WHAT ABOUT
THE PROTOCOLS

     Excerpt From "WATERS FLOWING EASTWARD"

        
THE "PROTOCOLS"
Chapter From "Controversy of Zion" by Douglas Reed

Read this book in its entirety on our web-site

While Zionism thus took shape in the Eastern ghettoes during the last century and at the start of this one emerged as a new force in international affairs (when the British Government offered it Uganda), the world-revolution, in those same Talmudic areas, prepared its third "eruption". The two forces moved forward together in synchronization (for Zionism, as has been shown, used the threat of Communism in Europe to gain the ear of European rulers for its territorial demand outside Europe). It was as if twin turbines began to revolve, generating what was in effect one force, from which the new century was to receive galvanic shocks.

According to Disraeli and Bakunin the world-revolution had come under Jewish leadership around the middle of the century, and its aims then changed. Bakunin's followers, who sought to abolish the State as such because they foresaw that the revolutionary State might become more despotic than any earlier despotism, were ousted and forgotten. The world-revolution therewith took the shape of Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto, which aimed at the super-State founded in slave-labour and in "the confiscation of human liberty" (as de Tocqueville wrote in 1848).

This change in leadership and aims determined the course of the 20th Century. However, the methods by which the existing order was to be destroyed did not change; they continued to be those revealed by Weishaupt's papers published in 1787. Many publications of the 19th Century showed that the original Illuminist plan continued through the generations to be the textbook of the revolutionaries of all camps, as to method.

These works propagated or exposed the destructive plan in various ways, sometimes allegorical, but always recognizable if compared with the original, Weishaupt's documents. In 1859 Crétineau Joly assailed Jewish Leadership of "the secret societies". His book reproduced documents (communicated to him by Pope Gregory XVI) of the Italian secret society, the Haute Vente Romaine; their authenticity is beyond question. The Haute Vente Romaine was headed by an Italian prince who had been initiated by one of Weishaupt's own intimates (Knigge) and was a reincarnation of the Illuminati. The outer circle of initiates, the dupes, were persuaded that "the object of the association is something high and noble, that it is the Order of those who desire a purer morality and a stronger piety, the independence and unity of their country". Those who graduated into the inner degrees progressively learned the real aims and swore to destroy all religion and legitimate government; then they received the secrets of assassination, poison and perjury first disclosed by Weishaupt's documents.

In 1862 Karl Marx (whose Communist Manifesto is recognizably Illuminist) founded his First International, and Bakunin formed his Alliance Sociale Democratique (the programme of which, as Mrs. Nesta Webster has shown by quoting correlative passages, was Illuminism undiluted). In the same year Maurice Joly published an attack on Napoleon III, to whom he attributed the identical methods of corrupting and ruining the social system (this book was written in al1egorical form). In 1868 the German Goedsche reproduced the same ideas in the form of an attack on Jewish leadership of the revolution, and in 1869 the French Catholic and Royalist Gougenot Des Mousseaux took up the same theme. In that year Bakunin also published his Polemic Against The Jews..

In all these works, in one form or another, the continuity of the basic idea first revealed by Weishaupt's documents appears: namely, that of destroying all legitimate government, religion and nationhood and setting up a universal despotism to rule the enslaved masses by terror and violence. Some of them assailed the Jewish. usurpation of, or succession to the leadership of the revolution.

After that came a pause in the published literature of the conspiracy first disclosed in 1787, until in 1905 one Professor Sergyei Nilus, an official of the Department of Foreign Religions at Moscow, published a book, of which the British Museum in London has a copy bearing its date-stamp, August 10, 1906. Great interest would attach to anything that could be elicited about Nilus and his book, which has never been translated; the mystery with which he and it have been surrounded impedes research. One chapter was translated into English in 1920. This calls for mention here because the original publication occurred in 1905, although the violent uproar only began when it appeared in English in 1920.

This one chapter was published in England and America as "The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion"; I cannot learn whether this was the original chapter heading or whether it was provided during translation. No proof is given that the document is what it purports to be, a minute of a secret meeting of Jewish "Elders". In that respect, therefore, it is valueless."

In every other respect it is of inestimable importance, for it is shown by the conclusive test (that of subsequent events) to be an authentic document of the world-conspiracy first disclosed by Weishaupt's papers. Many other documents in the same series had followed that first revelation, as I have shown, but this one transcends all of them. The others were fragmentary and gave glimpses; this one gives the entire picture of the conspiracy, motive, method and objective. It adds nothing new to what had been revealed in parts (save for the unproven, attribution to Jewish elders themselves), but it puts all the parts in place and exposes the whole. It accurately depicts all that has come about in the fifty years since it was published, and what clearly will follow in the next fifty years unless in that time the force which the conspiracy has generated produces the counter-force.

It is informed by a mass of knowledge (particularly of human weaknesses) which can only have sprung from the accumulated experience and continuing study of centuries, or of ages. It is written in a tone of lofty superiority, as by beings perched on some Olympian pinnacle of sardonic and ancient wisdom, and of mocking scorn for the writhing masses far below ("the mob" . . . "alcoholized animals" . . . "cattle" . . . "bloodthirsty beasts") who vainly struggle to elude the "nippers" which are closing on them; these nippers are "the power of gold" and the brute force of the mob, incited to destroy its only protectors and consequently itself.

The destructive idea is presented in the form of a scientific theory, almost of an exact science, argued with gusto and eloquence. In studying the Protocols I am constantly reminded of something that caught my eye in Disraeli's dictum, earlier quoted. Disraeli, who was careful in the choice of words, spoke of "the destructive principle" (not idea, scheme, notion, plan, plot or the like), and the Protocols elevate the theory of destruction to this status of "a fundamental truth, a primary or basic law, a governing law of conduct" (to quote various dictionary definitions of "principle"). In many passages the Protocols appear, at first sight, to recommend destruction as a thing virtuous in itself, and consequently justifying all the methods explicitly recommended to promote it (bribery, blackmail, corruption, subversion, sedition, mob-incitement, terror and violence), which thus become virtuous too.

But careful scrutiny shows that this is not the case. In fact the argument presented begins at the end, world power, and goes backward through the means, which are advocated simply as the best ones to that end. The end is that first revealed in Weishaupt's documents, and it is apparent that both spring from a much earlier source, although the Protocols, in time, stand to the Weishaupt papers as grandson to grandsire. The final aim is the destruction of all religion and nationhood and the establishment of the super State, ruling the world by ruthless terror.

When the Protocols appeared in English the minor point, who was the author of this particular document, was given a false semblance of major importance by the enraged Jewish attack on the document itself. The asseveration of Jewish leadership of the revolutionary conspiracy was not new at all; the reader has seen that Disraeli, Bakunin and many others earlier affirmed it. In this case the allegation about a specific meeting of Jewish leaders of the conspiracy was unsupported and could have been ignored (in 1913 a somewhat similar publication accused the Jesuits of instigating a world-conspiracy resembling that depicted alike in the Protocols and in Weishaupt's papers; the Jesuits quietly remarked that this was false and the matter was forgotten).

The response of official Jewry in 1920 and afterwards was different. It was aimed, with fury, at the entire substance of the Protocols; it did not stop at denying a Jewish plot, but denied that there was any plot, which was demonstrably untrue. The existence of the conspiracy had been recognized and affirmed by a long chain of high authorities, from Edmund Burke, George Washington and Alexander Hamilton to Disraeli, Bakunin and the many others mentioned in an earlier chapter. Moreover, when the Protocols appeared in English conclusive proof had been given by the event in Russia. Thus the nature of the Jewish attack could only strengthen public doubts; it protested much too much.

This attack was the repetition of the one which silenced those earlier leaders of the public demand for investigation and remedy, Robison, Barruel and Morse, but on this occasion it was a Jewish attack. Those three men made no imputation of Jewish leadership, and they were defamed solely because they drew public attention to the continuing nature of the conspiracy and to the fact that the French revolution was clearly but its first "eruption". The attack on the Protocols in the 1920's proved above all else the truth of their contention; it showed that the standing organization for suppressing public discussion of the conspiracy had been perfected in the intervening 120 years. Probably so much money and energy were never before in history expended on the effort to suppress a single document.

It was brought to England by one of the two leading British correspondents of that day in Moscow, Victor Marsden of the Morning Post (the significant story of the other correspondent belongs to a later chapter). Marsden was an authority on Russia and was much under the enduring effect of the Terror. He was in effect its victim, for he died soon after completing what he evidently felt to be a duty, the translation of the Protocols at the British Museum.

Publication in English aroused worldwide interest. That period (1920 and onward) marks the end of the time when Jewish questions could be impartially discussed in public. The initial debate was free and vigorous, but in following years the attack succeeded in imposing the law of lese majesty in this matter and today hardly any public man or print ventures to mention the Protocols unless to declare them "forged" or "infamous" (an act of submission also foretold in them).

The first reaction was the natural one. The Protocols were received as formidable evidence of an international conspiracy against religion, nationhood, legitimate government and property. All agreed that the attribution to Jewish authorship was unsupported, but that the subject matter was so grave, and so strongly supported by events subsequent to the original publication, that full enquiry was needed. This remedy, "investigation", was the one advocated by many leading men 120 years earlier. In this instance the attack was in effect again on the demand for investigation, not simply on the allegation against "the Elders of Zion".

The Times (of London) on May 8, 1920 in a long article said, "An impartial investigation of these would-be documents and of their history is most desirable . . . Are we to dismiss the whole matter without inquiry and to let the influence of such a book as this work unchecked?" The Morning Post (then the oldest and soberest British newspaper) published twenty-three articles, also calling for investigation.

In The Spectator on August 27, 1921, Lord Sydenham, a foremost authority of that day, also urged investigation: "The main point is, of course, the source from which Nilus obtained the Protocols. The Russians who knew Nilus and his writings cannot all have been exterminated by the Bolsheviks. His book . . . has not been translated, though it would give some idea of the man. . . What is the most striking characteristic of the Protocols? The answer is knowledge of a rare kind, embracing the widest field. The solution of this 'mystery', if it is one, is to be found where this uncanny knowledge, on which prophecies now literally fulfilled are based, can be shown to reside". In America Mr. Henry Ford, declaring that "the Protocols have fitted the world situation up to this time; they fit it now", caused his Dearborn Independent to publish a series of articles of which a million and a half reprints were sold.

Within two years the proprietor of The Times was certified insane (by an unnamed doctor in a foreign land; a later chapter will describe this episode) and forcibly removed from control of his publications, and The Times published an article dismissing the Protocols as a plagiarism of Maurice Joly's book. The proprietor of the Morning Post became the object of sustained vituperation until he sold the newspaper, which then ceased publication. In 1927 Mr. Henry Ford published an apology addressed to a well-known Jew of America; when I was in the United States in later years I was told by credible informants that he was persuaded to do this, at a moment when a new-model Ford automobile was about to be marketed, by hostile threats from dealers on whom the fortunes of his concern depended.

The campaign against the Protocols has never ceased since then. In communized Russia all copies discoverable had been destroyed at the revolution and possession of the book became a capital crime under the law against "anti-semitism". In the direct sequence to that, though twenty-five years later, the American and British authorities in occupied Germany after the Second World War constrained the Western German government to enact laws against "anti-semitism" on the Bolshevik model; and in 1955 a Munich printer who reproduced the Protocols had his business confiscated. In England at the time of publication the sale of the book was temporarily stopped by authority, under the pressure described, and in the course of the years the attack on it continued so violent that publishers feared it and only small local firms ever ventured to print it. In Switzerland, between the wars, a Jewish suit was brought against the book as "improper literature"; the case was won, but the verdict was set aside by a higher court.

The state of affairs thus brought about after 1920, and continuing today, was foretold by the Protocols in 1905: "Through the press we have gained the power to influence while remaining ourselves in the shade . . . The principal factor of success in the political" (field) " is the secrecy of its undertaking; the word should not agree with the deeds of the diplomat. . . We must compel the governments . . . to take action in the direction favoured by our widely-conceived plan, already approaching the desired consummation, by what we shall represent as public opinion, secretly prompted by us through the means of that so-called 'Great Power', the press, which, with a few exceptions that may be disregarded, is already entirely in our hands. . . We shall deal with the press in the following way: . . . we shall saddle and bridle it with a tight curb; we shall do the same also with all productions of the printing-press, for where would be the sense of getting rid of the attacks of the press if we remain targets for pamphlets and books? . . . No one shall with impunity lay a finger on the aureole of our government infallibility. The pretext for stopping any publication will be the alleged plea that it is agitating the public mind without occasion or justification . . . We shall have a sure triumph over our opponents since they will not have at their disposition organs of the press in which they can give full and final expression to their views owing to the aforesaid methods of dealing with the press . . ."

Such is the history of the Protocols thus far. Their attribution to Jewish "Elders" is unsupported and should be rejected, without prejudice to any other evidence about Jewish leadership of the world-revolution as such. The Jewish attack on them was bent, not on exculpating Jewry, but on stopping the publication on the plea that it was "agitating the public mind without occasion or justification". The arguments advanced were bogus; they were that the Protocols closely resembled several earlier publications and thus were "plagiaries" or "forgeries", whereas what this in truth showed was the obvious thing: that they were part of the continuing literature of the conspiracy. They might equally well be the product of non-Jewish or of anti-Jewish revolutionaries, and that is of secondary importance. What they proved is that the organization first revealed by Weishaupt's documents was in existence 120 years later, and was still using the methods and pursuing the aim then exposed; and when they were published in English the Bolshevik revolution had given the proof.

In my opinion the Protocols provide the essential handbook for students of the time and subject. If Lord Sydenham, in 1921, was arrested by the "uncanny knowledge" they displayed, "on which prophecies now literally fulfilled are based", how much more would he be impressed today, in 1956, when much more of them has been as literally fulfilled. Through this book any man can see how the upheavals of the past 150 years were, and how those of the next fifty years will be brought about; he will know in advance just how "the deeds" of his elected representatives will differ from their "word".

In one point I am able from my own experience to test Lord Sydenham's dictum about fulfilled prophecies. The Protocols, speaking of control of published information, say: "Not a single announcement will reach the public without our control. Even now this is already being attained by us inasmuch as all news items are received by a few agencies, in whose offices they are focused from all parts of the world. These agencies will then be entirely ours and will give publicity only to what we dictate to them". That was not the situation in 1905, or in Lord Sydenham's day, or in 1926, when I became a journalist, but it was developing and today is the situation. The stream of "news" which pours into the public mind through the newspapers comes from a few agencies, as if from half a dozen taps. Any hand that can control those valves can control "the news", and the reader may observe for himself the filtered form in which the news reaches him. As to the editorial views, based on this supply of news, the transformation that has been brought about may be comprehended by referring to the impartially critical articles published in The Times, Morning Post, Spectator, Dearborn Independent and thousands of other journals some twenty-five years ago. This could not happen today. The subjugation of the press has been accomplished as the Protocols foretold, and by the accident of my generation and calling I saw it come about.

Comparative study of the Protocols and of the Weishaupt papers leads to the strong deduction that both derive from a common and much older source. They cannot have been the product of any one man or one group of men in the period when they were published; the "uncanny knowledge" displayed in them obviously rests on the cumulative experience of eras. In particular, this applies (in Weishaupt's papers and the Protocols alike) to the knowledge of human weaknesses, which are singled out with analytical exactitude, the method of exploiting each of them being described with disdainful glee.

The instrument to be used for the destruction of the Christian nation-states and their religion is "the mob". The word is used throughout with searing contempt to denote the masses, (who in public are flattered by being called "the people"). "Men with bad instincts are more in number than the good, and therefore the best results in governing them are attained by violence and terrorization . . . The might of a mob is blind, senseless and unreasoning force ever at the mercy of a suggestion from any side". From this the argument is developed that "an absolute despotism" is necessary to govern "the mob", which is "a savage", and that "our State" will employ "the terror which tends to produce blind submission". The "literal fulfilment" of these precepts in communized Russia must be obvious to all today).

This "absolute despotism" is to be vested in the international super-State at the end of the road. In the meanwhile regional puppet-despots are depicted as essential to the process of breaking down the structure of states and the defences of peoples: "From the premier-dictators of the present day the peoples suffer patiently and bear such abuses as for the least of them they would have beheaded twenty kings. What is the explanation . . .? It is explained by the fact that these dictators whisper to the peoples through their agents that through these abuses the are inflicting injury on the States with the highest purpose - to secure the welfare of the peoples, the international brotherhood of them all, their solidarity and equality of rights. Naturally they do not tell the peoples that this unification must be accomplished only under our sovereign rule".

This passage is of especial interest. The term "premier-dictator" would not generally have been understood in 1905, when the peoples of the West believed their elected representatives to express and depend on their approval. However, it became applicable during the First and Second World Wars, when American presidents and British prime ministers made themselves, in fact, "premier-dictators" and used emergency powers in the name of "the welfare of peoples. . . international brotherhood . . . equality of rights". Moreover, these premier-dictators, in both wars, did tell the peoples that the ultimate end of all this would be "unification" under a world government of some kind. The question, who would govern this world government, was one which never received straightforward answer; so much else of the Protocols has been fulfilled that their assertion that it would be the instrument of the conspiracy for governing the world "by violence and terrorization" deserves much thought.

The especial characteristic of the two 20th Century wars is the disappointment which each brought to the peoples who appeared to be victorious. "Uncanny knowledge", therefore, again seems to have inspired the statement, made in 1905 or earlier, "Ever since that time" (the French Revolution) "we have been leading the peoples from one disenchantment to another", followed later by this: "By these acts all States are in torture; they exhort to tranquillity, are ready to sacrifice everything for peace; but. we will not give them peace until they openly acknowledge our international Super-Government, and with submissiveness". The words, written before 1905, seem accurately to depict the course of the 20th Century.

Again, the document says "it is indispensable for our purpose that wars, so far as possible, should not result in territorial gains". This very phrase, of 1905 or earlier, was made the chief slogan, or apparent moral principle, proclaimed by the political leaders of America and Britain in both world wars, and in this case the difference between "the word" and "the deed" of "the diplomat" has been shown by results. The chief result of the First War was to establish revolutionary-Zionism and revolutionary-Communism as new forces in international affairs, the first with a promised "homeland" and the second with a resident State. The chief result of the Second War was that further "territorial gains" accrued to, and only to, Zionism and Communism; Zionism received its resident State and Communism received half of Europe. The "deadly accuracy" (Lord Sydenham's words) of the Protocol's forecasts seems apparent in this case, where a specious phrase used in the Protocols of 1905 became the daily language of American presidents and British prime ministers in 1914-1918 and 1939-1945.

The reason why the authors of the Protocols held this slogan to be so important, in beguiling the peoples, is also explained. If the nations embroiled in wars are denied "territorial gains", the only victors will then be "our international agentur. . . our international rights will then wipe out national rights, in the proper sense of right, and will rule the nations precisely as the civil law of States rules the relations of their subjects among themselves". To bring about this state of affairs compliant politicians are needed, and of them the Protocols say: "The administrators whom we shall choose from among the public, with strict regard to their capacities for servile obedience, will not be persons trained in the arts of government, and will therefore easily become pawns in our game in the hands of men of learning and genius who will be their advisers, specialists bred and reared from early childhood to rule the affairs of the whole world".

The reader may judge for himself whether this description fits some of "the administrators" of the West in the last five decades; the test is their attitude towards Zionism, the world-revolution and world-government, and subsequent chapters will offer information in these three respects. But "deadly accuracy" appears to reside even more in the allusion to "advisers".

Here again is "uncanny knowledge", displayed more than fifty years ago. In 1905 the non-elected but powerful "adviser" was publicly unknown. True, the enlightened few, men like Disraeli, knew that "the world is governed by very different persons from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes", but to the general public the passage would have been meaningless.

In the First and Second World Wars, however, the non-elected, unofficial but imperious "adviser" became a familiar public figure. He emerged into the open (under "emergency powers") and became known to and was passively accepted by the public masses; possibly the contempt which the Protocols display for "the mob" was justified by this submission to behind-the-scenes rule even when it was openly exercized. In the United States, for instance, "advisers on Jewish affairs" became resident at the White House and at the headquarters of American armies of occupation. One financier (who publicly recommended drastic measures for "ruling the affairs of the world") was adviser to so many presidents that he was permanently dubbed "Elder Statesman" by the press, and visiting prime ministers from England also repaired to him as if to a supreme seat of authority.

The Protocols foretold this regime of the "advisers" when none understood what was meant and few would have credited that they would openly appear in the high places.

The Protocols repeatedly affirm that the first objective is the destruction of the existing ruling class ("the aristocracy", the term employed, was still applicable in 1905) and the seizure of property through the incitement of the insensate, brutish "mob". Once again, subsequent events give the "forecast" its "deadly accuracy":

"In politics one must know how to seize the property of others without hesitation if by it we secure submission and sovereignty. . . The words, 'Liberty, Equality, Fraternity', brought to our ranks, thanks to our blind agents, whole legions who bore our banners with enthusiasm. And all the time these words were canker-worms boring into the wellbeing of the people, putting an end everywhere to peace, quiet, solidarity and destroying all the foundations of the States. . . This helped us to our greatest triumph; it gave us the possibility, among other things, of getting into our hands the master card, the destruction of privileges, or in other words the very existence of the aristocracy . . . that class which was the only defence peoples and countries had against us. On the ruins of the natural and genealogical aristocracy . . . we have set up the aristocracy of our educated class headed by the aristocracy of money. The qualifications of this aristocracy we have established in wealth, which is dependent upon us, and in knowledge. . . It is this possibility of replacing the representatives of the people which has placed them at our disposal, and, as it were, given us the power of appointment …. . We appear on the scene as alleged saviours of the worker from this oppression when we propose to him to enter the ranks of our fighting forces; Socialists, Anarchists, Communists . . . By want and the envy and hatred which it engenders we shall move the mobs and with their hands we shall wipe out all those who hinder us on our way . . . The people, blindly believing things in print, cherishes . . . a blind hatred towards all conditions which it considers above itself, for it has no understanding of the meaning of class and condition. . . These mobs will rush delightedly to shed the blood of those whom, in the simplicity of their ignorance, they have envied from their cradles, and whose property they will then be able to loot. 'Ours' they will not touch, because the moment of attack will be known to us and we shall take measures to protect our own. . . The word 'freedom' brings out the communities of men to fight against every kind of force, against every kind of authority, even against God and the laws of nature. For this reason we, when we come into our kingdom, shall have to erase this word from the lexicon of life as implying a principle of brute force which turns mobs into bloodthirsty beasts. . . But even freedom might be harmless and have its place in the State economy without injury to the wellbeing of the peoples if it rested upon the foundation of faith in God. . . This is the reason why it is indispensable for us to undermine all faith, to tear out of the minds of the masses the very principle of Godhead and the spirit, and to put in its place arithmetical calculations and material needs . . ."

". . . We have set one against another the personal and national reckonings of the peoples, religious and race hatreds, which we have fostered into a huge growth in the course of the past twenty centuries. This is the reason why there is not one State which would anywhere receive support if it were to raise its arm, for every one of them must bear in mind that any agreement against us would be unprofitable to itself. We are too strong, there is no evading our power. The nations cannot come to even an inconsiderable private agreement without our secretly having a hand in it . . . In order to put public opinion into our hands we must bring it into a state of bewilderment by giving expression from all sides to so many contradictory opinions and for such length of time as will suffice to make the peoples lose their heads in the labyrinth and come to see that the best thing is to have no opinion of any kind in matters political, which it is not given to the public to understand, because they are understood only by him who guides the public. This is the first secret. The second secret requisite for the success of our government is comprised in the following: to multiply to such an extent national failings, habits, passions, conditions of civil life, that it will be impossible for anyone to know where he is in the resulting chaos, so that the people in consequence will fail to understand one another . . . By all these means we shall so wear down the peoples that they will be compelled to offer us international power of a nature that by its possession will enable us without any violence gradually to absorb all the State forces of the world and to form a Super-Government. In place of the rulers of today we shall set up a bogey which will be called the Super-Government administration. Its hands will reach out in all directions like nippers and its organization will be of such colossal dimensions that it cannot fail to subdue all the nations of the world".

That the Protocols reveal the common source of inspiration of Zionism and Communism is shown by significant parallels that can be drawn between the two chief methods laid down in them and the chief methods pursued by Dr. Herzl and Karl Marx: The Protocols repeatedly lay emphasis on the incitement of "the mob" against the ruling class as the most effective means of destroying States and nations and achieving world dominion. Dr. Herzl, as was shown in the preceding chapter, used precisely this method to gain the ear of European rulers.

Next, Karl Marx. The Protocols say, "The aristocracy of the peoples, as a political force, is dead. . . but as landed proprietors they can still be harmful to us from the fact that they are self-sufficing in the resources upon which they live. It is essential therefore for us at whatever cost to deprive them of their land. . . At the same time we must intensively patronize trade and industry . . . what we want is that industry should drain off from the land both labour and capital and by means of speculation transfer into our hands all the money of the world.. ..."

Karl Marx in his Communist Manifesto exactly followed this formula. True he declared that Communism might be summed up in one sentence, "abolition of private property", but subsequently he qualified this dictum by restricting actual confiscation to land and implying that other types of private property were to remain intact. (In the later Marxist event, of course, all private property was confiscated, but I speak here of the strict parallel between the strategy laid down before the event alike by the Protocols and Marx).

A passage of particular interest in the present, though it was written before 1905, says, "Nowadays if any States raise a protest against us, it is only proforma at our discretion and by our direction, for their anti-semitism is indispensable to us for the management of our lesser brethren". A distinctive feature of our era is the way the charge of "anti-semitism" is continually transferred from one country to another, the country so accused becoming automatically the specified enemy in the next war. This passage might cause the prudent to turn a sceptical eye on today's periodical reports of sudden "anti-semitic" turns in communized Russia, or elsewhere.

The resemblance to Weishaupt's documents is very strong in the passages which relate to the infiltration of public departments, professions and parties, for instance: "It is from us that the all-engulfing terror proceeds. We have in our service persons of all opinions, of all doctrines, restorating monarchists, demagogues, socialists, communists, and utopian dreamers of every kind. We have harnessed them all to the task: each one of them on his own account is boring away at the last remnants of authority, is striving to overthrow all established form of order. By these acts all States are in torture; they exhort to tranquillity, are ready to sacrifice everything for peace; but we will not give them peace until they openly acknowledge our international Super-Government, and with submissiveness".

The allusions to the permeation of universities in particular, and of education in general, also spring directly from Weishaupt, or from whatever earlier source he received them: ". . . We shall emasculate the universities . . . Their officials and professors will be prepared for their business by detailed secret programmes of action from which they will not with immunity diverge, not by one iota. They will be appointed with especial precaution, and will be so placed as to be wholly dependent upon the Government". This secret permeation of universities (which was successful in the German ones in Weishaupt's day, as his documents show) was very largely effective in our generation. The two British government officials who after their flight to Moscow were paraded before the international press in 1956 to state that they had been captured by Communism at their universities, were typical products of this method, described by the Protocols early in this century and by Weishaupt in 1787.

Weishaupt's documents speak of Freemasonry as the best "cover" to be used by the agents of the conspiracy. The Protocols allot the function of "cover" to "Liberalism": "When we introduced into the State organism the poison of Liberalism its whole political complexion underwent a change. States have been seized with a mortal illness, blood-poisoning. All that remains is to await the end of their death agony".

The term "utopian dreamers", used more than once, is applied to Liberals, and its original source probably resides in the Old Testamentary allusion to "dreamers of dreams" with "false prophets", are to be put to death. The end of Liberalism, therefore, would be apparent to the student even if the Protocols did not specify it: "We shall root out liberalism from the important strategic posts of our government on which depends the training of subordinates for our State structure".

The "Big Brother" regimes of our century, are accurately foretold in the passage, "Our government will have the appearance of a patriarchal paternal guardianship on the part of our ruler".

Republicanism, too, is to be a "cover" for the conspiracy. The Protocols are especially contemptuous of republicanism, in which (and in liberalism) they see the weapon of self-destruction forged out of "the mob": ". . . then it was that the era of republics became possible of realization; and then it was that we replaced the ruler by a caricature of a government, by a president, taken from the mob, from the midst of our puppet creatures, our slaves. This was the foundation of the mine which we have laid under the peoples".

Then the unknown scribes of some time before 1905 describe the position to which American presidents have been reduced in our century. The passage begins, "In the near future we shall establish the responsibility of presidents". This, as the sequence shows, means personal responsibility, as distinct from responsibility curbed by constitutional controls; the president is to become one of the "premier-dictators" earlier foreseen, whose function is to be to break down the constitutional defences of states and thus prepare "unification under our sovereign rule".

During the First and Second World Wars the American presidents did in fact become "premier-dictators" in this sense, claiming that "the emergency" and the need for "victory" dictated this seizure of powers of personal responsibility; powers which would be restored to "the people" when "the emergency" was past. Readers of sufficient years will recall how inconceivable this appeared before it happened and how passively it was accepted in the event. The passage then continues:

"The chamber of deputies will provide cover for, will protect, will elect presidents, but we shall take from it the right to propose new, or make changes in existing laws, for this right will be given by us to the responsible president, a puppet in our hands. . . Independently of this we shall invest the president with the right of declaring a state of war. We shall justify this last right on the ground that the president as chief of the whole army of the country must have it at his disposal in case of need. . . It is easy to understand that in these conditions the key of the shrine will lie in our hands and that no one outside ourselves will any longer direct the force of legislation. . . The president will, at our discretion, interpret the sense of such of the existing laws as admit of various interpretation; he will further annul them when we indicate to him the necessity to do so, besides this, he will have the right to propose temporary laws, and even new departures in the government constitutional working, the pretext both for the one and the other being the requirements for the supreme welfare of the state. By such measures we shall obtain the power of destroying little by little, step by step, all that at the outset when we enter on our rights, we are compelled to introduce into the constitutions of states to prepare for the transition to an imperceptible abolition of every kind of constitution, and then the time is come to turn every government into our despotism".

This forecast of 1905 or earlier particu1arly deserves Lord Sydenham's tribute of "deadly accuracy". American presidents in the two wars of this century have acted as here shown. They did take the right of declaring and making war, and it has been used at least once (in Korea) since the Second World War ended; any attempt in Congress or outside to deprive them of this power, or curb them in the use of it meets with violently hostile attack.

So the Protoco1s continue. The peoples, on their progress "from one disenchantment to another", will not be allowed "a breathing-space". Any country "which dares to oppose us" must be met with war, and any collective opposition with "universal war". The peoples will not be allowed "to contend with sedition" (here is the key to the furious attacks of the 1790's, 1920 and today on all demands for "investigation", "Witch-hunting", "McCarthyism" and the like). In the Super-State to come the obligation will fall on members of one family to denounce dissidents within the family circle (the Old Testamentary dispensation earlier mentioned). The "complete wrecking of the Christian religion" will not be long delayed. The peoples will be kept distracted by trivial amusements ("people's palaces") from becoming troublesome and asking questions. History will be rewritten for their delusion (another precept since fulfilled in communized Russia), for "we shall erase from the memory of men all facts of previous centuries which are undesirable to us, and leave only those which depict all the errors of the national governments". "All the wheels of the machinery of all States go by the force of the engine, which is in our hands, and that engine of the machinery of States is Gold".

And the end of it all: "What we have to get at is that there should be in all the States of the world, beside ourselves, only the masses of the proletariat, a few millionaires devoted to our interests, police and soldiers. . . The recognition of our despot. . . will come when the peoples, utterly wearied by the irregularities and incompetence. . . of their rulers, will clamour: 'Away with them and give us one king over all the earth who will unite us and annihilate the causes of discords, frontiers, nationalities, religions, State debts, who will give us peace and quiet, which we cannot find under our rulers and representatives' ".

In two or three of these passages I have substituted "people" or "masses" for "Goyim ", because the use of that word relates to the unproven assertion contained in the book's title, and I do not want to confuse the issues; evidence about the identity of the authors of the conspiracy must be sought elsewhere than in an unsupported allegation. The authors may have been Jewish, non-Jewish or anti-Jewish. That is immaterial. When it was published this work was the typescript of a drama which had not been performed; today it has been running for fifty years and its title is The Twentieth Century. The characters depicted in it move on our contemporary stage, play the parts foretold and produce the events foreseen.

Only the denouement remains, fiasco or fulfilment. It is a grandiose plan, and in my estimation cannot succeed. But it has existed for at least 180 years and probably for much longer, and the Protocols provided one more proof in a chain of proofs that has since been greatly lengthened. The conspiracy for world dominion through a world slave state exists and cannot at this stage be abruptly checked or broken off; of the momentum which it has acquired it now must go on to fulfilment or failure. Either will be destructive for a time, and hard for those of the time in which the dénouement comes.

Did Rothschild Write The Protocols of Zion?

       
The Elders Of Zion
And The Masters Of Discourse

 

The troublesome concept of the Hidden Hand or the Elders of Zion is superfluous and unnecessary.

 

"The latest controversy to involve the Arab World concerns a TV program A Rider without a Horse that started airing on Wednesday, Nov. 5th, the first day of the holy month of Ramadan on several Arab satellite channels. The source of the controversy is that the program is partly based on "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion", the old forgery originating in Tsarist Russia", writes Qais S. Saleh, a business consultant from Ramallah on the excellent website CounterPunch[1]. Expectedly, Saleh condemns the broadcast and warns the Palestinians and the Arabs to stay away from the bad old wolf of anti-Semitism, or, as he put it, "the trend of importation of anti-Semitic bigotry".

 

Saleh's view coincides with that of Michael Hoffman, on whose site the Protocols can be found. Hoffman thinks Arabs have no need to import anti-Semitic arguments from the old and far-away sources, provided they have a fresh round-the-clock local source: actual behaviour of the Jewish state and its Jewish citizens. It is much more convincing than old tales.

 

However, the Protocols are still with us and still entertain minds. Recently, the leading Italian novelist and thinker Umberto Eco contributed his opinion on the subject to the Guardian[2]. Eco "explains" the popular feelings towards the Jews: "They engaged in trade and lent money - hence the resentment towards them as "intellectuals".

 

 

In my limited knowledge, it is not the intellectuals who lend money, but bankers and loan sharks, while true intellectuals find their behaviour repulsive. Probably Eco has a different definition of 'intellectual' up his sleeve. "The ill-famed Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion were a rehash of serialised fictional material, and prove their own unreliability, since it is hardly credible that "the baddies" would reveal their fell purposes so blatantly" - concludes Eco.

 

One can forgive a business consultant from Ramallah, but Umberto Eco could notice that his definition would fit some other books, for instance, Gargantua and Pantagruel, an even older forgery, pretending to be a real chronicle of the Giants family, and built on 'serialised fictional material'. Don Quixote, Pickwick's Club, 1984 of Orwell - all these books "pretend" to describe real events to the same extent. They are 'forgeries', as they are ascribed to somebody else: Don Quixote to Sid Ahmed Benengeli[3], and Gargantua to Maitre Alcofribas Nasier[4].

 

The Protocols of the Elders of Zion are best described as 'pseudo-epigrapha', rather than 'fake'. They belong to the same category as Tomas Friedman's Letter of President Clinton to Mubarak. After all, pseudo-epigraphic genre is an old and venerable one. It is even better to consider the Protocols, 'a political pamphlet'.

 

In this essay, we shall attempt to find out why the Protocols refuse to lie down and die. We shall stay clear from the usual question, "who wrote it". Its real author remains unknown, and it is difficult to imagine this person, for the Protocols are a literary palimpsest. In the days of yore, a scribe would write his composition on a piece of old parchment, previously removing an older text. The erasure was rarely total, and a reader was treated to an integrated version of the Golden Ass and Fioretti of St Francis. In the Protocols, there are layers of old and even older stories, and it precludes meaningful quest for ultimate creator. Every text should be treated on its own merits, disregarding the question of authorship. Although, Jorge Luis Borges wrote that the author is an important part of a text. Indeed, if we would know the Protocols contain real blueprint of some Jewish elites, we would have our answer ready in minutes. But Protocols were published in the end of 19th-beginning of 20th century "as found", as apocrypha. They became a great bestseller and still stay there, though in some countries (notably the Soviet Union), mere possession of the text was punishable by death.

 

The Anonymous author of the Protocols describes a master-plan for vast restructuring of society, creation of a new oligarchy and subjugation of millions. The final product is not too different from the one described in a contemporary piece of writing, The Iron Heel by Jack London, the great radical from Oakland, California. However, London expected harsh cracking down, while Anonym's way to subjugation leads through Machiavellian manipulations and mind control a la Orwell's 1984. (Orwell's homage to the Protocols is even more striking as it is rarely noticed).

 

The difficulty of the Protocols is in an uncanny dissonance between its uncouth language and deep social and religious thought. It is a rude parody-like rendering of a satanic, subtle and well-thought out plan, wrote the Nobel Prise winning novelist Alexander Solzhenitsyn[5] in his (written in 1966 and published in 2001) analysis of the Protocols.

 

"The Protocols . show a blueprint of a social system. Its design is well above abilities of an ordinary mind, including that of its publisher. It is a dynamic process of two stages, of destabilization, increasing freedom and liberalism, which is terminated in social cataclysm, and on the second stage, new hierarchical restructuring of society takes place. It is more complicated than a nuclear bomb. It could be a stolen and distorted plan designed by a mind of genius. Its putrid style of an anti-Semitic grubby brochure [intentionally] obscures the great strength of thought and insight" .

 

Solzhenitsyn is aware of faults of the Protocols. "Its style is that of a filthy leaflet, the powerful line of thought is broken and fragmented, mixed up with ill-smelling incantations and psychological blunders. The system described is not necessarily connected with the Jews; it could be purely Masonic or whatever; while its strongly anti-Semitic current is not an organic part of the design".

 

Solzhenitsyn makes a textual experiment, removes words "Jews", "Goyim" and "conspiracy" and finds many disturbing ideas. He concludes: "The text demonstrates impressive foresight on the two systems of society, the Western and the Soviet one. While a strong thinker could possibly predict the development of the West in 1901, how could he grasp the Soviet future?"

 

Solzhenitsyn braved the Soviet regime, dared to write and publish the mammoth Archipelago Gulag, an indictment of the Soviet repression, but even he stalled and did not publish his research of the Protocols. He asked it to be published after his death only, and it was printed against his will in a very small number of copies in 2001. Let us follow Solzhenitsyn's line of thought and gaze into the crystal ball of the Protocols, while temporarily discounting its "Jewish line" and paying heed to the idea of creating a new system, not necessarily a Jewish-dominated one. The master-plan begins with reshaping of human mind:

 

"People's minds should be diverted (away from contemplation) towards industry and trade, and then they will have no time to think. The people will be consumed by the pursuit of gain. It will be vain pursuit, for we shall put industry on a speculative basis: what is withdrawn from the land by industry will slip through the hands of workers and industrialists and pass into the hands of financiers.

 

The intensified struggle for survival and superiority, accompanied by crises and shocks will create cold and heartless communities with strong aversion towards religion. Their only guide is gain that is Mammon, which they will erect into a veritable cult".

 

Foresight of Anonym is amazing: in the days of the Protocols' publication, Man was still the measure of things, and full eighty years would pass, until Milton Friedman and Chicago School would proclaim Market and Profit as the only guiding light.

 

The tool for enslavement of minds is the media, writes Anonym. "There is a great force that creates the movement of thought in the people, and that is the media. It is in the media that the triumph of freedom of speech finds its incarnation. Through the Press we have gained the power to influence minds while remaining unobserved. We shall erase from the memory of men the historical facts we do not want them to know, and leave only those we wish".

 

Years will pass since the publication until a small group of people who control our discourse while remaining unobserved, the media lords, would rise. The free discussion of the media barons, Berlusconi and Black, Maxwell and Sulzberger, Gusinsky and Zuckerman is banned from the media they own, while their cooperative affinity remains impressive. The freedom of discourse survives wherever independent (from media barons) media still exists. Hundred years ago, this force was much weaker than it is now, and it is amazing the Anonym recognised its potential.

 

Century before the rise of World Bank and IMF, the Protocols noticed the foreign loans are the best tools to rob countries of their wealth. "While the loans were internal, money remained in the land, but with externalisation of loans, all nations pay tribute of their subjects to the oligarchy". Indeed, the bigger loans poor countries get, the poorer they become.

 

Concentration of capital in the hands of financiers, concentration of media in few hands, extra-judicial killings of unyielding leaders, stock market with its derivatives sucks out wealth and it accumulates in the hands of the priesthood of Mammon, gain (or "market forces") as the only measure of successful strategy. Yes, the interest to the Protocols does not disappear because the described plan of creating oligarchic (not necessarily Jewish) rule is being implemented in real time and it is called the New World Order.

 

Sometimes, the Protocols are described as extreme-right-wing anti-utopian piece of writing. However, it spans both left and right-wing discourse. A right-wing writer would bless strengthening of Law and Order, but the following prediction of Anonym could be written today by a leftist libertarian, say, Noam Chomsky, witnessing the present transition to the New World Order: "The race of armaments and the increase of police force will bring forth society where are only the masses of the proletariat, a few millionaires, police and soldiers".

 

However, the deepest thought of Anonym remains in the spiritual sphere:

 

"Freedom might be harmless and have its place in the State economy without injury to the well-being of the people if it rested upon the foundation of faith in God, upon the Brotherhood of humanity. This is the reason why it is indispensable for us to undermine all faith, to tear out of the people's mind the very principle of God and the Spirit, and to put in its place arithmetical calculations and material needs".

 

Anonym connects the Faith and the idea of Brotherhood of humanity. Undermining of Faith ruins the Brotherhood. Freedom, instead of desirable and beautiful state of mind, turns into destructive drive when unhinged from the Faith. Instead of Faith, the Enemy offers pursuit of Mammon.

 

While reading in today's (16.11.02) IH Tribune philippics against gay priests and nuns, one notes the following lines in the Protocols: "We have taken care to discredit the Christian priesthood and ruin their mission which might still hinder our plans. Day by day, their influence on the people is falling lower. Collapse of Christianity is nigh".

 

We witness implementation of this plan: religion is removed from consideration, neo-liberalism or Mammon worship takes its place, while with disestablishment of socialism, this brave attempt of a non-faith-based brotherhood collapsed, leaving ideological vacuum. This observation caused some reviewers to exclaim, "The true designer of the Master-plan is our old foe, the Prince of the World, whose ultimate aim is elimination of Divine Presence and ruination of Man". True, but the Prince of the World can't act directly. He needs free agents that choose to accept his plan. These chief agents and possible allies, according to the pamphlet, are financial capitalists and Masters of Discourse, 'the Mind'.

 

They promote to the highest positions "politicians who, in case of disobedience to our instructions, must face criminal charges or disappear. We shall arrange elections in favour of candidates with some dark, undiscovered stain in their past. They will be our trustworthy agents out of fear of revelations" For us, contemporaries of Watergate and Lewinsky, it sounds familiar.

 

The shift from Stage One (liberalism and freedom) to Stage Two (tyranny) took place in our lifetime. If in 1968 the NY Times promoted the Freedom Riders, in 2002 it supports Patriot Act. An important American lawyer, Alan Dershovitz of Harvard made a U-turn from Human rights to Right to torture. This U-turn was predicted by the Protocols, as the purpose beyond the struggle against the old elites.

 

"The aristocracy enjoyed the labour of the workers, and it was interested in seeing that the workers were well fed, healthy, and strong. The people have annihilated the aristocracy, and have fallen into the grips of merciless money-grinding scoundrels".

 

In less emotional terms, the new bourgeoisie removed the old elites with support of people, while promising freedom and objecting to their privilege. After its victory, it took the privilege to itself, and turned out to be as bad (or worse) as the feudal lord. Marx referred to this complaint of aristocracy in one of the numerous additions to the Communist Manifesto, and considered it futile if partly justified. However, he did not live to witness a similar process which took place in the last days of the Soviet Union. The rising new bourgeoisie took control over the discourse, convinced people to fight the privilege of Nomenclature for the sake of equality and freedom, and after their victory, it assumed and multiplied the privilege, and rejected equality and freedom.

 

The Protocols predict rise of New Bourgeoisie, globalist Mammon-worshippers,

 

 

who are inherently hostile to Old Elites, to spirit, to religion, to the ordinary people. For a long while, they were the engine of the left, democracy-seeking movements, until their purpose was completed, and then they made the U-turn towards oligarchy.

 

This U-turn can be quantified by the inheritance and land tax rate in England: while the financial bourgeoisie and Masters of Discourse fought against the old ruling classes, the rates were high and eventually dismantled their power base; after their victory, the rate decreased allowing consolidation of the new ruling classes. It is possible that the Old Order had had some advantages. It is almost certain that a transition from the Old Order could be different if the people would understand the intentions of the enemy. But history can't be reversed, and it is quite futile to dream of return of the good lords and benevolent Party bosses.

 

Thus, the Protocols (purified of references to the Jews and conspiracies) are useful as they describe a blueprint of the New World Order, and help its adversaries to form a defensive strategy against the designs of Enemy. But the references to the Jews constitute large and important part of the text.

 

The Jews and the Protocols

 

The Protocols identify the moving force of the New World Order with a powerful group of extremely chauvinist, manipulative and domination-obsessed Jewish leaders. The leaders, according to the Protocols, despise ordinary community members; they utilise and support anti-Semitism as the means to keep their "lesser brethren", innocent ordinary folk of Jewish origin, in thrall to their rule. The leaders are described as pathological goy haters, bent on destroying culture and traditions of other nations while preserving their own. Their goal is to create world government and rule the homogenised and globalised world.

 

Their aims and intentions are stated in extremely contrarian and obnoxious way. Solzhenitsyn concluded that no sane person would deliver his favourite ideas in such self-demeaning and self-defeating way. "We extract gold from their blood and tears", "our power is based on workers' hunger", "revolutionaries are our human tools", "brutish minds of Goyim" are, in his opinion, words ascribed to the Jews by their enemies. A Jew would rather put such ideas in an oblique way, he felt.

 

It is not a water-tight argument. Some people speak in oblique way, others prefer a direct one. An Armenian from the Azeri capital, Baku told me in long gone 1988, "The Azeris are our cattle, without our Armenian mind their country would collapse in course of days, as they are silly donkeys". (A few months later, an explosion of native violence expelled the clever Armenians from Azerbaijan, and since then the Azeris manage their own land quite all right.) David Ben Gurion, the first ruler of the Jewish state, coined an equally arrogant maxim: "Who cares what Goyim say? What matters is what the Jews do!" This sentence is an almost direct quote from the Protocols.

 

The Protocols ascribe to the Elders a saying, "Each Jewish victim is worth in the sight of God a thousand goyim". This line, a pinnacle of arrogance, is not a vain invention of an anti-Semite. Two ministers of Sharon's government, Uri Landau and Ivet Lieberman demanded to kill one thousand Palestinian goyim for each Jewish victim. A Jewish extremist at a demo for the Jewish Temple Mount (18.11.02) called each Jew to kill one thousand Palestinian goyim. Apparently, some ideas of the Protocols are not foreign to some Jews.

 

The late Israeli scholar Israel Shahak and an American Jewish writer Norton Mezvinsky present in their Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel[6] a plethora of sayings by Jewish Rabbis that wouldn't be out of place in the Protocols. "The difference between a Jewish soul and souls of non-Jews is greater and deeper than the difference between a human soul and the souls of cattle" (p. ix). Shahak and Mezvinsky proved the rage of the Jewish chauvinists does not differentiate between Palestinians, Arabs and Goyim in general. In other words, whatever happened to Palestinians could happen to any Gentile community standing on the way of the Jews.

 

Indeed, if the Protocols would have no relation to reality, they probably wouldn't be as popular as they are. The Jews are sufficiently powerful to dream of domination, and some do. Apparently some Jewish ideas found their way into the text. Other thoughts are ascribed to the Jews on the basis of "qui bono".

 

The least acceptable idea of the Protocols is the presumption of an extremely ancient conspiracy of the Jews aiming to take over the world. The extreme philo-Semitic view denies the Jews their ability to act together and presents them as separate individuals united by prayer only. This view is not accepted by the Jews, and it does not agree with the common sense.

 

Solzhenitsyn does not believe in existence of the Elders of Zion, though "the togetherness and coordination of Jewish activity for the sake of their advancement caused many writers (beginning from Cicero) to imagine there is a single commanding centre to direct their attacks". "Without such a world centre, without conspiring, the Jews understand each other and are able to coordinate their actions".

 

The Jews are perfectly able to coordinate their actions, but I doubt human beings, Jews or English, Russians or Chinese are able to form long-standing plans spanning centuries and continents. Nobody was able to prove such a plot exists. Usually, 'anti-Semites' (the people who doubt or deny inherent benevolence of the Jews to Gentile society) argue for its authenticity as Henry Ford did. The car king said[7]: "the only statement I care to make about the Protocols is that they fit in with what is going on." Indeed they do, exclaims Victor Marsden, the English translator of the Protocols.

 

However, it is not a proof of Jewish plot. We can reach similar results rejecting the conspiracy line altogether, by applying the concept of self-interest to the real Jewish community as it was aptly described by Shahak-Mezvinsky. We shall prove that the troublesome concept of the Hidden Hand or the Elders of Zion is superfluous and unnecessary.

 

Traditional Jewish community had a structure of "upturned pyramid", in words of Zionist theoreticians: it contained many persons of wealth, learning and management, and very few workers. It appears an odd thing, until one understands that the Zionists artificially view the Jews in divorce of the society they live in. The Jewish 'upturned pyramid' couldn't exist without a real down-turned pyramid of Gentile low classes. The Jews compete with the native elites of the Gentile society for the right to exploit the Gentile worker and peasant. The modus operandi of the two competitors differs. While native elites shared some values with their lower classes and usually provided for some upward mobility, the Jewish community had its own structure and values.

 

Economically it stood for capitalist or quasi-capitalist exploitation of the natives, while ideologically the community declared loyalty to its leaders, rejection of common humanity with the natives, extreme ethnocentrism, feeling of racial and religious superiority towards the natives. It was a marginal community, forming no bonds of marriage and friendship with the natives. As a marginal community, it was free of long-standing considerations the native elites had had.

 

For instance, the Jewish community of 17th century Ukraine has been a collective tax-farmer and leaseholder, extracting from the natives SIX times more taxes and dues per person than a gentile landlord did, wrote a prominent Jewish Ukrainian historian Saul Borovoy in a recently published in Jerusalem book. The Jewish communities of Maghreb supported the colonial power against their gentile neighbours, etc. Their traditions forbade normal relations with the natives.

 

Let us presume that such a community acts in its egoistic interests. Forget conspiracy; forget the Elders of Zion, learned or otherwise. The community's only aim is to promote its own well-being. For a marginal group it means to make the social gap between its members and the native population as broad as possible, while minimising the backlash potential.

 

The group would naturally, for its self-interest, support every movement against native elites, whether initiated by the King (as the Jews did before the French Revolution) or by the rebelling low classes. It would not be done for the Jewish love of democracy or rebellious nature, but for improvement of their own positions. Ideal situation would be created by massacre or expulsion of the native elites, as the group members would be able to appropriate their positions. Indeed, it happened in Soviet Russia and Soviet Hungary in the aftermath of World War One. Massacre and exile of the native elites made the positions of power and influence available to the competing Jews.

 

Self-interest explains the Jewish involvement with the dreaded Cheka, the Soviet security services. Until 1937, the Jews occupied the top echelon of the KGB predecessor body, while millions of Russians lost their life or liberty. Objectively, these executioners made jobs and houses available for their fellow Jews. After the massacre and exile of Russian elites, the Jews were ready for equality, as a son of a Rabbi could easily compete with a son of Russian worker or peasant, though he wouldn't be able to compete with a son of Russian noble.

 

In a similar way, the Jews in Israel granted limited equality to the Palestinians in 1966, after confiscation of 90% of native lands and expulsion of 90% of natives. Now, the settlers promise to extend equality to the rest of Palestinians, after they will expel the majority of them elsewhere. In the light of great Jewish support for Israel, there is no reason to presume that the Jewish modus operandi in Palestine is intrinsically different from the Jewish intentions abroad.

 

Solzhenitsyn writes: "Executed <during the revolution army officers were Russians, the noblemen, priests, monks, deputies were Russians. In 1920s, the pre-revolutionary engineers and scientists were exiled or killed. They were Russians, while their place was taken by Jews. The best Russian Psychiatric institute in Moscow, its Russian members were arrested or exiled, while their place was taken by the Jews. Important Jewish doctors blocked the advancement of Russian medical scientists. The best intellectual and artistic elites of Russian people were killed, while the Jews grew and flourished in these (deadly for Russians) years".

 

The new Jewish elite did not fully identify with Russia but carried out separate policy. It had a fateful effect in 1991, when over 50 p.c. of Jews (as opposed to 13 p.c. of Russians) supported pro-Western coup of President Yeltsin. In 1995, 81% of Jews voted for pro-Western parties, and only 3% for the Communists (as opposed to 46% of Russians), according to the publication by the Jewish sociologist Dr Ryvkina in her book Jews in Post-Soviet Russia (1996).

 

In ever-expanding America, the Jews did not have to kill or remove the native elites; they became its important part, controlling discourse and wielding considerable financial clout. They still do not identify with the goyish America: every year, they force the Congress and the Administration to send five billion dollars to their Israeli offshoot and now try to let America fight their war in Iraq. They do discriminate other Americans, otherwise 60% of the leading positions in the media would not become Jewish[8].

 

Jews of France do not identify with France, either. "Their identification with Israel is so strong; it overshadows their ties to the country they live in". - writes Daniel Ben Simon in Haaretz. - "This dual loyalty was made very clear to me by a Jewish doctor in Nice."If the choice is between Israel and France, there's no question I feel closer to Israel," he said, without a moment's hesitation. He was born and bred in France; he went to medical school in France; his patients are French; he speaks French with his wife and children. But in the depths of his heart, he feels a greater affinity with the Jewish state".

 

In Palestine, the Jews have no compassion for the natives. They travel by segregated roads, study in segregated schools, while a Jew consumes ten times more water resources than a goy, and has seven times higher income. Thus, the Jewish separateness remains a fact of life for many Jewish communities.

 

For their own well-being the Jews have to obscure their unique position, wealth and power by the following means:

 

- Holocaust discourse helps to fight envy.

 

- In a mono-ethnic society, the Jews as the only foreign body do stick out and attract attention, while in multicultural society they are hardly seen. For this purpose, the Jews support immigration from non-European countries, as their presence would remove the stamp of Jewish exclusiveness.

 

- The Political Correctness is another device forbidding the discussion of Jewish influence.

 

- Fight against Christianity and the Church makes sense for a non-Christian community: if the Church would be strong, the Christians would prefer their own, Christian elite.

 

- Globalisation is a natural development for the people spread all over the globe, if they attach but little importance to the local ways.

 

- Impoverishment of the natives is but another side of growing wealth of the Jewish community.

 

Summing it up, a big share (though not all) of the ideas ascribed to the Jews by the Protocols are indeed the ideas useful or necessary for the Jewish communal well-being, without any need for great hatred towards Gentiles and/or the guidance of mythic Elders of Zion. That is the reason of the Protocols' long life. Paradoxically, without Israeli apartheid these facts would remain invisible for the host communities.

 

 

 

 

[1] A HORSELESS RIDER, THE PROTOCOLS OF THE ELDERS OF ZION & IMPORTED BIGOTRY By Qais S. Saleh, CounterPunch November 13, 2002 http://www.counterpunch.com/saleh1112.html  see more on http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/DailyNews/egypt021121_TV.html 

 

[2] http://books.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,12084,775668,00.html  

The poisonous Protocols by Umberto Eco

 

[3] CIDE HAMETE BENENGELI, in Cervantes' spelling

 

[4] Nom de plume of François Rabelais.

 

[5] Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Evrei v SSSR i v budushei Rossii, 2001 (in Russian)

 

[6] Pluto Press, 1999

 

[7] in an interview published in the New York World, February 17th, 1921

 

[8] The data provided by Kevin MacDonald of California University.

 

Israel Shamir is an Israeli journalist based in Jaffa. His articles can be found on the site www.israelshamir.net 

The Absolute Best Authentications
Of The Protocols Of Zion

By Leland Lehrman 1-6-6

The following are my nominations for the four top authentications of the Protocols of Zion, including Ivan Fraser's Proofs of an Ancient Conspiracy, Henry Makow's Protocol Forgery Arguments Are Flawed, Paquita de Shishmareff's Waters Flowing Eastward and Peter Myers Protocols of Zion Toolkit, to which I give first prize.

In my research and discussion with Henry Makow, one of the top scholars on the subject, I found Peter Myers' website, an Australian who is perhaps the living master of the subject of the Protocols of Zion. Even Tony Blizzard who worked at the Spotlight (now the American Free Press) and the Barnes Review with the previous world authority Paquita de Shishmareff while she was alive does not have a current mastery like Myers. If you read the article I have linked below, you will understand why I say so.

Myers goes into enormous detail on the technical aspects of the "forgery" argument, explaining the nuances of the arguments as well as demonstrating that only one-sixth [a liberal interpretation according to Makow] of the Protocols by word count can in fact be linked to any earlier document. The other five sixths, including the most egregiously offensive predictions regarding the Russian Revolution and other then-in-the-future events, are completely original, as is the crown jewel, the financial program - painfully evident if you look at our State Finances and the private ownership of all the major Central Banks worldwide.

If you read the Ivan Fraser article, the Henry Makow article, the book Waters Flowing Eastward by Paquita de Shishmareff and Father Dennis Fahey, and the extensive works by Peter Myers, you will come to the excruciating conclusion that the Protocols of Zion are not only genuine, but part of a stream of Masonic, Jewish Supremacist and Luciferian writing that continues to this day in works such as The Jewish Century, by Yuri Slezkine which are quite open about "Jewish" cultural dominance and superiority.

But he truth is that this scam is no more Jewish than banking is. A wise councilor recently showed me the seminal work on the topic of "hydraulic dictatorship" or the control of "scarce resources" as a method of political control: Karl Wittfogel's Oriental Despotism. Temple religions involving a priest/banker/miltary dictatorship, particularly in the Mideast, have existed since before the dawn of history. As my counsel likes to say, "Scams have a life of their own."

The nightmare of world domination and its deity Lucifer, don't give a damn who is manning the controls of the Death Star so long as they are doing a good job. This is why wars within the Illuminati appear to break out every now and then, as when Bush 41 decided to withhold loan guarantees to Israel pending "peace talks."

Although they lay claim to Jewish heritage, those "Jews" who play the world domination game are in effect no longer Jewish by religion in that their strategy is in direct contradiction with the Ten Commandments, the real pillar of the Hebrew religion. That they have "Jewish" genetic heritage is really of no importance, because empirical evidence is conclusive that both God and the Devil are equal opportunity employers.

Manipulating a religious structure in order to use its thought-forms for domination purposes is common within any religion, and neither Christianity, Islam nor any religion are immune to such parasitism and corruption. In effect the Protocols are a customized World Domination plan for those who identify themselves somehow with the militant, Talmudic strains of Judaism. One can find such domination plans in other forms when they are written for other audiences. The hidden author of them all is Lucifer, he just tweaks each plan a little in order to appeal to the psychological weakness or sense of identity of the target audience. However, it must be said that Lucifer has found extremely effective executors within his "Jewish" target group, and it is understandable why this should lead some to erroneously believe that somehow "Judaism" is the sole root cause of the "troubles" engendered by Lucifer's plans.

The Protocols themselves acknowledge that their plan hinges on their successful manipulation of existing power personages and that only at the absolute death of the host political organism will they reveal themselves and openly impose their absolute power. It is interesting to note in this context that Revelations hints at the same event, but farther up the change of command. Revelations predicts that at the moment the Jewish Supremacist Cult (Israel) declares its supreme rulership over the world from within a newly constructed Third Temple, Lucifer, the secret parasite within the Jewish Supremacist ideology will utterly destroy "Israel". Ultimately, Lucifer is the one who wishes to take the place of God, and he will not abide any mortal Rothschild descendant in that role.

It is to be expected that manipulated leaders will realize the ultimate intent of their manipulators and attempt to abort the plan. This appears to be happening right now as NSA and CIA whistleblowers reveal the privatization scams and absolute amorality now overtaking what was left of the "Intelligence Community." http://www.waynemadsenreport.com 

Finally, because the works by Myers are so extensive, and I dare not expect you to make it through them any time soon, I have extracted two particularly relevant sections, one related to Dr. John Coleman's research. A former MI6 agent now living in Carson City Nevada, Coleman's Committee of 300 is one of the most quoted books on the subject of Secret History. Check it out at bottom.

And now, the list of the absolute best links regarding the authenticity of the Protocols of Zion:

Ivan Fraser's Proofs of an Ancient Conspiracy: http://reactor-core.org/protocols/fraser.html 

Paquita de Shishmareff's Waters Flowing Eastward: http://book-case.kroupnov.ru/pages/library/Waters/ 

Henry Makow's "Protocols Forgery Argument is Flawed: http://www.savethemales.ca/000298.html 

Peter Myers on the Protocols: http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers/toolkit.html 

Peter Myers Teaser Passage #1: "Cohn's arithmetic is incorrect. The word-count of the parallel-passages from the Protocols, as listed by Bernstein (at bernstein.zip), is 4,361, while the word-count of the Protocols is 26, 496. That is, the parallel passages comprise 16.45% of the Protocols; this is substantial, but still less than one sixth of the total. What Cohn especially omits to mention, is the Protocols' extensive coverage of the world finance system."

Peter Myers Teaser Passage #2:

22. Dr. John Coleman on "Colonel" House from Committee of 300 book.

Dr. Coleman's book Conspirator's Hierarchy, the Committee of 300 [highly recommended] can be read here: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_sociopol_committee300.htm#menu 

Anyone who has read much of Lyndon Larouche's material will note great similarity in this 1992 book by Coleman. Both say that the One-World Conspiracy is British, centred on the Monarchy. They "write out" any specifically Jewish involvement, although a number of Jewish bodies get a mention, e.g. the ADL.

Yet the Jewish Defense Organization calls Larouche a Nazi: "Lyndon LaRouche hired Jewish flunkies like Steinberg and Goldstien to do his dirtywork. The name of the game is Yockeyism, crypto-Nazism ... " http://jdo.org/gibson.htm .

So, is there a hidden Jewish theme within Coleman's work?

When one considers the shocking press that the British Royals get (compared to, say, the Japanese or Danish Royals) with the media prying into their troubles, exacerbating them and putting them on the front pages; when one considers that Rupert Murdoch's media, and the Economist, promote the abolition of the British Monarchy; then another force is suspected behind the scenes.

Here's a clue: Coleman writes,

"... Robert Cecil of the Jewish Cecil family that had controlled the British monarchy since a Cecil became the private secretary and lover of Queen Elizabeth I ..." (Conspirators' Hierarchy, p. 201).

Coleman writes in his article King Makers, King Breakers: The Cecils (1985, ? Dr John Coleman, W.I.R., 2533 N. Carson St., Suite J-118 Carson City, NV 89706):

{p. 25} The records at Hatfield House show that the Unity of Science Conferences was the brain child of Robert Cecil, as confirmed by the Dutch Jew, Mandell Huis alias Colonel House, who was the controller of Woodrow Wilson and Wilson's personal representative at the Paris peace Conference; and the special representative of the United States Government at the Inter-Allied Conference of Premiers and Foreign Ministers in 1917; U. S. representative at the Armistice in 1918 and a member of the Commission on Mandates in 1919. Mandell Huis, like the Cecils, professed to be a Christian, but was a Jew by birth and conviction. He was a firm friend of the Cecil clan, and it was Huis who forced Wilson to agree to the July, 1915 arrangement made by Arthur Balfour which gave Palestine to the zionists and brouqht America into the first world war. Americans should be taught these things in schools and universities, but so great is the power of the Black Nobility, the RIIA, the CFR and the Eastern Liberal Establishment gang of traitors, that the majority

{p. 26} of Americans will probably never hear the name of the Cecil family, as one of the names which shaped the destiny of our once free great republican America. Before leaving the subject of "Colonel House" (Huis is the Dutch word for house), let me say that in spite of the many important tasks he was given to carry out, "Colonel House" was never a member of the United States government, nor was he elected to hold any of these important offices by the sovereign people of the United States. Therefore I say to you; "Of what use is our present system? We call ourselves a republic and a democracy, yet, no matter who we elect to the White House, the secret government of America continues to enact its policies, without the slightest regard for our wishes. Of what use then, is our electoral system?" ... {end}

So here is the Jewish theme lurking with the British theme. Yet, in Conspirators' Hierarchy there are only glimpses of this, such as:

"Cecil John Rhodes, a Committee of 300 member who fronted for the Rothschilds in South Africa ... " (p. 134).

"Committee of 300 members Cecil John Rhodes, Barney Barnato and Alfred Beit instigated and engineered the war. Rhodes was the principle agent for the Rothschilds ... " (p. 150)

This reverses Rhodes' usual priority over Rothschild, and puts Rothschild at the helm. Beit, too, was Jewish. Carroll Quigley wrote in The Anglo-American Establishment:

"{p. 134} Even Rhodes ... was not a racist. ... Some of his closest friends {p. 135} were Jews (like Beit), and in three of his wills he left Lord Rothschild as his trustee, in one as his sole trustee."

Here's another important quote from Conspirators' Hierarchy, on ties connecting Walter Lippmann, Edward Bernays (both Jewish), with H. G. Wells and the British Fabian Socialists, who, Quigley shows, were linked to the Anglo-American Establishment via the the Coefficient Club:

{p. 200} In 1928, Lippmann's compatriot Edward Bernays wrote a book called "CRYSTALLIZING PUBLIC OPINION" and in 1928 a second book of his was published entitled simply "PROPAGANDA." In it Bernays described his experiences at Wellington House. Bernays was a close friend of Master Manipulator H.G. Wells, whose many quasi-novels were used by

{p. 201} Bernays to help formulate mass mind control techniques. Wells was not shy about his role as a leader in changing lower class society, mainly because he was a close friend of members of the British royal family, and spent a great deal of time with some of the most highly placed politicians of the day, men like Sir Edward Grey, Lord Haldane, Robert Cecil of the Jewish Cecil family that had controlled the British monarchy since a Cecil became the private secretary and lover of Queen Elizabeth I, Leo Amery, Halford Mackinder of MI6 and later head of the London School of Economics, whose pupil Bruce Lockhart would become MI6 controller of Lenin and Trotsky during the Bolshevik Revolution, and even the great man himself, Lord Alfred Milner. One of Well's favorite watering holes was the prestigious St. Ermins Hotel, meeting place of the Coefficient Club, a club to which certified gentlemen only were admitted and where they met once a month. All of the men mentioned above were members and also members of the Souls Club. Wells claimed that any nation could be defeated, not by direct confrontation but by understanding the human mind-- what he called, "the mental hinterlands hidden behind the persona."

With such a powerful backer, Bernays felt confident enough to launch his "PROPAGANDA":

"As civilization becomes more complex, AND AS THE NEED FOR INVISIBLE GOVERNMENT HAS BEEN INCREASINGLY DEMONSTRATED (emphasis added-JC), the technical means have been invented and developed BY WHICH PUBLIC OPINION MAY BE REGIMENTED (emphasis added-JC). With printing press and newspaper, the telephone, telegraph, radio and airplanes, ideas can be spread rapidly, and even instantaneously, across the whole of America."

Bernays had not yet seen how much better television, which was to follow, would do the job.

{endquote} More at www.british-conspiracy.html  .

Is Coleman describing a Jewish conspiracy lurking within the British one and using it as a cover?

If so, this Jewish movement is divided into Internationalist ("Socialist") and Zionist wings. What Coleman says about Socialism applies to the former; he says nothing about the latter.

But the Fundamentalists in Israel are waging their own campaign against the former, which they call the "British" conspiracy (ignoring, for example, the Jewishness of Bill Clinton's cabinets).

The CIA is on one side; Mossad on the other.

The Socialist Internationalists (New Left), who can be considered either the Left faction of the "British", or as the Left faction of the "Jewish" block, are led by George Soros and Noam Chomsky. Both are Jewish; both oppose the war. Both support minority causes of the Gay Marriage type; a part of Chomsky's website is devoted to Gay and Lesbian issues.

Michael Higger writes in his book The Jewish Utopia that "A Jewish Utopia begins where Wells leaves off" (p. 6). www.jewish-utopia.html 

Thus, we now witness a struggle between these two visions of Judaism. Gay Marriage and the World Court are litmus issues that identify the two camps.

"Colonel" Edward House's "novel" of 1912, Philip Dru: Administrator, a model Woodrow Wilson followed; Jacob Schiff's campaigns for Zionism and World Government; and how two Conspiracies, an "Anglo" one and a Zionist one, joined up: www.house-schiff.html  ."

Leland Lehrman l

Telling the Real History of a Legendary Forgery
Israeli Filmmaker Plans a Documentary
on 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion'
By MAX GROSS

 FORWARD STAFF 

Nitzan Aviram is trying to keep his argument focused.

When the 50-year-old Israeli filmmaker found out that Egyptian television was making a series based in part on "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," the 97-year-old czarist forgery about Jews plotting to conquer the world, he thought it would be just another arrow in his quiver and little more. Aviram had recently begun researching the entire history of "The Protocols" for his own film, a documentary that reviews the antisemitic document's history from 1905 until the present. He assumed the Egyptian series, which reportedly treats "The Protocols" as fact, would become perhaps a footnote to his story.

But as the Egyptian series, "Horseman Without a Horse," became more and more controversial — as the number of Arab viewers around the Middle East skyrocketed and Jewish groups and American officials began lodging protests with the Egyptian government — it became more and more difficult to avoid the topic. "I had no idea that it would have the magnitude that it had," Aviram said.

Aviram's project is now, suddenly, all the more important for concerned Jews.

Aviram, who is currently in New York to raise funds for the film, has found people more willing to donate money than they might have been only weeks earlier. Daniel Talbot, head of New Yorker Films, has already agreed to distribute the unshot film, and Elie Wiesel has lent Aviram his support.

But despite pressures to let the recent controversy in Egypt take over his proposed documentary, "The Accursed Book," Aviram is determined to keep his film broad and historical. "I want to do it right," Aviram told the Forward. "Not just attack something."

The documentary will look at the original authors of "The Protocols" — the Russian expatriates who, Aviram argues, concocted the document in a Paris library by lifting passages from Herman Gödsche's "The Rabbi's Speech" — and the anti-Jewish violence in Russia it inspired. It will look at the document's significance between the world wars in the United States, where it was published in Henry Ford's Dearborn Independent, and Europe, where it helped inspire Hitler's "Final Solution." The film will cover trials challenging the document's authenticity in Switzerland and in South Africa; both courts dismissed the authenticity of the document. Finally, the documentary will show how "The Protocols" experienced a renewal of interest in the Arab world after the creation of Israel.

Aviram is thin, of medium height and crowned with short, silver-speckled hair. He met with the Forward at a diner on New York's Upper West Side — which he proudly claims as his old stomping grounds. Although born in Israel and currently residing in Tel Aviv with his wife, a film editor, Aviram spent many years in New York, first as an undergraduate at New York University and later as a frequent visitor with many devoted Upper West Side friends.

Aviram's father, Joseph, was a prominent archaeologist at Hebrew University in Jerusalem. Nitzan spent much of his childhood at Masada and in the Negev, accompanying his father on digs. At one dig site he met David Ben-Gurion, who asked him — in typical no-nonsense, Ben-Gurion style — if he was going to settle in the Negev.

"I guess," Aviram answered, sheepishly.

After graduating from NYU, where he majored in film, Aviram decided to become involved in the Israeli film industry. "I wanted to work in Israel, with the Israeli film industry," Aviram said, "but my first job was with a big $40 million American film series ['Masada'] that was being shot in Israel."

Since that first project, Aviram has been immersed in the Israeli film industry. He was one of the founders of The Children's Channel and has written and directed children's films, dramatizations of A. B. Yehoshua stories and a number of documentaries.

His 1998 documentary "Healing By Killing" details Hitler's program of euthanasia and sterilization of the mentally handicapped in Nazi Germany. The program — run and organized by physicians — served as a model for the selection processes in the Holocaust, Aviram argues. Two years ago Aviram wrote and directed "Beyond Hitler's Grasp," a film about Bulgaria during the Holocaust — one of the few European countries that protected its small Jewish population

"Robert Jay Lifton said to me, 'You really got to the root of the Holocaust,'" with "Healing By Killing," Aviram said. Lifton, a psychiatrist interviewed by Aviram for the film, also told the filmmaker that after such a massive subject, "You'll never be able to do anything again."

Aviram has since been looking for a project to match "Healing By Killing." He thinks he found one with "The Accursed Book" — getting, perhaps, to the root of the root-cause.

Aviram was introduced to the idea when he was given a copy of "The Lie That Won't Die" by former Israeli judge Hadassa Ben-Itto. Aviram immediately got in touch with Ben-Itto, and the two began translating the book into a documentary.

And unlike "Healing By Killing" or "Beyond Hitler's Grasp," Aviram knew a film about "The Protocols" would have more immediacy. It is not difficult to walk into just about any bookstore in the Middle East, including in Egypt and Jordan — which have peace treaties with Israel — and find a copy of "The Protocols," Aviram said.

"There is a progression" seen by people in Arab countries, Aviram said of "The Protocols." "One of the schemes of the elders is to create a Jewish state — so people say, 'You see! This is the fulfillment of 'The Protocols.'" The next step is to use the state to take over the world. The answer to this, says Aviram, is to expose the lie.

"I'm a little disappointed with the [Israeli] government. They should have come forward immediately and denounced" the Egyptian mini-series, he said. "Something must be done to arouse public opinion."

On the Protocols
Ezra Pound

[Ezra Pound, arguably one of America's greatest poets, moved to Italy in 1924 and became involved in the newly regenerated Italy of the time. He soon broadcasted from Fascist Italy during the Second World War. His broadcasts were a mix of politics, personal commentary, anecdotes, and old fashioned wit. These were heard in England and America with his aim to try and enlighten people on why the war was fought and for whom. His message was against the hyper-internationalism that held the world hostage under the thumb of finance bankers and criminal politicians.

"To send boys from Omaha to Singapore to die for British monopoly and brutality is not the act of an American patriot...This war did not begin in 1939. It is not a unique result of the infamous Versailles Treaty. It is impossible to understand it without knowing at least a few precedent historic events, which mark the cycle of combat...This war is part of the age-old struggle between the usurer and the rest of mankind: between the usurer and peasant, the usurer and producer, and finally between the usurer and the merchant, between usurocracy and the mercantilist system ...The present war dates at least from the founding of the Bank of England at the end of the 17th century, 1694-8. Half a century later, the London usurocracy shut down on the issue of paper money by the Pennsylvania colony, A.D. 1750. This is not usually given prominence in the U.S. school histories. The 13 colonies rebelled, quite successfully, 26 years later, A.D. 1776."

With the close of the war because of his broadcasts Pound was tried by the US government for treason and locked away in a mental institution in Washington D.C. He was later released and died in solitude in Italy. Following is a radio broadcast from Italy of April 20, 1943 discussing the controversial Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion Ed.]

If or when one mentions the Protocols alleged to be of the Elders of Zion, one is frequently met with the reply: Oh, but they are a forgery.

Certainly they are a forgery, and that is the one proof we have of their authenticity. The Jews have worked with forged documents for the past 24 hundred years, namely ever since they have had any documents whatsoever. And no one can qualify as a historian of this half century without having examined the Protocols. Alleged, if you like, to have been translated from the Russian, from a manuscript to be consulted in the British Museum, where some such document may or may not exist.

What we know for certain is that they were published two decades ago. That Lord Sydenham wrote a preface to them. That their content has been traced to another sketch said to have appeared in the eighteen forties. The interest in them does not lie in [the] question of their having been, or NOT been concocted by a legislative assembly of Rabbis, democratically elected, or secretly chosen by the Mysterious Order of Seven Branched Antlers or the Bowling Society of Milwaukee. Their interest lies in the type of mind, or the state of mind of their author. That was their interest for the psychologist the day they first appeared. And for the historian two decades later, when the program contained in them has so crushingly gone into effect up to a point, or down to a squalor.

What is interesting, perhaps most, to the historian is their definite campaign against history altogether, their declared intention to blot out the classics, to blot out the record, and to dazzle men with talk of tomorrow. That is a variant on the pie in the bait. As far as reality is concerned, as far as you and I are concerned it makes little difference whether prosperity is in heaven, or in the year 2300, or just round a corner that will never be turned.

A religious man might think his reward might be in heaven, but even a religious man ought to know that his reward will not be on earth in a hundred years time. In fact, the pie in the sky is a more reasonable proposition: an opium with more to it than Mr. Keynes' day after tomorrow.

I am not concerned with fixing blame retrospectively so much as with judging the present: those who are against the true word, the protocolaires. Now Keynes whose fair is foul, foul is fair sentence can be taken as the quintessence of something or other, is the perfect protoclaire. It comes over me that on the one occasion I had the curious experience of seeing him, he managed to utter two falsehoods in a very short space of time. In fact never opened his mouth without doing so. First in stating that he is an orthodox economist, which he is not, second in saying that the then high cost of living was due to lack of labor, when there were millions of men out of work.

You couldn't have done much better in two sentences if you were out for a record in the falsification. Protocol No. 8, second [paragraph]:

"We shall surround our government with a whole world of economists. That is the reason why economic sciences form, etc. Around us again will be a whole constellation of bankers, industrialists, capitalists and the main thing, millionaires, because in substance everything will be settled by the question of figures."

Is it possible to arouse any interest in verbal precision? Is it possible to persuade more than six or eight people to consider the scope of crossword puzzles and other devices for looking at words for something that is NOT their meaning? Cabala, for example, anything to make the word mean something it does NOT say. Anything to distract the auditor from the plain sense of the word, or the sentence? Even to communism that is NOT communism. To communism of the episcopal sort, which they want in England. A Bolshevism that is to leave the archbishops and curates just where they are, each with his living or benefice. A revelation against capital, allegedly against capital, that attacks property and leaves capital setting pretty.

Lenin all out for making banking a state affair. And then twenty years during which it has seemed to drop decidedly into the background, when the world revolution was very busy about something else.

It should by now be clear that some people fear NOT the outcome of the war, but the END of the war. Churchill, for example. Not defeat, not the ruin of the Empire that worries him, but the END of the war. End of the slaughter, end of the war conditions.

Robert Clive has been clear enough, ex-British ambassador in Tokyo. Tells you and the world Japan can not be beaten. But the war must go ON, according to Churchill and Roosevelt. Churchill sees the end of monopoly and privilege, or at least a shift when the war ends, no matter HOW. That is the point you should consider. In regard to the protocols, either there is and was a plot to ruin all goyim, all nations of Europe, or some people are stark raving crazy. They want war to go on to certain wreck. WHO are they?

Mere cannon fodder. The American troops in N. Africa know they are not there thru any wish of their own. The war was started for gold, to maintain the fetish value of gold. Plenty of other sidelines. Minor advantages have been COMMERCIALLY taken. Did the present regime in England WANT the troops to return after Dunkirk? Every move for reform in England is a fascist reform, or proposition along fascist lines.

The supreme betrayal of Europe is inherent in the alliance of Anglo-Jewry with Moscow. Debts rise. That is one part of the war. It is a contest between STOPPING the war and going on with it. And only one side does any fighting. Namely the party that STARTED the war. They are for its continuance. Who are they?

BUT they are also for starting the next one. They openly proclaim that AFTER (that is IF) America finishes with Japan, she will have to fight Russia. IF Russia should break into Europe.

Only blindness and deafness can keep you unaware of these proclamations. The U.S. must protect the world7 Why? Does the world want it? The U.S., once this war is over, must be strong enough to beat Russia.

The U.S. had a chance to maintain her prestige and unique position by staying NEUTRAL. Neutral while other powers exhausted themselves. And she DID not.

Who are the lunatics? Was there a deliberate plot? That is what should concern you. WAS there a plot? How long had it been in existence? Does it continue, with its Lehmans, Morgenthaus, Baruchs? Proposals to send the darkies to Africa, to work for Judea, and the rest of it? And WILL you, after Japan is thru with you, take on Russia? In order to maintain the banking monopoly? With Mr. Wille Wiseman, late of the British secret service, ensconced in Kuhn, Loeb and Co., to direct you and rule you?

The Entire Book Can Be Read At:

http://book-case.kroupnov.ru/pages/library/Waters/index.htm

WATERS FLOWING EASTWARD

Excerpts From:

The  War  Against the Kingship  of Christ

by L. FRY

Edited and Revised by

The Rev. Denis Fahey, C.S.S.P., B.A., D.Ph., D.D.

(Professor of Philosophy and Church History)

THE REVEREND DENIS FAHEY, C.S.SP., D.D, D.PH., M.A Editor of Waters Flowing Eastward

It was in the 1950-5 that the Catholic theologian and writer, the Reverend Denis Fahey of Dublin offered to edit a new edition of Mrs. Fry's book. During his lifetime he was unable to allow his name to appear as its submission for Ecclesiastical Censorship might have led to complications. The foreword and appendices and a number of notes to the present edition were the work of Father Fahey.

The authoress, Mrs. L. Fry, was married to one of the aristocrats of Czarist Russia and she suffered harrowing experiences in the days of the Bolshevist Revolution. This first hand knowledge of Communism in action has given authority to her writings. For many years she was associated with the work of the late French priest Monseigneur Jouin, helping him in his researches into the atheistic and Judeo-Bolshevist plot against Christianity.
 

PART TWO

THE PROTOCOLS

I. HOW THE PROTOCOLS CAME TO RUSSIA

The word " protocol " was used to signify a fly-leaf pasted at the top of an official document, bearing either the opening formula or a summary of the contents for convenient reference. The original draft of a treaty was usually pasted on in this way, that the signatories might check the correctness of the engrossed copy before signing. The draft itself being based on the discussion at the conference, the word came to mean also the minutes of the proceedings.

In this instance " the protocols " mean the " draft of the plan of action " of the Jewish leaders. There have been many such drafts at different periods in Jewish history since the dispersion, but few of them have come into general circulation. In all, the principles and morality are as old as the tribe. By way of illustration we give an instance which occurred in the fifteenth century.

In 1492, Chemor, chief Rabbi of Spain, wrote to the Grand Sanhedrin, which had its seat in Constantinople, for advice, when a Spanish law threatened expulsion.2 This was the reply:

" Beloved brethren in Moses, we have received your letter in which you tell us of the anxieties and misfortunes which you are enduring. We are pierced by as great pain to hear it as yourselves.

The advice of the Grand Satraps and Rabbis is the following:

1. As for what you say that the King of Spain 3 obliges you to become Christians: do it, since you cannot do otherwise.

2. As for what you say about the command to despoil you of your property: make your sons merchants that they may despoil, little by little, the Christians of theirs.

3. As for what you say about making attempts on your lives: make your sons doctors and apothecaries, that they may take away Christians' lives.

4. As for what you say of their destroying your synagogues: make your sons canons and clerics in order that they may destroy their churches.

5. As for the many other vexations you complain of: arrange that your sons become advocates and lawyers, and see that they always mix in affairs of State, that by putting Christians under your yoke you may dominate the world and be avenged on them.

6. Do not swerve from this order that we give you, because you will find by experience that, humiliated as you are, you will reach the actuality of power.

(Signed) PRINCE OF THE JEWS OF CONSTANTINOPLE."

The protocols given to the world by Nilus are only the latest known edition of the Jewish leaders programme. The story of how the latter came into general circulation is an interesting one.

In 1884 the daughter of a Russian general, Mile. Justine Glinka, was endeavouring to serve her country in Paris by obtaining political information, which she communicated to General Orgevskii4 in St. Petersburg. For this purpose she employed a Jew, Joseph Schorst,5 member of the Miz-raim Lodge in Paris. One day Schorst offered to obtain for her a document of great importance to Russia, on payment of 2,500 francs. This sum being received from St. Petersburg was paid over and the document handed to Mile. Glinka.6

She forwarded the French original, accompanied by a Russian translation, to Orgevskii, who in turn handed it to his chief, General Cherevin, for transmission to the Tsar. But Cherevin, under obligation to wealthy Jews, refused to transmit it, merely riling it in the archives.7

Meantime there appeared in Paris certain books on Russian court life8 which displeased the Tsar, who ordered his secret police to discover their authorship. This was falsely attributed, perhaps with malicious intent,9 to Mile. Glinka, and on her return to Russia she was banished to her estate in Orel. To the marechal de noblesse of this district, Alexis Sukhotin, Mile. Glinka gave a copy of the Protocols. Sukhotin showed the document to two friends, Stepanov and Nilus; the former had it printed and circulated privately in 1897; the second, Professor Sergius A. Nilus, published it for the first time in Tsarskoe-Tselo (Russia) in 1901, in a book entitled The Great Within the Small. Then, about the same time, a friend of Nilus, G. Butmi, also brought it out and a copy was deposited in the British Museum on August 10, 1906.

Meantime, through Jewish members10 of the Russian police, minutes of the proceedings of the Basle congress11 in 1897 had been obtained and these were found to correspond with the Protocols.12

In January 1917, Nilus had prepared a second edition, revised and documented, for publication. But before it could be put on the market, the revolution of March 1917 had taken place, and Kerenskii, who had succeeded to power, ordered the whole edition of Nilus's book to be destroyed. In 1924, Prof. Nilus was arrested by the Cheka in Kiev, imprisoned, and tortured; he was told by the Jewish president of the court, that this treatment was meted out to him for " having done them incalculable harm in publishing the Protocols ". Released for a few months, he was again led before the G. P. U. (Cheka), this time in Moscow and confined. Set at liberty in February 1926, he died in exile in the district of Vladimir on January 13, 1929.

A few copies of Nilus's second edition were saved and sent to other countries where they were published: in Germany, by Gottfreid zum Beek (1919); in England, by The Britons (1920); in France, by Mgr. Jouin in La Revue Internationale des SocUtes Secretes, and by Urbain Gohier in La Vieille France; in the United States, by Small, Maynard & Co. (Boston 1920), and by The Beckwith Co (New York 1921). Later, editions appeared in Italian, Russian, Arabic, and even in Japanese.

Such is the simple story of how these Protocols reached Russia and thence came into general circulation.

Mr. Stepanov's deposition'3 relative to it is here given as corroboration.

" In 1895, my neighbour in the district of Toula, Major (retired) Alexis Sukhotin, gave me a manuscript copy of the Protocols of the Wise Men ofZion. He told me that a lady of his acquaintance, whose name he did not mention, residing in Paris, had found it at the house of a friend, a Jew. Before leaving Paris, she had secretly translated it and had brought this one copy to Russia and given it to Sukhotin.

"At first I mimeographed this translation, but finding it difficult to read, I resolved to have it printed, making no mention of the date, town, or printer's name. In this I was helped by Arcadii Ippolitovich Kelepovskii, who at that time was chief of the household of Grand Duke Sergius.

He gave the document to be printed by the district printing press. This took place in 1897. Sergius Nilus inserted these Protocols in his work and added his own commentary. (Signed) PHILIP PETROVICH STEPANOV."

Formerly Procurator of the Synod of Moscow, Chamberlain, Privy Councillor, and (in 1897) Chief of the Moscow Kursk Railway in the town of Orel. April 17, 1927.

Witnessed by PRINCE DIMITRI GALITZIN. President of the Russian Colony of Emigrants at Stari Fontag.

1. From Greek, protos (first) + holla (glue).

2. The reply is found in the sixteenth century Spanish book, La Silva Curiosa, by Julio-Iniguez de Medrano (Paris, Orry, 1608), on pages 156 and 157, with the following explanation: " This letter following was found in the archives of Toledo by the Hermit of Salamanca, (while) searching the ancient records of the kingdoms of Spain; and, as it is expressive and remarkable, I wish to write it here."—vide, photostat facing page 80.

3. Ferdinand.

4. At that time Secretary to the Minister of the Interior, General Cherevin.

5. Alias Schapiro, whose father had been sentenced in London, two years previous, to ten years penal servitude for counterfeiting.

6. Schorst fled to Egypt where, according to French police archives, he was murdered.

7. On his death in 1896, he willed a copy of his memoirs containing the Protocols to Nicholas II.

8. Published under the pseudonym " Count Vassilii", their real author was Mme. Juliette Adam, using material furnished by Princess Demidov-San Donate, Princess Radzivill, and other Russians.

9. Among the Jews in the Russian secret service in Paris was Maniulov, whose odious character is drawn by M. Pateologue, Memoires.

10. Notably Eno Azev and Efrom. The latter, formerly a rabbi, died in 1925 in a monastery in Serbia, where he had taken refuge; he used to tell the monks that the protocols were but a small part of Jewish plans for ruling the world and a feeble expression of their hatred of the gentiles.

11. Supra, Part I.

12. The Russian government had learned that at meetings of the B'nai Brith in New-York in 1893-94, Jacob Schiff (supra, 52, 53) had been named chairman of the committee on the revolutionary movement in Russia.

13. The translation is the author's; appended facing page 81. a photostat of the original is

II. HOW AN AMERICAN EDITION WAS SUPPRESSED

There is a saying in several languages that only the truth hurts. Recognizing the fact beneath this expression, one is little surprised at the zeal with which certain parties seek to disprove documentary evidence. If the evidence were false, then it would be ignored by those concerned and pass quickly into the realm of forgotten things. But if the evidence is genuine and open to verification from many angles, then the truth will hurt, and thus not be ignored.

If this reasoning is correct, the violent methods used by the Jews, particularly those affiliated with the Zionist movement, to discredit and suppress the document entitled The Protocols of the Elders ofZion, would alone constitute a proof of its authenticity.

Nilus and Butmi had published the document without comment. Its success was therefore entirely due to:

1. The self-evident character of the document.

2. The logical reasoning expressed in clear, simple terms;

3. The explanation it gives of international politics;

4. The fact that the events predicted in it have actually occurred since.

But if its publishers gave no guarantee of its genuineness, those who have attacked it have failed even more conspicuously to discredit and refute it.
To quote Nesta Webster, in her World Revolution:

"The truth is, then, that the Protocols have never been refuted, and the futility of the so-called refutations published, as also the fact of their temporary suppression, have done more to convince the public of their authenticity than all the anti-Semite writings on the subject put together".

There is plenty of indisputable, documentary evidence which explains the Jewish plan of action, without recourse to the Protocols. Their importance lies in the fact that, published at a definite date, they foretold historical events which have upset the world, that they explained these events by the principles set forth in the work itself: this fact makes it superfluous to enquire whether the author of the Protocols is the Zionist Congress in corpore, a member of the congress, or some Jewish (or even Christian) thinker. Their source is of small moment: the facts, the relation of cause and effect, are there; the existence of the work prior to the events foretold in it can never be brought into question, and that is enough.

The first attempt at refutation appeared in 1920, entitled, The Jewish Bogey and the Forged Protocols of the Learned Elders ofZion, by a Jew, Lucien Wolf; it was followed by articles in the Metropolitan (New York) signed " William Hard ". The effect of these articles, contrary to the intention of their authors, was to draw wider public attention to the existence of the Protocols. At the same time in America the Jewish Anti-Defamation League2 filled the papers with denunciations of the libel from all parts of the country, thus proving how powerful is Jewish organization. One of its members was Louis Marshall, and, as an illustration of its activity, the story of the suppression of the edition of the Protocols which an American publishing house tried to bring out, is instructive. It shows not only the pressure the Jews can bring to bear on anyone who dares to lift his finger against them, but their own mental attitude of absolute intolerance towards others, while demanding of the world complete acquiescence in their schemes.

George Haven Putnam, head of the firm Putnam & Son, New York, after his annual visit to London, brought out in 1920 an American edition of The Cause of World Unrest?

About the same time, he decided to issue The Protocols of the Elders of Zion in book form. Advance notices were released and the book set up and ready to go on the stands about October 15. On the eve of its appearance, Putnam received the following letter from Louis Marshall.4

MY DEAR SIR:

As one who believes in those qualities that constitute the true American spirit, I have been greatly disturbed by the accounts given by the newspapers of the outrage to which you were subjected at the meeting held at Erasmus High School in Brooklyn the other evening. Knowing your patriotism, I can only regard the alleged cause, namely, that you had condemned the Declaration of Independence and were of the opinion that we owed an apology to England for severing our relations with her, as a slander, born of prejudice and ignorance.

I had scarcely finished reading this episode which had thus aroused my indignation, when I found upon my table a book, bearing the imprint of your firm, entitled The Cause of World Unrest, bound in a flaming red and purporting to be a republication of articles that have recently appeared in the London Morning Post with which I had become familiar. To say that I was shocked that your honoured name should be made the vehicle of disseminating among the American people these outpourings of malice, intolerance and hatred, this witches' broth of virulent poison, is merely to confess the poverty of my vocabulary. On opening the book I turned to the publishers' note, which was apologetic and disclaimed responsibility for the publication. It was followed by an introduction which made it absolutely clear that the purpose of the book was to charge the Jews with an age-long conspiracy to destroy civilization in order that they might absorb the wealth and power of the world. Thus proclaimed, at length came the stupid drivel intended to support this thesis and calculated to make the Jew repulsive in the eyes of his fellow-men and to exterminate him, not figuratively, but literally, appealing, as it does, to the lowest passions and proceeding upon the same processes that were employed in the Middle Ages for the same object. Then it was the blood accusation, the charge of poisoning wells, of spreading plagues and pestilence, of the desecration of the Host. Now it is pretended conspiracy to overturn the economic system of the world by inciting warfare and revolution.

Pict 1. LA SILVA CURIOSA: Photostat of the letter from the Grand S;iiihc<lrin>l Conslnntinople to the Chief Rabbi of Spain in 1492, ID be ('omul in UK- sixteenth century Spanish book by Julio-lniguez (I'niis. Orry, I608).

Pict 2. LA SILVA CURIOSA: continued.

Pict 3. MR. STEPANOVS DEPOSITION: the story of how the Protocols reached Russia and thence came into general circulation.

Pict 4. MR. STEPANOV'S DEPOSITION: continued

The slightest knowledge of history, the most elementary capacity for analysis, or even a minute inkling as to what the Jew is and has been, would suffice to stamp this book and the forged Protocols on which it is based, as the most stupendous libel in history. These writings are the work of a band of conspirators who are seeking to continue to make the Jew, as he has been in all the centuries, the scapegoat of autocracy. The Protocols bear the hall-mark of the secret agents of the dethroned Russian bureaucracy, and the book which you have published is a mere babbling reiteration of what the murderers of the Ukraine, of Poland, and of Hungary are urging as justification for the holocausts of the Jews in which they have been engaged. It has been intimated, and there is much to sustain the theory, that the real purpose of these publications in the United States and in England is to arouse sufficient hostility against the Jews to subject them to mob violence and thus to give justification to those who have incited pogroms in Eastern Europe.

I have also observed that, upon the cover of the book to which I am now referring, you are advertising the publication of The Protocols, which I unhesitatingly denounce as on their face palpable forgeries. If you were called upon to circulate counterfeit money or forged bonds, you would shrink in horror at the suggestion. What you have done and what you propose to do is, however, in morals, incalculably worse. You are assisting in spreading falsehoods, in uttering libels, the effect of which will be felt for decades to come. You are giving them respectability, whilst the name of the author is shrouded in secrecy. Even Mr. Gwynne does not avow paternity for the book which he has heralded. Much as you may desire to shake off responsibility, therefore, the real responsibility for hurling this bomb, for such it is, prepared though it has been by others, rests upon you. Whoever may read this book and is of such a low type of intelligence as to be influenced by it, will not be apt to draw the fine ethical distinctions with which you are seeking to salve your conscience. As a patriotic American, do you believe that you are contributing to the creation of that spirit of justice and fair-play, of unity and harmony, which is the very foundation of that Americanism for which every good citizen has yearned, when you stimulate hatred and passion by the publication of these dreadful falsehoods? If there should occur in this country, in consequence of those publications and those of Henry Ford, what is earnestly desired by the anti-Semites with whom you have arrayed yourself, do you suppose that, when the Almighty calls you to a reckoning and asks you whether you have ever borne false witness against your neighbour, you will be guiltless in His eyes because of your publishers' note disavowing responsibility ?

I know that you must have been pained, as I was when I read of the treatment to which you were subjected, because of lying accusations directed against you. Are you able to appreciate the pain, the grief, the agony, that you are causing three millions of your fellow-countrymen and to millions of men, women and children in other parts of the world by your participation in the disgraceful and inhuman persecution which is now being insidiously carried on by means of publications in the distribution of which you are now actively engaged ? I look upon this as a tragedy.

Louis MARSHALL.

Major Putnam, still feeling and sincerely believing that he was an independent American, though not a very brave one, for throughout he uses the name of Mr. Gwynne as a screen, answered:

New York, October 15th, 1920. DEAR MR. MARSHALL:

Your letter of the 13th inst., which has to do with the publication of the volume entitled World Unrest and the announcement of the companion volume The Protocols, has been read before the members of our publishing board and has received the respectful consideration to which any communication from a citizen of your standing and reputation is assuredly entitled. I am asked by my associates to make report as follows as to our own understanding of the matters in question:

1. We are not prepared to accept your view of the responsibility that attaches to a publishing imprint, or to the association of such imprint with one volume or another. We believe that our own policy in this matter is in accord with that of the leading publishing houses on both sides of the Atlantic. It would be impossible to carry on the business of publishing books of opinion, whether the opinions have to do with the issues of to-day or with matters of the past, if the publisher was assumed to be in accord with the con- clusions arrived at by one author or another. It is the intention to bring into print only such volumes as may present on such issues information that is understood to

make an addition to the knowledge of the subject, or conclusions which appear to be entitled to consideration, to analysis, or possibly to refutation.

2. We have on our own catalogue, for instance, volumes expressing almost every phase of theological or religious belief. The list includes some books accepted by the Christian Scientists as fairly representative of their doctrines. In publishing such books we have, of course, no intention of

announcing ourselves as upholding the theories of the Christian Scientists any more than in the publication of a volume by a Presbyterian divine we have expressed our acceptance of the Westminster catechism, or in printing a book by an Episcopal friend, we have been prepared to approve the reasonableness of the thirty-nine articles.

3. The volume, World Unrest, was, as you will have noted, brought into publication in London at the instance of Mr. Gwynne, the scholarly editor of the Morning Post. You doubtless have knowledge of the journals of England and will realize that the Post does not belong to the sensation-monger journals like Bottomley's John Bull or Hearst's American. It is a conservative paper which has the reputation of avoiding sensational material.

Mr. Gwynne had convinced himself that the papers brought into print in the Post, and later published under his direction in book form, were deserving of consideration. As we have stated in the publisher's note, we are not prepared to express any opinion whatsoever in regard to the so-called information presented, or as to the weight of the conclusions arrived at by the writer and endorsed by Mr. Gwynne. The recommendation came to us that, as the Gwynne volume used as a large part of its text the document entitled The Protocols, the readers of World Unrest would be interested in having an opportunity of examining the full text of The Protocols. You have already knowledge of this curious document. It has, it seems, been in print since 1905, and possibly earlier. An edition was published some months back by Eyre & Spottiswoode, conservative law publishers of London. The text that was brought to us is a translation freshly made from the Russian and is accompanied by a record of what is known of the original document.5

It is evident that the document has, as you point out, no voucher for authenticity and it is quite possible that it will be found to possess no historic importance. Attention has again been directed to it during the past year simply on the ground, according at least to the understanding of Mr. Gwynne's author and of himself, that certain of the instructions given and policies recommended in The Protocols appear to have been carried out by the bolshevik government in Russia. Certain suggestions in The Protocols have also been connected with the policies of the Zionists, policies which, according to Mr. Gwynne and some other writers, are causing serious unrest in Palestine, Syria and Arabia.

In presenting The Protocols to American readers in a carefully printed edition, we have not the least intention of expressing the view that the documents are authentic, or that they will in the end be considered as possessing historic authority.

Mr Gwynne takes the ground that neither World Unrest nor The Protocols -themselves present charges against the Jews as a whole. They emphasize certain things that have been done, or are alleged to have been done, by certain groups of Jews. It would be as fair to say that a record of lynching in Texas or Arkansas, or a record of the attempt of the Bryan group to secure the payment of debts fifty cents on the dollar, was to be considered as a charge against the whole American people.

Mr. Gwynne's associates take the ground that the leading Jews on both sides of the Atlantic, men whose patriotism is unquestioned, ought not to put these documents to one side as of trifling importance. The time may very properly have come at which the charges made as said, only against certain groups of Jews should be analyzed by the Jews whose judgments would be accepted as authoritative by English and American readers. If the charge is unfounded that bolshevism as carried on in Russia has been conducted largely under Jewish direction, the statement ought to be refuted.

I received only yesterday a copy of a monthly entitled The Brooklyn Anti-Bolshevist. The magazine undertakes to make " defense of American institutions against the Jewish bolshevist doctrines of Morris Hillquit and Leon Trotzki." It seems to me that American citizens of the Jewish race (and the group comprises some of the best citizens that we have) might properly interest themselves in making clear to the public that there is no foundation for any charge against the World Patriotism of the Jewish race.6

I wish very much that you might yourself be interested in preparing a volume that should give consideration to the whole subject matter and particularly, of course, to these publications which have come into print as a result of the world's indignation against the Moscow government.

G. P. Putnam's Sons would be well pleased to associate the imprint of their New York and London Houses with such a volume from the pen of a distinguished jurist like yourself.

One further thought occurs to me: You and I are believers in freedom of speech. We recognize that in war times certain reservations are in order for the sake of the nation, but we hold that, with the necessary reservations as to the rights of an individual, or as to a possible libel upon an individual, it is in order, and, from the point of view of the community, wise, to allow full freedom for platform utterances. If, however, this be true for the spoken word it should logically be applicable also to the word, that comes into print.

In case you may be interested in considering the suggestion of a monograph from your pen to be prepared by yourself, or by some competent authority whom you might be able to interest, I should be ready to keep an appointment for a personal word at such time and place as you might find convenient.

Submitting the suggestion for your consideration, I am, with cordial regards,

Yours faithfully, GEORGE HAVEN PUTNAM.

The suggestion of a ' monograph' from Louis Marshall's pen was somewhat ironical. There is no doubt that on October, 15, 1920, Major Putnam still felt himself an independent American.

And the binding of The Protocols went on as usual.

But on October 29th came one more letter from the president of the American Jewish committee:

New York City, October 29th, 1920. MY DEAR SIR:

Absence from the city and professional engagements have prevented me from replying earlier to yours of the 15th inst., in which you define your policy regarding the publication of The Cause of the World Unrest and your announcement of your intended publication of The Protocols.

I cannot accept the theories on which you seek to justify acts which, in all moderation, I sought to characterize in my letter of the 13th inst. You disregard entirely the proposition on which my criticism is based. Nobody can go farther than I do in upholding the freedom of the press and freedom of speech. - It has been my privilege to aid in the creation of important precedents in furtherance of these fundamentals of liberty. Libel and slander, however, have always been looked upon in American law as abuses of a free press and of free speech and as attacks upon the integrity of the constitutional guarantees that you invoke. Nor do I question the right of any publisher to issue " books of opinion " to whatever subject the opinions may relate.

They may be polemical or they may attack the soundness of scientific, political or theological theories or doctrines. No fair-minded man would for a moment venture to find fault because of strictures directed against his cherished doxy.

The Protocols and The Cause of World Unrest are not, however, books of opinion. They assume to deal with facts. The Protocols purport to be the pronouncements of so-called " Wise Men of Zion". The Cause of World Unrest undertakes to charge that the Jews and the Freemasons are together engaged in a conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and the arrogation by them of world domination. It is these alleged facts that I denounce as falsehoods and as libels criminal in intent and criminal in their operation. The Protocols, which are made the basis of the Cause of World Unrest and which you properly describe as companion volumes, are so intrinsically false that even Mr. Gwynne concedes that he himself has a serious doubt as to their genuineness. That The Protocols are a fabrication similar to those that have appeared in every period of history, appears from every line of that document. I am credibly informed that the manuscript was offered for publication to seven different publishing houses in this country, who refused to have their names connected with it, before Small, Maynard & Co, undertook to issue it to the American public. The author of the Cause of World Unrest hides behind anonymity. You yourself speak of the author as being " Mr. Gwynne's author." Apparently even you do not know the pedigree of this incendiary book. Yet you have, I repeat, given it your endorsement by publishing it, even though you disavow responsibility. Your position is that of one who endorses a note to give it currency and at the same time makes a mental reservation against meeting his obligation.

No, Major Putnam, the principle which you seek to establish will not work. Whoever touches pitch is defiled. Whoever retails falsehoods and spreads them, whether it be orally or through the medium of the press, is responsible for those falsehoods. It will not do to say that you have many friends among the Jews whom you respect and that these books are not intended to reflect upon all Jews. The world is not so discriminating. People whose passions are aroused

do not differentiate. The forger of The Protocols and the mysterious author of The Cause of World Unrest make no distinctions. Neither did their prototypes of the middle ages, nor the black hundreds of modern Russia, indulge in such refinements. Troy and Tyre were alike to them.

Do not for a moment misunderstand me. I contend that there are no Jews who are now engaged or who have ever been engaged in a conspiracy such as that charged by you as existing in these books which emerge smoking from your presses. The cry of Bolshevism will not suffice. Your reference to the Brooklyn Anti-Bolshevist shows what a sad pass you have reached. To shelter yourself behind the bulwarks of an infamous pasquinade of the guttersnipe variety and to insinuate that because that sheet pretends to defend American institutions " against the Jewish bolshevist doctrines of Morris Hillquit and Leon Trotzki " you may therefore descend to the same depths, is a revelation to me. I had not believed that any real, true American would thus lend himself to the creation of ill-will and malevolence. The fact that out of the mass of Russian Jews there is an infinitesimal percentage who are Bolshevists, affords no justification for laying the sins of Bolshevism at the door of the Jewish people. To say that Bolshevism is a Jewish movement is as ridiculous as to say that the Jews are responsible for capitalism, or because there are Jewish musicians, actors and poets, that music, the drama and poetry are Jewish movements.

I am not a Zionist, and yet I regard the slurs that these books are attempting to make against Zionism to be unworthy. The very Zionists whom these books are attacking have been persecuted by the Bolsheviks and have been denounced as counter-revolutionists, just as the mass of the Jews of Russia have been pursued as members of the bourgeoisie. I am not a member of the Masonic or of any other secret order, but the attempt in these books to charge Freemasonry with participation in such a conspiracy as is proclaimed almost argues the existence of a pathological condition on the part of the author that betokens mental aberration. When one remembers that fifteen of the presidents of the United States, including George Washington, have been Freemasons, it is unnecessary to go further in condemnation of these volumes which you are pleased to denominate " books of opinion ".

I had not believed that a Jew in this country would ever be called upon to occupy the humiliating position of defending his people against the charges such as those which are being spread broadcast through your agency. If ever the time comes when it shall be desirable to answer such books, I am quite sure that it will be unnecessary for me to avail myself of your invitation to make use of the services of your firms as publishers.

Very truly yours, Louis MARSHALL.

Two days later, Putnam bowed before the will of Jewry in the following terms:

November 1st, 1920. DEAR MR MARSHALL:

Mr Gwynne, at whose instance we brought into print the American edition of his volume on World Unrest, had taken the ground that the publication of the document known as The Protocols might throw light on the organization of the Bolshevists. Their operations have caused grave concern throughout the world and they are, therefore, a matter of legitimate public discussion.

It was his opinion that if it had not been for the apprehension aroused by bolshevism, the document would probably have been permitted to rest in obscurity.

An edition of The Protocols was, therefore, published in London by Eyre & Spottiswoode, law publishers of high standing.

It had seemed to us that the readers of " The World Unrest " were entitled to have the opportunity of examining the complete document (to which frequent references are made in Mr Gwynne's volume) and we had, therefore, undertaken the publication of a carefully prepared translation by us, which is now nearly in readiness, and has involved a considerable outlay.

We now find, however, that an edition printed in Boston is being distributed as a regular publication. There is no necessity for bringing into print another volume containing substantially the same material. We have decided, therefore, in deference to the objections raised by yourself, and by my valued friend, Oscar Strauss, not to proceed1 with the publication. I am, Yours very truly.

GEORGE HAVEN PUTNAM.

What had taken place between October 29 and November 1 ? Putnam wrote to one of the parties interested that so much pressure was brought to bear on him that he had to give up publishing The Protocols, and would be obliged to withdraw unsold copies of World Unrest. It is safe to conclude that Putnam's firm was threatened with bankruptcy if it persisted. We understand that Small, Maynard & Co. of Boston and The Beckwith Co. of New York and in fact practically every firm which has published The Protocols had difficulties within a year or two. Of course it is said that that is purely accidental: but it was just such an " accident " that Putnam wished to avoid!

1. 1st edition, p. 305.

2. This League compelled the Beckwith Co, which subsequently published the Protocols after Putnam's withdrawal, to insert in every copy sold a copy of the Jewish Anti-Defamation League's refutation.

3. The reproduction in book form of a series of articles which had appeared in the Morning Post of London.

4. See ante, ch. V.

5. This edition prepared by G. H. Putnam was subsequently published by The Beckwith Company, 299 Madison Avenue, New York.

6. Our italics.

7. Our italics.

III. MORE ATTEMPTS AT REFUTATION
THE LONDON TIMES LENDS A HAND

While the Jews have succeeded in having the Protocols suppressed, entirely in Russia, Poland, Rumania, and other countries in Eastern Europe, and partially in England and America, they have failed in their many ingenious efforts to have them refuted by non-Jews. Indeed the so-called refutations with which their henchmen flooded the press in 1920-21 reveal more of the real nature, workings, and associations of the Jews and their agents than they rebut the evidence of the Protocols.

It is noteworthy that not one of these numerous and contradictory refutations bears an honest, non-Jewish signature. There is the article of the notorious Princess Radzivill1 published in the Jewish Tribune (New York) for March 11, 1921, and followed by a statement by her friend, Mrs. Hurlbut. The former2 makes no mention of Mile. Glinka and describes the forgery of the protocols by Golovinskii and a renegade Jew, Manassevich Manuilov, in Paris in 1904 ". Further on, oblivious of chronology, she states that General Cherevin willed her his memoirs, including the protocols, at the time of his death in 1896. Golovinskii and Manuilov might, it would seem, have saved themselves trouble by procuring a copy of the document, which, according to Mr. Stepanov's testimony,3 had been printed and privately circulated in 1897.

Another person who wrote against the protocols, A. du Chayla, can hardly be taken more seriously. An article of his appeared on May 14, 1921, in the Tribune Juive of Paris; and later, another article on June 13 in the New York Call, a violent Communist sheet, besides articles in Soviet publications. Prof. Nilus mentions in one of his books4 meeting this Frenchman, who then paraded as a devotee of the Russian Orthodox Church. The character of this adventurer is well drawn in the reply his articles drew from a Russian lady, Madame Fermor, which is given in full.

" Lately there appeared in the Russian paper Poslednii Novosti, Nos. 331-332 a series of articles by Count Alexander de Chayla, in which he casts doubt on the authenticity of a certain document (The Protocols of the Elders of Ziori), because obtained by a man who did not inspire confidence.

"If the value of a document be based on the credit of the person by whom it is produced, one must also analyze the character of him who discredits it.

"That is why I am prompted to narrate how I became acquainted with Count du Chayla.

"I usually spent the summer on my estate in White Russia, in a village near Moguileff, where there is a famous convent. There, one day, about ten years ago, I was visited by the Superior, the Archimandrite Arsene, who introduced a young man, Count du Chayla. Du Chayla had been sent to the convent to study the Russian language and the Orthodox religion of which he pretended to be a devotee.

"Mr. Sabler5 had invited him to come to Russia and sent him to the celebrated monastery of Optina Poustine, whence he was sent to our monastery to serve as an example of anti-Catholic propaganda.

"It must be admitted that he lived up to his character and showed himself more of a Russian Orthodox than the Patriarch himself. Thanks to his zeal, beautifully sculptured angels in the Renaissance style were removed from the chapel of our monastery: du Chayla found them too Catholic. He told me the great joy he felt when he smashed these angels with a hammer. When I reproached him with an act of vandalism, his intolerance betrayed itself in the hatred which he then manifested against the Jews. Many a time I heard him say: " One must have a good pogrom in Russia." One can understand my astonishment when I read in his articles a false accusation of propaganda for pogroms against the White Army, which he now blames, he, who so loudly proclaimed that pogroms were a necessity! It is from him that I heard of the existence of Drumont's books, which he praised eloquently; he used to advise me to read them that I might understand to what extent the Jews had conquered France. He used to predict that the same fate would overtake Russia, if ever the Jews were granted full civil rights.

"Great was my surprise when I read du Chayla's attack on Drumont, whose books he now calls lies. He, who had so much admired Drumont.

"As I followed du Chayla's life in Russia, I was amazed to see the extraordinary rapidity of his political and ecclesiastical career. He became an intimate friend of the Bishops known for their Orthodoxy, and he preached the sacred and absolute power of the Russian Monarch and implacable hatred towards all foreigners. We saw du Chayla as an intimate friend of the Bishops Anthony of Volinia and Evlogii of Holm, frequent the famous salon of Countess Ignatieff. As he rose in Russian society, his activities shifted from the religious field: he took up politics, and, as a follower of Count Bobrinsky, leader of the Pan-Slavic Party, he was sent to Austria on a secret mission among the Galicians. He was subsequently arrested for espionage.

"After his return to Russia, he directed a violent campaign against the smaller racial groups of the empire, especially against the Poles and Finns. As du Chayla was always in need of money, I recommended him to the president of the commission for the affairs of Finland, Mr. Korevo, who used him for anti-Finnish propaganda in the foreign press. At the time of the declaration of war, du Chayla was a student in the theological academy of Petrograd; he was appointed chief of a field hospital organized by Bishop Pitirim and provided with funds from Rasputin. Then I lost sight of him until after the revolution, when I heard of him as an agent provocateur, inciting the Cossacks against the White Army. In 1919 du Chayla was tried by court martial and convicted of seditious activities in the pay of the Soviets. The sentence was published in the newspapers of the Crimea.

"I was astonished to find his name appended to an article in a Russian newspaper notorious for its equivocal position concerning the reconstruction of Russia. (Signed) TATIANA FERMOR."

June 9th, 1921—Paris.

Not satisfied—and rightly so—with these efforts to discredit the Protocols, and yet unable to attach the signature of a noted gentile writer to their denials, the Jews sought another expedient: the seal of approval of one of the best known newspapers would impress the general public. Heretofore the articles had borne the name of private persons: now an official exposure of the protocols was to be published over the signature of the " Correspondent of The London Times in Constantinople ". The identity of the " correspondent " was not revealed,^ although the most elementary sense of justice would insist on giving full credit to the gentleman who had made such a momentous discovery. Nor is there any evidence of his having been in Constantinople. Anyone who writes to the editor of a newspaper is a correspondent, and the number of lies which gain circulation in this fashion is notorious. The " sensational discovery " which. The Times1 thus gave to its readers was that the protocols were a " clumsy plagiarism " of a French book it called " The Dialogues of Geneva", published in Brussels in 1865.

The " correspondent" tells in a easy, off-hand manner and with perfect self-assurance, about meeting in Constantinople a Mr. W, who said: " Read this book through and you will find irrefutable proof that the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion is a plagiarism ".

So it wasn't the correspondent who deserved the credit for the " sensational discovery " after all; but a " Mr. X, a Russian landowner with English connexions ". Again, it is a pity that the gentleman should not have given his name and received the large reward which would surely have been his, from those who have been so active in suppressing and refuting the Protocols.

Then follows the story of Mr. X, with his views on religion, politics, secret societies, and the rest: this Mr. X is an old-fashioned gentleman and the reader is ready to believe every word, as reported by " our correspondent". Mr. X. explains how he obtained the copy of the Geneva Dialogues from an old Okhrana officer; this establishes the fact that the Russian police had made use of the book to forge the Protocols. In fact the " correspondent " goes on to identify this very copy of the Geneva Dialogues as belonging to A. Sukhotin—there is an " A. S. " scratched in the back which is conclusive—and from which the protocols were plagiarized and given to Nilus. Parallel passages from the Dialogues and the protocols are set opposite each other; and the English reader, never at home in Continental politics, is led into speculations on Napoleon Ill's relations with the Carbonari, his employment of Corsicans in the police, the employment of Corsicans by the Russian police, the knowledge Corsicans had of the existence of the Geneva Dialogues, Joly's purpose in writing them, the influence of Philippe, a Lyons mystic, on the Tsar, and so on, until the reader is completely overwhelmed. When he has reached this state, he is told: " At any rate, the fact of the plagiarism has now been conclusively established, and the legend [of the Protocols] may be allowed to pass into oblivion."

The publication of this news from Constantinople was hailed by all the Jews, whose instant enthusiasm is no less revealing than the following letter from a leading Zionist, which appeared in The Times on the same day as the "discovery".

To the Editor—The Times,

"Sir,

Your Constantinople correspondent, who has done a world service in tracking to their source the Protocols (for they have been carefully published throughout the world), says: "There is no evidence to show how the Geneva Dialogues reached Russia." In your leading article, however, you suggest that the protocols were forged under the auspices of Rachkovskii, head of the Russian secret police in Paris. This appears to be the truth. M. A. du Chayla, a French student of theology at St. Petersburg in 1910, who was in 1918 on the staff of the army of the Cossacks of the Don, has testified through the Tribune Juive (Paris, May 14, 1921) that Nilus told him that the protocols were sent him from Paris by his friend, Mme. K—, who had received them from General Rachkovskii. M. du Chayla confirms a suggestion of yours, that the courier who brought the ms. from Paris was Alexander Sukhotin. He has seen this very ms., which, being in poor French and varying penmanship, suggests a complex authorship in the Russian police bureau. The fact that the Geneva Dialogues have now been bought from an exmember of it, completes the chain.

That the object of the publication of 1905 was to drown the Russian revolution in Jewish blood, I, like you, have asserted. But it appears that there was a previous edition in 1902 in the shape of an appendix to a reprint of a pietistic work by Nilus, and the motive behind this earlier publication throws another curious sidelight upon the old Russian court. For that publication was apparently a move in the game to discredit in favour of Nilus a Lyons mystic. Philippe, of whose power over the Tsar the Grand Duchess Elizabeth disapproved. Knowing that Nilus was designed as Philippe's supplanter, Rachkovskii, it is thought, wished to secure his good graces by providing him with a valuable weapon against Russian liberalism.

I am sorry that your correspondent should conclude with the suggestion that those parts of the protocols not in the Geneva Dialogues may possibly have been supplied by Jews who spied on their co-religionists; for this far-fetched hypothesis gives a gleam of hope to the considerable number of organs throughout Europe that live only in the Protocols. Now is your correspondent accurate in thinking that only moral harm has been done by this historic forgery? M. du Chayla offers evidence that it has helped to goad on those countless pogroms in the Ukraine, of whose horrors Western Europe is almost ignorant. As for Nilus, he appears to be a fanatical mystagogue, honest enough except for that theological twist which betrayed itself when, confronted by the suspicion that the Protocols were forged, he replied: " Even if they were, God who could speak through Balaam's ass, could also put the truth in a liar's mouth."

Yours gratefully,

ISRAEL ZANGWILL ". Far End, East Preston, Sussex, August 18, 1921.

Since then, to some extent, the Protocols have been forgotten. But, Audiatur et altera pars, in the words of Max Nordau.8 The Times " correspondent " would convince us that there are similar or identical passages to be found in the Protocols and in the Dialogues; and this we readily admit. We go farther: identical passages will be found in earlier Protocols9 which go back to the days before the dispersion.

By way of illustration, let it be assumed that the Book of Common Prayer used in the Anglican Church were unknown to the Jews. Suppose, then, that a copy of it were secretly obtained by a certain Jew and published, and that the Jews were shocked by the Anglican doctrine of which they learned in this way for the first time. It would then be easy for another Jew to show that the Book of Common Prayer was a plagiarism: it contains passages copied, word for word, from the Gospels; the Psalms are a transcript from King James' Bible; and so on. And not only that, but there are many parallels to be found in the secular literature. " At any rate ", one can imagine the second Jew saying at the end, " the fact of plagiarism has been conclusively established, and we may therefore affirm that no such Book of Common Prayer is used in the worship of the Church of England."

The second Jew would be right in pointing out the parallels in the earlier literature—though his conclusion would be ridiculous—for there is a very real connection: and so it is with the Protocols.

One might have thought that The Times, in its desire to publish the truth about the Protocols, would at least have given the correct title of the Geneva Dialogues, it is, Dialogues aux Enfers entre Machiavelli et Montesquieu, published anonymously in Brussels in 1865. Moreover a minute's search in a library catalogue shows that another book, bearing a similar title, was published some years earlier: namely, Machiavelli, Montesquieu & Rousseau, by Jacob Venedey, published by Franz Dunnicker in Berlin in 1850. The Times, with its interest in plagiarisms, might have been tempted to glance at this latter volume as also at The Prince by Machiavelli and L'Esprit des Lois by Montesquieu. Had it done so, its curiosity would have been amply rewarded: passages quoted from the Protocols as plagiarised from the Dialogues of 1865, are similar to several10 in Venedey's book of 1850, and both Jacob Venedey and Maurice Joly should be branded as plagiarists.

But the resemblance between the Protocols and Venedey's book does not stop with a few parallel passages: the spirit of both is the same; it is revolutionary, whereas the Dialogues of 1865 are socialistic and polemical. The anonymous author merely borrowed certain descriptive passages in Venedey to give colour to his argument.11

Now hadn't The Times better discover a copy of Venedey belonging to a former Okhrana officer, so as to explain how the Russian secret police were able to plagiarize the spirit, as well as a few platitudes and descriptive bits, when forging the Protocols ? Its correspondent in Peiping might make that discovery some day? No, the Peiping correspondent (or any other) will be-very careful not to make that discovery, for the simple reason that Venedey was a Jew, whereas

The Times' point is that the Jews had nothing to do with the drafting of the Protocols. Its argument is that the author of the Dialogues was a Corsican; that the Corsicans in the Paris Police preserved the Dialogues and gave a copy to the Corsican members of the Russian police, who used it to forge the Protocols: these insidious Corsicans!12 But what of Venedey ?

Jacob Venedey, born in Cologne in May, 1805, was early engaged in revolutionary activities which caused his expulsion from Germany. He settled in Paris where, in 1835, he edited a paper of subversive character, called Le Proscrit. Driven from Paris by the police, he moved to Havre, until, thanks to the representations of Arago and Mignet, friends of Cr6mieux, he was allowed to return to the capital. Meanwhile his book, Romanisme, Christianisme et Germanisme, won the praise of the French Academy, Venedey was a close friend and associate of Karl Marx. After spending the years 1843-44 in England, the headquarters of continental revolutionaries, he worked in Brussels for the founding, with Marx in 1847, of a secret organization, " The Communist League of Workers " (later the " Societe internationale de la Democratic ").

After the February revolution in 1848, Venedey joined Marx in Germany, where he became one of the chiefs of the revolutionary committee of Fifty (March, 1848), and was sent as commissar into the Oberland to stand against Hecker. Later elected as a member of the Left from Hesse-Homburg, he continued to serve on the Committee of Fifty. It was at this time that he brought out in Berlin his Machia-yelli, Montesquieu & Rousseau, stressing the views attributed to Machiavelli and Rousseau in favour of despotism and oppression.13

When order was restored in Germany, Venedey was expelled from Berlin and Breslau. He was an active member of the Free Masons and affiliated with the Carbonari;14 he was also closely associated not only with the revolution 12. It is noteworthy that no Corsican has yet raised a voice ofprotest against the charges made in The Times. Yet it is the Corsicanswho are the real victims of a libel, not the Jews tionaries of his day, but (as might be expected) with the leading Jews, the founders of the Alliance Israelite Univer-selle.15 The latter included men of as different political parties as the reactionary-imperialist Fould, the liberal-conservative Disraeli, and the communist-revolutionary Marx, and whether living under an empire, a constitutional monarchy or a republic, all laboured towards a common aim, the establishment of an international Jewish world power.16 Prominent among them and in close touch with Venedey, was Adolphe Isaac Cr6mieux (1798-1880). A Nimes lawyer with an ardent admiration for Napoleon, he became legal adviser to the Bonaparte family and an intimate of Louis Napoleon with whom he joined in overthrowing the government of Louis Philippe in 1849. A member of the Mizraim Lodge, the Scottish Rite (of which he became Supreme Master on the death of Viennet), he was familiar with all new movements; and his influence enabled him to render at least one important service to Jewry by having the Jewish murderers of Father Thomas in Damascus (1841) set at liberty. One of the leaders in the revolution of February ] 848, he was appointed minister of justice under the provisional government, and used all his political influence in the election of Louis Napoleon to the presidency of the republic. Cremieux hoped in this way to be named Prime Minister and to control French policy for a period, as Disraeli did in England somewhat later. Like Disraeli, he had the financial support of the Rothschilds; but when the President chose for his banker another Jew, Fould, and named General Cavaignac premier, Cremieux saw he had lost. Bitterly disappointed, he became so hostile to his former friend that, at the time of the coup d'e"tat in 1851, he was imprisoned at Vincennes. On his release, he identified himself with the enemies of the emperor; these included the communist associates of Marx, Mazzini, Jacob Venedey (already mentioned), Louis Blanc, Ledru Rollin, Pierre Leroux, and a group of socialists, among whom was Maurice Joly.17

Joly, some thirty years younger than Cr6mieux, with an inherited hatred of the Bonapartes, seems to have fallen very largely under his influence. Through Cr6mieux, Joly became acquainted with communists and their writings. Though, until 1871 when his ambition for a government post turned him into a violent communist, he had not in 1864 gone beyond socialism, he was so impressed with the way they presented their arguments that he could not, if the chance were offered, refrain from imitating it. And this chance came in 1864-1865, when his hatred of Napoleon, whetted by Crdmieux, led him to publish anonymously in Brussels the Dialogues aux Enfers entre Machiavelli et Montesquieu. In this work he tells us,18 " Machiavelli represents the policy of Might, while Montesquieu stands for that of Right: Machiavelli will be Napoleon, who will himself describe his abominable policy ". It was natural that he should choose the Italian Machiavelli to stand for Bonaparte, and the Frenchman Montesquieu, for the ideal statesman: it was equally natural that he should put in the mouth of Machiavelli some of the same expressions which Venedey had put in it, and which Joly had admired. His own view was: " Socialism seems to me one of the forms of a new life for the people emancipated from the traditions of the old world. I accept a great many of the solutions offered by socialism; but I reject communism, either as a social factor, or as a political institution. Communism is but a school of socialism. In politics, I understand extreme means to gain one's ends—in that at least, I am a Jacobin."19

The French authorities, however, penetrated the thinlydisguised satire: Joly was arrested and sentenced to two years imprisonment (April, 1865). But the Dialogues had pleased Cremieux as much as they had displeased the emperor, and, when his term expired, his Jewish patron rallied to his support: Joly was able to found a legal review, Le Palais, with Jules Favre, Desmaret, Leblond, Arago, Berryer, and Adolphe Cremieux as its principal stockholders.

With the fall of Napoleon III, Adolphe Cremieux once more took an open part in politics. Pushing to the front his former secretary, Gambetta, he directed through him the negotiations with Bismarck. Bismarck himself was guided by the Jew Bamberger (1832-1899), a former revolutionary of '48, but who had for years managed the Paris branch of the Jewish bank Bischofsheim & Gold-schmidt; he was also a friend of Cremieux. A third Jew in the negotiations was the son of James Rothschild.20 In this way, care was taken that the treaty should be satisfactory, if not entirely to the signatories, yet at least so to the Alliance Israelite Universelle.

From then (1871) until his death in 1880, as President of the Alliance Israelite Universelle and Supreme Master of the Scottish Rite, Cremieux was one of the promoters of the anti-clerical movement following the Franco-Prussian war. His favourite theme was that there should be one cult: speaking at a general assembly of the Alliance he said: " The Alliance is not limited to our cult; it voices its appeal to all cults and wants to penetrate in all religions, as it has penetrated into all countries. Let us endeavour boldly to bring about the union of all cults under one flag of " Union and Progress ": such is the motto of humanity."21

One cult, one flag. Are the Protocols of Nilus, or the words of Machiavelli in Joly's book or in Venedey's book, anything but an elaborate exposition of the ideas thus briefly expressed by Cremieux? His activities are one of the best examples of Jewish internationalism. Thus the principal attempt to discredit the Protocols leads directly into historical studies which substantiate and illustrate their doctrine in a remarkable and unexpected manner.

1. Princess Catherine Radzivill was convicted of forgery in London on April 30,1902, the amount involved being ?3,000, and was sentenced to two years in prison (London Times, April 16, 29, and May 1, 1902). On October 13, 1921, suit was filed against her by the Hotel Embassy, New York, for failure to pay her bill of $1,239, and on October 30 she

was arrested on the instance of the Hotel Shelbourne, New York, on a charge of defrauding the hotel of $352. (New York World, Oct. 14 and

31, 1921). Later she went to live with her friend Mrs. Hurlbut at 503 West 124th Street, New York.

2. She was one of the Russian Liberals in Paris in 1884 who furnished Mme. Juliette Adam with details of Russian court life. She has since claimed the authorship of the books by " Count Vassilii", really written by Mme. Adam.

3. Supra, p. 75.

4. Entitled On the Bank of the River of God.

5. Sabler was Procurator of the Holy Synod at St. Petersburg: he supported Rasputin and other pseudo-mystics and had a disastrous influence on the Russian Church. (Cf. Paleologue, Memoires, 1927).

6. Philip Graves.

7. August 16, 17, 18, 1921: the articles were reprinted in a booklet entitled, The Truth about The Protocols, 24 pages.

8. Supra, p. 41 (note 25).

9. Supra, pp. 71, 72.

10. For example, the passage referring to Vishnu is found in Machiavelli, Montesquieu & Rousseau, in the Dialogues, and in Protocol

12, infra.

11. Space does not allow us here to trace the links between Jacob Venedey, the Alliance Israelite Universelle, Adolphe Cre'mieux, Maurice Joly, and Jules Janin.

13. Another case of plagiarism at work!

14. Cf. Die Bauhiitte, Feb. 1871, date of Venedey's death.

15. Supra, p. 30.

16. In his novel Coningsby (London, 1844), Disraeli draws a picture from life of the Jews ruling the world from behind thrones as graphic as anything in the Protocols of Nilus. (It is expected that The Times will shortly be in a position to establish conclusively that Coningsby is a plagiarism of a Byzantine novel of the XVIIth century). The passage in which Rothschild (Sidonid) describes this runs as follows:

" If I followed my own impulse, I would remain here," said Sidonia. " Can anything be more absurd than that a nation should apply to an individual to maintain its credit, and with its credit, its existence as an empire and its comfort as a people; and that individual one to whom its laws deny the proudest rights of citizenship, the privilege of sitting in its senate and of holding land; for though I have been rash enough to buy several estates, my own opinion is that by the existing law of England, an Englishman of Hebrew faith cannot possess the soil."

" But surely it would be easy to repeal a law so illiberal." " Oh! as for illiberality, I have no objection to it if it be an element of power. Eschew political sentimentality. What I contend is that if you permit men to accumulate property, and they use that permission to a great extent, power is inseparable from that property, and it is in the last degree impolitic to make it in the interest of any powerful class to oppose the institutions under which they live. The Jews, for example, independent of the capital qualities for citizenship which they possess in their industry, temperance, and energy and vivacity of mind, are a race essentially monarchical, deeply religious, and shrinking themselves from converts as from a calamity, are ever anxious to see the religious systems of the countries in which they live, flourish; yet since your society has become agitated in England and powerful combinations menace your institutions, you find the once loyal Hebrew invariably arrayed in the same ranks as the leveller and the latitudinarian, and prepared to support rather than tamely continue under a system which seeks to degrade him. The Tories lose an important election at a critical moment; 'tis the Jews come forward to vote against them. The Church is alarmed at the scheme of a latitudinarian university, and learns with relief that funds are not forthcoming for its establishment; a Jew immediately advances and endows it. Yet the Jews, Coningsby, are essentially Tories. Toryism indeed is but copied from the mighty

prototype which has fashioned Europe. And every generation they must become more powerful and more dangerous to the society which is hostile to them. Do you think that the quiet humdrum persecution of a decorous representative of an English university can crush those who have successively baffled the Pharaohs, Nebuchadnezzar, Rome, and the feudal ages? The fact is you cannot destroy a pure race of the Caucasian organisation. It is a physiological fact; a simple law of nature, which has baffled Egyptian and Assyrian kings, Roman emperors, and Christian inquisitors. No penal laws, no physical tortures, can effect that a superior race should be absorbed in an inferior, or be destroyed by it. The mixed persecuting races disappear, the pure persecuted race remains. And at this moment, in spite of centuries, or tens of centuries, of degradation, the Jewish mind exercises a vast influence on the affairs of Europe. I speak not of their laws, which you still obey; of their literature, with which your minds are saturated; but of the living Hebrew intellect.

" You never observe a great intellectual movement in Europe in which the Jews do not greatly participate. The first Jesuits were Jews: that mysterious Russian diplomacy which so alarms Western Europe is organised and principally carried on by Jews; that mighty revolution (of 1848) which will be in fact a second and greater Reformation, and of which so little is as yet known in England, is entirely developing under the auspices of Jews, who almost monopolise the professorial chairs of Germany. Neander, the founder of Spiritual Christianity, and who is Regius Professor of Divinity in the University of Berlin, is a Jew. Benary, equally famous, and in the same university, is a Jew. Wehl, the Arabic Professor of Heidelberg, is a Jew. Years ago, when I was in Palestine, I met a German student who was accumulating materials for the history of Christianity and studying the genius of the place; a modest and learned man. It was Wehl; then unknown, since become the first Arabic scholar of the day, and the author of the life of Mahomet. But for the German professors of this race, their name is legion. I think there are more than ten at Berlin alone.

" I told you just now that I was going up to town to-morrow, because I always made it a rule to interpose when affairs of state were on the carpet. Otherwise, I never interfere. I hear of peace and war in newspapers, but I am never alarmed, except when I am informed that the sovereigns want treasure; then I know that monarchs are serious.

" A few years back we were applied to by Russia. Now there has been no friendship between the Court of St Petersburg and my family. It has Dutch connections which have generally supplied it; and our representations in favour of the Polish Hebrews, a numerous race, but the most suffering and degraded of all the tribes, have not been very agreeable to the Czar. However circumstances drew to an approximation between the Romanoffs and the Sidonias. I resolved to go myself to St. Petersburg. I had on my arrival an interview with the Russian Minister of Finance, Count Cancrin; I beheld the son of a Lithuanian Jew. The loan was connected with the affairs of Spain; I resolved on repairing to Spain from Russia. I travelled without intermission. I had an audience immediately on my arrival with the Spanish minister, Senor Mendizabel; I beheld one like myself, the son of a Nuevo Christiano, a Jew of Aragon. In consequence of what transpired at Madrid, I went straight to Paris to consult the President of the French Council; I beheld the son of a French Jew, a hero, an imperial marshal and very properly so, for who should be military heroes if not those who worship the Lord of Hosts? "

" And is Soult a Hebrew? "

" Yes, and others of the French marshals, and the most famous, Massena, for example; his real name was Mannaseh: but to my anecdote. The consequence of our consultations was that some northern power should be applied to in a friendly and mediative capacity. We fixed on Prussia, and the President of the Council made an application to the Prussian minister, who attended a few days after our conference. Count Arnim entered the cabinet, and I beheld a Prussian Jew. So you see, my dear Coningsby, that the world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes (pp. 249-252).

17. His father was Philippe Lambert Joly, born at Dieppe, Attorney- General of the Jura under Louis-Philippe for ten years. His mother, Florentine Corbara Courtois, was the daughter of Laurent Courtois, paymaster-general of Corsica, who had an inveterate hatred of Napo leon I. Maurice Joly was born in 1831 at Lons-le-Saulnier and educated

at Dijon: there he had begun his law studies, but left for Paris in 1849 to secure a post in the Ministry of the Interior under M. Chevreau and just before the coup d'etat. He did not finish his law studies till 1860. Committed suicide in 1878.

18. Maurice Joly: son passe, son programme (autobiography), Paris, 1870.

19. Ibid.

20. Bismarck, who had met the latter's grandfather, knew that Rothschild's real name was Meyer, and regarded him as an " Israelitish citizen of Frankfurt", hence a German subject. To make matters worse, the victor was obliged to discuss the terms of peace with this renegade subject in French, the language of the vanquished, because

Rothschild professed not to understand German. Corti, House of Rothschild, vol. II.

21. Speech made on May 31, 1864; " Union and Progress " was the name given to several revolutionary associations and Masonic lodges. " One cult" is strongly reminiscent of Protocol XVI, infra. Cf. Cr6mieux, Paris, Capitate des Religions.

IV. TEXT AND COMMENTARY OF THE PROTOCOLS

The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion may be briefly described as a blueprint for the domination of the world by a secret brotherhood. Whatever may be the truth about their authorship—and, as will be shown, this has been the subject of bitter dispute—there can be no doubt that the world society to which they look forward is nothing more or less than a world police state.

The book in which the Protocols were first embodied was published by Professor Sergyei A. Nilus in Russia in 1905, a copy being received in the British Museum on August 10th, 1906. Professor Nilus's concern was to expose what he believed to be a ruthless, cold-blooded conspiracy for the destruction of Christian civilisation. Earlier, in August and September, 1903, the Russian newspaper Snamia had published the Protocols, and they are also believed to have been published in the winter of 1902/1903 in the newspaper Moskowskija Wiedomosti. They remained unknown outside Russia, however, until after the Bolshevik Revolution, when Russian emigrants brought Nilus's book to North America and Germany.

The similarity between what was forecast in the Protocols and the fate which had befallen Russia under the Bolsheviks was so marked that, after these long years of neglect, they rapidly became one_of the most famous (or notorious) documents in the world.

In Bolshevik Russia, the penalty for their mere possession was death. It remains so to this day, both in the Soviet Union and in the Satellite countries. Outside the Iron Curtain, in South Africa possession of the Protocols is also forbidden by law, although the penalty is less drastic.

As a result of their rapidly growing fame, numerous attempts were made to discredit the Protocols as a forgery. But it was not until 1933 that the Jews resorted to legal action. On 26th June, 1933, the Federation of Jewish Communities of Switzerland and the Berne Jewish Community brought an action against five members of the Swiss National Front, seeking a judgment that the Protocols were a forgery and a prohibition of their publication.1 The procedure of the Court was astounding, the provisions of the Swiss Civil Code being deliberately set aside. Sixteen witnesses called by the plaintiffs were heard, but only one of the forty witnesses called by the defendants was allowed a hearing. The judge allowed the plaintiffs to appoint two private stenographers to keep the register of proceedings during the hearing of their witnesses, instead of entrusting the task to a Court official.

In view of these and similar irregularities, it was not surprising that, after the case had lasted just on two years, the Court pronounced the Protocols to be a forgery and demoralising literature. The decision was given on 14th May, 1935, but it was announced in the Jewish Press before it was delivered by the Court I

On 1st November, 1937, the Swiss Court of Criminal Appeal quashed this judgment in its entirety. Jewish propagandists, however, still declare that the Protocols have been "proved" to be a forgery.

It was natural that the Jews should try to discredit the Protocols, for their growing fame was focussing more public attention on other revealing utterances.

In Disraeli's The Life of Lord George Bentinck, written in 1852, there occurs this quotation:—

"The influence of the Jews may be traced in the last outbreak of the destructive principle in Europe. An insurrection takes place against tradition and aristocracy, against religion and property. Destruction of the Semitic principle, extirpation of the Jewish religion, whether in the Mosaic or the Christian form, the natural equality of men and the abrogation of property are proclaimed by the Secret Societies which form Provisional Governments and men of Jewish Race are found at the head of every one of them. The people of God co-operate with atheists; the most skilful accumulators of property ally themselves with Communists; the peculiar and chosen Race touch the hand of all the scum and low castes of Europe; and all this because they wish to destroy that ungrateful Christendom which owes to them even its name, and whose tyranny they can no longer endure."

Max Nordau, a Jew, speaking at the Zionist Congress at Basle in August 1903, made this astonishing "prophesy":—

"Let me tell you the following words as if I were showing you the rungs of a ladder leading upward and upward: Herzl, the Zionist Congress, the English Uganda proposition, the future world war, the peace conference, where with the help of England a free and Jewish Palestine will be created."

Walter Rathenau, the Jewish banker behind the Kaiser, writing in the German Wiener Freie Presse, December 24th 1912, said:—

"Three hundred men, each of whom knows all the others, govern the fate of the European continent, and they elect their successors from their entourage."

Confirmation of Rathenau's statement came twenty years later in 1931 when Jean Izoulet, a prominent member of the Jewish Alliance Israelite Universelle, wrote in his Paris la Capitale des Religions:—

"The meaning of the history of the last century is that today 300 Jewish financiers, all Masters of Lodges, rule the world."

The London Jewish Chronicle, on April 4th, 1919, declared :—

"There is much in the fact of Bolshevism itself, in the fact that so many Jews are Bolshevists, in the fact that the ideals of Bolshevism at many points are consonant with the finest ideals of Judaism." and on March 15th, 1923, the Jewish World asserted:—

"Fundamentally Judaism is Anti-Christian."

These and many similar assertions from Jewish sources were damaging enough from the Jewish point of view. Taken in conjunction with the Protocols, with which more and more people were becoming familiar, they were damning.

The attitude of many people whose concern over the growing attack on Christian civilisation was rapidly increasing was summed up by the late Henry Ford senior, the founder of the world-famous motor manufacturing company. In an interview published in the New York World on February 17th, 1921, Mr. Ford declared:

"The only statement I care to make about the Protocols is that they fit in with what is going on. They are sixteen years old, and have fitted the world situation up to this time. THEY FIT IT NOW."

Those who, like Henry Ford, could see that "they fit it now" only sixteen years after Nilus's first publication of the Protocols, naturally tended to concentrate their attention on the relatively recent phenomenon of Bolshevism. Few of them then understood the equally dangerous, if more insidious, danger of internationalism.

Now, however, more than half a century after Nilus's publication of the Protocols, the reality of that danger must be crystal clear to anybody who views the world situation objectively.

The Protocols are full of references to a "super-Government". Protocol VI, for example, states:—

"In every possible way we must develop the significance of our super-Government by representing it as the Protector and Benefactor of all those who voluntarily submit to us."

That is exactly the way in which the United Nations organisation, set up at the end of the second World War, is represented to those who voluntarily submit to it.

It is exactly the way the various United Nations special agencies—U.N.E.S.C.O. (U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation); I.L.O. (International Labour Organisation); W.H.O. (World Health Organisation); F.A.O. (Food and Agriculture Organisation); Commission on Human Rights; Genocide Convention, etc.—are represented.

For some years there has been in existence an international organisation calling itself the World Association of Parliamentarians for World Government, which pursues the same objective as that of another long-established international organisation, Federal Union. This body does not disguise the fact that the United Nations, by means of a few relatively minor changes in its Charter, could be transformed virtually overnight into a World Government.

There has long been agitation for the creation of a World Police Force. This would enable the United Nations super-Government to function as the master of an all-powerful World Police State, and the closing years of the 1950'.? have seen the agitators for a World Police Force come close to achieving their objective. The U.N. Emergency Force, established after the Suez crisis of 1956, has been openly regarded as a "pilot scheme".

Should the few changes in the Charter necessary to transform the U.N. into a super-Government be made, it will have in the special agencies ready made Ministries of Education (or Propaganda), Labour, Health, Food and Agriculture, "Justice" etc.

Can it be an accident that these things are so accurately fore-shadowed in the Protocols?

The full-scale World super-Government is not the only, nor perhaps the most immediate, danger. It is obvious to everyone that the nations of the East are being herded into subjection under the dominance of the Soviet Union. But what of the nations of the West? Are they really the "free nations" which they are popularly supposed to be?

Far from it! They are being herded into the same sort of pen as are the nations of the East under Communism—and often on the pretext that this is the only way in which they can save themselves from Communism. Late in 1957, the process had gone far enough to be given an official name. That name was the "policy of inter-dependence".

The nations of the West are being brought under international control at political, military and economic levels. They are rapidly in process of becoming controlled also on the social level. All alike are being told that their only hope lies in the surrender of national sovereignty.

National Parliaments must give way to such bodies as the Council of Europe or the Atlantic Council. National Forces must be submerged in such bodies as the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (N.A.T.O.), the Baghdad Pact or the South-East Asia Treaty Organisation (S.E.A.T.O.), so that no nation has control over its own means of defence. National economies must be submerged in such bodies as the Organisation for European Economic Co-operation (O.E.E.C.), the European Payments Union (E.P.U.) or the World Bank, so that no nation may control its own economic destiny.

Even on the social level, individual national distinctions must disappear. For example, under the "Common Market" Treaty which unites six European nations on the economic plane, provision is made for the "equalisation of social policies". And strenuous efforts have been made to herd other European nations, Great Britain among them, into this same pen in the associated European Free Trade Area.

In 1934, when the leader of the British Labour Party (Mr. Clement Attlee) told the party's annual conference:—

"We are deliberately putting loyalty to a world order above loyalty to our own country", he was widely execrated.

Twenty-three years of propaganda, however, leave their mark, and when, in 1957, a Conservative Prime Minister of Britain told the British people that they must surrender some of their national sovereignity to an unknown international cabal, scarcely a voice was raised in protest. At the close of 1957 there was an official declaration of the British Government's support for the plan which was foreshadowed in the Protocols over sixty years ago. The Earl of Gosford, Joint Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, said in the House of Lords on 7th November, 1957:—

"Her Majesty's Government are fully in agreement with World Government. We agree that this must be the goal, and that every step that is humanly possible must be taken to reach that goal."

All over the world, "federation", "integration", "regionali-sation" and "inter-dependence" are the order of the day. All this is foreshadowed in the Protocols, published more than half-a-century ago by Sergyei Nilus, which, we are told, are a forgery.

Can all this be coincidence? Could any forger be so prescient?

Or are the Protocols what Nilus and many others believed them to be—the blueprint of a conspiracy to destroy Christian civilisation and place the whole world under the domination of a small, select cabal?

NOTES

I — "AGENTUR" and "The Political"

There are two words in this translation which are unusual, the words "Agentur" and "political" used as substantives. "Agentur" appears to be adopted from the original text and it means the whole body of agents and agencies directed by the Elders, whether members of the tribe or their Gentile tools.

By "the Political" Mr. Marsden means, not exactly the "body politic" but the entire machinery of politics.

II—The Symbolic Snake of Judaism

Protocol III opens with a reference to the Symbolic Snake of Judaism. In his Epilogue to the 1905 Edition of the Protocols Nilus gives the following interesting account of this symbol:—

According to the records of secret Jewish Zionism, Solomon and other Jewish learned men had already, in 929 B.C., thought out a theoretical scheme for the peaceful conquest of the whole universe by Zion.

As the course of history unfolded, this scheme was elaborated in detail and completed by later generations of men who had been initiated into their secrets. These learned men decided by peaceful means to conquer the world for Zion with the slyness of the Symbolic Snake, whose head was to represent those who have been initiated into the plans of the Jewish administration, and the body of the Snake to represent the Jewish people—the administration was always kept secret, even from the Jewish nation itself. As this Snake penetrated into the hearts of the nations which it encountered it undermined and devoured all the non-Jewish power of these States. It is foretold that the Snake has still to finish its work, strictly adhering to the designed plan, until the course which it has to run is closed by the return of its head to Zion and until, by this means, the Snake has completed its round of Europe and has encircled it—and until, by dint of enchaining Europe, it has encompassed the whole world. This it is to accomplish by using every endeavour to subdue the other countries by economic conquest.

The return of the head of the snake to Zion can only be accomplished after the power of all the Sovereigns of Europe has been laid low, that is to say, when by means of economic crises and wholesale destruction effected everywhere, there shall have been brought about spiritual demoralisation and moral corruption, chiefly with the assistance of Jewish women masquerading as French, Italians, etc. Their example is the surest method of encouraging licentiousness among the leaders of the nations.

A map of the course of the Symbolic Snake is shown as follows:—Its first stage in Europe was in 429 B.C. in Greece, where, about the time of Pericles, the Snake first started eating into the power of that country. The second stage was in Rome in the time of Augustus, about 69 B.C. The third in Madrid in the time of Charles V, in A.D. 1552. The fourth in Paris about 1790, in the time of Louis XVI. The fifth in London from 1841 onwards (after the downfall of Napoleon). The sixth in Berlin in 1871 after the Franco-Prussian war. The seventh in St. Petersburg, over which is drawn the head of the Snake under the date of 1881.

All these states which the Snake traversed have had the foundations of their constitutions shaken, Germany, with its apparent power, forming no exception to the rule. In economic conditions England and Germany are spared, but only till the conquest of Russia is accomplished by the Snake, on which at present (i.e., 1905) all its efforts are concentrated. The further course of the Snake is not shown on this map, but arrows indicate its next movement towards Moscow, Kieff and Odessa.

It is now well known to us to what extent the latter cities form the centres of the militant Jewish race. Constantinople is shown as the last stage of the Snake's course before it reaches Jerusalem. (This map was drawn years before the occurrence of the "Young Turk"—i.e., Jewish— Revolution in Turkey).

III—The term GOYIM

The term "Goyim", meaning Gentiles or non-Jews, is used throughout the Protocols and is retained by Mr. Marsden.

PROTOCOL 1

THE BASIC DOCTRINE

Right lies in Might—Politics versus Morals—The End justifies the Means —"Liberty, Equality, Fraternity"—The New Aristocracy.

Putting aside fine phrases we shall speak of the significance of each thought: by comparison and deduction we shall throw light upon surrounding facts.

What I am about to set forth, then, is our system from the two points of view, that of ourselves and that of the goyim (i.e., non-Jews).

It must be noted that men with bad instincts outnumber good men, and therefore the best results in governing them are attained by violence and terrorisation, and not by academic discussions. Every man aims at power, everyone would like to become a dictator if only he could, and rare indeed are the men who would not be willing to sacrifice the welfare of all for the sake of securing their own welfare.

What has restrained the beasts of prey who are called men? What has served for their guidance hitherto?

At the dawn of society they were subjected to brutal and blind force; afterwards—to Law which is the same force, only disguised. I draw the conclusion that by the law of nature right lies in force.

Political freedom is an idea but not a fact, and one must know how to use it as a bait whenever it appears necessary to attract the masses of the people to one's party for the purpose of crushing another who is in authority. This task is rendered easier if the opponent has himself been infected with the idea of freedom, so-called liberalism, and for the sake of an idea, is willing to yield some of his power. It is precisely here that the triumph of our theory appears; the slackened reins of government are immediately, by the law of life, caught up and gathered together by a new hand, because the blind might of the nation cannot for one single day exist without guidance, and the new authority merely fits into the place of the old already weakened by liberalism.

In our day the power which has replaced that of the rulers who were liberal is the power of Gold. Time was when Faith ruled. Freedom is an impossible ideal to achieve because no one knows how to use it with moderation. It is enough to hand over a people to self-government for a certain length of time for that people to be turned into a disorganised mob. Thereafter there arises internecine strife, which soon devolves into class warfare, in the midst of which States burn down and their importance is reduced to that of a heap of ashes.

Whether a State exhausts itself in its own convulsions, whether its internal discord brings it under the power of external foes—in any case it can be accounted irretrievably lost: it is in our power. The despotism of Capital, which is entirely in our hands, reaches out to it a straw that the State, willy-nilly, must take hold of: if not—it goes to the bottom.

Should anyone of a liberal mind say that such reflections as the above are immoral I would put the following questions :—If every State has two foes and if in regard to the external foe it is allowed and not considered immoral to use every manner and art of conflict, as for example to keep the enemy in ignorance of plans of attack and defence, to attack him by night or in superior numbers, then in what way can the same means in regard to a worse foe, the destroyer of the structure of society and the commonweal, be called immoral and not permissible?

Is it possible for any sound logical mind to hope with any success to guide crowds by the aid of reasonable counsels and arguments, when any objection or contradiction, senseless though it may be, can be made, and when such objection may find more favour with the people, whose powers of reasoning are superficial? Men in masses and the men of the masses, being guided solely by petty passions, paltry beliefs, customs, traditions and sentimental theorism, fall a prey to party dissension, which hinders any kind of agreement even on the basis of a perfectly reasonable argument. Every resolution of a crowd depends upon a chance or packed majority, which, in its ignorance of political secrets,

puts forth some ridiculous resolution that lays in the administration a seed of anarchy.

The political has nothing in common with the moral. The ruler who is governed by the moral is not a skilled politician, and is therefore unstable on his throne. He who wishes to rule must have recourse both to cunning and to make-believe. Great national qualities, like frankness and honesty, are vices in politics, for they bring down rulers from their thrones more effectively and more certainly than the most powerful enemy. Such qualities must be the attributes of the kingdoms of the goyim, but we must in no wise be guided by them.

Our right lies in force. The word "right" is an abstract thought and proved by nothing. The word means no more than:—Give me what I want in order that thereby I may have proof that I am stronger than you.

Where does right begin? Where does it end?

In any State where central authority is weak, and where laws and rulers have lost their personality amid the flood of rights ever multiplying out of liberalism, I find a new right—to attack by the right of the strong, and to scatter to the winds all existing forces of order and regulation, to reconstruct all institutions and to become the sovereign lord of those who have left to us the rights of their power by laying them down voluntarily in their liberalism.

Our power in the present tottering condition of all forms of power will be more invincible than any other, because it will remain invisible until the moment when it has gained such strength that no cunning can any longer undermine it.

Out of the temporary evil we are now compelled to commit will emerge the good of an unshakeable rule, which will restore the regular course of the machinery of the national life, brought to nought by liberalism. The result justifies the means. Let us, however, in our plans, direct our attention not so much to what is good and moral as to what is necessary and useful.

Before us is a strategic plan from which we cannot deviate without running the risk of seeing the labour of many centuries brought to naught.

In order to elaborate satisfactory forms of action it is necessary to have regard to the rascality, the slackness, the instability of the mob, its lack of capacity to understand and respect the conditions of its own life, or its own welfare. It must be understood that the might of a mob is blind, senseless and unreasoning force, ever at the mercy of a suggestion from any side. The blind cannot lead the blind without bringing them into the abyss; consequently members of the mob, upstarts from the people even though they may have a genius for wisdom, yet having no understanding of the political, cannot come forward as leaders of the mob without bringing the whole nation to ruin.

Only one trained from childhood for independent rule can understand the meaning of the words that can be constructed from the political alphabet.

A people left to itself, that is, to upstarts from its midst, brings itself to ruin by party dissensions excited by the pursuit of power and honours and disorders arising therefrom. Is it possible for the masses of the people calmly and without petty jealousies to form judgements, to deal with the affairs of the country, which cannot be mixed up with personal interests? Can they defend themselves from an external foe? It is unthinkable, for a plan broken up into as many parts as there are heads in the mob loses all homogeneity, and thereby becomes unintelligible and impossible to execute.

It is only with a despotic ruler that plans can be elaborated extensively and clearly in such a way as to distribute the whole properly among the several parts of the machinery of the State: from this the conclusion is inevitable that a satisfactory form of government for any country is one that is concentrated in the hands of one responsible person. Without an absolute despotism there can be no existence for civilisation which is carried on not by the masses but by their guide, whosoever that person may be. The mob is a savage and displays its savagery at every opportunity. The moment the mob seizes freedom in its hands it quickly turns to anarchy, which in itself is the highest degree of savagery.

Behold the alcoholised animals, bemused with drink, which freedom permits them to consume to excess. It is not for us and ours to walk that road. The peoples of the goyim are bemused with alcoholic liquors; their youth has grown stupid on classicism and from early immorality, into which it has been inducted by our special agents—by tutors, lackeys, governesses in the houses of the wealthy, by clerks and others, by our women in the places of dissipation frequented by the goyim. Among the latter I also include the so-called "society ladies," voluntary followers of the others in corruption and luxury.

Our countersign is—Force and Make-believe. Only force conquers in political affairs, especially if it be concealed in the talents essential to statesmen. Violence must be the principle, and cunning and make-believe the rule for governments which do not want to lay down their crowns at the feet of agents of some new power. This evil is the one and only means to attain the end, the good. Therefore we must not stop at bribery, deceit and treachery when they should serve towards the attainment of our end. In politics one must know how to seize the property of others without hesitation if by it we secure submission and sovereignty.

Our State, marching along the path of peaceful conquest, has the right to replace the horrors of war by less noticeable and more satisfactory sentences of death, necessary to maintain the terror which tends to produce blind submission. Just but merciless severity is the greatest factor of strength in the State: not only for the sake of gain but also in the name of duty, for the sake of victory, we must keep to the programme of violence and make-believe. The doctrine of squaring accounts is precisely as strong as the means of which it makes use. Therefore it is not so much by the means themselves as by the doctrine of severity that we shall triumph and bring all governments into subjection to our super-government. It is enough for them to know that we are merciless for all disobedience to cease.

Far back in ancient times we were the first to cry among the masses of the people the words "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity," words many times repeated since those days by stupid poll-parrots who from all sides round flew down upon these baits and with them carried away the well-being of the world, true freedom of the individual, formerly so well guarded against the pressure of the mob. The would-be wise men of the goyim, the intellectuals, could not fathom these abstract words; did not note the contradiction of their meaning and interrelation; did not see that in nature there is no equality, cannot be freedom: that Nature herself has established inequality of minds, of characters, and capacities, just as immutably as she has established subordination to her laws: never stopped to think that the mob is a blind thing, that upstarts elected from among it to bear rule are, in regard to the political, the same blind men as the mob itself, that the adept, though he be a fool, can yet rule, whereas the non-adept, even if he were a genius, understands nothing in the political—to all these things the goyim paid no regard; yet all the time dynastic rule rested upon these tenets: for the father passed on to the son a knowledge of the course of political affairs in such wise that none should know it but members of the dynasty and none could betray it to the governed. As time went on the meaning of the dynastic transference of the true position of affairs in the political was lost, and this aided the success of our cause.

In all corners of the earth the words "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity" brought to our ranks, thanks to our blind agents, whole legions who bore our banners with enthusiasm. And all the time these words were canker-worms at work boring into the well-being of the goyim, putting an end everywhere to peace, quiet, solidarity and destroying all the foundations of the goya States. As you will see later, this helped us to our triumph: it enabled us to grasp, among other things, the master card—the destruction of the privileges, or in other words of the very existence of the aristocracy of the goyim, that class which was the only defence peoples and countries had against us. On the ruins of the natural and genealogical aristocracy of the goyim we have set up the aristocracy of our educated class headed by the aristocracy of money. The qualifications for this aristocracy we have established in wealth, which is dependent upon us, and in knowledge, for which our learned elders provide the motive force.

Our triumph has been rendered easier by the fact that in our relations with the men whom we wanted we have always worked upon the most sensitive chords of the human mind, upon the cash account, upon the cupidity, upon the insatiability for material needs of man; and each one of these human weaknesses, taken alone, is sufficient to paralyse initiative, for it hands over the will of men to the disposition of him who has bought their activities.

The abstraction of freedom has enabled us to persuade the mob in all countries that their government is nothing but the steward of the people who are the owners of the country, and that the steward may be replaced like a worn-out glove.

It is this possibility of replacing the representatives of the people which has placed them at our disposal, and, as it were, given us the power of appointment.

PROTOCOL 2

ECONOMIC WARS

Routine scientific government—Darwinism, Marxism, Nietzcheism—Press-inculcated mentality.

It is indispensable for our purposes that wars, as far as assible, should not result in territorial gains: war will urns be brought on to the economic ground, where the nations will not fail to perceive in the assistance we give the strength of our predominance, and this state of things will put both sides at the mercy of our international agentur, which possesses millions of eyes ever on the watch and unhampered by any limitations whatsoever. Our international rights will then wipe out national rights, in the proper sense of right, and will rule the nations precisely as the civil law of States rules the relations of their subjects among themselves. The administrators, whom we shall choose from among the public with strict regard to their capacities for servile obedience, will not be persons trained in the arts of government and will therefore easily become pawns in our game in the hands of men of learning and genius, who will be their advisers, specialists bred and reared from early childhood to rule the affairs of the whole world. As is well known to you, these specialists of ours have been drawing the information they need to fit them for rule from our political plans, from the lessons of history, from observations made of the events of every moment as it passes. The goyim are not guided by practical use of unprejudiced historical observation, but by theoretical routine without any critical regard for consequent results. We need not, therefore, take any account of them—let them amuse themselves until the hour strikes, or live on hopes of new forms of enterprising pastime, or on the memories of all they have enjoyed. For them, let that play the principal part which we have persuaded them to accept as the dictates of science (theory). It is with this object in view that we are constantly, by means of our press, arousing a blind confidence in these theories. The intellectuals of the goyim will puff themselves up with their knowledge and without any logical verification will put into effect all the information available from science, which our agentur specialists have cunningly pieced together for the purpose of educating their minds in the direction we want.

Do not suppose for a moment that these statements are empty words: think carefully of the successes we arranged for Darwinism, Marxism, Nietzcheism. To us Jews, at any rate, it should be plain to see what a disintegrating effect these directives have had upon the minds of the goyim.

It is indispensable for us to take account of the thoughts, characters, tendencies of the nations in order to avoid making slips in the political and in the direction of administrative affairs. The triumph of our system, and of the machinery of which it is composed, which may vary according to the temperament of the peoples we encounter, will not be assured unless its practical application is based upon a resume of the lessons of the past in the light of the present.

In the hands of the States of to-day there is a great force that creates the movement of thought in the people, and that is the Press. The part played by the Press is to keep pointing out requirements supposed to be indispensable, to give voice to the complaints of the people, to express and to create discontent. It is in the Press that the triumph of freedom of speech finds its incarnation. But the goyim States have not known how to make use of this force; and it has fallen into our hands. Through the Press we have gained the power to influence while remaining ourselves in the shade; thanks to the Press we have got the gold in our hands, notwithstanding that we have had to gather it out of oceans of blood and tears. But it has paid us, though we have sacrificed many of our people. Each victim on our side is worth in the sight of God a thousand goyim.

PROTOCOL 3

METHODS OF CONQUEST

The Symbolic Snake—"People's Rights"—Liquidation of the Goyim—"Sovereign Lord of the World"—Universal economic crisis—"Ours they will not touch..."—Secret Masonic agents.

Today I may tell you that our goal is now only a few steps off. There remains but a small space to cross of the long path we have trodden before the cycle of the Symbolic Snake, by which we symbolise our people, will be completed. When this ring closes, all the States of Europe will be locked in its coil as in a powerful vice.

The constitutional scales of these days will shortly break down, for we have established them with a certain lack of accurate balance in order that they may oscillate incessantly until they wear through the pivot on which they turn. The goyim are under the impression that they have welded them sufficiently strong and they have all along kept on expecting that the scales would come into equilibrium. But the pivots—the kings on their thrones—are hemmed in by their representatives, who play the fool, distraught with their own uncontrolled and irresponsible power. This power they owe to the terror which has been breathed into the palaces. As they have lost contact with their people, the kings on their thrones are no longer able to come to terms with them and so strengthen themselves against seekers after power. We have made a gulf between the far-seeing Sovereign Power and the blind force of the people so that both have lost all meaning, for like the blind man and his stick, both are powerless apart.

In order to incite seekers after power to abuse it we have set all forces in opposition one to another, breaking up their liberal tendencies towards independence. To this end we have stirred up every form of enterprise, we have armed all parties, we have set up authority as a target for every ambition. Of States we have made gladiatorial arenas where a host of confused issues contend .... A little more, and disorders and bankruptcy will be universal ....

Babblers inexhaustible have turned into oratorical contests the sittings of Parliament and Administrative Boards. Bold journalists and unscrupulous pamphleteers daily fall upon executive officials. The abuse of power is the final lever preparing all institutions for their overthrow, when everything will fly skywards under the blows of the maddened mob.

All people are chained down to heavy toil by poverty more firmly than ever they were chained by slavery and serfdom; from these they might free themselves, one way and another these problems could be overcome, but from want they will never get away. We have included in the constitution such rights as to the masses appear fictitious and not actual rights. All these so-called "People's Rights" can exist only as an idea which can never be realised in practical life. What is it to the proletarian labourer, bowed double over his heavy toil, crushed by his lot in life, if talkers get the right to babble, if journalists get the right to scribble any nonsense side by side with good stuff, once the proletariat obtains no other profit from the constitution, save only those pitiful crumbs which we fling them from our table in return for their voting in favour of what we dictate, in favour of the men we place in power, the servants of our agentur .... Republican rights for a poor man are no more than a bitter piece of irony, for since he is obliged to toil almost all day, on the one hand, he is unable to use them, and on the other, they rob him of all guarantee of regular and certain earnings by making him dependent on strikes by his comrades or lockouts by his masters.

The people under our guidance have annihilated the aristocracy, who were their one and only defence and foster-mother for the sake of their own advantage which is inseparably bound up with the well-being of the people. Nowadays, with the destruction of the aristocracy, the people have fallen into the grips of merciless money-grinding scoundrels who have laid a pitiless and cruel yoke upon the necks of the workers.

We appear on the scene as the alleged saviours of the worker from this oppression and we suggest that he should enter the ranks of our fighting forces—Socialists, Anarchists, Communists—to whom we always give support in accordance with an alleged brotherly rule (of the solidarity of all humanity) of our social masonry. The aristocracy, which enjoyed by law the labour of the workers, was interested in seeing that the workers were well fed, healthy and strong. We are interested in just the opposite—in the diminution, the killing out of the goyim. Our power is in the chronic shortness of food and physical weakness of the worker because by all that this implies he is made the slave of our will, and he will not find in his own authorities either strength or energy to set against our will. Hunger gives capital the right to rule the worker more surely than it was given to the aristocracy by the legal authority of kings.

By want and the envy and hatred which it engenders we shall move the mobs and with their hands we shall wipe out all those who hinder us on our way.

When the hour strikes for our Sovereign Lord of all the World to be crowned it is these same hands which will sweep away everything that might be a hindrance thereto.

The goyim have lost the habit of thinking unless prompted by the suggestions of our specialists. Therefore they do not see the urgent necessity of what we, when our kingdom comes, shall adopt at once, namely this, that it is essential to reach in national schools one simple, true piece of knowledge, the basis of all knowledge—the knowledge of the structure of human life, of social existence, which requires division of labour, and, consequently, the division of men into classes and conditions. It is essential for all to know that owing to difference in the objects of human activity there cannot be any equality, that he who by any act of his own compromises a whole class cannot be equally responsible before the law with him who affects no one but only his own honour. The true knowledge of the structure of society, into the secrets of which we do not admit the goyim, would demonstrate to all men that position and work must be kept within a certain circle, that they may not become a source of human suffering, arising from an education which does not correspond with the work which individuals are called upon to do. After a thorough study of this knowledge the people will voluntarily submit to authority and accept such position as is appointed them in the State. In the present state of knowledge and the direction we have given to its development the people, blindly believing things in print, cherishes—thanks to promptings intended to mislead and to its own ignorance—a blind hatred towards all conditions which it considers above itself, for it has no understanding of the meaning of class and condition.

This hatred will be still further magnified by the effects of an economic crisis, which will stop dealings on the exchanges and bring industry to a standstill. We shall create by all the secret subterranean methods open to us and with the aid of gold, which is all hi our hands, a universal economic crisis whereby we shall simultaneously throw upon the streets whole mobs of workers in all the countries of Europe. These mobs will rush delightedly to shed the blood of those whom, in the simplicity of their ignorance, they have envied from their cradles, and whose property they will then be able to loot.

Ours they will not touch, because the moment of attack will be known to us and we shall take measures to protect our own.

We have demonstrated that progress will bring all the goyim to the sovereignty of reason. Our despotism will be precisely that; for it will know how to pacify all unrest by wise severities, to cauterise liberalism out of all institutions.

When the populace has seen that all sorts of concessions and indulgences are yielded it in the name of freedom, imagining itself to be sovereign lord it has stormed its way to power, but, naturally, like every other blind man, it has come upon a host of stumbling blocks, it has rushed to find a guide, it has never had the sense to return to the former state and it has laid down its plenipotentiary powers at our feet. Remember the French Revolution, to which it was we who gave the name of "Great": the secrets of its preparations are well known to us for it was wholly the work of our hands.

Ever since that time we have been leading the peoples from one disenchantment to another, so that in the end they should turn also from us in favour of that King-Despot of the blood of Zion, whom we are preparing for the world.

At the present day we are, as an international force, invincible, because if attacked by some we are supported by other States. It is the bottomless rascality of the goyim peoples, who crawl on their bellies to force, but are merciless towards weakness, unsparing to faults and indulgent to crimes, unwilling to bear the contradictions of a free social system but patient unto martyrdom under the violence of a bold despotism—it is those qualities which are aiding us to independence. From the premier-dictators of the present day the goyim peoples suffer patiently and bear abuses for the least of which they would have beheaded twenty kings.

What is the explanation of this phenomenon, this curious inconsequence of the masses of the peoples in their attitude towards what would appear to be events of the same order?

It is explained by the fact that these dictators whisper to the peoples through their agents that through these abuses they are inflicting injury on the States with the highest purpose—to secure the welfare of the peoples, the international brotherhood of them all, their solidarity and equality of rights. Naturally they do not tell the peoples that this unification must be ccomplished only under our sovereign rule.

And thus the people condemn the upright and acquit the guilty, persuaded ever more and more that it can do whatsoever it wishes. Thanks to this state of things the people are destroying every kind of stability and creating disorders at every step.

The word "freedom" brings out the communities of men to fight against every kind of force, against every kind of authority, even against God and the laws of nature. For this reason we, when we come into our kingdom, shall have to erase this word from the lexicon of life as implying a principle of brute force which turns mobs into bloodthirsty beasts.

These beasts, it is true, fall asleep again every time when they have drunk their fill of blood, and at such times can easily be riveted into their chains. But if they be not given blood they will not sleep but continue to struggle.

PROTOCOL 4

MATERIALISM REPLACES RELIGION

Stages of a Republic—Gentile masonry a screen—International speculation in industry—Cult of Gold.

Every republic passes through several stages. The first of these is comprised in the early days of mad raging by the blind mob, tossed hither and thither, right and left: the second is demagogy from which is born anarchy, and that leads inevitably to despotism—not any longer legal and overt, and therefore responsible, despotism, but unseen and secretly hidden, yet nevertheless sensibly felt despotism in the hands of some secret organisation or other, whose acts are the more unscrupulous in as much as it works behind a screen, behind the backs of all sorts of agents, to change whom not only does not injuriously affect but actually aids the secret force by saving it, thanks to continual changes, from the necessity of expending its resources on rewarding long services.

Who and what is in a position to overthrow an invisible force? And this is precisely what our force is. Gentile masonry blindly serves as a screen for us and our objects, but the plan of action of our force, even its very abiding-place, remains for the whole people an unknown mystery.

But even freedom might be harmless and have its place in the State economy without injury to the well-being of the peoples if it rested upon the foundation of faith in God, upon the brotherhood of humanity, unconnected with the conception of equality, which is negatived by the very laws of creation, for they have established subordination. With such a faith as this a people might be governed by a wardship of parishes, and would walk contentedly and humbly under

the guiding hand of its spiritual pastor submitting to the dispositions of God upon earth. This is the reason why it is indispensable for us to undermine all faith, to tear out of the minds of the goyim the very principle of Godhead and the spirit, and to put in its place arithmetical calculations and material needs.

In order to give the goyim no time to think and take note, their minds must be diverted towards industry and trade. Thus, all the nations will be swallowed up in pursuit of gain and in the race for it will not take note of their common foe. But again, in order that freedom may once for all disintegrate and ruin the communities of the goyim, we must put industry on a speculative basis: as a result, what is withdrawn from the land by industry will slip through their hands and pass into speculation, that is, to our classes.

The intensified struggle for superiority and shocks delivered to economic life will create, nay, have already created, disenchanted, cold and heartless communities. Such communities will foster a strong aversion towards the higher political and towards religion. Their only guide is gain, that is Gold, which they will erect into a veritable cult, for the sake of those material delights which it can give. Then will the hour strike when, not for the sake of attaining the good, not even to win wealth, but solely out of hatred towards the privileged, the lower classes of the goyim will follow our lead against our rivals for power, the intellectuals of the goyim.

PROTOCOL 5

DESPOTISM & MODERN PROGRESS

Centralised Government—Gulfs separating States—Sham eloquence to overcome public opinion—Super-Government Administration.

What form of administrative rule can be given to communities in which corruption has penetrated everywhere, communities where riches are attained only by the clever surprise tactics of semi-swindling tricks; where looseness reigns; where morality is maintained by penal measures and harsh laws but not by voluntarily accepted principles; where the feelings towards faith and country are obliterated by cosmopolitan convictions? What form of rule is to be given to these communities if not that despotism which I shall describe to you later? We shall create an intensified centralisation of government in order to grip in our hands all the forces of the community. We shall regulate mechanically all the actions of the political life of our subjects by new laws. These laws will withdraw one by one all the indulgences and liberties which have been permitted by the goyim, and our kingdom will be distinguished by a despotism of such magnificent proportions as to be at any moment and in every place in a position to wipe out any goyim who oppose us by deed or word.

We shall be told that such a despotism as I speak of is not consistent with the progress of these days, but I will prove to you that it is.

In the times when the peoples looked upon kings on their thrones as on a pure manifestation of the will of God, they submitted without a murmur to the despotic power of kings: but from the day when we insinuated into their minds the conception of their own rights they began to regard the occupants of thrones as mere ordinary mortals. The holy unction of the Lord's Annointed has fallen from the heads of kings in the eye of the people, and when we also robbed them of their faith in God the might of power was flung upon the streets into the place of public proprietorship and was seized by us.

Moreover, the art of directing masses and individuals by means of cleverly manipulated theory and verbiage, by regulations of life in common and all sorts of other tricks, in all of which the goyim understand nothing, belongs likewise to the specialists of our administrative brain. Reared on analysis, observation, on delicacies of fine calculation, in this species of skill we have no rivals, any more than we have in the drawing up of plans of political action and solidarity. In this respect the Jesuits alone might have compared with us, but we have contrived to discredit them in the eyes of the unthinking mob as an overt organisation, while we ourselves all the while have kept our secret organisation in the shade. However, it is probably all the same to the world who is its sovereign lord, whether the head of Catholicism or our despot of the blood of Zion! But to us, the Chosen People, it is very far from being a matter of indifference.

For a time perhaps we might be successfully dealt with by a coalition of the goyim of all the world: but from this danger we are secured by the discord existing among them whose roots are so deeply seated that they can never now be plucked up. We have set one against another the personal and national reckonings of the goyim, religious and race hatreds, which we have fostered into a huge growth in the course of the past twenty centuries. This is the reason why there is not one State which would anywhere receive support if it were to raise its arm, for every one of them must bear in mind that any agreement against us would be unprofitable to itself. We are too strong—there is no evading our power. The nations cannot come to even an inconsiderable private agreement without our secretly having a hand in it.

Per Me reges regnant. "It is through me that Kings reign." And it was said by the prophets that we were chosen by God Himself to rule over the whole earth. God has endowed us with genius that we may be equal to our task. Were genius in the opposite camp it would still struggle against us, but even so a newcomer is no match for the old-established settler: the struggle would be merciless between us, such a fight as the world has never yet seen. Aye, and the genius on their side would have arrived too late. The wheels of the machinery of all States are moved by the force of the engine, which is in our hands, and that engine of the machinery of States is—Gold. The science of political economy invented by our learned elders has for long past been giving royal prestige to capital.

Capital, if it is to co-operate untrammelled, must be free to establish a monopoly of industry and trade: this is already being put in execution by an unseen hand in all quarters of the world. This freedom will give political force to those engaged in industry, and that will help to oppress the people. Nowadays it is more important to disarm the peoples than to lead them into war; more important to use for our advantage the passions which have burst into flames than to quench their fire; more important to catch up and interpret the ideas of others to suit ourselves than to eradicate them. The principal object of our directorate consists in this: to debase the public mind by criticism; to lead it away from serious reflection calculated to arouse resistance; to distract the forces of the mind towards a sham fight of empty eloquence.

In all ages the peoples of the world, equally with individuals, have accepted words for deeds, for they are content with a show and rarely pause to note, in the public arena, whether promises are followed by performances. Therefore we shall establish show institutions which will give eloquent proof of their benefit to progress.

We shall assume the liberal physiognomy of all parties, of all directions, and we shall give that physiognomy a voice in orators who will speak so much that they will exhaust the patience of their hearers and produce an abhorrence of oratory.

In order to put public opinion into our hands we must bring it into a state of bewilderment by giving expression from all sides to so many contradictory opinions and for such length of time as will suffice to make the goyim lose their heads in the labyrinth and come to see that the best thing is to have no opinion of any kind in matters political, which it is not given to the public to understand, because they are understood only by him who guides the public. This is the first secret.

The second secret requisite for the success of our government is comprised in the following: To multiply to such an extent national failings, habits, passions, and conditions of civil life, that it will be impossible for anyone to know where he is in the resulting chaos, so that the people in consequence will fail to understand one another. This measure will also serve us in another way, namely, to sow discord in all parties, to dislocate all collective forces which are still unwilling to submit to us, and to discourage any kind of personal initiative which might in any degree hinder our affair. There is nothing more dangerous to us than personal initiative: if it has genius behind it, such initiative can do more than can be done by millions of people among whom we have sown discord. We must so direct the education of the goyim communities that whenever they come upon a matter requiring initiative they drop their hands in despairing impotence. The strain which results from freedom of action saps the forces when it meets with the freedom of another. From this collision arise grave moral shocks, disenchantments, failures. By all these means we shall so wear down the goyim that they will be compelled to offer us international power of a nature that will enable us without any violence gradually to absorb all the State forces of the world and to form a Super-Government. In place of the rulers of to-day we shall set up a bogey which will be called the Super-Government Administration. Its hands will reach out in all directions like nippers and its organisation will be of such colossal dimensions that it cannot fail to subdue all the nations of the world.

Pict 5. Дозволено цензурою. Москва, 28 сентября 1905 года.

The Subtitle page from the 2nd edition (1905) with the words: Passed by the Censor Moscow. 28th of September, 1905. The British Museum Library stamp is shown.

PROTOCOL 6

TAKE-OVER TECHNIQUE

Reservoirs of riches—Destruction of goy aristocracy—Vicious circle of rising prices.

We shall soon begin to establish huge monopolies, reservoirs of colossal riches, upon which even large fortunes of the goyim will depend to such an extent that they will go to the bottom together with the credit of the States on the day after the political smash ....

You gentlemen here present who are economists, just imagine the significance of this combination! ....

In every possible way we must develop the significance of our Super-Government by representing it as the Protector and Benefactor of all those who voluntarily submit to us.

The aristocracy of the goyim as a political force, is dead —we need not take it into account; but as landed proprietors they can still be harmful to us since as such they are self-sufficient. It is essential therefore for us at whatever cost to deprive them of their land. This object will be best attained by increasing the burdens upon landed property— in loading lands with debts. These measures will check land-holding and keep it in a state of humble and unconditional submission.

The aristocrats of the goyim, being hereditarily incapable of contenting themselves with little, will rapidly burn up and fizzle out.

At the same time we must intensively patronise trade and industry, but, first and foremost, speculation, whose part is to provide a counterpoise to industry: the absence of speculative industry will multiply capital in private hands and will serve to restore agriculture by freeing the land from indebtedness to the land banks. We want industry to drain off from the land both labour and capital and by means of speculation transfer into our hands all the money of the world, and thereby throw all the goyim into the ranks of the proletariat. Then the goyim will bow down before us, if for no other reason but to get the right to exist.

To completely ruin the industry of the goyim we shall bring to the assistance of speculation the luxury which we have developed among the goyim, that greedy demand for luxury which is swallowing up everything. We shall raise the rate of wages which, however, will not bring any advantage to the workers, for, at the same time, we shall produce a rise in prices of the first necessaries of life alleging that it arises from the decline of agriculture and cattle-breeding; we shall further undermine sources of production, artfully and deeply by accustoming the workers to anarchy and to drunkenness, and side by side therewith taking all measures to extirpate from the face of the earth all the educated forces of the goyim.

In order that the true meaning of things may not strike the goyim before the proper time we shall mask it under an alleged ardent desire to serve the working classes and the great principles of political economy about which our economic theories are carrying on an energetic propaganda.

PROTOCOL 7

WORLD-WIDE WARS

Encouraging an arms race—Universal war to check goy opposition—The guns of America, China and Japan.

The intensification of armaments, the increase of police forces—are all essential for the completion of the aforementioned plans. We desire that there should be in all the States of the world, besides ourselves, only the masses of the proletariat, a few millionaires devoted to our interests, police and soldiers.

Throughout all Europe, and by means of relations with Europe, in other continents also, we must create ferments, discords, and hostility. Therein we gain a double advantage. In the first place we keep in check all countries, for they well know that we have the power whenever we like to create disorders or to restore order. All these countries are accustomed to see in us an indispensable force of coercion. In the second place, by our intrigues we shall tangle up all the threads which we have woven into the cabinets of all States by means of the political, by economic treaties, or loan obligations. In order to succeed in this we must use great cunning and penetration during negotiations and agreements, but, as regards what is called the "official language," we shall keep to opposite tactics and assume the mask of honesty and compliancy. In this way the peoples and governments of the goyim, whom we have taught to look only at the outside of whatever we present to their notice, will still continue to accept us as the benefactors and saviours of the human race.

We must be in a position to respond to every act of opposition by war with the neighbours of that country which dares to oppose us: but if these neighbours should also venture to stand collectively together against us, then we must offer resistance by a universal war.

The principal factor of success in the political is the secrecy of its undertakings: the word should not agree with the deeds of the diplomat.

We must compel the government of the goyim to take action in the direction favoured by our widely-conceived plan, already approaching the desired consummation, by what we shall represent as public opinion, secretly prompted by us through the means of that so-called "Great Power"— the Press, which with a few exceptions that may be disregarded, is already entirely in our hands.

In a word, to sum up our system of keeping the governments of the goyim in Europe in check, we shall show our strength to one of them by terrorist attempts and to all, if we allow the possibility of a general rising against us, we shall respond with the guns of America or China or Japan.

PROTOCOL 8

PROVISIONAL GOVERNMENT

Legal justification for audacity—Super-educational training— Control of bankers, industrialists and capitalists.

We must arm ourselves with all the weapons which our opponents might employ against us. We must search out the very finest shades of expression and knotty points in the Lexicon of legal justification for those cases where we shall have to pronounce judgments that might appear abnormally audacious and unjust, for it is important that these resolutions should be set forth in expressions that shall seem to be the most exalted moral principles cast into legal form. Our directorate must surround itself with all these forces of civilization among which it will have to work. It will surround itself with publicists, practical jurists, administrators, diplomats and finally, with persons prepared by a special super-educational training in our special schools. These persons will have cognizance of all the secrets of the social structure, they will know all the languages that can be made up by political alphabets and words; they will be made acquainted with the whole underside of human nature, with all its sensitive chords on which they will have to play. These chords are the cast of mind of the goyim, their tendencies, shortcomings, vices and qualities, the particularities of classes and conditions. Needless to say that the talented assistants of authority, of whom I speak, will not be taken from among the goyim, who are accustomed to perform their administrative work without giving themselves the trouble to think what its aim is, and never consider what it is needed for. The administrators of the goyim sign papers without reading them, and they serve either for mercenary reasons or for ambition.

We shall surround our government with a whole world of economists. That is the reason why economic sciences form the principal subject of the teaching given to the Jews. Around us again will be a whole constellation of bankers, industrialists, capitalists and—the main thing—millionaires, because in substance everything will be settled by the question of figures.

For a time, until there will no longer be any risk in entrusting responsible posts in our States to our brother-Jews, we shall put them in the hands of persons whose past and reputation are such that between them and the people lies an abyss, persons who, if they disobey our instructions, must face criminal charges or disappear—this in order to make them defend our interests to their last gasp.

PROTOCOL 9

RE-EDUCATION

Meaning of anti-semitism—Source of the all-engulfing terror, Boosting of false theories.

In applying our principles let attention be paid to the character of the people in whose country you live and act: a general, identical application of them, until such time as the people shall have been re-educated to our pattern, cannot succeed. But by approaching their application cautiously you will see that not a decade will pass before the most stubborn character will change and we shall add a new people to the ranks of those already subdued by us.

The words of the liberal, which are in effect the words of our masonic watchword, namely, "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity," will, when we come into our kingdom, be changed by us into words no longer a watchword, but only an expression of idealism, namely, into: "The right of liberty, the duty of equality, the ideal of brotherhood." That is how we shall put it—and so we shall catch the bull by the horns . . . . De facto we have already wiped out every kind of rule except our own, although de jure there still remain a good many of them. Nowadays, if any States raise a protest against us it is only pro forma at our discretion, and by our direction, for their anti-Semitism is indispensable to us for the management of our lesser brethren. I will not enter into further explanations, for this matter has formed the subject of repeated discussion amongst us.

For us there are no checks to limit the range of our activity. Our Super-Government subsists in extra-legal conditions which are described in the accepted terminology by the energetic and forcible word—Dictatorship. I am in a position to tell you with a clear conscience that at the proper time we, the law-givers, shall execute judgment and sentence, we shall slay and we shall spare; we, as head of all our troops, are mounted on the steed of the leader. We rule by force of will, because in our hands are the fragments of a once powerful party, now vanquished by us. And the weapons in our hands are limitless ambition, burning greediness, merciless vengeance, hatred and malice.

It is from us that the all-engulfing terror proceeds. We have in our service persons of all opinions, of all doctrines, restoring monarchists, demagogues, socialists, communists, and Utopian dreamers of every kind. We have harnessed them all to the task: each one of them on his own account is boring away at the last remnants of authority, is striving to overthrow all established forms of order. By these acts all states are in torture; they exhort to tranquillity, they are ready to sacrifice everything for peace: but we will not give them peace until they openly acknowledge our international Super-Government, and with submissiveness.

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.

We might have reason to apprehend a union between the "clear-sighted" force of the goy kings on their thrones and the "blind" force of the goy mobs, but we have taken all needful measure against any such possibility: between the one and the other force we have erected a bulwark in the shape of a mutual terror between them. In this way the blind force of the people remains our support and we, and we only, shall provide them with a leader and, of course, direct them along the road that leads to our goal.

In order that the hand of the blind mob may not free itself from our guiding hand, we must every now and then enter into close communion with it, if not actually in person, at any rate through some of the most trusty of our brethren. When we are acknowledged as the only authority we shall discourse with the people personally on the market places, and we shall instruct them on questions of the political in such wise as may turn them in the direction that suits us.

Who is going to. verify what is taught in the village schools ? But what an envoy of the government or a king on his throne himself may say cannot but become immediately known to the whole State, for it will be spread abroad by the voice of the people.

In order not to annihilate the institutions of the goyim before it is time we have touched them with craft and delicacy, and have taken hold of the ends of the springs which move their mechanism. These springs lay in a strict but just sense of order; we have replaced them by the chaotic licence of liberalism. We have got our hands into the administration of the law, into the conduct of elections, into the press, into the liberty of the person, but principally into education and training as being the corner-stones of a free existence.

We have fooled, bemused and corrupted the youth of the goyim by rearing them in principles and theories which are known to us to be false although it is by us that they have been inculcated.

Above the existing laws, without substantially altering them, and by merely twisting them into contradictory interpretations, we have erected something grandiose in the way of results. These results found expression first in the fact that the interpretations masked the laws: afterwards they entirely hid them from the eyes of the governments since it had become impossible to understand the tangled web of legislation.

This is the origin of the theory of arbitration.

You may say that the goyim will rise upon us, arms in hand, if they guess what is going on before the time comes; but in the West we have prepared against this a manoeuvre of such appalling terror that the very stoutest hearts quail— the undergrounds, those subterranean corridors, before the time comes, will be driven under all capitals, from whence those capitals will be blown into the air with all their organisations and archives.

PROTOCOL 10

PREPARING FOR POWER

Camouflaged political freedom—Universal suffrage—The rise of republics—Transition to masonic despotism—Proclamation of the "Lord of all the World"—Innoculation of diseases.

Today I begin with a repetition of what I said before, and I beg you to bear in mind that government and peoples are content in the political with outside appearances. And how, indeed, are the goyim to perceive the underlying meaning of things when their representatives give the best of their energies to enjoying themselves? For our policy it is of the greatest importance to notice this detail; it will be of assistance to us when we come to consider the division of authority, freedom of speech, of the press, of religion (faith), of the law of association, of equality before the law, of the inviolability of property, of the dwelling, of taxation (the idea of concealed taxes), of the reflex force of the laws. All these questions are such as ought not to be touched upon directly and openly before the people. In cases where it is indispensable to touch upon them they must not be categorically named, it must merely be declared without detailed exposition that the principles of contemporary law are acknowledged by us. The reason for keeping silence in this respect is that by not naming a principle we leave ourselves freedom of action, to drop this or that out of it without attracting notice; if they were all categorically named they would all appear to have been already given.

The mob cherishes a special affection and respect for the geniuses of political power and accepts all their deeds of violence with the admiring response: "rascally, well, yes, it is rascally, but it's clever! . . . a trick, if you like, but how craftily played, how magnificently done, what impudent audacity!" ....

We count upon attracting all nations to the task of erecting the new fundamental structure, the project for which has been drawn up by us. This is why, first and foremost, it is indispensable for us to arm ourselves and to store up in ourselves that absolutely reckless audacity and irresistible might of the spirit which in the person of our active workers will break down all hindrances in our way.

When we have accomplished our coup d'etat we shall say then to the various peoples: "Everything has gone terribly badly, all have been worn out with sufferings. We are destroying the causes of your torment—nationalities, frontiers, differences of coinages. You are at liberty, of course, to pronounce sentence upon us, but can it possibly be a just one if it is confirmed by you before you make any trial of what we are offering you." .... Then will the mob exalt us and bear us up in their hands in a unanimous triumph of hopes and expectations. Voting, which we have made the instrument which will set us on the throne of the world by teaching even the very smallest units of members of the human race to vote by means of meetings and agreements by groups, will then have served its purposes and will play its part then for the last time by a unanimity of desire to make close acquaintance with us before condemning us.

To secure this we must have everybody vote without distinction of classes and qualifications, in order to establish an absolute majority, which cannot be got from the educated propertied classes. In this way, by inculcating in all a sense of self-importance, we shall destroy among the goyim the importance of the family and its educational value and remove the possibility of individual minds splitting off, for the mob, handled by us, will not let them come to the front nor even give them a hearing; it is accustomed to listen to us only who pay it for obedience and attention. In this way we shall create a blind, mighty force which will never be in a position to move in any direction without the guidance of our agents set at its head by us as leaders of the mob. The people will submit to this regime because it will know that upon these leaders will depend its earnings, gratifications and the receipt of all kinds of benefits.

A scheme of government should come ready made from one brain because it will never be clinched firmly if it is allowed to be split into fractional parts in the minds of many. It is permissible, therefore, for us to know of the scheme of action but not to discuss it lest we disturb its artfulness, the interdependence of its component parts, the practical force of the secret meaning of each clause. To discuss and make alterations in a labour of this kind by means of numerous votes is to impress upon it the stamp of all the reasoning and misunderstanding which has failed to penetrate the depth and extent of its plottings. We want our schemes to be forcible and suitably concocted. Therefore we ought not to fling the work of genius of our guide to the fangs of the mob or even to a selected company.

These schemes will not turn existing institutions upside down just yet. They will only effect changes in their economy and consequently in the whole combined movement of their progress, which will thus be directed along the paths laid down in our schemes.

Under various names there exists in all countries approximately one and the same thing. Representation, Ministry, Senate, State Council, Legislative and Executive Corps. I need not explain to you the mechanism of the relation of these institutions to one another, because you are aware of all that; only take note of the fact that each of the above-named institutions corresponds to some important function of the State, and I would beg to remark that the word "important" I apply not to the institution but to the function, consequently it is not the institutions which are important but their functions. These institutions have divided up among themselves all the functions of government—administrative, legislative, executive, wherefore they have come to operate as do the organs in the human body. If we injure one part in the machinery of State, the State falls sick, like a human body, and . . . will die.

When we introduced into the State organism the poison of Liberalism its whole political complexion underwent a change. States have been seized with a mortal illness— blood-poisoning. All that remains is to await the end of their death agony.

Liberalism produced Constitutional States, which took the place of what was the only safeguard of the goyim, namely. Despotism; and a constitution, as you well know, is nothing else but a school of discord, misunderstanding, quarrels, disagreements, fruitless party agitations, party whims—in a word, a school of everything that serves to destroy the personality of State activity. The tribune of the "talkeries" has, no less effectively than the Press, condemned the rulers to inactivity and impotence, and thereby rendered them useless and superfluous, for which reason indeed they have been in many countries deposed. Then it was that the era of republics became a possibility that could be realized; and then it was that we replaced the ruler by a caricature of a government—by a president, taken from the mob, from the midst of our puppet creatures, our slaves. This was the foundation of the mine which we have laid under the goy people, I should rather say, under the goy peoples.

In the near future we shall establish the responsibility of presidents.

By that time we shall be in a position to disregard forms in carrying through matters for which our impersonal puppet will be responsible. What do we care if the ranks of those striving for power should be thinned, if there should arise a deadlock from the scarcity of finding presidents, a deadlock which will finally disorganise the country? ....

In order that our scheme may produce this result we shall arrange elections in favour of such presidents as have in their past some dark, undiscovered stain, some "Panama" or other—then they will become trustworthy agents for the accomplishment of our plans, being afraid, on the one hand, of revelations, and eager, on the other, for what everyone who has attained power desires, namely, the retention of the privileges, advantages and honour connected with the office of president. The chamber of deputies will protect and elect presidents, but we shall take from it the right to propose new, or make changes in, existing laws, for this right will be given by us to the responsible president, a puppet in our hands. Naturally, the authority of the president will then become a target for every possible form of attack, but we shall provide him with a means of self-defence in the right of an appeal to the people, for the decision of the people over the heads of their representatives that is to say, an appeal to that same blind slave of ours— the majority of the mob. Independently of this we shall invest the president with the right to declare a state of war. We shall justify this last right on the ground that the president as chief of the whole army of the country must be able to command it, should it be needed to defend the new republican constitution, since the right to defend it will belong to him as the responsible representative of this constitution.

It is easy to understand that in these conditions the key of the shrine will lie in our hands, and no one outside ourselves will any longer direct the force of legislation.

Besides this we shall, with the introduction of the new republican constitution, take from the Chamber the right of interpellation on government measures, on the pretext of preserving political secrecy, and, further, we shall by the new constitution reduce the number of representatives to a minimum, thereby proportionately reducing political passions and the passion for politics. If, however, they should, which is hardly to be expected, burst into flame, even in this minimum we shall nullify them by a stirring appeal and a reference to the majority of the whole people .... Upon the president will depend the appointment of presidents and vice-presidents of the Chamber and the Senate. Instead of constant sessions of Parliaments we shall reduce their sittings to a few months. Moreover, the president, as chief of the executive power, will have the right to summon and dissolve Parliament, and, in the latter case, to prolong the time for the appointment of a new parliamentary assembly. But in order that the consequences of all these acts which in substance are illegal, should not, prematurely for our plans, fall upon the responsibility established by us of the president, we shall instigate ministers and other officials of the higher administration about the president to evade his dispositions by taking measures of their own, for doing which they will be made the scapegoats in his place .... This part we especially recommend to be given to be played by the Senate, the Council of State, or the Council of Ministers, but not to an individual official.

The president will, at our discretion, interpret the sense of such of the existing laws as admit of various interpretations; he will further annul them when we indicate to him the necessity to do so. Besides this, he will have the right to propose temporary laws, and even new departures in the government constitutional working, the pretext both for the one and the other being the requirements for the supreme welfare of the State.

By such measures we shall obtain the power of destroying little by little, step by step, all that at the outset when we enter on our rights, we are compelled to introduce into the constitutions of States to prepare for the transition to the imperceptible abolition of every kind of constitution, and then the time is come to turn every form of government into our despotism.

The recognition of our despot may also come before the destruction of the constitution; the moment for this recognition will come when the peoples, utterly wearied by the irregularities and incompetence—a matter which we shall arrange for—of their rulers, will clamour: "Away with them and give us one king over all the earth who will unite us and annihilate the causes of discords—frontiers, nationalities, religions, State debts—who will give us peace and quiet which we cannot find under our rulers and representatives."

But you yourselves perfectly well know that to produce the possibility of the expression of such wishes by all the nations it is indispensable to stir up the people's relations with their governments in all countries so as utterly to exhaust humanity with dissension, hatred, struggle, envy and even to use torture, starvation, the inoculation of disease and want, so that the goyini see no other course open to them than to take refuge in our complete sovereignty in money and in all else.

But if we give the nations of the world a breathing space the moment we long for is hardly likely ever to arrive.

PROTOCOL 11

THE TOTALITARIAN STATE

The new constitution—Abolition of the rights of man— "Show" army of masonic lodges.

The State Council has been, as it were, the emphatic expression of the authority of the ruler; it will be, as the "show" part of the Legislative Corps, what may be called the editorial committee of the laws and decrees of the ruler.

This then, is the programme of the new constitution. We shall make Law, Right and Justice (1) in the guise of proposals to the Legislative Corps, (2) by decrees of the president under the guise of general regulations, of orders of the Senate and of resolutions of the State Council in the guise of ministerial orders, (3) and in case a suitable occasion should arise—in the form of a revolution in the State.

Having established approximately the modus agendi we will occupy ourselves with details of those combinations by which we have still to complete the revolution in the course of the machinery of State in the direction already indicated. By these combinations I mean the freedom of the Press, the right of association, freedom of conscience, the voting principle, and many another that must disappear for ever from the memory of man, or undergo a radical alteration the day after the promulgation of the new constitution. It is only at that moment that we shall be able at once to announce all our orders, for, afterwards, every noticeable alteration will be dangerous, for the following reasons: if this alteration be brought in with harsh severity and in a sense of severity and limitations, it may lead to a feeling of despair caused by fear of new alterations in the same direction: if, on the other hand, it be brought in in a sense of further indulgences it will be said that we have recognised our own wrongdoing and this will destroy the prestige of the infallibility of our authority, or else it will be said that we have become alarmed and are compelled to show lenience for which we shall get no thanks because it will be supposed to be compulsory .... Both the one and the other are injurious to the prestige of the new constitution. We desire that from the first moment of its promulgation, while the peoples of the world are still stunned by the accomplished fact of the revolution, still in a condition of terror and uncertainty, they should recognize once for all that we are so strong, so inexpugnable, so superabundantly rilled with power, that in no case shall we take any account of them, and so far from paying any attention to their opinions or wishes, we are ready and able to crush with irresistible power all expression or manifestation thereof at every moment and in every place, that we have seized at once everything we wanted and shall in no case divide our power with them .... Then in fear and trembling they will close their eyes to everything, and be content to await what will be the end of it all.

The goyim are a flock of sheep, and we are their wolves. And you know what happens when the wolves get hold of the flock? ....

There is another reason also why they will close their eyes: for we shall keep promising them to give back all the liberties we have taken away as soon as we have quelled the enemies of peace and tamed all parties ....

It is not worth while discussing how long they will be kept waiting for the return of their liberties ....

For what purpose then have we invented this whole policy and insinuated it into the minds of the goy without giving them any chance to examine its underlying meaning? For what, indeed, if not in order to obtain in a roundabout way what is for our scattered tribe unattainable by the direct road ? It is this which has served as the basis of our organisation of secret Masonry which is not known to, and whose aims are not even so much as suspected by, these goy cattle attracted by us into the "show" army of Masonic Lodges in order to throw dust in the eyes of their fellows.

God has granted to us, His Chosen People, the gift of the dispersion, and in this which appears in all eyes to be our weakness, has come forth all our strength, which has now brought us to the threshold of sovereignty over all the world.

There now remains not much more for us to construct upon the foundation we have laid.

PROTOCOL 12

CONTROL OF THE PRESS

Masonic "freedom"—Control of printing and publishing— Vishnu, idol of the Press.

The word "freedom" which can be interpreted in various ways, is defined by us as follows:— Freedom is the right to do that which the law allows. This interpretation of the word will at the proper time be of service to us, because all freedom will thus be in our hands, since the laws will abolish or create only that which is desirable for us according to the aforesaid programme.

We shall deal with the press in the following way: what is the part played by the press of to-day? It serves to excite and inflame those passions which are needed for our purpose or else it serves selfish ends of parties. It is often vapid, unjust, mendacious, and the majority of the public have not the slightest idea what ends the press really serves. We shall saddle and bridle it with a tight rein: we shall do the same also with all productions of the printing press, for where would be the sense in silencing the attacks of the press if we remain targets for pamphlets and books? The produce of publicity, which nowadays is a source of heavy expense owing to the necessity of censorship, will be turned by us into a very lucrative source of income to our State: we shall lay on it a special stamp tax and require deposits of caution-money before permitting the establishment of any organ of the press or of printing offices: these will then have to guarantee our government against any kind of attack on the part of the press. For any attempt to attack us, if such still be possible, we shall inflict fines without mercy. Such measures as stamp tax, deposit of caution-money and fines secured by these deposits, will bring in a huge income to the government. It is true that party organs might not spare money for the sake of publicity, but these we shall shut up at the second attack upon us. No one shall with impunity lay a finger on the aureole of the infallibility of our government. The pretext for stopping any publication will be the alleged plea that it is agitating the public mind without occasion or justification. I beg you to note that among those making attacks upon us will also be organs established by us, but they will attack exclusively points that we have pre-determined to alter.

Not a single announcement will reach the public without our control. Even now this is already being attained by us inasmuch as all news items are received by a few agencies, in whose offices they are focused from all parts of the world. These agencies will then be already entirely ours and will give publicity only to-what we dictate to them.

If we have already contrived to possess ourselves of the minds of the goy communities to such an extent that they all come near looking upon the events of the world through the coloured glasses of those spectacles we are setting astride their noses; if already there is not a single State where there exist for us any barriers to admittance into what goy stupidity calls State secrets: what will our position be then, when we shall be acknowledged supreme lords of the world in the person of our king of all the world ....

Let us turn again to the future of the printing press. Every one desirous of being a publisher, librarian, or printer, will be obliged to provide himself with the diploma instituted therefore, which, in case of any fault, will be immediately impounded. With such measures the instrument of thought will become an educative means in the hands of our government, which will no longer allow the mass of the nation to be led astray in by-ways and fantasies about the blessings of progress. Is there any one of us who does not know that these phantom blessings are the direct roads to foolish imaginings which give birth to anarchical relations of men among themselves and towards authority, because progress, or rather the idea of progress, has introduced the conception of every kind of emancipation, but has failed to establish its limits .... All the so-called liberals are anarchists, if not in fact, at any rate in thought. Every one of them is hunting after phantoms of freedom, and falling exclusively into licence, that is, into the anarchy of protest for the sake of protest ....

We turn to the periodical press. We shall impose on it, as on all printed matter, stamp taxes per sheet and deposits of caution-money, and books of less than 30 sheets will pay double. We shall reckon them as pamphlets in order, on the one hand, to reduce the number of magazines, which are the worst form of printed poison, and, on the other, in order that this measure may force writers into such lengthy productions that they will be little read, especially as they will be costly. At the same time what we shall publish ourselves to influence mental development in the direction laid down for our profit will be cheap and will be read voraciously. The tax will bring vapid literary ambitions within bounds and the liability to penalties will make literary men dependent upon us. And if there should be any found who are desirous of writing against us, they will not find any person eager to print their productions. Before accepting any production for publication in print the publisher or printer will have to apply to the authorities for permission to do so. Thus we shall know before hand of all the tricks being prepared against us and shall nullify them by outstripping them with explanations on the subject treated of.

Literature and journalism are two of the most important educative forces, and therefore our government will become proprietor of the majority of the journals. This will neutralise the injurious influence of the privately-owned press and will put us in possession of a tremendous influence upon the public mind .... If we give permits for ten journals, we shall ourselves found thirty, and so on in the same proportion. This, however, must in nowise be suspected by the public. For this reason all journals published by us will be in appearance, of the most opposite tendencies and opinions, thereby creating confidence in us, and bringing over to us our quite unsuspicious opponents, who will thus fall into our trap and be rendered harmless.

In the front rank will stand organs of an official character. They will always stand guard over our interests, and therefore their influence will be comparatively insignificant.

In the second rank will be the semi-official organs, whose part it will be to attract the tepid and indifferent.

In the third rank we shall set up our own opposition, which, to all appearance, in at least one of its organs, will present what looks like the very antipothesis to us. Our real opponents at heart will accept this simulated opposition as their own and will show us their cards.

All our newspapers will be of all possible complexions— aristocratic, republican, revolutionary, even anarchical— for so long, of course, as the constitution exists .... Like the Indian idol Vishnu, they will have a hundred hands, and every one of them will have a finger on any one sector of public opinion as required. When a pulse quickens these hands will lead opinion in the direction of our aims, for an excited patient loses all power of judgment and easily yields to suggestion. Those fools who will think they are repeating the opinion of a newspaper of their own camp will be repeating our opinion or any opinion that seems desirable for us. In the vain belief that they are following the organ of their party they will in fact follow the flag which we hang out for them.

In order to direct our newspaper militia in this sense we must take especial and minute care in organising this matter. Under the title of central department of the press we shall institute literary gatherings at which our agents will without attracting attention issue the orders and watchwords of the day. By discussing and controverting, but always superficially, without touching the essence of the matter, our organs will carry on a sham fight fusillade with the official newspapers solely for the purpose of giving occasion for us to express ourselves more fully than could well be done from the outset in official announcements, whenever, of course, that is to our advantage.

These attacks upon us will also serve another purpose, namely, that our subjects will be convinced of the existence of full freedom of speech and so give our agents an occasion to affirm that all organs which oppose us are empty babblers, since they are incapable of finding any substantial objections to our orders.

Methods of organisation like these, imperceptible to the public eye but absolutely sure, are the best calculated to succeed in bringing the attention and the confidence of the public to the side of our government. Thanks to such methods we shall be in a position as from time to time may be required, to excite or tranquillize the public mind on political questions, to persuade or confuse, printing now truth, now lies, facts or their contradictions, according as they may be well or ill received, always very cautiously feeling our ground before stepping upon it ... We shall have a sure triumph over our opponents since they will not have at their disposition organs of the press in which they can give full and final expression of their views, owing to the aforesaid methods of dealing with the press. We shall not even need to refute them except very superficially.

Trial shots like these, fired by us in the third rank of our press, in case of need, will be energetically refuted by us in our semi-official organs.

Even nowadays, take only the French press, there are forms which reveal masonic solidarity in acting on the watchword: all organs of the press are bound together by professional secrecy; like the augurs of old, not one of their number will give away the secret of his sources of information unless it is resolved to announce them. Not one journalist will venture to betray this secret for not one of them is ever admitted to practice literature unless his whole past has some disgraceful sore or other .... These sores would be immediately revealed. So long as they remain the secret of a few the prestige of the journalist attracts the majority of the country—the mob follow after him with enthusiasm.

Our calculations are especially extended to the provinces. It is indispensable for us to inflame there those hopes and impulses with which we could at any moment fall upon the capital, and we shall represent to the capitals that these expressions are the independent hopes and impulses of the provinces. Naturally, the source of them will be always one and the same—ours. We require that, until such time as we are in the plenitude of power, the capitals should find themselves stifled by the provincial opinion of the nation, i.e., of a majority arranged by our agentur. It is essential for our purpose that at the psychological moment the capitals should not be in a position to discuss an accomplished fact for the simple reason, if for no other, that it has been accepted by the public opinion of a majority in the provinces.

When we are in the period of the new regime prior to the transition to that of the assumption of our full sovereignty we must not admit any revelations by the press of any form of public dishonesty; it is necessary that the new regime should be thought to have so perfectly contented everybody that even criminality has disappeared . . . Cases of the manifestation of criminality should remain known only to their victims and to chance witnesses—no more.

PROTOCOL 13

DISTRACTIONS

Daily bread—Recreation centres—The unsuspected plan.

The need for daily bread forces the goyim to keep silence and be our humble servants. Agents taken on to our press from among the goyim will at our orders discuss anything which it is convenient for us to issue directly in official documents, and we meanwhile, quietly amid the din of the discussion so raised, shall simply take and carry through such measures as we wish and then offer them to the public as an accomplished fact. No one will dare to demand the abrogation of a matter once settled, all the more so as it will be represented as an improvement .... And immediately the press will distract the current of thought towards new questions (have we not trained people always to be seeking something new ?) Into the discussions of these new questions will throw themselves those of the brainless dispensers of fortunes who are not able even now to understand that they have not the remotest conception about the matters which they undertake to discuss. Questions of the political are beyond the comprehension of any save those who have guided it already for many ages, the creators.

From all this you will see that in securing the opinion of the mob we are only facilitating the working of our machinery, and you may remark that it is not for actions but for words issued by us on this or that question that we seem to seek approval. We are constantly making public declaration that we are guided in all our undertakings by the hope, joined to the conviction, that we are serving the common weal.

In order to distract people who may be too troublesome from discussing questions of the political we are now putting forward what we allege to be new questions of the political, namely, questions of industry. In this sphere let them discuss themselves silly! The masses agree to remain inactive, to take a rest from what they suppose to be political activity (in which we trained them in order to use them as a means of combating the goy governments) only on condition of being found new employments, in which we are prescribing them something that looks like the same political object. In order that the masses themselves may not guess what they are about, we further distract them with amusements, games, pastimes, passions, people's palaces .... Soon we shall begin through the press to propose competitions in art, in sport of all kinds: these interests will finally distract their minds from questions in which we should find ourselves compelled to oppose them. Growing more and more unaccustomed to reflect and form any opinions of their own, people will begin to

talk in the same tones as we, because we alone shall be offering them new directions for thought... of course through such persons as will not be suspected of solidarity with us.

The part played by the liberals, Utopian dreamers, will be finally played out when our government is acknowledged. Till such time they will continue to do us good service. Therefore we shall continue to direct their minds to all sorts of vain conceptions of fantastic theories, new and apparently progressive: for have we not with complete success turned the brainless heads of the goyim with progress, till there is not among the goyim one mind able to perceive that under this word lies a departure from truth in all cases where it is not a question of material inventions, for truth is one, and in it there is no place for progress. Progress, like a fallacious idea, serves to obscure truth so that none may know it except us, the Chosen of God, its guardians.

When we come into our kingdom our orators will expound great problems which have turned humanity upside down in order to bring it in the end under our beneficent rule.

Who will ever suspect then that all these peoples were stage-managed by us according to a political plan which no one has so much as guessed at in the course of many centuries?

PROTOCOL 14

ASSAULT ON RELIGION

Destruction of existing religions and substitution of the religion of Moses—A new era of slavery
—Pornography encouraged in progressive countries.

When we come into our kingdom it will be undesirable for us that there should exist any other religion than ours of the One God with whom our destiny is bound up by our position as the Chosen People and through whom our same destiny is united with the destinies of the world. We must therefore sweep away all other forms of belief. If this gives birth to the atheists whom we see to-day it will not, being only a transitional stage, interfere with our views, but will serve as a warning for those generations which will hearken to our preaching of the religion of Moses, that, by its stable and thoroughly elaborated system, has brought all the peoples of the world into subjection to us. Therein we shall emphasise its mystical right, on which as we shall say, all its educative power is based .... Then at every possible opportunity we shall publish articles in which we shall make comparisons between our beneficent rule and those of past ages. The blessings of tranquillity, though it be a tranquillity forcibly brought about by centuries of agitation, will throw into higher relief the benefits to which we shall point. The errors of the goyim governments will be depicted by us in the most vivid hues. We shall implant such an abhorrence of them that the peoples will prefer tranquillity in a state of serfdom to those rights of vaunted freedom which have tortured humanity and exhausted the very sources of human existence, sources which have been exploited by a mob of rascally adventurers who know not what they do .... Useless changes of forms of government to which we instigated the goyim when we were undermining their state structures will have so wearied the peoples by that time that they will prefer to suffer anything under us rather than run the risk of enduring again all the agitations and miseries they have gone through.

At the same time we shall not omit to emphasise the historical mistakes of the goy governments which have tormented humanity for so many centuries by their lack of understanding of everything that constitutes the true good of humanity in their chase after fantastic schemes of social blessings, never noticing that these schemes kept on producing a worse and never a better state of the universal relations which are the basis of human life ....

The whole force of our principles and methods will lie in the fact that we shall present them and expound them as a splendid contrast to the dead and decomposed old order of things in social life.

Our philosophers will discuss all the shortcomings of the various beliefs of the goyim. But no one will ever bring under discussion our faith from its true point of view since this will be fully learned by none save ours, who will never dare to betray its secrets.

In countries known as progressive and enlightened, we have created a senseless, filthy, abominable literature. For

some time after our entrance to power we shall continue to encourage its existence in order to provide a telling relief by contrast to the speeches, party programme, which will be distributed from exalted quarters of ours .... Our wise men, trained to become leaders of the goyim, will compose speeches, projects, memoirs, articles, which will be used by us to influence the minds of the goyim, directing them towards such understanding and forms of knowledge as have been determined by us.

PROTOCOL 15

RUTHLESS SUPPRESSION

Simultaneous world revolution—Purpose and direction of masonry—The Chosen people—Dogmatic right of the strong The King of Israel.

When we at last definitely come into our kingdom by the aids of coups d'etat prepared everywhere for one and the same day, after the worthlessness of all existing forms of government has been definitely acknowledged (and not a little time will pass before that comes about, perhaps even a whole century) we shall make it our task to see that against us such things as plots shall no longer exist. With this purpose we shall slay without mercy all who take arms (in hand) to oppose our coming into our kingdom. Every kind of new institution of anything like a secret society will also be punished with death; those of them which are now-in existence, are known to us, serve us and have served us, we shall disband and send into exile to continents far removed from Europe. In this way we shall proceed with those goy masons who know too much; such of these as we may for some reason spare will be kept in constant fear of exile. We shall promulgate a law making all former members of secret societies liable to exile from Europe as the centre of our rule.

Resolutions of our government will be final, without appeal.

In the goy societies, in which we have planted and deeply rooted discord and protestantism, the only possible way of restoring order is to employ merciless measures that prove the direct force of authority: no regard must be paid to the victims who fall, they suffer for the well-being of the future. The attainment of that well-being, even at the expense of sacrifices, is the duty of any kind of government that acknowledges as the justification for its existence not only its privileges but its obligations. The principal guarantee of stability of rule is to confirm the aureole of power, and this aureole is attained only by such a majestic inflexibility of might as shall carry on its face the emblems of inviolability from mystical causes—from the choice of God. Such was until recent times, the Russian autocracy, the one and only serious foe we had in the world, without counting the Papacy. Bear in mind the example when Italy, drenched with blood, never touched a hair of the head of Sulla who had poured forth that blood. Sulla enjoyed an apotheosis for his might in the eyes of the people, though they had been torn in pieces by him, but his intrepid return to Italy ringed him round with inviolability. The people do not lay a finger on him who hypnotises them by his daring and strength of mind.

Meantime, however, until we come into our kingdom, we shall act in the contrary way: we shall create and multiply free masonic lodges in all the countries of the world, absorb into them all who may become or who are prominent in public activity, for in these lodges we shall find our principal intelligence office and means of influence. All these lodges we shall bring under one central administration, known to us alone and to all others absolutely unknown, which will be composed of our learned elders. The lodges will have their representatives who will serve to screen the above-mentioned administration of masonry and from whom will issue the watchword and programme. In these lodges we shall tie together the knot which binds together all revolutionary and liberal elements. They will be composed of all strata of society. The most secret political plots will be known to us and will fall under our guiding hands on the

very day of their conception. Among the members of these lodges will be almost all the agents of international and national police, since their service is for us irreplaceable in the respect that the police are in a position not only to use their own particular measures with the insubordinate, but also to screen our activities and provide pretexts for discontents, et cetera.

The class of people who most willingly enter into secret societies are those who live by their wits, careerists, and in general people, mostly light-minded, with whom we shall have no difficulty in dealing and in using to wind up the mechanism of the machine devised by us. If this world grows agitated the meaning of that will be that we have had to stir it up in order to break up its too great solidarity. But if there should arise in its midst a plot, then at the head of that plot will be no other than one of our most trusted servants. It is natural that we and no other should lead masonic activities, for we know whither we are leading, we know the final goal of every form of activity whereas the goyim have knowledge of nothing, not even of the immediate effect of action; they put before themselves, usually, the momentary reckoning of the satisfaction of their self-opinion in the accomplishment of their thought without even remarking that the very conception never belonged to their initiative but to our instigation of their thought....

The goyim enter the lodges out of curiosity or in the hope of getting a nibble from the public pie, and some of them in order to obtain a hearing before the public for their impracticable and groundless fantasies: they thirst for the emotion of success and applause, of which we are remarkably generous. And the reason why we give them this success is to make use of the high conceit of themselves to which it gives birth, for that insensibly disposes them to assimilate our suggestions without being on their guard against them in the fullness of their confidence that it is their own infallibility which is giving utterance to their own thoughts and that it is impossible for them to borrow those of others .... You cannot imagine to what extent the wisest of the goyim can be brought to a state of unconscious naivete through this high conceit of themselves, and at the same time how easy it is to take the heart out of them by the slightest ill-success, though it be nothing more than silencing the applause they enjoyed, and reducing them to slavish submission for the sake of winning a renewal of success .... By so much as ours disregard success if only they can carry through their plans, by so much the goyim are willing to sacrifice any plans only to have success. This psychology of theirs materially facilitates for us the task of setting them in the required direction. These tigers in appearance have the souls of sheep and the wind blows freely through their heads. We have set them on the hobbyhorse of an idea about the absorption of individuality by the symbolic unit of collectivism .... They have never yet and they never will have the sense to reflect that this hobbyhorse is a manifest violation of the most important law of nature, which has established from the very creation of the world one unit unlike another and precisely for the purpose of instituting individuality ....

If we have been able to bring them to such a pitch of stupid blindness is it not proof and amazingly clear proof of the degree to which the mind of the goyim is undeveloped in comparison with our mind? This it is, mainly, which guarantees our success.

And how far-seeing were our learned elders in ancient times when they said that to attain a serious end it behoves us not to stop at any means or to count the victims sacrificed for the sake of that end .... We have not counted the victims of the seed of the goy cattle, though we have sacrificed many of our own, but for that we have now already given them such a position on the earth as they could not even have dreamed of. The comparatively small numbers of the victims from the number of ours have preserved our nationality from destruction.

Death is the inevitable end for all. It is better to bring that end nearer to those who hinder our affairs than to ourselves, to the founders of this affair. We execute masons in such wise that none save the brotherhood can ever have a suspicion of it, not even the victims themselves of our death sentence, they all die when required as if from a normal kind of illness .... Knowing this, even the brotherhood in its turn dare not protest. By such methods we have plucked out of the midst of masonry the very root of protest against our disposition. While preaching liberalism to the goyim we at the same time keep our own people and our agents in a state of unquestioning submission.

Under our influence the execution of the laws of the goyim has been reduced to a minimum. The prestige of the law has been exploded by the liberal interpretations introduced into this sphere. In the most important and fundamental affairs and questions judges decide as we dictate to them, see matters in the light wherewith we enfold them for the administration of the goyim, of course, through persons who are our tools though we do not appear to have anything in common with them—by newspaper opinion or by other means .... Even senators and the higher administration accept our counsels. The purely brute mind of the goyim is incapable of analysis and observation, and still more of foreseeing whither a certain manner of setting a question may tend.

In this difference in capacity for thought between the goyim and ourselves may be clearly discerned the seal of our position as the Chosen People and of our higher quality of humanness, in contradistinction to the brute mind of the goyim. Their eyes are open, but see nothing before them and do not invent (unless, perhaps, material things). From this it is plain that nature herself has destined us to guide and rule the world.

When comes the time of our overt rule, the time to manifest its blessings, we shall remake all legislatures, all our laws will be brief, plain, stable, without any kind of interpretations, so that anyone will be in a position to know them perfectly. The main feature which they will hold in common is submission to orders, and this principle will be carried to a grandiose height. Every abuse will then disappear since all, down to the lowest unit, will be held responsible before the higher authority of the representative of power. Abuses of power subordinate to this last instance will be so mercilessly punished that none will be found anxious to try experiments with their own powers. We shall pursue jealously every action of the administration on which depends the smooth running of the machinery of the State, for slackness in this produces slackness everywhere; not a single case of illegality or abuse of power will be left without exemplary punishment.

Concealment of guilt, connivance between those in the service of the administration—all this kind of evil will disappear after the very first examples of severe punishment. The aureole of our power demands suitable, that is, cruel punishment for the slightest infringement, for the sake of gain, of its supreme prestige. The sufferer, though his punishment may exceed his fault, will count as a soldier falling on the administrative field of battle in the interest of authority, principle and law, which do not permit that any of those who hold the reins of the public coach should turn aside from the public highway to their own private paths. For example: our judges will know that whenever they feel disposed to plume themselves on foolish clemency they are violating the law of justice which is instituted for the exemplary edification of men by penalties for lapse and not for display of the spiritual qualities of the judge .... Such qualities it is proper to show in private life, but not in a public square which is the educational basis of human life.

Our legal staff will not serve beyond the age of 55, firstly because old men hold more obstinately to prejudiced opinions and are less capable of submitting to new directions, and secondly because after this measure we will enjoy greater elasticity in changing the staff, which will thus the more easily bend under our pressure: he who wishes to keep his place will have to give blind obedience to deserve it. In general, our judges will be elected by us only from among those who thoroughly understand that the part they have to play is to punish and apply laws and not dream about the manifestations of liberalism at the expense of the educational scheme of the State, as the goyim in these days imagine it to be. This method of shuffling the staff will serve also to explode any collective solidarity of those in the same service and will bind all to the interests of the government upon which their fate will depend. The young generation of judges will be trained in certain views regarding the inadmissibility of any abuses that might disturb the established order of our subjects among themselves.

In these days the judges of the goyim create indulgences to every kind of crimes, not having a just understanding of their office, because the rulers of the present age in appointing judges to office take no care to inculcate in them a sense of duty and consciousness of the matter which is demanded of them. As a brute beast lets out its young in search of prey, so do the goyim give their subjects places of profit without thinking to make clear to them for what purpose such place was created. This is the reason why their governments are being ruined by their own forces through acts of their own administration.

Let us borrow from the example of the results of these actions yet another lesson for our government.

We shall root out liberalism from all the important strategic posts of our government on which depends the training of subordinates for our State structure. Such posts will fall exclusively to those who have been trained by us for administrative rule. To the possible objection that the retirement of old servants will cost the Treasury heavily, I reply, firstly, they will be provided with some private service in place of what they lose, and, secondly, I have to remark that all the money in the world will be concentrated in our hands, consequently it is not our government that has to fear expense.

Our absolutism will in all things be logically consecutive and therefore our supreme will in each one of its decrees will be respected and unquestionably fulfilled: it will ignore all murmurs, all discontents of every kind and will destroy to the root every kind of manifestation of them in act by punishment of an exemplary character.

We shall abolish the right of cassation, which will be transferred exclusively to our disposal—to the cognizance of our ruler, for we must not allow the conception among the people of a thought that there could be such a thing as a decision that is. not right by judges set up by us. If, however, anything like this should occur, we shall ourselves cassate the decision, but inflict therewith such exemplary punishment on the judge for lack of understanding of his duty and the purposes of his appointment as will prevent a repetition of such cases .... I repeat that it must be borne in mind that we shall know every step of our administration which only needs to be closely watched for the people to be content with us, for it has the right to demand from a good government a good official.

Our government will have the appearance of a patriarchal paternal guardianship on the part of our ruler. Our own nation and our subjects will discern in his person a father caring for their every need, their every act, their every interrelation as subjects one with another, as well as their relations to the ruler. They will then be so thoroughly imbued with the thought that it is impossible for them to dispense with this wardship and guidance, if they wish to live in peace and quiet, that they will acknowledge the autocracy of our ruler with a devotion bordering on Apotheosis, especially when they are convinced that those whom we set up do not put their own in place of his authority but only blindly execute his dictates. They will be rejoiced that we have regulated everything in their lives as is done by wise parents who desire to retain their children in the cause of duty and submission. For the peoples of the world in regard to the secrets of our state are ever through the ages only children under age, precisely as are also their governments.

As you see, I found our despotism on right and duty: the right to compel the execution of duty is the direct obligation of a government which watches over its subjects like a father. It has the right of the strong that it may use it for the benefit of directing humanity towards that order which is defined by nature, namely, submission. Everything in the world is in a state of submission, if not to man, then to circumstances or to its own inner character, in all cases to what is stronger. And so shall we be this something stronger for the sake of good.

We are obliged without hesitation to sacrifice individuals, who commit a breach of established order, for in exemplary punishment of evil lies a great educational problem.

When the King of Israel sets upon his sacred head the crown offered him by Europe he will become patriarch of the world. The indispensable victims offered by him in consequence of their suitability will never reach the number of victims offered in the course of centuries by the mania of magnificence, the emulation between the goy governments.

Our King will be in constant communion with the peoples, making to them from the tribune speeches which fame will in that same hour distribute over all the world.

PROTOCOL 16

BRAINWASHING

Emasculation of the Universities—Abolition of freedom of instruction.

In order to effect the destruction of all collective forces except ours we shall emasculate the first stage of collectivism—the universities, by re-educating them in a new direction. Their officials and professors will be prepared for their business by detailed secret programmes of action from which they will not with immunity diverge, not by one iota. They will be appointed with special precaution, and will be so placed as to be wholly dependent upon the Government.

We shall exclude from the course of instruction State Law as also all that concerns the political question. These subjects will be taught to a few dozens of persons chosen for their pre-eminent capacities from among the number of the initiated. The universities must no longer send out from their halls milksops concocting plans for a constitution, like a comedy or a tragedy, busying themselves with questions of policy in which even their own fathers never had any power of thought.

The ill-guided acquaintance of a large number of persons with questions of state creates Utopian dreamers and bad subjects, as you can see for yourselves from the example of the universal education in this direction of the goyim. We must introduce into their education all those principles which have so brilliantly broken up their order. But when we are in power we shall remove every kind of disturbing subject from the course of education and shall make out of the youth obedient children of authority, loving him who rules as the support and hope of peace and quiet.

Classicism, as also any form of study of ancient history, in which there are more bad than good examples, we shall replace with the study of the programme of the future. We shall erase from the memory of men all facts of previous centuries which are undesirable to us, and leave only those which depict all the errors of the government of the goyim. The study of practical life, of the obligations of order, of the relations of the people one to another, of avoiding bad and selfish examples, which spread the infection of evil, and similar questions of an educational nature, will stand in the forefront of the teaching programme, which will be drawn up on a separate plan for each calling or state of life, in no wise generalising the teaching. This treatment of the question is specially important.

Each state of life must be trained within strict limits corresponding to its destination and work in life. The occasional genius has always managed and always will manage to slip through into other states of life, but it is the most perfect folly for the sake of this rare occasional genius to let through into ranks foreign to them the untalented who thus rob of their places those who belong to those ranks by birth or employment. You know yourselves in what all this has ended for the goyim who allowed this crying absurdity.

In order that he who rules may be seated firmly in the hearts and minds of his subjects it is necessary for the time of his activity to instruct the whole nation in the schools and on the market places about his meaning and his acts and all his beneficent initiatives.

We shall abolish every kind of freedom of instruction. Learners of all ages will have the right to assemble together with their parents in the educational establishments as it were in a club: during these assemblies, on holidays, teachers will read what will pass as free lectures on questions of human relations, of the laws of examples, of the limitations which are born of unconscious relations, and, finally, of the philosophy of new theories not yet declared to the world. These theories will be raised by us to the stage of a dogma of faith as a transitional stage towards our faith. On the completion of this exposition of our programme of action in the present and the future I will read you the principles of these theories.

In a word, knowing by the experience of many centuries that people live and are guided by ideas, that these ideas are imbibed by people only by the aid of education provided with equal success for all ages of growth, but of course by varying methods, we shall swallow up and confiscate to our own use the last scintilla of independence of thought, which we have for long past been directing towards subjects and ideas useful for us. The system of bridling thought is already at work in the so-called system of teaching by object lessons, the purpose of which is to turn the goyim into unthinking submissive brutes waiting for things to be presented before their eyes in order to form an idea of them .... In France, one of our best agents, Bourgeois, has already made public a new programme of teaching by object lessons.

PROTOCOL 17

ABUSE OF AUTHORITY

The demoralisation of Justice—Wrecking of the Christian religion—Jewish Patriarch Pope of the universe
—Secret police employing public informers.

The practice of advocacy produces men cold, cruel, persistent, unprincipled, who in all cases take up an impersonal, purely legal standpoint. Their inveterate habit is to refer everything to the defensive value of its properties and not to the public welfare of its results. They do not usually decline to undertake any defence whatever, they strive for an acquittal at all costs, cavilling over every petty crux of jurisprudence and thereby they demoralise justice. For this reason we shall set this profession into narrow frames which will keep it inside this sphere of executive public service. Advocates, equally with judges, will be deprived of the right to communicate with litigants; they will receive business only from the court and will study it by notes of report and documents, defending their clients after they have been interrogated in court on facts that have appeared. They will receive an honorarium without regard to the quality of the defence. This will render them mere reporters on law-business in the interests of justice and as a counterpoise to the proctor who will be the reporter in the interests of prosecution; this will shorten business before the courts. In this way will be established a practice of honest unprejudiced defence conducted not from personal interest but by conviction. This will also, by the way, remove the present practice of corrupt bargaining between advocates to agree only to let that side win which pays most

We have long past taken care to discredit the priesthood of the goyim, and thereby to ruin their mission on earth, which in these days might still be a great hindrance to us. Day by day its influence on the peoples of the world is falling lower. Freedom of conscience has been declared everywhere, so that now only years divide us from the moment of the complete wrecking of that Christian religion. As to other religions, we shall have still less difficulty in dealing with them, but it would be premature to speak of this now. We shall set clericalism and clericals into such narrow frames as to make their influence move in retrogressive proportion to its former progress.

When the time conies finally to destroy the papal court the finger of an invisible hand will point the nations towards this court. When, however, the nations fling themselves upon it, we shall come forward in the guise of its defenders as if to save excessive bloodshed. By this diversion we shall penetrate to its very bowels and be sure we shall never come out again until we have gnawed through the entire strength of this place.

The King of the Jews will be the real Pope of the Universe, the patriarch of an international Church.

But, in the meantime, while we are re-educating youth in new traditional religions and afterwards in ours, we shall not overtly lay a finger on existing churches, but we shall fight against them by criticism calculated to produce schism ....

In general, then, our contemporary press will continue to criticise State affairs, religions, incapacities of the goyim, always using the most unprincipled expressions in order by every means to lower their prestige in the manner which can only be practised by the genius of our gifted tribe

Our kingdom will be an apologia of the divinity Vishnu, in whom is found its personification—in our hundred hands will be, one in each, the springs of the machinery of social life. We shall see everything without the aid of official police which, in that scope of their rights which we elaborated for the use of the goyim, hinders governments from seeing. In our programme one-third of our subjects will keep the rest under observation from a sense of duty, on the principle of volunteer service to the State. It will then be no disgrace to be a spy and informer, but a merit: unfounded denunciations, however, will be cruelly punished that there may be no development of abuses of this right.

Our agents will be taken from the higher as well as the lower ranks of society, from among the administrative class who spend their time in amusements, editors, printers and publishers, booksellers, clerks, and salesmen, workmen coachmen, lackeys, et cetera. This body, having no rights and not being empowered to take any action on their own account, and consequently a police without any power, will only witness and report. Verification of their reports and arrests will depend upon a responsible group who will control police affairs, while the actual act of arrest will be performed by the gendarmerie and the municipal police. Any persons not denouncing anything seen or heard concerning questions of state will also be charged with and made responsible for concealment, if it be proved that he is guilty of this crime.

Just as nowadays our brethren are obliged at their own risk to denounce to the kabal apostates of their own family or members who have been noticed doing anything in opposition to the kabal, so in our kingdom over all the world it will be obligatory for all our subjects to observe the duty of service to the State in this direction.

Such an organisation will extirpate abuses of authority, of force, of bribery, everything in fact which we by our counsels, by our theories of the superhuman rights of man, have introduced into the customs of the goyim .... But how else were we to procure that increase of causes predisposing to disorders in the midst of their administration? .... Among the numbers of those methods one of the most important is —agents for the restoration of order, so placed as to have the opportunity in their disintegrating activity of developing and displaying their evil inclinations—obstinate self-conceit, irresponsible exercise of authority, and, first and foremost, venality.

PROTOCOL 18

ARREST OF OPPONENTS

Measures of secret defence—Undermining authority.

When it becomes necessary for us to strengthen the strict measures of secret defence (the most fatal poison for the prestige of authority) we shall arrange a simulation of disorders or some manifestation of discontents finding expression through the co-operation of good speakers. Round these speakers will assemble all who are sympathetic to his utterances. This will give us the pretext for domiciliary perquisitions and surveillance on the part of our servants from among the number of the goyim police ....

As the majority of conspirators act out of love for the game, for the sake of talking, so, until they commit some overt act we shall not lay a finger on them but only introduce into their midst observation elements .... It must be remembered that the prestige of authority is lessened if it frequently discovers conspiracies against itself: this implies a presumption of consciousness of weakness, or, what is still worse, injustice. You are aware that we have broken the prestige of the goy kings by frequent attempts upon their lives through our agents, blind sheep of our flock, who are easily moved by a few liberal phrases to crimes provided only they be painted in political colours. We have compelled the rulers to acknowledge their weakness in advertising overt measures of secret defence and thereby we shall bring authority to destruction. Our ruler will be secretly protected only by the most insignificant guard, because we shall not admit so much as a thought that there could exist against him any sedition with which he is not strong enough to contend or from which he is compelled to hide.

If we should admit this thought, as the goyim have done and are doing, we should ipso facto be signing a death sentence, if not for our ruler, at any rate for his dynasty, at no distant date.

According to strictly enforced outward appearances our ruler will employ his power only for the advantage of the nation and in no wise for his own or dynastic profits. Therefore, with the observance of this decorum, his authority will be respected and guarded by the subjects themselves, it will receive an apotheosis in the admission that with it is bound up the well-being of every citizen of the State, for upon it will depend all order in the common life of the pack ....

Overt defence of this kind argues weakness in the organisation of his strength.

Our ruler will always be surrounded among the people by a mob of apparently curious men and women, who will occupy the front ranks about him, to all appearance by chance, and will restrain the ranks of the rest out of respect as it will appear for good order. This will sow an example of restraint also in others. If a petitioner appears among the people forcing his way through the ranks and trying to hand in a petition, the first ranks must receive the petition and before the eyes of the petitioner pass it to the ruler, so that all may know that what is handed in reaches its destination, and that, consequently, the ruler himself is subject to control. To exist, the aureole of power requires that the people may be able to say "If the king knew of this," or "the king will hear of it."

With the establishment of official secret defence the mystical prestige of authority disappears: given a certain audacity, and everyone counts himself master of it, the sedition-monger is conscious of his strength, and when occasion serves watches for the moment to make an attempt upon authority .... For the goyim we have been preaching something else, but by that very fact we are enabled to see what measures of overt defence have brought them to.

Criminals with us will be arrested at the first more or less well-grounded suspicion; it cannot be allowed that out of fear of a possible mistake an opportunity of escape should be given to persons suspected of a political lapse or crime, for in these matters we shall be literally merciless. If it is still possible, by stretching a point, to admit a reconsideration of the motive causes in simple crimes, there is no possibility of excuse for persons occupying themselves with questions in which nobody except the government can understand anything And it is not all governments that understand true policy.

PROTOCOL 19

RULERS AND PEOPLE

Making use of public petitions—Debasing heroism—Martyrdom of sedition-mongers.

If we do not permit any independent dabbling in the political we shall on the other hand encourage every kind of report or petition with proposals for the government to examine all kinds of projects for the amelioration of the condition of the people; this will reveal to us the defects or else the fantasies of our subjects, to which we shall respond either by accomplishing them or by wisely rebutting them to prove the short-sightedness of one who judges wrongly.

Sedition-mongering is nothing more than the yapping of a lap-dog at an elephant. For a well organised government, not from the point of view of the police but of the public, the lap-dog yaps at an elephant entirely unconscious of its strength and importance. It needs no more than to take a good example to show the relative importance of both and the lap-dogs will cease to yap and will wag their tails the moment they set eyes on an elephant.

In order to destroy the prestige of heroism for political crime we shall send it for trial in the category of thieving, murder, and every kind of abominable and filthy crime. Public opinion will then confuse in its conception this category of crime with the disgrace attaching to every other and will brand it with the same contempt.

We have done our best, and I hope we have succeeded, in preventing the goyim from adopting this means of contending with sedition. It was for this reason that through the Press and in speeches indirectly—in cleverly compiled school-books on history, we have advertised the martyrdom alleged to have been accepted by sedition-mongers for the idea of the commonweal. This advertisement has increased the contingent of liberals and has brought thousands of goyim into the ranks of our livestock cattle.

PROTOCOL 20

FINANCIAL PROGRAMME

Progressive taxation—Stagnant capital—The ruinous Gold Standard.

Today we shall touch upon the financial programme, which I put off to the end of my report as being the most difficult, the crowning and the decisive point of our plans. Before entering upon it I will remind you that I have already spoken before by way of a hint when I said that the sum total of our actions is settled by the question of figures.

When we come into our kingdom our autocratic government will avoid, from a principle of self-preservation, stupidly burdening the masses of the people with taxes, remembering that it plays the part of father and protector. But as State organisation is costly it is necessary nevertheless to obtain the funds required for it. It will, therefore, elaborate with particular precaution the question of equilibrium in this matter.

Our rule, in which the king will enjoy the legal fiction that everything in his State belongs to him (which may easily be translated into fact), will have power to resort to the lawful confiscation of all sums of every kind for the regulation of their circulation in the State. From this it follows that taxation will best be covered by a progressive tax on property. In this manner the dues will be paid without straining or ruining anybody in the form of a percentage of the amount of property. The rich must be aware that it is their duty to place a part of their superfluities at the disposal of the State since the State guarantees them security of possession of the rest of their property and the right to honest gains. I say honest, for the control over property will do away with robbery on a legal basis.

This social reform must come from above, for the time is ripe for it—it is indispensable as a pledge of peace.

The tax upon the poor man is a seed of revolution and works to the detriment of the State which in hunting after the trifling is missing the big. Quite apart from this, a tax on capitalists diminishes the growth of wealth in private hands where we have in these days concentrated it as a counterpoise to the government strength of the goyim—their State finances.

A tax increasing in a percentage ratio to capital will give a much larger revenue than the present individual or property tax, which is useful to us now for the sole reason that it excites trouble and discontent among the goyim.

The force upon which our king will rest consists in equilibrium and the guarantee of peace, for the sake of which things it is indispensable that the capitalists should yield up a portion of their incomes in order to ensure the working of the machinery of the State. State needs must be paid by those who will not feel the burden and have enough to take from.

Such a measure will destroy the hatred of the poor man for the rich, in whom he will see a necessary financial support for the State, and the organiser of peace and well-being since he will see that it is the rich man who is paying the necessary means to attain these things.

In order that payers of the educated classes should not too much distress themselves over the new payments they will have full accounts given them of the destination of those payments, with the exception of such sums as will be appropriated for the needs of the throne and the administrative institutions.

He who reigns will not have any properties of his own once all in the State represents his patrimony, or else the one would be in contradiction to the other; the fact of holding private means would destroy the right of property in the common possession of all.

Relatives of him who reigns, his heirs excepted, who will be maintained by the resources of the State, must enter the ranks of servants of the State or must work to obtain the right to property; the privilege of royal blood must not serve for spoiling the treasury.

Purchase, receipt of money or inheritance will be subject to the payment of a stamp progressive tax. Any transfer of property, whether money or other, without evidence of payment of this tax, which will be strictly registered by names, will render the former holder liable to pay interest on the tax from the moment of the transfer of these sums up to the discovery of his evasion of declaration of the transfer. Transfer documents must be presented weekly at the local treasury office with notifications of the name, surname and permanent place of residence of the former and the new holder of the property. This transfer with the register of names must begin from a definite sum which exceeds the ordinary expenses of buying and selling of necessaries, and these will be subject to payment only by a stamp impost of a definite percentage of the unit.

Just estimate how many times such taxes as these will cover the revenue of the goyim States.

The State exchequer will have to maintain a definite complement of reserve sums, and all that is collected above that complement must be returned into circulation. From these sums will be organised public works. The initiative in works of this kind, proceeding from State sources, will bind the working class firmly to the interests of the State and to those who reign. From these same sums also a part will be set aside as rewards of inventiveness and productiveness.

On no account should so much as a single unit above the definite and freely estimated sums be retained in the State treasuries, for money exists to be circulated and any kind of stagnation of money acts ruinously on the running of the State machinery, for which it is the lubricant; stagnation of the lubricant may stop the regular working of the mechanism.

The substitution of interest-bearing paper for a part of the token of exchange has produced exactly this stagnation. The consequence of this circumstance are already sufficiently noticeable.

A court of account will also be instituted by us, and in it the ruler will find at any moment a full account of State income and expenditure, with the exception of the current monthly account, not yet made up, and that of the preceding month, which will not yet have been delivered.

The one and only person who will have no interest in robbing the State is its owner, the ruler. This is why his personal control will remove the possibility of leakages or extravagances.

The representative function of the ruler at receptions for the sake of etiquette, which absorbs so much invaluable time, will be abolished in order that the ruler may have time for control and considerations. His power will not then be split up into fractional parts among time-serving favourites who surround the throne for its pomp and splendour, and are interested only in their own and not in the common interests of the State.

Economic crises have been produced by us for the goyim by no other means than the withdrawal of money from circulation. Huge capitals have stagnated, withdrawing money from States which were constantly obliged to apply to those same stagnant capitals for loans. These loans burdened the finances of the State with the payment of interest and made them the bond slaves of these capitals .... The concentration of industry in the hands of capitalists out of the hands of small masters has drained away all the juices of the peoples and with them also of the States ....

The present issue of money in general does not correspond with the requirements per head, and cannot therefore satisfy all the needs of the workers. The issue of money ought to correspond with the growth of population and thereby children also must absolutely be reckoned as consumers of currency from the day of their birth. The revision of issue is a material question for the whole world.

You are aware that the gold standard has been the ruin of the States which adopted it, for it has not been able to satisfy the demands for money, the more so that we have removed gold from circulation as far as possible.

With us the standard that must be introduced is the cost of working-man power, whether it be reckoned in paper or in wood. We shall make the issue of money in accordance with the normal requirements of each subject, adding to the quantity with every birth and subtracting with every death.

The accounts will be managed by each department (the French administrative division), each circle.

In order that there may be no delays in the paying out of money for State needs the sums and terms of such payments will be fixed by decree of the ruler; this will abolish the protection by a ministry of one institution to the detriment of others.

The budgets of income and expenditure will be carried out side by side that they may not be obscured by distance one to another.

The reforms projected by us in the financial institutions and principles of the goyim will be clothed by us in such forms as will alarm nobody. We shall point out the necessity of reforms in consequence of the disorderly darkness into which the goyim by their irregularities have plunged the finances. The first irregularity, as we shall point out, consists in their beginning with drawing up a single budget which increases year after year owing to the following cause: this budget is dragged out to half the year, then they demand a budget to put things right, and this they expend in three months, after which they ask for a supplementary budget, and all this ends with a liquidation budget. But, as the budget of the following year is drawn up in accordance with the sum of the total addition, the annual departure from the normal reaches as much as 50 per cent, in a year, and so the annual budget is trebled in ten years. Thanks to such methods, allowed-by the carelessness of the goy States, their treasuries are empty. The period of loans supervenes, and that has swallowed up remainders and brought all the goy States to bankruptcy.

You understand perfectly that economic arrangements of this kind, which have been suggested to the goyim by us, cannot be carried on by us.

Every kind of loan proves infirmity in the State and a want of understanding of the rights of the State. Loans hang like a sword of Damocles over the heads of rulers, who, instead of taking from their subjects by a temporary tax, come begging with outstretched palm to our bankers. Foreign loans are leeches which there is no possibility of removing from the body of the State until they fall off by themselves or the State flings them off. But the goy States do not tear them off; they persist in putting more on to themselves so that they must inevitably perish, drained by voluntary blood letting.

What also indeed is, in substance, a loan, especially a foreign loan? A loan is—an issue of government bills of exchange containing a percentage obligation commensurate to the sum of the loan capital. If the loan bears a charge of 5 per cent., then in twenty years the State vainly pays away in interest a sum equal to the loan borrowed, in forty years it is paying a double sum, in sixty treble—and all the while the debt remains an unpaid debt.

From this calculation it is obvious that with any form of taxation per head the State is baling out the last coppers of the poor taxpayers in order to settle accounts with wealthy foreigners, from whom it has borrowed money instead of collecting these coppers for its own needs without the additional interest.

So long as loans were internal the goyim only shuffled their money from the pockets of the poor to those of the rich, but when we bought up the necessary person in order to transfer loans into the external sphere all the wealth of States flowed into our cash-boxes and all the goyim began to pay us the tribute of subjects.

If the superficiality of goy kings on their thrones in regard to State affairs and the venality of ministers or the want of understanding of financial matters on the part of other ruling persons have made their countries debtors to our treasuries to amounts quite impossible to pay, it has not been accomplished without on our part heavy expenditure of trouble and money.

Stagnation of money will not be allowed by us and therefore there will be no State interest-bearing paper, except a one-per-cent. series, so that there will be no payment of interest to leeches that suck all the strength out of the State. The right to issue interest-bearing paper will be given exclusively to industrial companies who will find no difficulty in paying out of profits, whereas the State does not make interest on borrowed money like these companies, for the State borrows to spend and not to use in operations.

Industrial papers will be bought also by the government which from being as now a payer of tribute by loan operations will be transformed into a lender of money at a profit. This measure will stop the stagnation of money, parasitic profits, and idleness all of which were useful for us among the goyim so long as they were independent but are not desirable under our rule.

How clear is the undeveloped power of thought of the purely brute brains of the goyim, as expressed in the fact that they have been borrowing from us with payment of interest without ever thinking that all the same these very moneys, plus an addition for payment of interest, must be got by them from their own State pockets in order to settle up with us. What could have been simpler than to take the money they wanted from their own people?

But it is a proof of the genius of our chosen mind that we have contrived to present the matter of loans to them in such a light that they have even seen in them an advantage for themselves.

Our accounts, which we shall present when the time comes in the light of centuries of experience gained by experiments made by us on the goy States, will be distinguished by clearness and definiteness and will show at a glance to all men the advantage of our innovations. They will put an end to those abuses to which we owe our mastery over the goyim, but which cannot be allowed in our Kingdom.

We shall so hedge about our system of accounting that neither the ruler nor the most insignificant public servant will be in a position to divert even the smallest sum from its destination without detection or to direct it in another direction except that which will be once fixed in a definite plan of action.

And without a definite plan it is impossible to rule. Marching along an undetermined road and with undetermined resources brings heroes and demi-gods to ruin.

The goy rulers, whom we once upon a time advised should be distracted from State occupations by representative receptions, observances of etiquette, and entertainments, were only screens for our rule. The accounts of favourite courtiers who replaced them in the sphere of affairs were drawn up for them by our agents, and every time gave satisfaction to short-sighted minds by promises that in the future economies and improvements were foreseen .... Economies from what? From new taxes?—were questions that might have been but were not asked by those who read our accounts and projects.

You know to what they have been brought by this carelessness, at what a pitch of financial disorder they have arrived, notwithstanding the astonishing industry of their peoples.

PROTOCOL 21

LOANS AND CREDIT

Bankruptcy—Abolition of money markets.

To what I reported to you at the last meeting I shall now add a detailed explanation of internal loans. Of foreign loans I shall say nothing more, because they have fed us with the national moneys of the goyim, but for our State there will be no foreigners, that is, nothing external.

We have taken advantage of the venality of administrators and the slackness of rulers to get our moneys twice, thrice and more times over by lending to the goy governments moneys which were not all needed by the States. Could anyone do the like in regard to us? .... Therefore, I shall only deal with details of internal loans.

States announce that such a loan is to be concluded and open subscriptions for their own bills of exchange, that is, for their interest-bearing paper. That they may be within the reach of all the price is determined at from a hundred to a thousand; and a discount is made for the earliest subscribers. Next day, by artificial means, the price of them goes up, alleged reason being that everyone is rushing to buy them. In a few days the treasury safes are, as they say, overflowing, and there's more money than they can do with (why then take it?) The subscription, it is alleged, covers many times over the issue total of the loan; in this lies the whole stage effect—look you, they say, what confidence is shown in the government's bills of exchange.

But when the comedy is played out there emerges the fact that a debit, and an exceedingly burdensome debit, has been created. For the payment of interest it becomes necessary to have recourse to new loans, which do not swallow up but only add to the capital debt. And, when this credit is exhausted it becomes necessary by new taxes to cover, not the loan, but only the interest on it. These taxes are a debit employed to cover a debit.

Later comes the time for conversions, but they diminish the payment of interest without covering the debt, and besides they cannot be made without the consent of the lenders; on announcing a conversion a proposal is made to return the money to those who are not willing to convert their paper. If everybody expressed his unwillingness and demanded his money back, the government would be hoisted on their own petard and would be found insolvent and unable to pay the proposed sums. By good luck the subjects of the goy governments, knowing nothing about financial affairs, have always preferred losses on exchange and diminution of interest to the risk of new investments of their moneys, and have thereby many a time enabled these governments to throw off their shoulders a debit of several millions.

Nowadays, with external loans, these tricks cannot be played by the goyim for they know that we shall demand all our moneys back.

In this way an acknowledged bankruptcy will best prove to the various countries the absence of any means between the interests of the peoples and those who rule them.

I beg you to concentrate your particular attention upon this point and upon the following: nowadays all internal loans are consolidated by so-called flying loans, that is, such as have terms of payment more or less near. These debts consist of moneys paid into the savings banks and reserve funds. If left for long at the disposition of a government these funds evaporate in the payment of interest on foreign loans, and are replaced by the deposit of equivalent amount of rents.

And these last it is, which patch up all the leaks in the State treasuries of the goyim.

When we ascend the throne of the world all these financial and similar shifts, as being not in accord with our interests, will be swept away so as not to leave a trace, as also will be destroyed all money markets, since we shall not allow the prestige of our power to be shaken by fluctuations of prices set upon our values, which we shall announce by law at the price which represents their full worth without any possibility of lowering or raising. (Raising gives the pretext for lowering, which indeed was where we made a beginning in relation to the values of the goyim.)

We shall replace the money markets by grandiose government credit institutions, the object of which will be to fix the price of industrial values in accordance with government views. These institutions will be in a position to fling upon the market five hundred millions of industrial paper in one day, or to buy up for the same amount. In this way all industrial undertakings will come into dependence upon us. You may imagine for yourselves what immense power we shall thereby secure for ourselves ....

PROTOCOL 22

POWER OF GOLD

The secret of what is coming—Mysticism of the new authority and the reverent fear of the people.

In all that has so far been reported by me to you, I have endeavoured to depict with care the secret of what is coming, of what is past, and what is going on now, rushing into the flood of the great events coming already in the near future, the secret of our relations to the goyim and of financial operations. On this subject there remains still a little for me to add.

In our hands is the greatest power of our day—gold: in two days we can procure from our storehouses any quantity we may please.

Surely there is no need to seek further proof that our rule is predestined by God? Surely we shall not fail with such wealth to prove that all that evil which for so many centuries we have had to commit has served at the end of ends the cause of true well-being—the bringing of everything into order? Though it be even by the exercise of some violence, yet all the same it will be established. We shall contrive to prove that we are benefactors who have restored to the rent and mangled earth the true good and also freedom of the person, and therewith we shall enable it to be enjoyed in peace and quiet, with proper dignity of relations, on the condition, of course, of strict observance of the laws established by us. We shall make plain therewith that freedom does not consist in dissipation and in the right of unbridled licence any more than the dignity and force of a man do not consist in the right for everyone to promulgate destructive principles in the nature of freedom of conscience, equality and the like. The freedom of the person in no wise consists in the right to agitate oneself and others by abominable speeches before disorderly mobs, for true freedom consists in the inviolability of the person who honourably and strictly observes all the laws of life in common, and human dignity is wrapped up in consciousness of the rights and also of the absence of rights of each, and not wholly and solely in fantastic imaginings about the subject of one's ego.

Our authority will be glorious because it will be all-powerful, it will rule and guide, and not muddle along after leaders and orators shrieking themselves hoarse with senseless words which they call great principles and which are nothing else, to speak honestly, but Utopian .... Our authority will be the crown of order, and in that is included the whole happiness of man. The aureole of this authority will inspire a mystical bowing of the knee before it and a reverent fear before it ef all the peoples. True force makes no terms with any right, not even with that of God: none dare come near to it so as to take so much as a span away from it.

PROTOCOL 23

INSTILLING OBEDIENCE

Cutting down of luxury goods—The supreme lord to replace all existing rulers.

That the peoples may become accustomed to obedience it is necessary to instill lessons of humility and therefore to reduce the production of articles of luxury. By this we shall improve morals which have been debased by emulation in the sphere of luxury. We shall re-establish small master production which will mean laying a mine under the private capital of manufacturers. This is indispensable also for the reason that manufacturers on the grand scale often move, though not always consciously, the thoughts of the masses in directions against the government. A people of small masters knows nothing of unemployment and this binds them closely with existing order, and consequently with the firmness of authority. Unemployment is a most perilous thing for a government. For us its part will have been played out the moment authority is transferred into our hands. Drunkenness will also be prohibited by law and punishable as a crime against the humanness of man who is turned into a brute under the influence of alcohol. Subjects, I repeat once more, give blind obedience only to the strong hand which is absolutely independent of them, for in it they feel the sword of defence and support against social scourges .... What do they want with an angelic spirit in a king? What they must see in him is the personification of force and power.

The supreme lord who will replace all existing rulers, dragging on their existence among societies demoralised by us, societies that have denied even the authority of God, from whose midst breaks out on all sides the fire of anarchy, must first of all proceed to quench this all-devouring flame. Therefore he will be obliged to kill off those existing societies, though he should drench them with his own blood, that he may resurrect them again in the form of regularly organised troops fighting consciously against every kind of infection that may cover the body of the State with sores.

This Chosen One of God is chosen from above to demolish the senseless forces moved by instinct and not reason, by brutishness and not humanness. These forces now triumph in manifestations of robbery and every kind of violence under the mask of principles of freedom and rights. They have overthrown all forms of social order to erect on the ruins the throne of the King of the Jews; but their part will be played out the moment he enters into his kingdom. Then it will be necessary to sweep them away from his path, on which must be left no knot, no splinter.

Then will it be possible for us to say to the peoples of the world: Give thanks to God and bow the knee before him who bears on his front the seal of the predestination of man to which God himself has led his star that none other but Him might free us from all the before-mentioned forces and evils.

PROTOCOL 24

QUALITIES OF THE RULER

Selecting and training the seed of David.

I pass now to the method of confirming the dynastic roots of King David to the last strata of the earth. This confirmation will first and foremost be included in that in which to this day has rested the force of conservatism by our learned elders of the conduct of all the affairs of the world, in the directing of the education of thought of all humanity.

Certain members of the seed of David will prepare the kings and their heirs, selecting not by right of heritage but by eminent capacities, inducting them into the most secret mysteries of the political, into schemes of government, but providing always that none may come to know the secrets. The object of this mode of action is that all may know that government cannot be entrusted to those who have not been inducted into the secret places of its art ....

To these persons only will be taught the practical application of the aforenamed plans by comparison of the experiences of many centuries, all the observations on the politico-economic moves and social sciences—in a word, all the spirit of laws which have been unshakably established by nature herself for the regulation of the relations of humanity.

Direct heirs will often be set aside from ascending the throne if in their time of training they exhibit frivolity, softness and other qualities that are the ruin of authority, which render them incapable of governing and in themselves dangerous for kingly office.

Only those who are unconditionally capable of firm, even cruel, direct rule will receive the reins of power from our learned elders.

In case of falling sick with weakness of will or other form of incapacity, kings must by law hand over the reins of rule to new and capable hands ....

The king's plans of action for the current moment, and all the more so for the future, will be unknown, even to those who are called his closest counsellors.

Only the king and the three who stood sponsor for him will know what is coming.

In the person of the king who with unbending will is master of himself and of humanity all will discern as it were fate with its mysterious ways. None will know what the king wishes to attain by his dispositions, and therefore none will dare to stand across an unknown path.

It is understood that the brain reservoir of the king must correspond in capacity to the plan of government it has to contain. It is for this reason that he will ascend the throne not otherwise than after examination of his mind by the aforesaid learned elders.

That the people may know and love their king it is indispensable for him to converse in the market-places with his people. This ensures the necessary clinching of the two forces which are now divided one from another by us by the terror.

This terror was indispensable for us till the time comes for both these forces separately to fall under our influence.

The king of the Jews must not be at the mercy of his passions, and especially of sensuality: on no side of his character must he give brute instincts power over his mind. Sensuality worse than all else disorganises the capacities of the mind and clearness of views; distracting the thoughts to the worst and most brutal side of human activity.

The prop of humanity in the person of the supreme lord of all the world of the holy seed of David must sacrifice to his people all personal inclinations.

Our supreme lord must be of an exemplary irreproachability.

Signed by the representatives of Zion, of the 33rd degree.

1. See Appendix II, infra, pp. 263-267.

CONCLUDING PASSAGE FROM THE EPILOGUE OF NILUS

(Edition of 1905)

According to the testament of Montefiore, Zion is not sparing, either of money or of any other means, to achieve its ends. In our day, all the governments of the entire world are consciously or unconsciously submissive to the commands of this great Supergovernment of Zion, because all the bonds and securities are in its hands; for all countries are indebted to the Jews for sums which they will never be able to pay. All affairs—industry, commerce, and diplomacy —are in the hands of Zion. It is by means of its capital loans that it has enslaved all nations. By keeping education on purely materialistic lines, the Jews have loaded the Gentiles with heavy chains with which they have harnessed them to their " Super-government".

The end of national liberty is near, therefore personal freedom is approaching its close; for true liberty cannot exist where Zion uses the lever of its gold to rule the masses and dominate the most respectable and enlightened class of society.

" He that hath ears to hear, let him hear ".

It is nearly four years since the Protocols of the Elders of Zion came into my possession. Only God knows what efforts I have made to bring them to general notice—in vain—and even to warn those in power, by disclosing the causes of the storm about to break on apathetic Russia who seems, in her misfortune, to have lost all notion of what is going on around her.

And it is only now when I fear it may be too late, that I have succeeded in publishing my work, hoping to put on their guard those who still have ears to hear and eyes to see.

One can no longer doubt it, the triumphant reign of the King of Israel rises over our degenerate world as that of Satan, with his power and his terrors; the King born of the blood of Zion—the Antichrist—is about to mount the throne of universal empire.

Events are precipitated in the world at a terrifying speed: quarrels, wars, rumours, famines, epidemics, earthquakes— everything which even yesterday was impossible, today is an accomplished fact. One would think that the days pass so rapidly to advance the cause of the chosen people. Space does not allow us to enter into the details of world history with regard to the disclosed " mysteries of iniquity," to prove from history the influence which the " Wise Men of Zion " have exercised through universal misfortunes, by foretelling the certain and already near future of humanity, or by raising the curtain for the last act of the world's tragedy.

Only the light of Christ and of his Holy Church Universal can fathom the abyss of Satan and disclose the extent of its wickedness.

I feel in my heart that the hour has already struck when there should urgently be convoked an Eighth Oecumenical Council which would unite the pastors and representatives of all Christendom. Secular quarrels and schisms would all be forgotten in the imminent need of preparing against the coming of the Anti-christ.1

1. This forecast of Sergius Nilus is all the more remarkable, when one considers that it appeared in the Epilogue to his edition of the Protocols of 1905.

V. A FEW ILLUSTRATIVE FACTS

Jacob Brafmann and his Work

About the middle of the last century, Jacob Brafmann, a Jewish rabbi in Russia, became a convert to Christianity and spent the rest of his life endeavouring to throw light on the Jewish questions in general, and on the situation in Russia in particular, both in the interest of gentiles and of the Jews themselves. His two works, The Book of the Kahal,1 and The Jewish Brotherhoods,* were first published at government expense some sixty years ago and are still the best source of information on many points. Brafmann's story, given in his own words in the preface to the Book of the Kahal, is reprinted here :*

"During his majesty's (Alexander II) stay at Minsk in 1858, I submitted to him a report on the social status and organization of the Jews in Russia. Some time after, by order of the holy synod (April 29, 1859), I was called to St. Petersburg in connection with the report, and was subsequently (May 13, 1860) appointed professor of Hebrew at the Minsk seminary. I was also charged with finding a means for overcoming the obstacles to conversion to Christianity set up by the Jews ... Thoroughly familiar with the Jewish question (as I had professed Judaism till the age of thirty-four), I knew where to draw the materials necessary for the work, and the archbishop of Minsk furnished me with the means. My task was facilitated by the co-operation of several enlightened Jews4. I thus obtained valuable material which served not only for the work in hand, but also to throw light on the Jewish question in general, as well as their social and religious organization in Russia.

This material included over a thousand acts of the Jewish Kahal (civil administration), and of the beth-dins (Talmudic law courts), showing the power and extent of their secret government. The Kahal goes so far as to decree what individuals may be invited to, and what dishes served at, a Jewish family feast.

On the important question, whether the law of the land is binding on the Jews, the comments in the Talmud are evasive, but the documents here listed (under Nos. 5, 16, 166) show that the Jews must abide by the instructions of the Kahal and the beth-din, in contradistinction to the law of the land and their own conscience.

Similarly, on the question of the real estate and appurtenances belonging to non-Jews, the Talmud is obscure; but the thirty-seven acts cited in our fifth article prove conclusively that the Kahal may sell to Jews the right (Hasaka and Meropie) to the real estate and appurtenances of any gentile. The documents also prove that the Kahal and the beth-din are not bound to judge according to Jewish law, but may hand down personal decisions as they please-Thus, by secret acts, the Jews circumvent their Christian competitors and acquire a controlling share of the capital and real estate of the country.

I submitted these documents together with my recommendations to Gov. Gen. von Kaufmann, who appointed a commission to examine them, with the result that the official Jewish Kahal was suppressed by the circular of Aug. 34, 1867.

The authenticity of all the documents is thoroughly established; the 290 documents published herewith cover the period from 1794 to 1803. To facilitate their study, they have been arranged in seventeen categories, each preceded by a short explanation on the laws and customs referred to, and indicating their real aim and influence on the Jews and on the gentiles."

As the subject of Brafmann's other work, The Jewish Brotherhoods, has been treated rather fully in chapter II, it is hardly necessary to give an analysis of the book here.

1. First edition (Vilna, 1869), excellent German translation by Siegfried Passarge, Das Such vom Kahal (Hammer Verlag, Leipzig, 1928), 2 vol. French translation by Mgr. Jouin, Les Sources de VimpM- alisme juif: Le Qahal (Paris, 1925).

2. (Vilna, 1868).

3. Our translation, somewhat abbreviated.

4. See Vilna Gazette (1866), 169: " Views of an individual Jew."

The Writing on the Wall

THE CABBALISTIC SIGNIFICANCE OF THE MYSTERIOUS INSCRIPTION
FOUND ON THE WALL OF THE ROOM IN WHICH THE IMPERIAL RUSSIAN FAMILY WAS MURDERED.

The three letters N of the inscription are the letter " " repeated three times in three different languages.1 The first letter on the right is a L (lamed) in the cursive handwriting of the ancient Hebrew alphabet. It is the twelfth letter of that alphabet with the numerical value of 30 (cabbalistically reduced to the fundamental number: — 3 + 0 = 3, which explains why the letter " L " is thrice repeated in the inscription).2 The second letter is also the letter lamed but in the Samaritan script.3

The third letter A. is the Greek letter lambda, corresponding to the same letter lamed.

In ancient sacred Hebrew, based on the ancient sacred language of the Egyptian temples, each letter, apart from its vernacular value as sound and number, has, moreover, secret meanings known only to adepts. Fabre d'Olivet thus characterizes the accumulation of the different meanings contained in the ancient Hebrew alphabet:—

" Moses, in his teaching, followed the method of the Egyptian priests who made use of three methods to express their thoughts: the first was the common use; the second was symbolical or figurative; the third was sacred or hieroglyphic. Such was the character of that language. According to their will, the same word had the ordinary, figurative or the allegorical meaning. Heraclitus has expressed this difference in three terms: namely, the spoken word, the symbol, and the hidden meaning."4

Moreover, each letter stood for one of the names of God, and for one of the mysterious keys of the Tarot, the sacred book wherein, under different images, is concentrated all the ancient practice of magical science.5

The name of God, corresponding to the letter lamed, is Shadai, composed of three letters, represented by A (the Greek capital letter D) and it governs the sphere of Saturn. The number of Saturn is also 3. This explains once again why the letter lamed is thrice repeated.6

On the other hand, following cabbalistic teaching, the letter lamed stands for the heart, the king of the body, wherein dwells the soul—Ruach. Cabbalists affirm that man is formed of three main invisible parts: namely, Nesham, the mind, Ruach, the soul, and Nefesh, the lower soul or subconscience which governs directly the material body. Nesham has its seat in the brain; Nefesh, in the liver, and Ruach, in the centre, between liver and brain, namely, in the heart. According to the ancients, the heart is king of the body (Melek = king), and, we repeat again, was situated in the body between brain and liver, that is, in the centre.7 This is clearly shown by the cabbalistic analysis of the word Melek = king.

Three words are fused in one: " brain ", represented by the first letter of the word mem; " heart " by the first letter of the word lamed; and " liver ", by the first letter of the word kaph, which is the same letter as ;J, but in the form used at the end of a word. It is clear, therefore, that the letter L (lamed), symbolising the " heart ", which is found in the centre between " liver " and " brain ", is placed in the word Melek between letters representing these two organs.8

Therefore, according to the ancients, the heart (lamed) is the king (Melek) of the organism and the seat of life. The destruction of the heart causes the death of the organism and, in symbolical language, it also means that the destruction of the king brings about the downfall of the kingdom.

Furthermore, in studying the hidden meaning of the roots, one discovers that the root LL (double lamed), still found in Arabic, means the agony of a man being torn to pieces.9

The addition of a third only strengthens this meaning and indicates the agony bf a desperate situation.

Interpreting the inscription on the wall with the help of the Tarot,10 one finds that the letter L corresponds to the twelfth card of the Great Arcana,l1 and also to the letter Luzain, of the sacred language of the Egyptian Magi. This arcanum represents a man hanging by one foot from a pole whose two ends rest on two trees from each of which six branches have been cut. The man's arms are tied behind his back and folded so as to form the base of a triangle pointing downwards; the apex is formed by the head of the man. It is the sign of violent death, but it can also mean sacrifice.12

Therefore, reading the cabbalistic meaning of the three letters, one gets:— HERE THE KING WAS STRUCK TO THE HEART IN

PUNISHMENT OF HIS CRIMES, or, HERE THE KING WAS SACRIFICED TO BRING

ABOUT THE DESTRUCTION OF HIS KINGDOM.

Finally, the line drawn beneath these three letters (in Magical Science the horizontal line is the symbol of the passive principle) indicates that those who killed the king did not do so of their own will, but in obedience to superior command.

Whoever wrote this inscription was a man well versed in the secrets of the ancient Jewish cabbalism, as contained in the Cabbala and the Talmud. In accomplishing the deed in obedience to superior order, this man performed a rite of Black Magic. It is for this reason that he commemorated his act by a cabbalistic inscription in cipher, which belonged to the rite.

The inscription therefore proves:—

1. That the Tsar was killed.

2. That the murder of the Tsar was committed by men under the command of occult forces; and by an organiza tion which, in its struggle against existing power resorted to the ancient cabbalism in which it was well versed. The Kellogg Palestine Pact Extract from League of Nations—Treaty Series, vol. XLin-1926, No. 1046, pages 41-59.

Convention respecting the Rights of the Governments of the two Countries and their respective Nationals in Palestine, signed at London, December 3, 1924.

English official text communicated by His Britannic Majesty's Foreign Office. The registration of this Convention took place January 6, 1926. This Convention was also transmitted to the Secretariat by the Department of State of the Government of the United States of America, February 17, 1926.

(Preamble followed by the text of the mandate as it was approved by the Council of the League of Nations, 28 articles, signed at London, July 3, 1922.)

Whereas the mandate in the above terms came into force on September 29, 1923; and Whereas the United States of America, by participating in the war against Germany, contributed to her defeat and the defeat of her Allies; and to the renunciation of the rights and titles of her Allies in the territory transferred by them, but has not ratified the Covenant of the League of Nations embodied in the Treaty of Versailles; and Whereas the Government of the United States and the Government of His Britannic Majesty desire to reach a definite agreement independently with respect to the rights of the two Governments and their respective Nationals in Palestine;

His Britannic Majesty and the President of the United States of America have decided to conclude a convention to this effect, and have named as plenipotentiaries:

His Majesty (titles):

The Right Honourable Joseph Austen Chamberlain (titles);

The President of the United States of America:

His Excellency the Honourable Frank B. Kellogg (titles);

Who have agreed as follows:

ARTICLE 1.

Subject to the provisions of the present Convention the United States consents to the dominion of Palestine by His Britannic Majesty, pursuant to the mandate recited above.

ARTICLE 2.

The United States and its nationals shall have and enjoy all the rights and benefits secured under the terms of the mandate to Members of the League of Nations and their nationals, notwithstanding the fact that the United States is not a Member of the League of Nations.

ARTICLE 3.

Vested American property rights in the mandated territory shall be respected and in no way impaired.

ARTICLE 4.

A duplicate of the annual report to be made by the Mandatory under Art. 24 of the mandate shall be furnished to the United States.

ARTICLE 5.

Subject to the provisions of any local laws for the maintenance of public order and public morals, the nationals of the United States will be permitted freely to establish and

maintain educational, philanthropic, and religious institutions in the mandated territory, and to receive voluntary applicants and to teach in the English language.

ARTICLE 6.

The extradition treaties and conventions which are or may be in force between the United States and Great Britain, and the provisions of any treaties which are or may be in force between the two countries which relate to extradition or consular rights shall apply to the mandated territory.

ARTICLE 7.

Nothing contained in the present Convention shall be affected by any modification which may be made in the terms of the mandate, as recited above, unless such modification shall have been assented to by the United States.

ARTICLE 8.

The present Convention shall be ratified in accordance with etc. Done in duplicate at London this 3rd day of December, 1924.

(L.S.) Austen Chamberlain.

(L.S.) Frank B. Kellogg.

Note an the Kellogg-Briand Pact

This pact was not written by Secretary of State Frank B. Kellogg, but was entirely the work of a Jewish Chicago lawyer, Solomon O. Levinsohn. He first presented it to the late M. Briand and later to Mr. Kellogg, who sponsored it.

It became known as the Kellogg-Briand Pact and was signed in Paris on August 27, 1928. (Cf. The story of this Pact in the Revue Internationale des Societts Secretes, Paris, 1930).

1. The student may be confused by the fact that, in the photograph which is reproduced facing page 192, the characters appear as though reversed, and written from right to left. But this is not the case, and is explained by the position assumed by the writer, who stood with his back to the wall, with his right arm stretched down, and formed the letters from right to left, in the Hebrew manner.

2. The cabbalistic interpretation of letters and words is found in the following books: Kircher, Oedipus Aegyptiacus; Lenain, La Science Cabbalistique; Dee, Monas Hieroglyphica; H. Krumrath, Amphitheatre de Veternel sapience; Franck, La Cabbale.

3. Fabre d'Olivet, La Langue hebralque restitute.

4. Fabre d'Olivet, op. fit.

5. Eliphas Levy, Dogme et Rituel de la haute magie.

6. Cornelius Agrippa, Philosophic Occulle.

7. Cf. The report made by Leinigen to the Munich Psychological Society, March 3, 1887.

8. To cipher the real meaning, cabbalists frequently resort to a special kind of hieroglyphics, one form of which is synthetic, whereby a word is concealed by several others. For instance, the first letters of several words are taken and assembled in one word, as in the present case in the word Melek. See Molitor, Philosophic de la Tradition. The above is a reproduction of the photograph of the inscription found on the wall of the room in Ekaterinburg where the Tsar Nicholas II and his Family were murdered, in 1918, by order of the Bolsheviks. The town was retaken from the Bolsheviks, a tew weeks after the murder, by the forces of General Denikin, at whose command an official inquest was instituted: the bodies of the Imperial Family were exhumed, etc., and a careful record of the proceedings was kept. The photograph is found in this record.

The name of the town has since been changed by the Bolsheviks to Sverdlovsk, after the Jewish President, Sverdlov, of the Court which ordered the murder.

The student must not be confused by the fact that in the above photograph the characters are written upside-down and from right to left. That is explained by the fact that the writer stood with his back to the wall, with his right arm stretched down, and he formed the letters from right to left, in the Hebrew manner.

9. Fabre d'Olivet, op. cit.

10. Eliphas L6vy, op. cit. Papus, Tarot des Bohimiens.

11. The Arcana (arcana= mysterious) are the cards of the Tarot: the Great Arcana, of which there are twenty-two, correspond to the letters of the sacred alphabet which was first of all Egyptian and after wards became Jewish. Their invention is attributed to the founder of the Egyptian secret science, Hermes Tot or Trismegistos. Our playing

cards today originally came from the Lesser Arcana.

12. P. Christian, Histoire de la Magie.

SUPPLEMENTS

APPENDIX I

THE STATE OF THE WORLD

Reprinted from " The Australian Social Crediter," March and April, 1946.

Conversion of Governments into Dictatorships.

" At the moment (February, 1945), there does not appear to be much likelihood that the German contributions to the general hell will be overlooked, and if there is any truth in the statements that the German atrocities have been largely directed against the Jews, they will not be. But it is obvious that the International-New-Deal-Peppers-and-Planners are counting on using Germany as the scape-goat to which to divert attention from the consolidation of their war gains. That in this country not less than America, the Managerial State—" All Power to the Official "—was decided upon in 1931 if not long before, and organised in the sure and certain hope that a nice big war could be provoked and kept going while its position was buttressed " in war, or under threat of war " is so clear that only willfulness or unfamiliarity with the facts can obscure it. We do not think we are likely to see a period of crude deflation on the cessation of hostilities, because the dog has learnt that trick. But that both individual purchasing-power and individual freedom of initiative will be curtailed by every possible means, and there are many, is evidenced by the care with which     " the threat of war " is being prepared to replace " war." And God wot, the threat of war is not far to seek."

We quote this paragraph from The Social Crediter of a year ago because it provides for those " unfamiliar with the facts " an excellent perspective of the past year's events. The military phase of the war ended with the terroristic demonstration of the atomic bomb; and it is clear in retrospect that hostilities were prolonged, despite the efforts of the Japanese, to enable the dropping of those bombs. On the conclusion of the military phase, the " threat of war " phase was substituted without so much as a day's delay, and the " administrative adjustments " referred to by Lord Rothschild were set in train.

During the war, arrangements were consolidated to ensure a condition of apparent world famine. We are indebted to an editorial from the London Sunday Express, reprinted in the Sydney Daily Telegraph of February 26, 1946, for a demonstration that the appearance is false. This article reports that world stocks of wheat next June will be 2,000,000 tons more than in June, 1938. Elsewhere it has been reported that Argentina is burning grain in locomotives.

Thus the " threat of war," plus artificial famine, provide the necessary background for the conversion of governments into dictatorships. In Eastern Europe the process is crude; totalitarian governments have been installed under the guidance of Soviet Russian-trained Russian agents, and are backed by Russian arms. Thus in Jugoslavia Marshal Tito has been installed. Tito is a Josef Broz, or his double; there is some doubt. The real Broz, after early Communist activities in Jugoslavia, took part in the Spanish civil war, then returned to Moscow, where he received special training. In 1941 he returned to Jugoslavia as head of the Secret International Terrorist Organisation (Tanya Internatsionalna Terroristichka Organizatsiya—i.e. T.I.T.O.). There is a report, however, that the real Broz " disappeared " under Russian auspices, and was replaced by a double, provided from the same larder.

Again, in Poland, a Russian sponsored totalitarian government has been installed under M. Bierut, whose real name is Krasnodebski. This man in 1921 accepted Soviet citizenship. " Attached at once to the Polish section of the Commintern, he spent several years on theoretical training and practical courses in Moscow. In December, 1924, he was sent to Poland for the first time, and almost at once became one of the leading personalities of the Communist Party. For a time he was organising demonstrations and riots to undermine the institutions of the Polish State." (The Tablet, July 14,1945). Later he became head of the Polish section of the OGPU. In 1941 " he was dropped from a Soviet plane into Poland . . . was ordered to take advantage of the German occupation to build a network of Communist organisations, and with their assistance to set up institutions and an administration to rival the Underground Polish authorities acting under the Polish Government in London. In March, 1944, Bierut, accompanied by four other people . . . crossed the frontier into Russia. Upon their arrival at the Soviet capital they introduced themselves as the Polish National Home Council, and the only ' genuine representation of the Polish Nation.''

The Times, and the socialist Press generally, connived at all this, and at the same time prepared the ground for the Socialist victory at the British General Elections. This achieved, the next step was taken. Without warning, American Lend-Lease supplies were cut off, precipitating an era of intensified austerity which could be held to justify the totalitarian measures of the new Government.

A drive for exports took the place of the " period of crude deflation " which followed World War I. This is very important. Industry has grown up from its beginnings to serve the multitudinous needs of individuals. But " export trade," like war, provides an over-riding objective. It provides a reason, an excuse, for the organisation of industry; and the organisation of industry implies the organisation of the community to serve it.

The measures known collectively as Social Security are, in reality, nothing but the administrative arrangements underlying the total organisation of the Community. They were originally developed for that purpose in Germany. The essential principle involved is to prevent the individual accumulating savings, and hence independence, and thus to force him into subjection to the mass of detailed regulations governing every aspect of existence, which are brought into being under special enabling clauses of the main Acts. This is the " Managerial State—' All Power to the Official.' "

Managerial State Legislation—First Section British National Socialist legislation can be seen, in perspective, to fall into two chief divisions. The first comprises Lord Rothschild's " administrative adjustments," and includes the various measures for organisation of industry and community—nationalising of banking and industry, control of investment, and the reduction of all members of the community, except Government officials and bureaucrats (including the managerial class and labour Gauleiters), to a common level, " the managed." Included in this is the equalisation of income through controlled devaluation of money (planned inflation), plus taxation. The inflation—i.e., rise in prices—rapidly reduces the real value of professional and small business incomes; this process is offset by wage increases for the low wage earners. The objective is an approximate equalisation of all non-official incomes at a level which will not permit of individual savings. It is important to observe that this level may include, later on, a moderately high standard of living; but that standard will be compulsory, in order to absorb all income. The contingencies which normally would call for savings will be met by so-called " insurance." This is not genuine insurance. Contributions are simply taxation, and benefits are the provision of a minimum income, or special services (e.g., medical treatment) under narrowly defined and regulated conditions. Thus independence for the individual will be impossible. So long as he does as he is ordered to do—i.e., remains " fully employed " in the various jobs to which he is directed—he will be well-fed, and by degrees adequately housed and amused. If, however, he endeavours to assert his independence, his income will be cut off, and he will have no savings to carry him on, and no free-choice of alternative employment.

The propaganda for " Social Security " is merely an elaborate disguise for the conditions that obtain in the Army, and it is not improbable that once the total organisation of the community, with the abolition of all independence, is achieved, the disguise will be dropped. But this is chiefly a question of administrative convenience.

Managerial State Legislation—Second Section The second division into which legislation falls comprises sanctions—means of enforcing the " administrative adjustments." Under this heading are grouped international commitments, propaganda, and direct coercion.

International commitments (with which the export drive may be classified) provide a justification, a " total " objective. Contributions to UNRRA, maintenance of occupation forces, acquisition of dollars, membership of UNO, etc., etc., are super-national objectives, and hence external to national politics, and hence outside the sphere of the individual. Now quite casual inspection of super-national politics of the present day reveals that it is a mass of lies, murders, corruption, wars and destruction; Satanism. But the reader may call it what he will, so long as he will judge contemporary super-nationalism by its fruits. He may find his own interpretation for the expression " Possessed by the Devil."

Propaganda is quite obviously " possessed by the Devil." It is driving Man to destruction. International " News " is derived from international news-agencies; but it is not, for the most part, news, but propaganda, and at times of decisive importance, it carries the policy of international Communism. On the principle of admitting freely what is already known, it is now freely enough admi tted that we made a " mistake " in supporting Tito. It is now clear, in retrospect, that the Press clamour, lead by The Times, in favour of E.L.A.S. in Greece might have been fatal to the British Empire; and it will become clear that the international propaganda campaign against Franco is in order to promote fatal developments.

Under cover of the situation created and maintained by international commitments and propaganda (" the threat of war "), the means of direct coercion are being steadily consolidated. Russia and its satellites are undeniably police-states. In Great Britain, the police forces have been centralised, the Ministry of Social Security—i.e., of central control of the individual—set up, and officials of various departments have been armed with powers of entering private homes on various pretexts, and of securing 'evidence' in connection with industrial accidents. Every day sees an increase in the power of the official to mind the individual's business, with, of course, a reciprocal decrease in the individual's self-determination.

The State of the World is not an Accident. If people are deceived by the ostensible objectives of socialist legislation, they will pay the price. " By their fruits shall ye know them."

By their fruits: not by the advertisements. It is only natural that these things should be put forward in disguise; and if we cannot distinguish between words and things, we shall perish. Judge by the socialism we have; judge by falling production, rising prices, murderous taxation, increasing anarchy, loathsome austerity; that is policy in practice, the proletarianising of the community.

How can the sincere Socialist—the one who merely votes Socialism—believe that the tin-pot mechanism of the Party vote will enable him to overthrow the ultimate possessors of power? Does he seriously think that the ' Capitalist' Press will assist in its own overthrow? On the very premises of the Socialist, Socialism as advocated must be a ' Capitalist' plot for the final enslavement of the worker. But the ' Capitalist' is not the independent business-man; he is the International Capitalist—the Cartelist and the Financier, who control the international news-agencies, and own government debts, and who through those debts hold a lien on the physical assets of every country, and who, under the guise of Socialism, are putting the bailiffs in. It is childish to believe that Socialism has come into power against the will of the ultimate International Power.

The state of the world is no accident; for those who will look, it bears every mark of design. The Mark of the Beast.

And? F. A. Voight, in Nineteenth Century and After writes: " The question What can we do ? has many answers, and whoever gives an answer may do so according to his knowledge, his capacity, and his station (there are many, indeed, who give answer beyond all these). But one answer, at least, is possible to the humblest: To bear witness. It is the duty of all who can do so, whether in print, in their letters, or in talk, to withstand or rectify, in however restricted a manner, the cumulative falsification of history perpetrated by the principal media of-publicity in our time . . ."

One of the functions of the Press is to mislead public opinion, even informed public opinion, as to the timing of the plot. The public is taught to think that if after all they don't like " Socialism," they can simply change the Government in five years time, and revert to freedom. It is not so. Under cover of party politics, the shackles are being bolted. It is intended that when we find we don't like what we've got, it will be too late to do anything about it. And that won't take long.

" In this, the gravest crisis of the world's history, it is essential to realise that the stakes which are being played for are so high that the players on one side, at least, care no more for the immolation of the peoples of a continent than for the death of a sparrow.. . . There is a working coalition between the scum of the underworld and the richest men in the world to murder those from whom alone redemption for the underworld can come, in order that any threat to the power of the financier may be removed. The underworld will be dealt with just as easily as Stalin deals with any opposition, when the underworld has done its job." (The Social Crediter, February 10, 1945). We warn the decent men of the Left as well as of the Right that if they don't wake up now their massacre is certain.

The Great Powers of the World.

On February the 18th, Mr. Churchill was closeted in Miami with Mr. Bernard Baruch and his U.S.A. Branch Manager, Mr. James Byrnes. On March the 5th Mr. Churchill gave the signal we have been expecting. From 1942, when Germany double-crossed Russia, until, virtually, March, 1946, the international news-agencies have systematically concealed the development of the situation. Under cover of the " line " that we must secure Russia's co-operation, and therefore must say nothing which might offend her, we have sacrificed the Poles, and connived at the installation of police-governments run by specially trained Russian agents in every country traversed by the Red Armies. The facts that have not been concealed have been explained by the plea that Russia is " nervous " (poor mighty child), and therefore entitled, at any cost of human slaughter and suffering, to make her boundaries secure by extending those boundaries by the incorporation of her neighbours and the " social-engineering " of their populations.

British foreign policy, in particular, appears senseless. Not content with the outcome of the policy of appeasing Germany, we have adopted the identical policy as regards Russia. To try to reconstruct our foreign policy is like trying to piece together a jig-saw puzzle that has a key piece missing; it won't hang together.

And there is the vital clue. There is a piece missing. The essential fact to grasp is that national foreign policies are the resultant of the natural foreign policy plus an international component. And because in general the nature of the international policy deflecting the national policy is unrecognised, foreign policies are essentially unpredictable, and we are plunged into a series of wars which we do not want, and which could certainly have been avoided by a realistic national foreign policy. Wars are actually outmoded, in the sense that modern industrial development provides potential plenty for every nation. The British Empire, however it came into existence, is not now in any sense an aggressive entity. For some time past it has practised the essential requirements of non-aggressiveness—economic and political decentralisation. Yet the British Empire has been chiefly concerned in the last two wars, and is clearly to be involved in the next—hence Mr. Churchill's speech.

It can be stated quite definitely that our continued existence as an Empire, as a set of Nations, and as a culture—all three or any of them—depends on our recognising, and dealing with, the alien policy which deflects our own. The situation is analogous to a chemical experiment in which the results do not conform to those predicted, because of the unsuspected presence of an impurity in the reagents. Discover and eliminate the impurity, and theory and practice coincide.

This alien policy has been described and analysed by Major C. H. Douglas in his books The Big Idea, Programme for the Third World War, and The Brief for the Prosecution. It has, as its immediate objective, the elimination of the British Empire and its culture.

To describe the situation very briefly: In addition to the recognised Great Powers in the world—let us say, the Big Three—there is a fourth. The fourth Great Power is the Jewish nation, which, because it has no fixed geographical State, is overlooked as such. Nevertheless, it has a Government, which is largely secret, and that Government has a policy. The policy is derived from the mystic philosophy of the Jews—the belief that they are the Chosen People, with a mission to organise and govern the other peoples of the world.

Now, since this Power has no country, and no army, its foreign policy must be pursued by other than the methods of direct armed conquest. Its most important weapon is Finance—money-power. Thus at the centre is Jewish State policy. Outside this, as it were, is the organisation of International Finance, which is predominantly, though not entirely, Jewish. International Finance, as such, has a policy; but that policy is derived from, and furthers, Jewish State policy.

The technique of the policy is really absurdly simple; in essence it consists of mortgaging property, and foreclosing. The foreclosure is, in practice, the dictation of policy. Thus all governments are in debt, and all have to borrow. The conditions on which they can borrow are conditions dictated by the policy of International Finance, and put forward as principles of "sound finance." Now financial policy dictates economic policy, and economic policy, as things are, delimits politics so-called.

Theoretically, virtually the assets of the whole world are mortgaged to the banking system—i.e., the Money Power; legally, there is no reason why the Money Power should not take possession. But practically it is impossible, because public opinion would revolt; so that some form of police force to prevent revolt must be established. So that over and above the purely financial technique by which the Money Power has established its claim to ownership of the world, on behalf of its hidden masters, politics have been controlled so as to lead to a world police-force.

This is being achieved by the elimination of nations through wars, and the subordination of the remaining nations to their bureaucracies through Socialism.

In 1942, Major Douglas wrote: "Socialism, or to give it its correct name, Monopoly, is not a production system, which is exactly what one would expect from its origins."

The idea so skillfully inculcated that confiscation of property will assist in the distribution of wealth is, of course, completely without foundation. Socialism is a restriction system, as any examination of Socialistic practice in the Trades Unions will confirm, and it has two well-defined principles—centralisation of power, both economic and political, and espionage.

" That is to say, every advance towards Socialism is an advance towards the Police State . . ." (The Big Idea.)

Nearly a year after the end of the war, conditions in Great Britain are much worse than during the war. This means, not that Socialism has failed, but that it is succeeding. It is doing what its true authors intended it should do— reduce the people to a condition of penury and slavery. Politics and economics are both predominantly in the service of the secret Fourth Great Power.

Now the operation of this fourth major foreign policy in the world must normally be to call forth a " healthy reaction," both economic and political, to it. But as the policy is a secret policy, the effect is simply a confusion of policies, until the threat is so obvious that a distinct policy does emerge. The British policy towards the threat of Russia can be seen more and more clearly to have been absurd; but equally, the threat is becoming so obvious that only one British policy is becoming possible. But, of course, immense damage has been done.

The main strategy of the Fourth Power is destruction of the national institutions of the other three Powers from within, and the manipulation of the three Powers into conflict with each other. As the fourth Power " owns " each of the others, it will dominate the world when one of the three dominates the world. But, since Russia already has a developed secret-police system, and is militaristic, Russia may be billed to eliminate the other two. But in the meantime the next phase is apparently intended to be the destruction of the British Empire by Russia. To this end, by paralysis of British resistance, the strategic position of Russia has been enormously strengthened, while the economic position of Great Britain has been ruined. Food and coal reserves have gone, industry has been wrecked by interference and the threat of nationalisation, and morale has been virtually destroyed by a combination of Utopian but impossible promises, and austerity. Moreover, Russia has an enormous fifth-column in all countries of the British-Empire, and the integrity of the Armed Forces has been sapped by the propaganda of the Services' " educational " organisations.

We have been manoeuvred into a position where it is too late to do anything about the military situation. That was intended. If anything can be done about the general situation, it can be done only by a direct challenge to the power of the Fourth State. The genuine nationals of the British Empire and the United States will have to eliminate the power and the policy of the International Jew. Once that is done—and only if it is done—Russia may be stayed. But God knows how little time remains.

Only a few weeks ago, there was but an occasional bare whisper in the daily Press that Russia just conceivably, in certain circumstances—if we offended her by saying so, for example—might become a threat. We were told just enough to warn us of the danger of saying more. But that phase has passed. Mr. Baruch has given the " go " signal to Mr. Churchill, and Mr. Churchill has passed it on through all the modern resources of controlled propaganda. Even the fatal words " appeasement " and " Munich " are once more becoming common currency, and with the aid of little daily doses of instruction, the Common Man is rapidly becoming an expert in foreign affairs, and soon should be able to realise that the Third World War is on the way.

Marxist Strategy and Tactics.

The Russian Government is the exponent of a fairly highly elaborated dogma derived from a philosophy known as dialectical and historical materialism. The doctrines involved in this dogma have various origins and histories, but their modern expression began with their formulation as a system by Karl Marx (Mordecai) and Frederick Engels, and their extension by Vladimir Lenin (Ulianov). The current system is generally known as Marxism-Leninism. Marxism-Leninism has, however, been further adapted by Stalin, whose pronouncements are surely authoritative.

Russia is governed through the hierarchy of the Communist Party. Party membership is absolutely conditional on a thorough grounding in Marxism-Leninism, and promotion in the hierarchy requires a high degree of " theoretical" knowledge— i.e., knowledge of the theory of Marxism-Leninism. The over-all policy pursued by Soviet Russia is, of course, derived from the beliefs so thoroughly inculcated.

According to Marxism-Leninism, the real social structure of the world, under Capitalism, consists of its class structure, and nation-States are quite secondary. That is to say, men are united primarily by their classes, so that to belong to the proletarian, or " toiling masses," class, over-rides considerations of nationality. The proletarian class is considered to be a world fact; the class is homogeneous, and opposed in interest and outlook throughout the world to all other classes which it will, " step by step," hurl from power.

The picture is, therefore, that of two forces like two armies, radically opposed throughout the world. Because of the inherent defects in the Capitalist system which gives the Capitalists and their sub-classes their power, sooner or later, and somewhere or other, the proletarian force must " break through" the line of the Capitalist forces. Once this happens, the whole nature of the struggle is changed, for the victorious segment of the proletariat becomes the leader of the rest of the world-proletariat, and strategy alters accordingly.

Stalin describes the strategy of this stage, which was reached with the October Revolution in Russia, quite explicitly:

" Objective: to consolidate the dictatorship of the proletariat in one country, using it as a base for the overthrow of imperialism in all countries. The revolution is spreading beyond the confines of one country; the period of world revolution has commenced.

The main forces of the revolution: the dictatorship of the proletariat in one country, the revolutionary movement of the proletariat in all countries.

Main reserves: the semi-proletarian and small-peasant masses in all developed countries.

Direction of the main blow: isolation of the petty-bourgeois democrats, isolation of the parties of the Second International, which constitute the main support of the policy of compromise with imperialism.

Plan for the disposition of forces: alliance of the proletarian revolution with the liberation movement in the colonies and the dependent countries." (Foundation of Leninism.) (Italics in original. Our paragraphs.)

" The fundamental question of revolution is power." (Lenin). In order to achieve the maximum power, it is necessary for the first country achieving the initial victory of the proletariat to organise itself in such a way as to obtain the greatest power. That is to say, it must organise itself on totalitarian lines under the direction of a General Staff under a Chief of the General Staff; in short, it must become a fully organised army, in order to play its necessary part in the continuation of the world revolution. This is the true and only meaning of the term "dictatorship of the proletariat." Jokes about "dictatorship over the proletariat" are entirely beside the point. "Dictatorship of the proletariat" is purely and simply a technical term in the vocabulary of Marxism-Leninism, and relates to the strategic concept of having a properly organized force available to assist revolution as it occurs elsewhere in the world. "The revolution in the victorious country must regard itself not as a self-sufficient entity but as an aid, as a means of hastening the victory of the proletariat in other countries." (Stalin).

Similarly, the terms "petty-bourgeois democrats" and "parties of the Second International" refer to what we call "Labour" or "Labour-Socialism." The formation of such groups is regarded by the theoreticians as a natural phenomenon in the development of the world revolution. Their role is to demonstrate to the oppressed toiling masses that only revolution can succour them! and one of the first tasks of the victorious revolution must be to liquidate these "compromisers with imperialism" who have committed the crime of betraying the revolution, and who are rivals for the leadership of the proletariat. The appearance of these groups is only a demonstration of the progress of the general revolution, which, according to Lenin, would take some decades to run its course, during which the deepening crisis would be marked by depression, unemployment, and war, as well as by such "petty bourgeois expedients" as Fabianism and Social Democracy. All this would have to be, however; the first country to achieve revolution could do no more than help to intensify the crisis, act as a beacon to the toiling masses, and prepare for the decisive moment by building up its own strength and organisation.

While the strategy of Marxism-Leninism remains steady and consistent through this period (i.e., the period between the Russian Revolution and World Revolution), tactics, which are largely the concern of the Communist Parties in various countries, vary with "the ebb and flow" of the developing situation in those countries. Any criticism of the contradictions of Communist activities therefore misses the point entirely; there is no variation in strategy, which is centred in the General Staff (Politbureau) in Russia, and which is consistently preparing for general revolution; but it is in the very nature of tactics to vary with the fluctuating fortunes of the struggle. For example, the recent Iron Workers' strike is said to have resulted in a defeat for the Communists. That is not so. The objective of the strike was to reduce the reserves of critical materials—iron and coal—in order to hasten on the " nation-wide crisis," and " weaken the Government"; and in that it succeeded. The tactics were designed to lead the workers in and out of the strike, covering both manoeuvres with suitable slogans and propaganda. From the strategical point of view it was essential that the strike should " fail " at a point short of a full crisis. The strategical objective of all such tactics at present is to worsen the lot of the community, and increase the difficulties of the " petty-bourgeois " (compromising) Government. The recent Coal Report is striking evidence of the strategical success of tactics as applied to the coal industry.

It must be admitted that the Marxist-Leninist theory appears to find practically complete confirmation in the state of the world. The end of the " Imperialist war " (into which Russia was, despite her detachment, drawn) finds the " Capitalist crisis " still more intensified, and " petty-bourgeois governments " still less able to cope with it. The changes " demanded " by the oppressed masses are quite clearly not alleviating their condition, and the various factions of " the ruling classes" (including Labour parties) are at loggerheads. A fresh outbreak of revolution is anticipated in Greece, and local tactics are being directed accordingly. France is highly unstable, and would detonate into revolution if fresh civil war could be promoted in Spain. The British Empire is distracted by " liberation movements in colonies and dependent countries " and by threats to Empire security as in Persia and Palestine.

Financial Rules favouring Revolution can be changed.

There is, however, another side to the picture. The vital and fundamental premiss of the Marxist-Leninist theory is the automatic and inevitable nature of the " contradiction " in Capitalist economy. The Capitalist does not oppress and exploit the Worker because he likes it, but because he cannot avoid it. He, like the Worker, is caught up in a System he cannot control. As Lenin emphasised, Revolution would be impossible unless a general crisis arose.

The central aspect of the Capitalist system is money. The Capitalist " produces for profit," and profit is taken in money. That is to say, the vital aspect of Capitalist economy is in its relation to the financial system and the financial system itself consists of certain " principles," or rules, or laws; for example, the principles of " sound finance." Thus the Capitalist conducts his business and makes his profits according to the rules which govern the use of money.

The Marxist-Leninist position therefore rests ultimately on the question of those rules. Are those rules in the nature of things, genuine " laws " like the laws of physics; or are they conventions, man-made ?

On the hypothesis that the rules are laws, and therefore unchangeable, it follows that the Capitalist is helpless, and faultless; the case for his liquidation hardly rests on a very satisfactory moral basis. But it also follows that no improvement is possible, even in Russia's case, unless the use of money is abolished; but Russia has not abolished money, and claims an improvement; in point of fact, Russia has modified the rules. In general, however, it is quite clear that the rules are modified constantly, not only by Russia, but everywhere. Whether or not a country is on the gold standard is a case in point—it is the result of a decision. But the " laws " of a strict gold standard are different from the " laws " of a dollar or sterling standard.

Thus the Marxist-Leninist strategy is applicable to a situation that has its origin in the results of the operation of rules of finance. Who is responsible for those rules ?

Although there is some overlapping of personnel, especially in the case of Big Business and the cartels, through interlocking directorates, it is quite clear that the production and the financial systems are separate entities. It is also clear that the financial system is far more highly centralised than is the production system. In practically every country there is now a Central Bank, which has well-defined functions, including especially the regulation of the volume of money. But these Central Banks in turn come under a super-Central Bank, the Bank of International Settlements, though at the moment there is some indication that this Bank's function will be transferred to the World Bank working in co-operation with the International Fund. However that may be, it is the case that there is a world centralised financial system. In the case of industry—the production system—on the other hand, such world centralisation as there is relates only to specific industries, notably the chemical industry, while the greater part of industry is relatively independent, and uncoordinated.

Now in the nature of things an uncoordinated industry cannot impose a consistent policy on centralised world finance; but, by setting up and maintaining the rules of the system, finance can, and does, impose a policy on industry. Broadly, the rules are in the system of accounting, and in the necessity of making a financial profit, according to the accounting conventions.

Marxist-Leninist strategy is derived from and dependent on an intensifying crisis; and that crisis derives from the financial rules under which industry is conducted. If the crisis disappeared, Communism would retrogress.

Now as long as finance and production are lumped together under the term " Capitalism," there appears to be no escape from the necessity for Communism. But finance and production are not identities; they are entirely separate systems. To fail to discriminate, of course, adds to the confusion, for what is required is not any re-organisation of industry, but an alteration in the financial rules which impose a policy on industry.

An alteration in these rules was proposed by the Government of Alberta, and was opposed by financial interests; not only opposed, but prevented.

Further than this, there is documentary evidence that International Financiers financed the Russian Revolution.

Surely, now, the nature of the situation is plain. The greatest power in the world is wielded by International Finance, which directs its policy to produce an intensifying crisis as a result of which World Revolution is promoted, the effect of which would be a world dictatorship through, in the first place, the agency of Russia. The purpose is to dispossess every individual of any form of property which could confer independence, and centralise all ownership in institutions themselves centralised under a World State.

Misunderstanding of this situation at this stage only accelerates our progress to disaster. It must be realised that every effort is made to maintain the fiction of class-war on the one hand, and the threat of Russia as a great national power on the other. As a result, perfectly well-meaning, sincere and able politicians constantly make the situation worse.

Russia is not a " Great Power " in the national sense; she does not want war or territorial aggrandisement in the ordinary sense. Russia is a reservoir of strength and highly-trained personnel awaiting, expecting, and promoting revolution which she is prepared to back. Every intensification of the crisis brings the critical moment nearer; the greater the confusion, the easier her task. Therefore the apparent threat of war aids her, and the confusion as to her policy—i.e., whether she just wants to secure her boundaries, or whether she is following Hitler's path of aggression—makes the situation more favourable for revolution.

We can now put the whole jig-saw puzzle together. The responsible agents in the world are the men controlling the international financial system. Through financial power— the indebtedness of governments and institutions to them— they can either dictate or heavily influence policy. Their efforts are directed along two main lines: the maintenance of such financial rules as must lead to a world crisis, and the sponsoring of the Marxist-Leninist theory and its exponents to take advantage of the crisis to institute a World Police State. Financial power has enabled them to secure control of all the main channels of publicity, especially the international news-agencies through which a bias can be imparted to the presentation of world news so as to intensify the crisis. During the war, they secured the setting up of UNRRA whose purpose is to restrict the distribution of food, and lead to famine in Europe. Through such institutions as the London School of Economics and Political and Economic Planning, as well as the more frankly Socialist organisations, they have disseminated doctrines which have gradually resulted in the institution of a system of bureaucratic socialism in Great Britain which has strangled private initiative and paralysed recovery from the ravages of war, and transferred power from Parliament to a junta concealed behind the bureaucracy.

Europe has now been brought to near-detonation point. Its peoples are being driven to desperation by gross food-shortage, and lack of recovery from the desolation of war. Greece and France are in a highly unstable condition, and might be precipitated into revolution at any time. Whenever this happens, Russia is waiting to come to the assistance of the " victorious proletariat" and to set up the Federated States of Soviet Europe. In the commotion, the life-lines of the British empire, already frayed, will be completely severed, leaving Great Britain easy prey for either " liquidation " as " reactionary petty-bourgeois " or its own revolution.

Once this strategic situation is grasped, it becomes clear that the well-meaning words of, say, Mr. Menzies, are like petrol as a fire-extinguisher. It is also clear why Mr. Baruch, the international financier, gave Mr. Churchill the go-ahead signal, providing Russia was misrepresented as a military menace.

The situation is indeed formidable. Now, obviously a strategy opposed to a misconception can do nothing but worsen the situation. That is to say, as long as our policy is based on the assumption that Russia is a potential aggressor in the ordinary sense, every move is likely only to lead to irrevocable disaster. And similarly, every attempted denunciation of, or opposition to, the tactics, as such of the local Communists only furthers their strategy, because it helps to intensify the crisis. The vital necessity is rapid amelioration of the crisis, combined with frank exposure of the real situation.

We most earnestly appeal to those with the potential power to deal with the situation to examine what we say impartially, and to realise that a great deal of what they believe and take for granted is the result of years of the most careful and subtle propaganda; that certain courses of action, unorthodox in appearance, are practicable and urgently necessary.1

1. The full text of this Article can be had from The Australian Social Crediter, Box 3266, Sydney, N.S.W.

APPENDIX II

THE BERNE TRIALS.1

" A lawyer, who assisted at the two trials, published in the review Hammer of December, 1937, a statement according to which the Judge (of the Lower Court) was in debt to a Jew at the time of the trial. This very serious allegation has never to my knowledge been denied. The Neue Berner Zeitung of October 29, 1937, formulated a not less serious complaint against the same Judge, who was obliged by his superiors to take an action against the paper. At the time of writing the action is not yet over. It would seem that the Judge was hardly the proper man to decide such a delicate question.

" It must be remarked also that, contrary to what appeared in many newspapers, the Court of Appeal found that, in spite of the prescriptions of the law, the reports of certain depositions had been drawn up by the private reporters of the Jewish plaintiffs. ' The proceedings as carried out in the Lower Court were not in accordance with custom and law. .. . The manner of drawing up the reports was in contradiction with the binding prescriptions of the law (Art. 92 and 215 Str. V).

" That seems clear and definite. Besides, the reports had not been read to the accused and had not been signed, as the law prescribes. In addition, witnesses for the defence had not been convoked and the Judge (of the Lower Court) had accepted from the plaintiffs, as coming from Moscow, photographs which had been insufficiently legalized as well as faulty translations of Russian documents. Is it astonishing then that the accused were condemned by the Lower Court and that the Jews rejoiced? The proof that the Protocols were a forgery had been furnished at last.

" But they had to change their tune. The Bernese Court of Appeal quashed the judgment of the Lower Court. The Higher Court found fault with the setting-up of a commission of experts to examine the question of the authenticity of the Protocols, since the authenticity or non-authenticity of the Protocols did not concern the Court. Moreover, the Court of Appeal severely criticized the choice of the experts, especially the selection of the third. ' If we leave out of account the completely unnecessary expense of the other judgments, in the circumstances, this would have been satisfactory, provided that the third expert selected had been completely impartial and unprejudiced. C. A. Loosli, however, had already, in 1937, published a pamphlet entitled Die Schlimmen Juden, in which he had characterized the Protocols as a recklessly malevolent fabrication and had heaped scorn on them as a forgery, in a manner that was purely polemical and absolutely unscientific. The form that Loosli's judgment in the matter would take was, therefore, capable of being to a large degree calculated in advance, so that he did not enjoy the requisite confidence of all parties'.3. The Court then drew the obvious conclusion: ' Such a mode of appointing an expert is not up to standard.'

" It will be enough to mention one fact in order to justify this criticism of the expert, Loosli. A few pages back I showed that the testimony of Radziwill was valueless, since it has been proved that the Protocols had already been published in 1903. Loosli wanted, nevertheless, to make use of Radziwill's testimony in his professional report of October, 1934. To get out of the difficulty, he simply changed the date of Radziwill's testimony from 1903 to 1895.

" The result of the second trial was never in doubt. The accused (Fischer and Schnell) were acquitted, and one of them had to pay 100 francs costs out of a total of about 28,000 francs. Here it is interesting to note that the whole Jewish Press took good care not to mention that this slight penalty had nothing to do with the Protocols. You will remember what I said at the beginning, namely, that the Jews had included other publications in their action. The 100 francs costs were imposed on Mr. T. Fischer because of the article entitled Shweizermadchen hute dich vor schandenden Juden.

" A more disastrous result for the Jews could hardly be imagined. And what made it harder for them to bear was the fact that the Bernese Higher Court alluded to a judgment of the Federal Court, in which it was stated that the Swiss Law does not forbid and ' could not forbid journalists to express even very advanced opinions on the Jewish question, however painful these expressions of opinion might be for the Israelites.'

" The Jews however are already ' putting across ' their own version of the trial. The Jewish Daily Post of April 28, 1935, wrote that the first trial had shown " the success that could be achieved by means of good Jewish organization ". This excellent organization was ready to go into action after the disaster of the second trial, as a couple of examples will show.

" The Jewish Chronicle of November 5, 1937, wrote that the Court of Appeal had declared the Protocols a forgery and had held that they must be regarded as trashy literature. The same review asserted that the Court found that the falsity of the Protocols had been proved. In reality the Court of Appeal had declared that the authenticity of the Protocols had not been proved, which does not mean that their falsity had been proved. The Higher Tribunal added that the Lower Court should not have entered upon that question at all. ' To enter upon an expert examination of that question and carry it out was altogether superfluous '.*. The statement of the Jewish Chronicle must be stigmatized as contrary to the truth.

" The Revue de Geneve (Jewish Review of Geneva), in its issue of November 1937, and the Journal des Nations, in its issue of November 3, 1937, were nearer the truth and sinned only by omission. They wrote that " the proofs of the authenticity of the Protocols had not been furnished," but they left out that the Lower Court had been blamed for having raised the question of authenticity, as that question did not concern it.

" It is a universally admitted principle of historical criticism that when a document has been discovered, that document must be held to be authentic so long as its lack of authenticity, in other words, its falsity, has not been proved. This has always been the rule in regard to historical criticism. When it is stated that proof of the authenticity of the Protocols has not been furnished, the cart is put before the horse. It is for the Jews to prove that the Protocols constitute a forgery, and we know that all the attempts to prove this have been lamentable failures. What is more, it is known that the Provisional [Russian] Government of Prince Lwow, Freemason, handed over to the Jew Winawer, all the documents concerning the Protocols that were to be found in the Russian Home Office or at the Police Headquarters. If a proof or even a shadow of a proof, of the falsity of the Protocols had been found amongst these documents, the Jews would have published it immediately.

" I do not intend to weary my readers with the account of other misrepresentations and skillfully concocted affirmations similar to those I have mentioned. It is a pity that writers, whose good faith cannot be called in question, take their information from such dubious sources. They make the mistake of not subjecting those sources to the severe criticism indispensable in a matter that aroused so much passionate feeling, and they neglect to consult the official documents. They thus contribute to get the false Jewish version accepted. They consider that they are acting charitably in defending unfortunate victims of persecution and calumny, while in reality they are working for the triumph of the Jews.

" A Belgian religious wrote a short time ago that the decision of the Higher Cantonal Court confirmed the judgment of the Lower Court magistrate with regard to the falsity of the Protocols. The same author also asserted that the Court declared the Protocols to be ' a document written in bad faith, a malignant and poisonous forgery'.5 The Reverend Father is wrong. It was not the Court, but the barristers for the Jews who attacked the Protocols as the vilest product of the printing press ever published in Switzerland. I have carefully perused the 53 folio pages of the judgment and I can affirm that the Court nowhere declared the Protocols to be ' a document written in bad faith, a malignant and poisonous forgery.' That statement is absolutely opposed to the truth.

" The Court certainly made use of some very severe epithets, such as ' stupid Jew-baiting,' ' attempt to defame the Jews as a body,' but these were employed with reference to the article Shweizermadchen hute dich vor schandenden Juden, which had nothing to do with the Protocols, but which the Jews had cleverly included in their case.

" The Court declared that the Protocols were ' shoddy or trashy literature in the aesthetic and literary.. . sense.' With that judgment we are in complete agreement. What remains to be determined is who is the author of this ' trashy literature.' On that point the Court declared itself incompetent."

1. Extract from Les Protocols des Sages de Sion constituent-ils un faux by H. de Vries de Heekelingen (Printed at Lausanne, 1938). In May 1935, the Judge of the Lower Court of the Swiss Canton of Berne, Meyer, gave judgment in the action taken by the Swiss Jewish Association and the Jewish Community of Berne against Theodore Fischer and Silvio Schnell concerning the Protocols and other publications. An appeal was lodged by Fischer and Schnell against the judgment, and the Court of Appeal or Higher Court of Berne gave its decision in October, 1937.

2. M. de Vries de Heekelingen here quotes the German text of the Judgment.

3. M. de Vries de Heekelingen again quotes from the German text of the High Court's decision.

4. M. de Vries de Heekelingen again quotes from the German text of the High Court's decision.

5. Article in La Nouvelle Revue tHeologique (January, 1938, p. 57) by the R. Pere Pierre Charles, S.J.

APPENDIX III

THE RULERS OF RUSSIA

On the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet the following are all Jews: N. Shvernik, Chairman; A. F. Gorkin, Secretary; A. M. Kirchenstein, Deputy Chairman; Ilya Ehrenberg; S. V. Kaftanov (5 out of 12).

On the Council of Ministers—L. M. Kaganovich, L. P. Beria, while of the remaining 10, three members are married to Jewesses—Stalin, Voroshilov and Molotov.

On the Politbureau of the Central Committee all the above are included with only four others. And there is a Jew at the head of every one of the following Ministries:—Agricultural Stocks, Building Industry, Food and Material Reserves, Heavy Industry Construction. The Information Services are under the control of the Jew S. Lozovsky. The Jewish control of Russia was even more apparent immediately after the Communist Revolution when the Jew content of the Government became close on 90%, from having been none under the Tzardom.

Puppet Governments of Communist Europe.

In Poland the Jew Jacob Bergman exercises most control, supported by six other Jews out of eleven members of the Politbureau, besides a Jew at the head of the Ministry of Education, as Public Prosecutor and Chief of the Youth Movement. In Hungary the Government of five members is all-Jewish. In Czecho-Slovakia the Secretary and Deputy Secretary of the Communist Party are both Jews. In Yugoslavia the man behind Tito is the Jew Moishe Pjade. In Roumania the Jewess Anna Pauker is the real ruler.

Names of the Jews in the above appointments have been published in FREE BRITAIN and will be provided, where asked for, as will the names of the six Jews who led the Dock Strike of last year and the Jews at the head of the Communist Movements in Canada and South Africa. In Britain the most important one is Ivor Montagu, one of the leading members of the " British " Communist Party and son of a Jew Peer.

These are the People you would have to fight for in another War.

Here are some of the appointments in the United Nations Executive and in its Agencies; they are all Jews:

Department of Economic Affairs

Special Adviser: A. Rosenberg.

Economic Stability Director: D. Weintraub. Department of Public Information

Assistant Secretary General: Ben Cohen.

Films Division Director: J. Benoit-Levy. Legal Department: Chief: A. H. Feller. Director of Interpreters: G. Rabinovitch. Administrative Department

Deputy Director: Max Abramovitz.

Executive (Personnel) : M. Bergmann. International Labour Office

Director General: A. Morse. UNESCO

Educational Reconstruction Director, J. Eisenhart.

International Understanding Director, M. F. Luffman.

Tension Division Director, O. Klineberg.

Public Information Director, H. Kaplan.

Administrative Bureau Director, C. H. Weitz.

Personnel Bureau Director, S. S. Selsky.

Housing Director, M. B. Abramski. International Bank Secretary: M. M. Mendels. International Monetary Fund

Managing Director: C. Gutt assisted by O. L. Altman.

Research Director: E. M. Bernstein; Senior Counsellor: Joseph Gold. World Health Organisation

Technology Director: Z. Deutschmann G. Meyer. International Refugee Organisation

M. Cohen and P. Jacobsen. U.N.O. Observer in Korea Col. Alfred Katzin.

The links of the vast Jewish organisation which controls Communism on both sides of the Iron Curtain extends into every country—not only into openly Communist groups and to the less important members of the Soviet Spy system where most of those so-far convicted have been Jews. The links are such as to show that those who control Soviet policy inside Russia are merely part of a much wider Jewish organization whose central control need not be in Russia at all. There can be no doubt that some of its most influential members are in America and very high up in American politics, that is, when you consider the following:—

Bernard Baruch—80 year old " Elder Statesman," " Key figure in politics," etc. . . . Chairman, War Industries Board from 1918, when he admitted before Congress that he had more power than the President. He was Adviser to Jas. F. Byrnes, War Mobilisation Director, from 1943. " One President after another has made him a confidante " said the paper American Hebrew of 17th June, 1946. He is a great friend of Mr. Churchill. He was Economic Adviser to U.S.A. Peace Commission in 1st World War and Master Mind of the New Deal Policy which has been called " Sovietism by Stealth."

He was often denounced by Senator Huey Long, who was shot dead in 1933. He first made his money in Wall Street and is now credited with owning 50 million dollars. He is generally regarded by Jews throughout the world as their leader and champion, a position previously held by Jacob H. Schiff (died 1920), the head partner in the Jewish Wall St. Bank of Kuhn Loeb and Co., which financed the Communist Revolution in Russia, providing considerable material and moral aid for Trotsky. Schiff personally had taken a close interest in promoting the revolutionary movement in Tzarist Russia from the days of the Russo-Japanese war which he financed for Japan, Baruch then is t