words of Lev Trotzky as they appear in his book, Stalin: "In view of the Party's semi-legality the names of persons elected by secret ballot were not announced at the Congress, with the exception of the four who had received the largest number of votes. Lenin - 133 out of a possible 134, Zinoviev - 132, Kamenev - 131, Trotzky - 131". [Stalin: An Appraisal of the Man and His Influence, by Lev Trotsky (translated by Charles Malamuth), Harper Bros., New York & London, 1941) pages 220-221.] These four two months before the October Revolution, were the top leaders of the Bolshevik Party. Three were Jews and the fourth, Lenin, was married to a Jewess.

Trotzky's writings are extremely enlightening from a historical viewpoint. He hated Stalin and he wrote his book, Stalin, to prove that Stalin was a Johnny-come-lately, an upstart, and an usurper. He brings forth masses of evidence to show how unimportant Stalin was in Party councils during and immediately after the October Revolution. In doing so, Trotzky again and again emphasizes who the really important leaders were. Let us take another typical comment from his book on Stalin as he describes the meetings of the October Central Committee shortly before the Bolshevik Revolution:

"The 422 pages of the fourth volume, dealing with August and September, record all the happenings, occurrences, brawls, resolutions, speeches, articles in any way deserving of notice. Sverdlov, then practically unknown, was mentioned three times in that volume; Kamenev, 46 times; I, who spent August and the beginning of September in prison, 31 times; Lenin, who was in the underground, 16 times; Zinoviev, who shared Lenin's fate, 6 times. Stalin was not mentioned even once. Stalin's name is not even in the index of approximately 500 proper names." [Stalin (ibid) pages 222-223]

Thus, Trotzky again cites evidence to prove that Stalin was not an important figure in the Bolshevik Party in 1917. But in doing so he names the real leaders, who as before are the Jews, Kamenev, Zinoviev, Trotzky, and the up and coming Sverdlov. Lenin is the only gentile.

Because the top party leaders were either in prison or in hiding as a result of the abortive July Days uprising, the Sixth Party Congress was organized by the lesser lights of the party, of whom Sverdlov was the most active. Lev Trotzky, ever anxious to discredit Stalin, gives us this description: "The praesidium consisted of Sverdlov, Olminsky, Lomov, Yurenev, and Stalin. Even here, with the most prominent figures of Bolshevism absent, Stalin's name is listed in last place. The Congress resolved to send greetings to 'Lenin, Trotzky, Zinoviev, Lunacharsky, Kamenev, Kollontai, and all the others arrested and per-

{p. 55} secuted comrades'. These were elected to the honorary praesidium." [Stalin (ibid) page 217.] Here again, in the words of Trotzky, we have named the "most prominent figures of Bolshevism": Lenin, Trotzky, Zinoviev, Kamenev, Kollontai and Lunacharsky. And we know these were the most important leaders because they were the ones Kerensky had arrested or driven underground following the July Days revolt. Of these, only Lunacharsky and Lenin were gentile; the others were Jewish. These facts show why the Jewishness of communism is so immediately and indisputably apparent to anyone who has the slightest knowledge of Bolshevik history.


On August 17th Kamenev was released from prison, and exactly a month later Trotzky was also freed by the Kerensky regime. On Sept. 24th Trotzky was elected president of the Petersberg Soviet, displacing Cheidze, the Menshevik. From this moment on the Bolsheviks were in control of the Petersberg Soviet. On October 29th the Petersberg Soviet voted to transfer all military power to a "Military Revolutionary Committee", headed by Trotzky. Revolution was now only days away.

{p. 64} The Triumvirate

Lenin died of a brain hemorrhage in January of 1924. By this time the communists had become firmly entrenched. The civil wars were over and every vestige of organized resistance to Jewish-Bolshevism had been destroyed. On Lenin's death the party leadership fell to fighting among itself.

Lenin had, as early as May of 1922 suffered a paralytic stroke which affected his speech and motor reflexes. In December he suffered a second stroke, and his place was taken by a triumvirate composed of Zinoviev, Kamenev, and Joseph Stalin. Shortly afterwards Lenin suffered another stroke, and in 1924 he died.

Trotzky in Decline

In the early days of the new regime Trotzky had enjoyed near equality with Lenin in prestige and power. Outside of Russia, Lenin-Trotzky were regarded as a duality, and in current literature of that period their names were often hyphenated. The outside world had therefore fully expected Trotzky to assume Lenin's mantle as party leader. But after 1922 Trotzky's prestige in the Politburo had declined rapidly, as we shall see.

In the year the triumvirate began to function the Politburo was composed of Lenin, Zinoviev, Kamenev, Trotzky, Bukharin, Tomsky, and Stalin. The Lenin-Zinoviev-Kamenev "troika" had, of course, been dominant so long as Lenin was active, but now Zinoviev and Kamenev, as the surviving members of the "troika," regarded themselves as Lenin's rightful successors, and they looked on Trotzky as a competitor. Into this picture Stalin insinuated himself. He allied himself with Kamenev and Zinoviev, and the three were able to turn the Politburo against Trotsky. Stalin thus became the junior member of the triumvirate. Trotzky describes the situation this way [Stalin (ibid) page 337] "Used as a counterweight against me, he was bolstered and encouraged by Zinoviev and Kamenev, and to a lesser extent by Rykov, Bukharin and Tomsky. No one thought at the time that Stalin would some day loom

{p. 65} away above their heads. In the first triumvirate Zinoviev treated Stalin in a circumspectly patronizing manner; Kamenev with a touch of irony."

Zinoviev was considered to be the senior triumvir, and he gave the opening address at the 12th Party Congress, a function heretofore reserved to Lenin. Zinoviev was not well received in this capacity, and before the Congress had adjourned, Stalin's control over the party machine gave him a dominant position in the triumvirate. This was the situation shortly after Lenin's death.

Stalin to Power

Stalin now moved to consolidate his position. In April of 1925 he engineered Trotzky's removal as War Commissar. In the same month he broke with Zinoviev and Kamenev and allied himself with politburo members Bukharin, Rykov, and Tomsky

Trotzky, Zinoviev, and Kamenev now united their forces in opposition to Stalin. But now it was too late. In February of 1926 Zinoviev was expelled from the Politburo then from the presidency of the Petersberg (Leningrad) Soviet, and finally as president of the Third International. Less than a month later (October 23) Trotzky and Kamenev were also expelled from the Politburo.

This marked the end of any effective resistance to Stalin. The next year Zinoviev, Kamenev, and Trotzky were removed from the party's Central Committee, and shortly afterwards all three were read out of the party. In 1929 Trotzky was exiled abroad. In June of 1930 Stalin became the supreme dictator of Russia.

It is frequently argued that Stalin's rise to power marked the end of the Jewish phase of communism. In support of this, it is pointed out that while such Jews as Trotzky, Zinoviev, Kamenev, Martynov, Zasulich, Deutsch, Parvus, Axelrod, Radek, Uritzky, Sverdlov, Dan, Lieber, Martov, and others were prominent in the early history of the revolution, these have almost without exception been executed or exiled. This on the surface is a convincing argument. But it completely overlooks the fact that Stalin has both a Jewish wife and a Jewish son-in-law. Both Stalin and his daughter, Svetlana, have married into the powerful Jewish Kaganovich family. ...


One of the most frequent arguments used to disprove the Jewishness of Russia's present day leadership, strangely enough, revolves around Lazar Kaganovich. Propagandists are fond of pointing him out as "the only Jewish member of the Politburo," the suggestion being that since the Politburo contains only one Jew, it is plainly not Jewish controlled. But this argument will not stand the light of day it completely ignores the fact that both Premier Stalin and vice-premier Molotov have Jewish wives. And it conveniently overlooks the fact that the solitary Jew, Kaganovich, is doubly related to Stalin by marriage. Kaganovich is not just another member of the Politbureau he is Stalin's brother-in-law, and his chief advisor and trouble-shooter. The Stalin-Molotov-Kaganovich combination which rules Russia today is just as solidly Jewish as was the original Lenin-Zinoviev-Kamenev-Trotzky government. {end}

More on Kaganovich: kaganovich.html.

Lenin, although of mixed ancestry, identified as Jewish: lenin-trotsky.html.

Bertrand Russell's evidence that the Bolshevik Government was originally set up by atheistic Jews: russell.html.

For the last 30 years, the West has been experimenting with the abolition of marriage, as was done in the Soviet Union until Stalin reversed it.

When co-habitation between the sexes is treated the same as marriage; when "Gay" relationships are called "marriage"; then marriage has been abolished. The only difference is that this step was done openly in the USSR, but our leaders in the West are less straightforward.

Trotsky is associated with the abolition of the state and the family; Stalin with their reintroduction: sex-soviet.html.

(3) Stalin Versus the World Government

3.1. The movement for World Government has a number of versions, some being Jewish. The Jewish versions range from the non-theistic to the religious fundamentalist, with Waton in the middle. The fundamentalist one aims to build the Third Temple (tmf.html), and make it the spiritual capital of the world. There is a connection between Zionism and Jewish finance: the Balfour Declaration was addressed to Lord Rothschild as the representative of world Jewry, not to a rabbi (balfour.html). Trotsky seems to represent another faction: later in life, he supported those wanting a separate Jewish homeland, but earlier he promoted the pulling down of not only churches but synagogues too, in the Soviet Union, and the suppression of the religious side of Judaism there. (nedava.html)

3.2. The main non-Jewish version looks to the Hellenism of the Roman Empire for inspiration. It was put by leading Anglo-Saxon intellectuals such as Bertrand Russell and H. G. Wells, who pointed out that in that Empire, one could travel from one end to the other, without borders. All peoples, races, cultures and religions of the empire mingled, and from this melting pot a common culture emerged, spread from one end to the other, containing bits of all the separate components. They contrasted this with the proliferation of national borders, parochialism, racial separatism and cultural chauvinism in nation-states today.

H. G. Wells put the case in After Democracy (1932), The Open Conspiracy (1933), & The Shape of Things to Come (1933) (opensoc.html). Factions of the CFR, Bildebergers, & Trilateral Commission have adopted this Hellenistic version, at least during the Cold War, when each side stressed its "internationalist" universalism. Wells & Russell felt that neither Aryanism nor Zionism could be the basis of the New World Order. Their Hellenistic version includes some Marxist ideas, but is anti-Stalinist (wells-lenin-league.html). Is it Hellenism masquerading as Marxism, or Marxism masquerading as Hellenism? Samuel Huntington thought the latter: huntington.html.

Russell argued for collective ownership of the earth's resources; Wells advocated free trade, central planning, & massive population re-distribution around the world. The Hellenism we have at present (Multiculturalism, New Age syncretism) is mixed with International Socialism (abolition of the nation-State and the Family, a single set of "human rights" norms for all humanity).

3.3. In 1946, just after the last world war, a proposal for World Government was put in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists over several months in 1946. In his book promoting world government, Has Man a Future?, Bertrand Russell describes how it evolved, first crafted by David Lilienthal, then further developed by Bernard Baruch (p. 25 & p. 97). This "Baruch Plan" was canvassed in the issues of 1946 and put to Stalin. Lilienthal and Baruch were Jews, linked to Jewish financiers. By the end of that year, Stalin had rejected it, because it implied submission to Washington, and the Cold War had begun.

In the issue of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists of October 1, 1946, Bertrand Russell wrote "The American and British governments ... should make it clear that genuine international cooperation is what they most desire. But although peace should be their goal, they should not let it appear that they are for peace at any price. At a certain stage, when their plan [sic] for an international government are ripe, they should offer them to the world ... If Russia acquiesced willingly, all would be well. If not, it would be necessary to bring pressure to bear, even to the extent of risking war". (baruch-plan.html)

An article in the September 1, 1946 issue, written by William T. R. Fox, is headed "Debate on World Government or Discussion of Atomic Energy Control". It begins, "The Lilienthal report of March 16 and the Baruch proposals of June 14 have succeeded in evoking support from an extraordinary broad spectrum of American opinion. Opponents and proponents of world government ... the great debate on world government ...".

A report on the front page of the July 1, 1946 issue reads, 'In the first meeting, on June 13, the program for world-wide control of atomic energy through an International Atomic Development Authority (which was received with widespread approval as a bold and constructive plan ehen it was first suggested in the Acheson-Lilienthal report) and of its enforcement by the elimination of veto power, was presented to the world by Bernard Baruch as the official proposal of the American government. ... [but] opposed by Gromyko on behalf of the USSR, and has since been criticised in the Russian press as an attempt to establish an American "atomic world domination"'.

For comparison, H. G. Wells, the leading advocate of World Government, depicted an international authority as the back door to World Government. In his futuristic 1933 book The Shape of Things to Come, he presents a scenario where, 'After the chaos of the war (1949-50) and the subsequent pestilence and "social fragmentation" (1950-60) there arose, among other attempts to again reconstitute a larger society, a combine of the surviving aviators and the men employed upon the ground plant of their trade and transport. This combine was called The Transport Union ... It initiated various conferences of technicians and at last one in 1965, when it was reorganized as The Air and Sea Control ... It was this Air and Sea Control which ultimately gave rise in 1978 at the Second Conference of Basra to the World Council. This was the first declared and formal supreme government of the world' (Corgi edition, Book 3, chapters 5 to 8; emphasis added).

Wells states his opposition to Marx but his support for Lenin: "In his time Lenin had to pose as the disciple and exponent of Marx" (p. 55). (hgwells.html)

3.4. After the Cold War ended, U.S. (Jewish) Secretary of State Madeline Albright announced, "No nation in the world need be left out of the system we are constructing. ... We must take advantage of this historic opportunity that now exists to bring the world together in an international system based on democracy, open markets, law and a committment to peace" (Sydney Morning Herald, June 6, 1997). She conceded that "not every nation is yet ready to play its full part in this system", but said the world had no despot like the Soviet dictator Josef Stalin, who at the time of the Marshall Plan prevented Eastern Europe from joining in.

2.5. The Bolshevik Government was set up by non-theistic Jews: lenin-trotsky.html. Lenin and Trotsky had hoped for a Bolshevik coup in Germany; but when the Poles defeated the Red Army in 1920, it was unable to get through to Germany to assist the uprising there. Without being able to include industrialised Germany in their orbit, the Bolsheviks - having eliminated the aristocracy and intelligensia - had to settle for ruling a land of peasants. That tilted the balance in favour of Stalin, with his "go it alone" plan for developing Socialism in one country.

The Bolsheviks were constantly mindful of parallels with the French Revolution, and on guard against any Napoleon who might arise. Trotsky, being head of the Red Army, was seen as such (potentially), and in response took measures to show he was not going to seize power as part of a slide into "Reaction". The critical time was when he was replaced as head of the Red Army; it was because of the fears about a Napoleon arising, that he accepted being shifted out of this position. Later, the same charges - about being a potential Napoleon - were whispered about Tukhachevsky.

Trotsky also harmed his own career by failing to attend Lenin's funeral. He blamed Stalin for this, but Walter Duranty, pro-Soviet correspondent of the New York Times, wrote in his book USSR: The Story of Soviet Russia (Hamish Hamilton, London 1944):

{p. 99} Whatever may have been his reasons, Trotsky's failure to pay his last tribute to the dead leader horrified the people of Mosciw as a want of respect and good taste. It was, moveover, a political error of the first magnitude and dealt a fatal blow to Trotsky's prestige, which his adversaries were quick to see and turn to good account.

{p. 100} Trotsky's own explanation in his autobiography of his absence from Lenin's funeral is thin and unconvincing, and does small credit either to his head or his heart.

{p. 102} Such a combination of pernsonal callousness and political insensitiveness does more to explain Trotsky's downfall than a hundred books by Stalin's warmest supporters. To suggest that he was sulking is perhaps unfair. His autobiography states that he had an attack of influenza in October, 1923, which passed into a chronic fever aggravated (at this point he cites his wife's diary in confirmation) by his losing struggle against opponents in the Politburo. A month's stay at Prince Youssupov's former country house near Moscow brought no improvement and his doctor ordered a trip to Sukhum, which restored Trotsky s health but ruined his career. From that time onwards, although he had many devoted adherents in the Party, he had irretrievably "lost face" with the mass of Russian people. His adversaries in Russia have not failed to question the genuineness of his illness at that time; they have claimed that it was sickness of spirit rather than sickness of body, that Trotsky had made an ambitious bid for Lenin's succession and that when he failed his wounded egoism turned on itself like a scorpion and poisoned him. They point to the long comedy of his plea to enter Germany "on grounds of ill health and for no other purpose than medical treatment" at the time of his exile from Russia, when no country save Turkey would give him harborage. Even there, from the pleasant island where he lived in the Bosporus, he poured out a continual stream of complaints about his health. In short, they imply, Trotsky was either a liar or a hypochondriac or both, but what they really mean is that he "worked himself into a fever," as the saying goes; and that may well be true. It is clear from his own account that it was not the state of his health which prevented him from taking part in Lenin's funeral.


More on Trotsky: worst.html.

Stalin's wresting of power from the Jewish Bolsheviks is described by Benjamin Ginsberg (The Fatal Embrace, pp. 53-6 ginsberg.html); and attested by Solzhenitsyn in his book The First Circle, through the character Adam Roitman:

"Perhaps his memory deceived him, but hadn't he been right in thinking that during the Revolution, and for a long time afterwards, Jews were regarded as more reliable than Russians? In those days, the authorities always probed more deeply into the antecedents of a Russian, demanding to know who his parents were and what the source of his income was prior to 1917. No such checks had been made on Jews; they had all been on the side of the Revolution which delivered them from pogroms and the Pale of settlement. "But now this. ... surreptitiously, hiding behind minor figures, Joseph Stalin was taking it upon himself to be the new scourge of the Israelites" (The First Circle, Fontana paperback, p. 511; see also pp. 510, 515-6, 547-8, 559).

Stalin was the most enigmatic figure of the twentieth century. It was he who thwarted the Jewish attempt to control the USSR, and the 1946 plan for World Government. The media downplays the harshness of Communism, fearing that this information might justify Hitler. Even Viktor Suvorov's book Icebreaker, which uses Russian source-material to show that Stalin was about to attack Hitler, when Hitler found out and got in first, even this book is barely known, presumably because it might cause the public to question the standard line about the origin of the war. Stalin's main advantage in the contest for the leadership, was that he was not Jewish; this does not attest to racism among the Russians, but to a consistent Jewish preference, as a minority feeling vulnerable, for cloaking their power. How different would the century have been, if Stalin had been unable to wrest control from them? Unlike Hitler, who opposed the Revolution, Stalin operated within it. Whereas in the "Trotskyist" years up to 1928, marriage had been abolished, and homosexuality legalised, Stalin reversed these policies, restoring the structural features (the family and the state) destroyed in the anarchic "Trotskyist" period. It was he who got the economy moving. The victims of the new Russia now see a good side in Stalin, but the memory of the Ukraine famine undid the USSR in 1991 (see

3.6. An earlier plan for World Government was put at the Conference of Versailles; articles 10 to 16 of the League of Nations Covenant provide for a World Army (c20-doc.html). Fearful of losing its independence, the U.S. Senate vetoed these parts; Wilson however refused to modify the Covenant, and so the U.S. did not join.

E. J. Dillon in his book The Peace Conference (Hutchinson & Co., London, 1919) noted that, despite all the talk of international participation and co-operation, the Conference was dominated by the Anglo-Saxon powers, and the Anglo-Saxon delegations were dominated by their Jewish members:

'Of all the collectivities whose interests were furthered at the Conference, the Jews had perhaps the most resourceful and certainly the most influential exponents. There were Jews from Palestine, form Poland, Russia, the Ukraine, Roumania, Greece, Britain, Holland and Belgium; but the largest and most brilliant contingent was sent by the United States' (p. 10).

'This adverse vote on Mr. Wilson's pet scheme to have religious inequality proclaimed as a means of hindering sanguinary wars brought to its climax the reaction of the Conference against what it regarded as a systematic endeavour to establish the overlordship of the Anglo-Saxon peoples in the world. ... Most of them believed that a pretext was being sought to enable the leading Powers to intervene in the domestic concerns of all the other States ... other Delegates ... feared that a religious - some would call it racial - bias lay at the root of Mr. Wilson's policy. It may seem amazing to some readers, but it is none the less a fact that a considerable number of Delegates believed that the real influences behind the Anglo-Saxon peoples were Semitic' (p. 422).

'They confronted the President's proposal on the subject of religious inequality, and, in particular, the odd motive alleged for it, with the measures for the protection of minorities which he subsequently imposed on the lesser States, and which had for their keynote to satisfy the Jewish elements in Eastern Europe. And they concluded that the sequence of expedients framed and enforced in this direction were inspired by the Jews, assembled in Paris for the purpose of realizing their carefully thought-out programme, which they succeeded in having substantially executed. The formula into which this policy was thrown ... was this: "Henceforth the world will be governed by the Anglo-Saxon peoples, who, in turn, are swayed by their Jewish elements". It is difficult to convey an adequate notion of the warmth of feeling - one might almost call it the heat of passion - which this supposed discovery generated. The applications of the theory to many of the puzzles of the past were countless and ingenious. The illustrations of the manner in which the policy was pursued, and the cajolery and threats which were said to have been employed in order to ensure its success, covered the whole history of the Conference, and presented it through a new and possibly distorted medium. The morbid suspicions aroused may have been the natural vein of men who had passed a great part of their lives in petty racial struggles; but according to common account, it was abundantly nurtured at the Conference by the lack of reserve and moderation displayed by some of the promoters of the minority clauses who were deficient in the sense of measure' (pp. 422-3).

Dillon says that the delegates noted that, at that very time, Communist revolutions were breaking out in Central and East European countries, led by Communist Jews for whom the religious Jews felt "disgust" (p. 69). If the religious Jews distanced themselves from the Communist Jews, why did they defend the latter, instead of repudiating them, when governments cracked down on them? Why did religious Jews like financier Jacob Schiff want to bring down the Czar's government, on account of its pogroms against revolutionary Jews, if Schiff was repudiating those revolutionary Jews?

In his letters (Cyrus Alder, Jacob H Schiff: His Life and Letters, 1928), Schiff reveals an obsession with bringing down the Russian government. He admits to loaning money to Japan for the 1904-5 war, for a political purpose: 'I further said, that as a friend of Japan, who had rendered important services in financing her war loans, in order to enable her to defend herself and become victorious over Russia, " the enemy of mankind," ...' (vol I, p. 255). He admits, "The claim that among the ranks of those who in Russia are seeking to undermine governmental authority there are a considerable number of Jews may be true" (vol II, p. 131), then goes on to blame and attack the Czar, rather than repudiate those revolutionary Jews.

Trotsky wrote in his autobiography, "After the October revolution, an enterprising New York publisher brought out my German pamphlet as an imposing American book. According to his own statement, President Wilson asked him, by telephone from the White House, to send the proofs of the book to him; at that time, the President was composing his Fourteen Points, and, according to reports from people who were informed, could not get over the fact that a Bolshevik had forestalled him in his best formulae" (My Life: The Rise and Fall of a Dictator, p. 208). The 14 Points were issued on January 8, 1918; point 3 provides for Free Trade, point 6 welcomes the USSR.

3.7. Soon after the Conference, Lenin wrote, in September 1920, "... somewhere in the proximity of Warsaw lies the center of the entire current system of international imperialism ... because Poland, as a buffer between Russia and Germany ... is the linchpin of the whole Treaty of Versailles. The modern imperialist world rests on the Treaty of Versailles ... Poland is such a powerful element in this Versailles peace that by extracting this element we break up the entire Versailles peace. We had tasked ourselves with occupying Warsaw; the task changed and it turned out that what was being decided was not the fate of Warsaw but the fate of the Treaty of Versailles" (in Richard Pipes, ed., The Unknown Lenin: From the Secret Archive (Yale University Press, New Haven, 1996), pp. 100-101).

Lenin's opposition seems to show that the Internationalist forces were in two opposed camps, whereas The Protocols of Zion implies that they are all in one camp. However, at the time of the Treaty of Versailles, the Internationalist forces (Trotsky in the East, Wells in the West) were united in their push for World Government; they wished the Bolsheviks to be part of it. It was only because the Tory forces narrowly defeated them at the Peace Conference, that Lenin turned against the Treaty of Versailles system: toolkit3.html.

As Russians regained control of Communism, Jews turned against it, increasingly switching allegiance to Israel instead. Before Stalin, Jews were able to embrace both Communism and Zionism; Arthur Koestler is an example (koestler.html). Professor Ben-Ami Shillony, in his book The Jews and the Japanese: the Successful Outsiders, embraces both Zionism and Trotsky: only Stalin spoiled the party. (japan.html)

Zionist intellectual J. L. Talmon wrote in his 1970 book Israel Among the Nations, that the Soviet Union itself, in co-operation with Gamel Nasser, issued an updated version of the Protocols:

"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 ..." (p. 188). (talmon.html)

Talmon uses literary licence here, equating any assertion of Jewish conspiratorial action, with endorsement of The Protocols of Zion. The Soviet Union, it seems, never issued The Protocols of Zion, but from the Baruch Plan (above) and the plan to create a Jewish part of the Crimea (see below), Stalin did conclude that there was a Zionist plot for World Domination, and Yuri Ivanov's book Caution: Zionism is an example of material issued by the Soviet Union on that theme: ivanov.html.

As at p. 70 in Israel Among the Nations, with regard to the Tsarina, Talmon seems to be following Norman Cohn's book Warrant For Genocide: "Stalin in his last years produced a new version of the conspiracy-myth, in which the Jews figured as agents of an imperialist plot to destroy the Soviet Union and assassinate its leaders ... " (Warrant For Genocide, Penguin, 1970, p. 15) cohn.html.

3.8. Pavel Sudoplatov, Stalin's spymaster, made startling disclosures in his 1994 memoirs, Special Tasks. He notes the importance of Jewish support for the USSR during World War II: "During World War II, more than ninety percent of the lonely soldiers spread throughout Western Europe who sent us crucial information that enabled us to beat back the German invasion were Jews whose hatred of Hitler spurred them to risk their lives and families" (p. 4). He says that the Soviet atomic program depended on assistance from Western scientists such as Robert Oppenheimer and Neils Bohr (both Jewish), and backed this up with further information in a later edition of the book: sudoplat.html.

Since Baruch and Lilienthal were Jews on the American side, pushing for World Government on American terms before the USSR got the bomb, it looks as if Jews were divided over that. However, the Jewish support was not for American nationalism but for an international entity above any country (USA or USSR).

3.9. Sudoplatov says that during WWII, co-operation between Soviet and American Jews was so close that a plan to create a Jewish Republic in the Crimea, within the USSR, was being promoted. He devotes a whole chapter to this topic, titled California in the Crimea, and at one point notes, "Gregory Kheifetz, our operative who had been successful in atomic espionage, told me that the letter was a proposal with details for a plan to make the Crimean Socialist Republic a homeland for Jewish people from all over the world" (Special Tasks, p. 286).

When did Stalin change his mind? "It was in the second half of 1946, when Stalin had become disenchanted with Jewish alliances abroard and Jewish demands at home and was feeling isolated by the British-American joint stand in Palestine, that he began to stimulate an anti-Semitic campaign which culminated in a purge of Jews from the party machinery, diplomatic service, military apparatus, and intelligence services" (pp. 293-4, emphasis added).

Sudoplatov may not have been aware of the 1946 proposal for World Government - he makes no reference to it - but the timing suggests that it caused Stalin, once again, to turn against the Jews.

3.10. But Stalin was murdered on account of his conflict with Zionism, and knowledge of this was suppressed in the USSR and is barely known in the West.

Who would want to suppress it - Zionist and Trotskyist factions, perhaps? The most complete evidence on Stalin's murder is in The Death of Stalin: An Investigation by 'MONITOR': death-of-stalin.html.

The biography of Stalin by Edvard Radzinsky, Stalin, also presents evidence that Stalin was murdered:

January 13, 1953: Tass announced the discovery of a terrorist group of poisoning doctors - the Doctors Plot (Radzinsky, p. 539).

February 8, 1953: Pravda published the names of Jewish saboteurs etc.

February 11, 1953: the USSR severed diplomatic relations with Israel (Yosef Govrin, Israeli-Soviet Relations 1953-1967, pp. 3-4).

End of February, 1953: rumors went around Moscow that the Jews were to be 3eported to Siberia (Radzinsky, p. 542), with March 5 rumoured to be the date when this would happen (p. 546}.

March 5, 1953: Stalin declared dead.

Radzinsky (partly of Jewish ancestry, and taking a Zionist line here) claims that Stalin was inviting war with America, the home of Zionism and world finance, over this issue, because America was dominated by Zionist financiers (p. 543).

Radzinsky documents harsh measures against Soviet Jews from 1950, developing into the Doctors' Plot: "the sinister Jewish organisation Joint was bent on destroying the Russian people. It had probably begun operations in the days of Trotsky, Zinoviev, and Kamenev ... ubiquitous cosmopolitans were poisoning the country's ideology ... Traitorous doctors were killing statesmen. ... Zionists had infiltrated even the highest levels of the political elite" (p. 535).

A number of eminent Jewish doctors were arrested; on January 13, 1953, Tass announced the discovery of a terrorist group of poisoning doctors (p. 539). On February 8, Pravda published the names of Jewish saboteurs etc.; "At the end of February rumors went around Moscow that the Jews were to be deported to Siberia" (p. 542).

On March 5, before he could take any action against those accused of Zionist conspiracy, Stalin was murdered (Radzinsky, pp. 547-556). radzinsk.html.

The Jewish view on the Doctors' Plot is further elaborated in Louis Rapaport, Stalin's War Against the Jews.

After Stalin's death, Beria's seizure of power once again represented control by the Jewish faction; but he too was brought down. Stalin was dethroned, but Stalinism remained. Gorbachev set out to destroy it, restoring the (utopian in his eyes) Trotskyist pre-Stalin period. He pardoned Sakharov but not Solzhenitsyn: convergence.html. But as he loosened the screws, the "White" forces took their chance and brought Communism down.

2.11. The struggle between Moscow and Jerusalem was over which would be the centre of Socialism. In a sense, this struggle was a Cold War we could not see, but as real as the one we could. Stalin jealously observed the loyalty of Soviet Jews to the newly created state of Israel, and the 1967 and 1973 Middle-East wars pitting Moscow against Jerusalem caused many Jews to rediscover their religious roots, turned many from Bolshevism to Zionism, and led to the campaign for Jewish emigration from the USSR.

Sudoplatov observed, "The acceptance within the leadership of anti-Semitic policies finally stripped the government of an entire population of public servants who had supported the Revolution and worked for the establishment of Soviet power. When the country came upon hard times and disintegrated, the flower of this educated leadership and their children had emigrated to Israel and the West" (Special Tasks: Memoirs of an Unwanted Witness, p. 309). Sudoplatov himself had a Jewish wife, and sided with Beria, a Jew, against Kruschev, for the succession: sudoplat.html.

3.12. The Trotskyists say, "we are no longer Trotskyists now", meaning that they no longer regard Trotsky as superior to Lenin. In the struggle with Stalin, they are still Trotskyists: International Socialists, for whom the socialism of the 1950s was National Socialism, to be destroyed. They battled agsinst the old nationalist Left to promote free trade (against fair trade), gay rights and radical feminism (against family stability), chaos in schools (against the interest of poor children), and the rule of UN committees infiltrated by their NGOs, over national governments. They support Globalisation, co-operating with international bankers to promote free trade and free movement of capital, weaken the nation-state system, getting nearly every country in debt to tax havens (the Bahamas, the City of London, Singapore etc.). Then they engage in violent clashes against those same bankers.

For example, see the Trotskyist ICFI website, especially, or the book Socialism or Nationalism?: Which Road for the Australian Labor Movement? (Pathfinder Press [of the Socialist Workers' Party], 1979), by Jon West, Dave Holmes and Gordon Adler, which opposes Protection (pp. 27-9) and supports Foreign Investment:

"The left-nationalists have proposed a variety of arguments to demonstrate that foreign-owned corporations are more damaging to the interests of Australian working people than corporations owned in Australia. ... It is often argued that foreign investment slows Australia's econoomic growth because foreign companies ship home their profits instead of plowing them back into the Australian economy. Two replies are possible to this argument. Firstly, there is no evidence to suggest that Australian companies re-invest a higher proportion of their profits than foreign corporations ... Another argument is that foreign corporations tend to shut down, to lay off workers more frequently because large multinationals can transfer their operations to other countries if Australian wages are too high. However, Australian companies are just as susceptible to shifts on the international and domestic markets as multinationals ... A further argument is that foreign corporations are tending to invest in raw materials, primarily mining industries, and are thus turning Australia into a quarry for US imperialism. ... This argument has been advanced by the {Stalinist} Communist Party of Australia, among others. It ignores the fact that Australian workers are being thrown out of work primarily due to the international recession and its effects on Australian industry" (p. 67): xTrots.html.

Trotskyism subverts the socialist movement, causing the Stalinist and Nazi attempts to cauterise it. The Trotskyist line is, "We can't have Socialism until the world is one country, with all races mixed. So we promote Capitalism, only to overthrow it once it has destroyed all nation-States." Wolves in sheep's clothing, they promote policies that cause poverty, then claim to lead the poor against the oppressors.

3.13. The assassination of Yitzhak Rabin hints at a struggle between two rival Internationalisms, the Hellenist and Socialist one of Wells and Russell, and the religious Zionist one, with Rabin's secular Zionists caught in the middle.

Victor Ostrovsky, a former Mossad agent, reveals how the Israeli Right tried to counter George Bush snr.'s Peace initiative: ostrovsky.html.

Israel's Religious Right is determined to build their Temple, not next to the Dome of the Rock, but on the exact site, even if that means war with the entire Islamic world. The Protestant Religious Right would drag the U.S. in on the Zionist side; and given their constant condemnation of China, if such a conflagration breaks out, China and the Islamic block would be forced together, despite having no natural affinities. Samuel Huntington's vision (in The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order) of a future war against China and the Islamic block, is not far-fetched, but Huntington does not see that it would have a religious basis, being the battle for Greater Zion. If the Zionists were content merely to have a small homeland in Palestine, there would be no need for a war; but the Religious Right in Israel is advocating demolition of the Dome of the Rock: tmf.html. If they killed Rabin, they will stop at nothing. Zion has waited 1900 years for this moment; will Islam be allowed to stand in the way?

Noam Chomsky's line on the Mideast is misleading ... as a Marxist, he ignores the Religious factor ... to him, only material factors like Oil count. Contrary to Chomsky, the West's control over Mideast oil is jeapardised by Israel's expansionist policies, & in particular its plan to demolish the Dome of the Rock to build the Third Temple. Only religion explains the fanaticism on both sides.


(4) Punishing Russians after the Cold War

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

{quote} With Russia becoming an effective Jewish colony where "anti-Semitism" was an offense punishable by death and the native gentile culture was effectively stamped out (thanks to a leadership consisting mainly of Jews such as Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kamenev, and Severdlov, held together under the stewardship of the obsequious philosemite Lenin), Jews throughout the world put their hopes in the possibility of similar revolutions elsewhere. Indeed, their comrades in arms were hard at work affecting similar changes in Hungary (Kuhn), Austria (Adler) and Germany (Eisner). The rise of Fascist and Nazi movements only served to further polarize Jewish support in favor of international communism.

This near unanimity would change as a result of two developments: a shift in the character of Soviet Communism on the one hand and the foundation of the State of Israel on the other. 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.

... many Jewish leftists turned on a dime to back the US in the Cold War because America could serve as a life support system for Israel and a bulwark against resurgent Russian "anti-Semitism" ...

... While paleoconservative leaning Cold Warriors such as Pat Buchanan have pushed for normalized relations with Russia, the neocons continue to fight on the Cold War, enthusiastically supporting Chechen separatists as "freedom fighters" and advocating NATO expansion.

... For all their talk about "anti-Communism," the real engine driving neocon Cold Warrior instincts was punishing the hated Russian goyim for the sin of "anti-Semitism," not any opposition to residual or latent Marxism.

{endquote} More at jewish-emigration-ussr.html.

(5) Correspondence with Jacob Jugashvili, a great grandson of Stalin

(5.1) Re[2]: stalin's family Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 18:38:39 +0500 From: Jacob Jugashvili <>

... Yes i'm a great grandson of J. Stalin. Have a look at for the family tree and other info about me and our family. My father, Yevgeni Jugashvili, is a retired colonel of the Soviet Army. He knew well Molotov, Golovanov, Berezhkov (Stalin's interpreter) and other people who worked and lived with Stalin, so my father better informed about our family history. He grew up in a Suvorov cadet school in Kalinin.

(5.2) To Jacob Jugashvili from Peter Myers


... One of Stalin's descendants, a Jugashvili, was in the news a year or two ago, calling for a restoration of Communism in Russia. Was it you?

(5.3) stalin's family Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 23:10:44 +0400 From: "Jacob Jugashvili" <>

... My father Yevgeni Jugashvili co-founder of Union of Army Officers (Soiuz Officerov) in Russia and Society of Stalin. In 2000 he run for parliamentary elections in Russia (DUMA). He wasn't calling "for restoration of Communism" in Russia but for bringing to justice those who invaded russia in 1917, but escaped the judgement, those who sold our country to world sionism: Gorbachov, Eltsin, Shevarnaze ...


Moscow and Jerusalem: the Other Cold War : moscow-vs-jerusalem.html .

Seeing the real Trotsky: trotsky.html.

The early Soviet Union - after Lenin and Trotsky, but before Stalin's ascendancy: soviet-union-early.html.

Isaac Deutscher wrote that the Bolshevik Government, in its first years, was run by "emigres had lived many years in the West", who looked down on Russian "backwardness" and pursued "internationalist" politics:

"... they were Marxists in partibus infidelium, West European revolutionaries acting against a non-congenial Oriental background, which ... tried to impose its tyranny upon them. Only revolution in the West could relieve them from that tyranny ... "

"No sooner had Bolshevism mentally withdrawn into its national shell than this attitude became untenable. The party of the revolution had to stoop to its semi-Asiatic environment. It had to cut itself loose from the specifically Western tradition of Marxism ... ".

Beria and Gorbachev attempted to return to this "Western" Marxism: each emphatically rejected Stalin. But Deutscher was a Jewish Trotskytist, and this "Western" Marxism is Trotskyism by another name: beria.html.

Stalin was murdered. He died within 2 months of the Doctors' Plot being announced. His murderers were in two factions: a Jewish one (Beria, Kaganovich, Molotov) and a "Russian" one (Khruschev). The Jewish one seized power, but was overthrown a few months later, by Khruschev: death-of-stalin.html.

If you found the above material on Stalin of interest, then you will want to read The Fraud of Neoconservative "Anti-Communism", by Max Shpak, May 15, 2002

Seeing the real Trotsky: trotsky.html.

Stalin's Purges were directed at the Left Opposition, led by three "dissatisfied Jewish intellectuals" Trotsky, Zinoviev & Kamenev: stalin-purges.html.

The wives of Stalin: wives-of-stalin.html.

The death of Stalin: death-of-stalin.html.

From Trotskyists to Neocons ... the CIA infiltrating the Left: cia-infiltrating-left.html.

The Doctors Plot: Stalin accused of endorsing the Protocols of Zion: toolkit3.html.

Red Symphony, by Dr. J. Landowsky; translated by George Knupffer. Stalin's Formal Communism (Bonapartism) cf Trotsky's Real Communism. Bears on the fact that Communism seems to be continuing, Trotskist/Fabian/New Left style, despite the fall of the USSR. Open Borders, Gay Marriage, the World Court, the Kyoto Protocol, "Hate" Laws which suppress open discussion, these are the signs. Stalin stole their conspiracy; his legacy had to be defeated, just as much as Aryanism and Christianity: red-symphony.html.

Isaac Deutscher on Trotsky vs. Stalin: deutscher.html.

Making sense of Gorbachev: convergence.html.

Vladimir Pozner on Why Jews left the Soviet Union - Max Shpak on Why the West Betrays Russians: jewish-emigration-ussr.html.

Back to the Zionism/Communism index: zioncom.html.

Write to me at contact.html.