lack of democracy. Jewish nature is autocratic. Democracy is all right
for the rest of the world, but the Jew wherever he is found forms an
aristocracy of one sort or another. Democracy is merely a tool of a word
which Jewish agitators use to raise themselves to the ordinary level in
places where they are oppressed below it; but having reached the common
level they immediately make efforts for special privileges, as being
entitled to them--a process of which the late Peace Conference will
remain the most startling example. The Jews today are the only people
whose special and extraordinary privileges are written into the world's
Treaty of Peace. But more of that at another time.
No one now pretends to deny, except a few spokesmen who really do not
rule the thought of the Jews but are set forth for the sole benefit of
influencing Gentile thought, that the socially and economically
disruptive elements abroad in the world today are not only manned but
also moneyed by Jewish interests. For a long time this fact was held in
suspense owing to the vigorous denial of the Jews and the lack of
information on the part of those agencies of publicity to which the
public had looked for its information. But now the facts are coming
forth. Herzl's words are being proved to be true--"when we sink, we
become a revolutionary proletariat, the subordinate officers of the
revolutionary party"--and these words were first published in English in
1896, or 24 years ago.
Just now these tendencies are working in two directions, one for the
tearing down of the Gentile states all over the world, and the other for
the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine. The latter project has
the best wishes of the whole world, but it is far from having the best
wishes of the whole, or even the larger part, of Jewry. The Zionist
party makes a great deal of noise, but it is really an unrepresentative
minority. It can scarcely be designated as more than an unusually
ambitious colonization scheme. [See note on page 95.] It is doubtless
serving, however, as a very useful public screen for the carrying on of
secret activities. International Jews, the controllers of the world's
governmental and financial power, may meet anywhere, at any time, in war
time or peace time, and by giving out that they are only considering the
ways and means of opening up Palestine to the Jews, they easily escape
the suspicion of being together on any other business. The Allies and
enemies of the Gentile nations at war thus met and were not molested. It
was at a Zionist conference--the sixth, held in 1903--that the recent
war was exactly predicted, its progress and outcome indicated, and the
relation of the Jews to the Peace Treaty outlined.
That is to say, though Jewish nationalism exists, its enshrinement in a
state to be set up in Palestine is not the project that is engaging the
whole Jewish nation now. The Jews will not move to Palestine just yet;
it may be said that they will not move at all merely because of the
Zionist movement. Quite another motive will be the cause of the exodus
out of the Gentile nations, when the time for that exodus fully comes.
As Donald A. Cameron, late British Consul-General at Alexandria, a man
fully in sympathy with Zionism and much quoted in the Jewish press,
says: "The Jewish immigrants (into Palestine) will tire of taking in one
another's washing at three per cent, of winning one another's money in
the family, and their sons will hasten by train and steamer to win 10
per cent in Egypt * * * The Jew by himself in Palestine will eat his
head off; he will kick his stable to pieces." Undoubtedly the time for
the exodus--at least the motive for the exodus--is not yet here.
The political aspect of the Jewish Question which is now engaging at
least three of the great nations--France, Great Britain and the United
States--has to do with matters of the present organization of the Jewish
nation. Must it wait until it reaches Palestine to have a State, or is
it an organized State now? Does Jewry know what it is doing? Has it a
"foreign policy" with regard to the Gentiles? Has it a department which
is executing that foreign policy? Has this Jewish State, visible or
invisible, if it exists, a head? Has it a Council of State? And if any
of these things is so, who is aware of it?
The first impulsive answer of the Gentile mind would be "No" to all
these questions--it is a Gentile habit to answer impulsively. Never
having been trained in secrets or invisible unity, the Gentile
immediately concludes that such things cannot be, if for no other reason
than that they have not crossed his path and advertised themselves.
The questions, however, answered thus, require some explanation of the
circumstances which are visible to all men. If there is no deliberate
combination of Jews in the world, then the control which they have
achieved and the uniformity of the policies which they follow must be
the simple result, not of deliberate decisions, but of a similar nature
in all of them working out the same way. Thus, we might say that as a
love for adventure on the water drove the Britisher forth, so it made
him the world's greatest colonist. Not that he deliberately sat down
with himself and in formal manner resolved that he would become a
colonizer, but the natural outworking of his genius resulted that way.
But would this be a sufficient account of the British Empire?
Doubtless the Jews have the genius to do, wherever they go, the things
in which we see them excel. But does this account for the relations
which exist between the Jews of every country, for their world councils,
for their amazing foreknowledge of stupendous events which break with
shattering surprise on the rest of the world, for the smoothness and
preparedness with which they appear, at a given time in Paris, with a
world program on which they all agree?
The world has long suspected--at first only a few, then the secret
departments of the governments, next the intellectuals among the people,
now more and more the common people themselves--that not only are the
Jews a nation distinct from all the other nations and mysteriously
unable to sink their nationality by any means they or the world may
adopt to this end, but that they also constitute a state; that they are
nationally conscious, not only, but consciously united for a common
defense and for a common purpose. Revert to Theodor Herzl's definition
of the Jewish nation, as held together by a common enemy, and then
reflect that this common enemy is the Gentile world. Does this people
which knows itself to be a nation remain loosely unorganized in the face
of that fact? It would hardly be like Jewish astuteness in other fields.
When you see how closely the Jews are united by various organizations in
the United States, and when you see how with practiced hand they bring
those organizations to bear as if with tried confidence in their
pressure, it is at least not inconceivable that what can be done within
a country can be done, or has been done, between all the countries where
the Jews live.
At any rate, in the American Hebrew of June 25, 1920, Herman Bernstein
writes thus: "About a year ago a representative of the Department of
Justice submitted to me a copy of the manuscript of 'The Jewish Peril'
by Professor Nilus, and asked for my opinion of the work. He said that
the manuscript was a translation of a Russian book published in 1905
which was later suppressed. The manuscript was supposed to contain
'protocols' of the Wise Men of Zion and was supposed to have been read
by Dr. Herzl at a secret conference of the Zionist Congress at Basle. He
expressed the opinion that the work was probably that of Dr. Theodor
Herzl. . . . . He said that some American Senators who had seen the
manuscript were amazed to find that so many years ago a scheme had been
elaborated by the Jews which is now being carried out, and that
Bolshevism had been planned years ago by Jews who sought to destroy the
world."
This quotation is made merely to put on record the fact that it was a
representative of the Department of Justice of the United States
Government, who introduced this document to Mr. Bernstein, and expressed
a certain opinion upon it, namely, "that the work was probably that of
Theodor Herzl." Also that "some American Senators" were amazed to note
the comparison between what a publication of the year 1905 proposed and
what the year 1920 revealed.
The incident is all the more preoccupying because it occurred by action
of the representative of a government who today is very largely in the
hands of, or under the influence of, Jewish interests. It is more than
probable that as soon as the activity became known, the investigator was
stopped. But it is equally probable that whatever orders may have been
given and apparently obeyed, the investigation may not have stopped.
The United States Government was a little late in the matter, however.
At least four other world powers had preceded it, some by many years. A
copy of the Protocols was deposited in the British Museum and bears on
it the stamp of that institution, "August 10, 1906." The notes
themselves probably date from 1896, or the year of the utterances
previously quoted from Dr. Herzl. The first Zionist Congress convened in
1897.
The document was published in England recently under auspices that
challenged attention for it, in spite of the unfortunate title under
which it appeared. Eyre and Spottiswoode are the appointed printers to
the British Government, and it was they who brought out the pamphlet. It
was as if the Government Printing Office at Washington should issue them
in this country. While there was the usual outcry by the Jewish press,
the London Times in a review pronounced all the Jewish counter-attacks
as "unsatisfactory."
The Times noticed what will probably be the case in this country also
that the Jewish defenders leave the text of the protocols alone, while
they lay heavy emphasis on the fact of their anonymity. When they refer
to the substance of the document at all there is one form of words which
recurs very often--"it is the work of a criminal or a madman."
The protocols, without name attached, appearing for the most part in
manuscripts here and there, laboriously copied out from hand to hand,
being sponsored by no authority that was willing to stand behind it,
assiduously studied in the secret departments of the governments and
passed from one to another among higher officials, have lived on and on,
increasing in power and prestige by the sheer force of their contents. A
marvelous achievement for either a criminal or a madman! The only
evidence it has is that which it carries within it, and that internal
evidence is, as the London Times points out, the point on which
attention is to be focused, and the very point from which Jewish effort
has been expended to draw us away.
The interest of the Protocols at this time is their bearing on the
questions: Have the Jews an organized world system? What is its policy?
How is it being worked?
These questions all receive full attention in the Protocols. Whosoever
was the mind that conceived them possessed a knowledge of human nature,
of history and of statecraft which is dazzling in its brilliant
completeness, and terrible in the objects to which it turns its powers.
Neither a madman nor an intentional criminal, but more likely a
super-mind mastered by devotion to a people and a faith could be the
author, if indeed one mind alone conceived them. It is too terribly real
for fiction, too well-sustained for speculation, too deep in its
knowledge of the secret springs of life for forgery.
Jewish attacks upon it thus far make much of the fact that it came out
of Russia. That is hardly true. It came by way of Russia. It was
incorporated in a Russian book published about 1905 by a Professor
Nilus, who attempted to interpret the Protocols by events then going
forward in Russia. This publication and interpretation gave it a Russian
tinge which has been useful to Jewish propagandists in this country and
England, because these same propagandists have been very successful in
establishing in Anglo-Saxon mentalities a certain atmosphere of thought
surrounding the idea of Russia and Russians. One of the biggest humbugs
ever foisted on the world has been that foisted by Jewish propagandists,
principally on the American public, with regard to the temper and genius
of the truly Russian people. So, to intimate that the Protocols are
Russian, is partially to discredit them.
The internal evidence makes it clear that the Protocols were not written
by a Russian, nor originally in the Russian language, nor under the
influence of Russian conditions. But they found their way to Russia and
were first published there. They have been found by diplomatic officers
in manuscript in all parts of the world. Wherever Jewish power is able
to do so, it has suppressed them, sometimes under the supreme penalty.
Their persistence is a fact which challenges the mind. Jewish apologists
may explain that persistence on the ground that the Protocols feed the
anti-Semitic temper, and therefore are preserved for that service.
Certainly there was no wide nor deep anti-Semitic temper in the United
States to be fed or that felt the greed for agreeable lies to keep
itself alive. The progress of the Protocols in the United States can
only be explained on the ground that they supply light and give meaning
to certain previously observed facts, and that this light and meaning is
so startling as to give a certain standing and importance to these
otherwise unaccredited documents. Sheer lies do not live long, their
power soon dies. These Protocols are more alive than ever. They have
penetrated higher places than ever before. They have compelled a more
serious attitude to them than ever before.
The Protocols would not be more worthy of study if they bore, say, the
name of Theodor Herzl. Their anonymity does not decrease their power any
more than the omission of a painter's signature detracts from the art
value of a painting. Indeed, the Protocols are better without a known
source. For if it were definitely known that in France or Switzerland in
the year 1896, or thereabouts, a group of International Jews, assembled
in conference, drew up a program of world conquest it would still have
to be shown that such a program was more than a mere vagary, that it was
confirmed at large by efforts to fulfill it. The Protocols are a World
Program--there is no doubt anywhere of that. Whose program, is stated
within the articles themselves. But as for outer confirmation, which
would be the more valuable--a signature, or six signatures, or twenty
signatures, or a 25-year unbroken line of effort fulfilling that
program?
The point of interest for this and other countries is not that a
"criminal or a madman" conceived such a program, but that, when
conceived, this program found means of getting itself fulfilled in its
most important particulars. The document is comparatively unimportant;
the conditions to which it calls attention are of a very high degree of
importance.
[NOTE: The statements indicated are those of non-Zionist Jews. The real
Jewish program is that program which is executed. It was the Zionist
program that was followed by the Peace Conference. It must therefore be
regarded as the official program.]
[Issue of July 10, 1920.]
"We are a people--One people . . . . When we sink, we become a
revolutionary proletariat, the subordinate officers of a revolutionary
party; when we rise, there rises also our terrible power of the purse."
--Theodore Herzl, "A Jewish State," pp. 5, 23.
IX.
The Historic Basis of Jewish Imperialism
A great unloosening of speech with reference to the Jewish Question and
the Jewish program for world power has occurred in this country since
the beginning of this series of articles. It is now possible to
pronounce the word "Jew" in a perfectly serious discussion, without
timidity, or without intimidation. Heretofore that has been regarded as
the special prerogative of the Jewish publicists themselves and they
have used the name exclusively in well-organized and favorable
propaganda. They can oust portions of Shakespeare from the public
schools on the ground that the Jews are offended; they can demand the
removal of one of Sargent's paintings from the Boston Library because it
represents the Synagogue in a decline. But when anything emanates from
the Gentile side which indicates that the Gentile is also conscious of
the Jew, then the charge of prejudice is instantly and strongly made.
The effect of that in this country has been a ban on speech which has
had few parallels in our history. Recently at a banquet a speaker used
the term "Jews" in reference to the actions of a group of Jewish
bankers. A Jewish guest leaped to his feet demanding to know if the
speaker considered it "American" to single out a race that way. The
speaker replied, "I do, sir," and received the approval of the audience.
In that particular part of the country, business men's tongues had been
tied for years by the unwritten law that Jews must never by singled out
as Jews.
No one would have predicted a year ago that a newspaper like the Chicago
Tribune could have convinced itself that it was good newspaper policy to
print in the first column of its first page a copyrighted article on the
Jewish program for world rule, printing the word "Jew" in large letters
in its headline, and abstaining from editorial retouching of the word
"Jew" in the body of the article. The usual plan is to do what an
eastern newspaper did when dealing with the same subject: wherever the
term "international Jew" occurred in the article which it printed, it
was retouched to "financiers."
The Chicago Tribune, however, on Saturday, June 19, 1920, printed in the
first column of the first page a cable dispatch from John Clayton, its
special correspondent, under the heading: "Trotsky Leads Jew-Radicals to
World Rule. Bolshevism Only a Tool for His Scheme."
The first paragraph reads as follows:
"For the last two years army intelligence officers, members of the
various secret service organizations of the Entente, have been bringing
in reports of a world revolutionary movement other than Bolshevism. At
first these reports confused the two, but latterly the lines they have
taken have begun to be more and more clear."
As previously stated in THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT, our own secret service
is one of these, though there is reason to believe that because of the
influence of Jews upon the government these investigations were not
pursued with the persistency that might otherwise have been given them.
However, we know from Jewish sources, not to mention any other, that the
Department of Justice of the United States was at one time interested
enough to make inquiries.
What the Tribune writer does in the above paragraph is to show that this
interest has been sustained for two years by officials of the Entente, a
fact which ought to be borne in mind by those who declare that the whole
matter is of German instigation. The emergence of the Jewish Question
into American thought was immediately met by a statement from Jewish
sources that it was a German importation, and that the anti-Semitism
which flowed over Germany and resulted in cleaning out the overwhelming
Jewish revolutionary influences from the new German Government, was only
a trick to throw the blame for the defeat of Germany on the Jews.
American rabbis are even now unitedly preaching that history shows that
every great war is followed by a new "attack" on the Jews. It is
undoubtedly a fact that every war newly opens the people's eyes to the
power which international Jewish financiers exert with reference to
war--and it would seem that such a fact is worthy of a better
explanation than that of "prejudice." However, as the Tribune article
shows, and as all the facts confirm, the interest is not confined to the
German side; indeed, it is not even strongest there. It is "the various
secret service organizations of the Entente" that have been most active
in the matter.
The second paragraph further distinguishes between Bolshevism and Jewish
imperialism:
"Bolshevism aims at the overthrow of existing society and the
establishment of an international brotherhood of men who work with their
hands as rulers of the world. The second movement aims for the
establishment of a new racial domination of the world. So far as the
British, French and our own department's inquiry have been able to
trace, the moving spirits in the second scheme are Jewish radicals."
Other statements in the article are:
"Within the ranks of communism is a group of this party, but it does not
stop there. To its leaders, communism is only an incident."
(This will recall the statement of Lord Eustace Percy, quoted last week
from the Canadian Jewish Chronicle--"Not because the Jew cares for the
positive side of radical philosophy, not because he desires to be a
partaker in Gentile nationalism or Gentile democracy, but because no
existing Gentile system of government is anything but distasteful to
him.")
"They are ready to use the Islamic revolt, hatred by the central empires
for England, Japan's designs on India, and commercial rivalry between
America and Japan."
"As any movement of world revolution must be, this is primarily
anti-Anglo-Saxon."
"The organization of the world Jewish-radical movement has been
perfected in almost every land."
"The aims of the Jewish-radical party have nothing of altruism behind
them beyond liberation of their own race."
It will be conceded that these are rather startling statements. If they
were found in a propagandist publication of no responsibility, the
average reader might pass them by as preposterous, so little does the
average reader know of the secret influences which shape his life and
frame his problems. But appearing in a great newspaper, they must
receive a different evaluation.
Nor did the Tribune stop at the news article. On June 21, 1920, an
editorial appeared entitled "World Mischief." The editorial is evidently
an effort to prevent possible misunderstanding of what the news article
was driving at.
"The Jewish phase of the movement, he asserts, aims at a new racial
domination of the world . . ."
The Tribune also says that while it is perhaps natural for the Jews of
other countries to be engaged in this "world mischief," the Jews of
England and the United States "are loyal nationalists and conservative
upholders of the national traditions." It were well if this were true.
Perhaps it is true of tens of thousands of Jews as individuals; it
certainly is not true of those internationalists who pull the strings of
all the governments and who during the last six tragic years have been
meddling with world affairs in a way which must soon be plainly told.
The unfortunate circumstance is that all the American and English Jews
must for a time feel a distress which no one desires them to feel, which
everyone would do much to save them from, but which seems inevitable
until the whole story is told and until the mass of the Jews themselves
cut off from their name and support some who now receive their deepest
homage.
It is worth while observing the contrasts and similarities between the
Gentile and Jewish reaction to this alleged movement to establish a
Jewish imperialism over the world. Jewish publicists first deny it
without qualification. It is all false, all a lie, all hatched up by
enemies of the Jews in order to stir up hatred and murder. As the
evidence accumulates, the Jewish tone changes: "Well, suppose it is
true," the publicists say; "is it any wonder that the poor oppressed
Jews, driven to madness through their sufferings, should dream dreams of
overthrowing their enemies and placing themselves in the seat of
authority?"
The Gentile mind, confronted with the statement, says: "Yes, but they
are Russian Jews. Don't mind them. American Jews are all right. They
would never be taken in by anything like that." Going a little deeper
into the subject, the Gentile mind is forced to admit the existence of
some kind of a subversive world movement, the power of which has shaken
even this country, and that the moving spirits in it are revolutionary
Jews. And then the tendency from that point forward is either to fall in
with the theory that the movement is really Jewish in its origin,
agitation, execution and purpose, or to set up the theory that it is a
"world movement" undoubtedly, but only incidentally Jewish. The end of
both Jewish and Gentile reaction is an admission that something
answering to the movement charged actually exists.