newspaper no one will question, has this to say in a lengthy editorial
on the subject:
"In spite of this, it would be a tremendous mistake to conclude that the
Jewish peril, given another name and atmosphere, does not exist. It
might, indeed, be renamed, out of one of the grandest of the books of
the Old Testament, 'the terror by night,' for it is, essentially, the
Psalmist's concept of the forces of mental evil at which, consciously or
unconsciously, Professor Nilus is aiming. In other words, that a secret
international political organization exists, working unremittingly by
means of its Bureau of Psychology, though the world which should be
awake to it is entirely asleep to it, is, to the man who can read the
signs of the times, a thing unquestionable."
The Monitor gives warning against prejudice and disregard of the laws of
evidence which is exceedingly timely and is, indeed, the desire of
anyone who has ever undertaken to deal with this subject, but too often
it is a disregard of facts and not of evidence that makes the
difficulty. It is safe to say that most of the prejudice today is
against the facts, it has not been caused by them.
There are two preconceptions to be guarded against in making an approach
to this question. One is that the Jewish imperialistic program, if such
a thing exists, is of recent origin. Upon the mere mention of such a
program, Gentiles are likely to think that it was formulated last week,
or last year, or within recent time. That need not be the case at all,
and in Jewish matters it is very likely not to be the case. It is very
easy to see how, if the program were to be formulated today, it would be
wholly different from the one which is to be considered. The kind of
program that would be made today indeed exists too, but it is not to be
compared in extent and profundity with that which has existed for a very
long time. Perfect constitutions of invisible governments are not the
creations of secret conventions; they are the accumulated thought and
experience of centuries. Moreover, no matter how prone a modern
generation may be to disregard such things, the mere fact that they may
have existed as a secret racial ideal for centuries is a powerful
argument for their respectable acceptance, if not active execution, by
the generation that now is. There is no idea deeper in Judaism than that
Jews constitute a Chosen People and that their future is to be more
glorious than their past. A large part of the Christian world accepts
that, too, and it may well be true, but in a moral universe it cannot
come to pass by the methods which have been and are being used.
But to mention the ancient lineage of the idea of the Chosen People is
merely to suggest that of all the programs that may have gathered round
it to assist its full historical realization, it is not strange that
there should be one very old one to which the wisest minds of Israel
have contributed their best of mind and heart to insure its success.
That there is such a plan has been the belief of many deep delvers in
the hidden things of the world, and that such a plan has at times had
its dress rehearsals, so to speak, on a limited stage, as if in
preparation for its grand finale on the universal stage, is another
belief held by men at whose knowledge it is impossible to cavil.
So, then, it may be that we are dealing with something for which
present-day Jews, even the more important internationalists, are not
originally responsible. It may have come to them as part of their
ancient Jewish inheritance. Certainly, if it were a mere modern thing,
hastily conceived and thrown together after the modern fashion, it could
be expected to disappear in the same era which saw it born.
Another preconception to be guarded against is that every Jew one meets
has secret knowledge of this program. That is not the case. With the
general idea of the ultimate triumph of Israel every Jew who has
retained contact with his people is familiar, but with the special plans
which for centuries have existed in formulated form for the attainment
of that triumph, the average Jew is no more familiar than anyone
else--no more so than was the average German with the secret plans of
the Pan-Germanic party whose ideas started and guided the recent war.
The average Jew enters into the plans of the secret group just to this
extent, except in specially selected cases: It is perfectly understood
that the consummation of the Jewish triumph will not be distasteful to
any Jew, and if the methods to be used toward the end are a bit violent,
every Jew can be depended upon to see in that violence a very
insufficient retribution visited upon the Gentile world for the
sufferings which it has caused the sons of Judah throughout the
centuries.
Still, with even these preconceptions guarded against, there is no
escape from the conclusion that if such a program of Jewish world
imperialism exists today, it must exist with the cognizance and active
support of certain individuals, and that these groups of individuals
must have somewhere an official head.
This is, perhaps, the one point at which more investigators stop than at
any other. The idea of a Jewish autocrat is too strange for the mind
which has not been much in contact with the main question. And yet there
is no race which more instinctively supports autocracy than does the
Jewish race, no race which more craves and respects position. It is
their sense of the value of position that explains the main course their
activities take. The Jew is primarily a money-maker for the reason that
up to this time money is the only means he knows by which to gain
position. The Jews who have gained position for any other reason are
comparatively few. This is not a Gentile gibe; it is the position of a
famous Anglo-Jewish physician, Dr. Barnard Von Oven, who wrote: "All
other means of distinction are denied him; he must rise by wealth, or
not at all. And if, as he well knows, to insure wealth will be to insure
rank, respect and attention in society, does the blame rest with him who
endeavors to acquire wealth for the distinction which it will purchase,
or with that society which so readily bows down to the shrine of
Mammon?"
The Jew is not averse to kings, only to the state of things which
prevents a Jewish king. The future autocrat of the world is to be a
Jewish king, sitting upon the throne of David, so ancient prophecies and
the documents of the imperialistic program agree.
Is such a king in the world now? If not, the men who could choose a king
are in the world. There has been no king of the Jews since before the
Christian Era, but until about the eleventh century there were Princes
of the Exile, those who represented the headship of the Jews who were
dispersed through the nations. They were and still are called
"exilarchs," or Princes of the Exile. They were attended by the wise men
of Israel, they held court, they gave the law to their people. They
lived abroad wherever their circumstances or convenience dictated, in
Christian or Mohammedan countries. Whether the office was discontinued
with the last publicly known exilarch or merely disappeared from the
surface of history, whether today it is entirely abandoned or exists in
another form, are questions which must wait. That there are offices of
world jurisdiction held by Jews is well known. That there are world
organizations of Jews--organizations, that is, within the very strong
solidarity of the Jewish nation itself--is well known. That there is
world unity on certain Jewish activities, defensive and offensive, is
well known. There is nothing in the condition or thought of the Jews
which would render the existence today of an exilarch distasteful to
them; indeed, the thought would be very comfortable.
The Jewish Encyclopedia remarks: "Curiously enough, the exilarchs are
still mentioned in the Sabbath services of the Ashkenazim ritual * * *
The Jews of the Sephardic ritual have not preserved this anachronism,
nor was it retained in most of the Reform synagogues of the nineteenth
century."
Is there, then, a Jewish Sanhedrin?--a governing or counseling body of
Jews who take oversight of the affairs of their people throughout the
world?
The Jewish Sanhedrin was a most interesting institution. Its origin and
method of constitution are obscure. It consisted of 71 members, with the
president, and performed the functions of a political senate. There is
nothing to show whence the Sanhedrin derived its authority. It was not
an elective body. It was not democratic. It was not representative. It
was not responsible to the people. In these qualities, it was typically
Jewish. The Sanhedrin was chosen by the prince or priest, not with the
purpose of safeguarding the people's interest, but to assist the ruler
in the work of administration. It was thus assembled by call, or it was
self-perpetuating, calling its own members. The arrangement seems to
have been that well-known device by which an aristocracy can maintain
itself in power whatever the political construction of the nation may
be. The Jewish Encyclopedia says: "The Sanhedrin, which was entirely
aristocratic in character, probably assumed its own authority, since it
was composed of members of the most influential families of the nobility
and priesthood."
This body was flanked by a similar body, which governed the religious
interests of the nation, the members being drawn apparently from classes
nearer the common people.
The Sanhedrin exercised authority not only over the Jews of Palestine,
but wherever they were scattered throughout the world. As a senate
exercising direct political authority, it ceased with the downfall of
the Jewish State in the year 70, but there are indications of its
continuance as an advisory body down to the fourth century.
In 1806, in order to satisfy the mind of Napoleon upon some questions
which had arisen concerning the Jews, an Assembly of Notables was
called, whose membership consisted of prominent Jews of France. They, in
turn, to bring the sanction of all Jewry to the answers which they
should give Napoleon, convoked the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin assembled in
Paris on February 9, 1807. It followed the prescribed ancient forms; it
was comprised of Jews from all parts of Europe; it was assembled to put
the whole authority of Jewry behind any compact the French Jews may have
been able to make with Napoleon.
In putting forth its decisions, this Sanhedrin of 1807 declared that it
was in all respects like the ancient Sanhedrin, "a legal assembly vested
with power of passing ordinances in order to promote the welfare of
Israel."
The significance of these facts is this: Whatever the leaders of the
Jews may do today in the way of maintaining the policy and constitution
of Israel, would not constitute a new departure. It would not signify a
new attitude. It would not be evidence of a new plan.
It would be entirely natural, Jewish solidarity being what it is, that
the Sanhedrin should still be continued. The ancient Sanhedrin appears
to have had a group of ten who were somewhat exalted in importance above
the rest; it would be perfectly natural if the leaders of the Jews were
today divided into committees, by countries or by objects.
There are always being held, year by year, world meetings of the
principal Jews of all lands. They come together whenever called, to the
disregard of everything else. Great judges from the high courts of the
various countries, international financiers, Jewish orators of the
"liberal type" who have the ear of the Gentiles, political maneuverers
from all the parties represented in the world, they assemble wherever
they will, and the subjects of their deliberations are made known only
to the extent they will. It is not to be supposed that all of the
attendants on these conventions are members of the inner circle. The
list of delegates will show scores of persons with whom no one would
associate Lord Reading and Judge Brandeis. If the modern Sanhedrin
meets, and it would be the most natural thing in the world if it should,
we may be sure it meets within the closed circle of those persons which
the Jewish aristocracy of money, intellect and power approves.
The machinery of a Jewish world government exists ready-made. The Jew is
convinced that he has the best religion, the best morality, the best
method of education, the best social standards, the best ideal of
government. He would not have to go outside the circle of that which he
considers best to get anything which he may need to advance the welfare
of his people, or to execute any program which may have to do with the
outside world.
It is the ancient machinery that the international Jew uses in all those
activities which he permits the world to see in part. There are
gatherings of the financial, political and intellectual chief rulers of
the Jews. These gatherings are announced for one or another
thing--sometimes. Sometimes there is a gathering of Jews in a world
capital, with no announced purpose. They all appear in one city, confer
and depart.
Whether there is a recognized head to all of this is yet to be
disclosed. There can be little doubt, however, as to the existence of
what may be called a "foreign policy," that is, a definite point of view
and plan of action with reference to the Gentile world. The Jew feels
that he is in the midst of enemies, but he also feels that he is a
member of a people--"one people." He must have some policy with regard
to the outer world. He cannot help but consider present conditions, he
cannot consider them without being stirred to speculate upon what the
outcome must be, and he cannot speculate on the outcome without in some
manner endeavoring to make it as he would like it to be.
The invisible government of the Jews, its attitude toward the Gentile
world, its policy with regard to the future, are not, then, the abnormal
things that some would make them appear. Given the Jewish position, they
are of all things most natural. Jewish existence in this world is not
such as woos the Jew into sleepy contentment; it is such as stirs him
into organization against future contingencies and into programs which
may shape those contingencies to the benefit of his race. That there
should be a Sanhedrin of the Jews, a world body of the leading men of
all countries; that there should even be an exilarch, a visible and
recognized head of the Sanhedrin, mystically foreshadowing the autocrat
to come; that there should even be a world program, just as every
government has its foreign policy, are not strange, uncanny
suppositions. They grow normally out of the situation itself.
And it is also natural that not every Jew should know this. The
Sanhedrin always was the aristocracy, and would be today. When rabbis
cry from their pulpits that they know nothing about this thing, they are
doubtless telling the truth. What the international Jew depends upon is
the likelihood of every Jew approving that which brings power and
prestige to his people. At any rate, it is well enough known that
however little the ordinary Jewish leader may have been told about world
programs, he regards with the greatest respect and confidence the very
men who must put these programs through, if these exist at all.
The twenty-fourth Protocol of the Learned Elders of Zion has this to
say:
"Now I will discuss the manner in which the roots of the house of King
David will penetrate to the deepest strata of the earth. This dynasty,
even to this day, has given the power of controlling world affairs to
our wise men, the educational directors of all human thought."
This would indicate, if reliable, that, as the Protocol goes on to
recite, the Autocrat himself has not appeared, but the dynasty, or the
Davidic line in which he must appear, have entrusted the work of
preparing for him to the Wise Men of Zion. These wise men are
represented not only as preparing those who exercise rulership over
Judaism's affairs, but also as framing and influencing the world's
thought toward ends which shall be propitious to these plans. Whatever
may be hidden in the program, it is certain that its execution or the
effects of its execution cannot be hidden. Therefore, it may be possible
to find in the outer world the clues which, traced back to their source,
reveal the existence of a program, whose promise for the world, good or
bad, ought to be widely known.
[Issue of July 17, 1920.]
X.
An Introduction to the "Jewish Protocols"
The documents most frequently mentioned by those who are interested in
the theory of Jewish World Power rather than in the actual operation of
that power in the world today, are those 24 documents known as "The
Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion."
The Protocols have attracted much attention in Europe, having become the
center of an important storm of opinion in England only recently, but
discussion of them in the United States has been limited. These are the
documents concerning which the Department of Justice was making
inquiries more than a year ago, and which were given publication in
London by Eyre and Spottiswoode, the official printers to the British
Government.
Who it was that first entitled these documents with the name of the
"Elders of Zion" is not known. It would be possible without serious
mutilation of the documents to remove all hint of Jewish authorship, and
yet retain all the main points of the most comprehensive program for
world subjugation that has ever come to public knowledge.
Yet it must be said that thus to eliminate all hint of Jewish authorship
would be to bring out a number of contradictions which do not exist in
the Protocols in their present form. The purpose of the plan revealed in
the Protocols is to undermine all authority in order that a new
authority in the form of autocracy may be set up. Such a plan could not
emanate from a ruling class which already possessed authority, although
it might emanate from anarchists. But anarchists do not avow autocracy
as the ultimate condition they seek. The authors might be conceived as a
company of French Subversives such as existed at the time of the French
Revolution and had the infamous Duc d'Orleans as their leader, but this
would involve a contradiction between the fact that those Subversives
have passed away, and the fact that the program announced in these
Protocols is being steadily carried out, not only in France, but
throughout Europe and very noticeably in the United States.
In their present form which bears evidence of being their original form,
there is no contradiction. The allegation of Jewish authorship seems
essential to the consistency of the plan.
If these documents were the forgeries which Jewish apologists claim them
to be, the forgers would probably have taken pains to make Jewish
authorship so clear that their anti-Semitic purpose could easily have
been detected. But only twice is the term "Jew" used in them. After one
has read much further than the average reader usually cares to go into
such matters, one comes upon the plans for the establishment of the
World Autocrat, and only then it is made clear of what lineage he is to
be.
But all through the documents there is left no doubt as to the people
against whom the plan is aimed. It is not aimed against aristocracy as
such. It is not aimed against capital as such. It is not aimed against
government as such. Very definite provisions are made for the enlistment
of aristocracy, capital and government for the execution of the plan. It
is aimed against the people of the world who are called "Gentiles." It
is the frequent mention of "Gentiles" that really decides the purpose of
the documents. Most of the destructive type of "liberal" plans aim at
the enlistment of the people as helpers; this plan aims at the
degeneration of the people in order that they may be reduced to
confusion of mind and thus manipulated. Popular movements of a "liberal"
kind are to be encouraged, all the disruptive philosophies in religion,
economics, politics and domestic life are to be sown and watered, for
the purpose of so disintegrating social solidarity that a definite plan,
herein set forth, may be put through without notice, and the people then
molded to it when the fallacy of these philosophies is shown.
The formula of speech is not, "We Jews will do this," but "The Gentiles
will be made to think and do these things." With the exception of a few
instances in the closing Protocols, the only distinctive racial term
used is "Gentiles."
To illustrate: the first indication of this kind comes in the first
Protocol in this way:
"The great qualities of the people--honesty and frankness--are
essentially vices in politics, because they dethrone more surely and
more certainly than does the strongest enemy. These qualities are
attributes of Gentile rule; we certainly must not be guided by them."
And again:
"On the ruins of the hereditary aristocracy of the Gentiles we have set
up the aristocracy of our educated class, and over all the aristocracy
of money. We have established the basis of this new aristocracy on the
basis of riches, which we control, and on the science guided by our wise
men."
Again:
"We will force up wages, which however will be of no benefit to workers,
for we at the same time will cause a rise in the prices of prime
necessities, pretending that this is due to the decline of agriculture
and of cattle raising. We will also artfully and deeply undermine the
sources of production by instilling in the workmen ideas of anarchy and
encourage them in the use of alcohol, at the same time taking measures
to drive all the intellectual forces of the Gentiles from the land."
(A forger with anti-Semitic malice might have written this any time
within the last five years, but these words were in print at least 14
years ago according to British evidence, a copy having been in the
British Museum since 1906, and they were circulated in Russia a number
of years prior.)
The above point continues: "That the true situation shall not be noticed
by the Gentiles prematurely we will mask it by a pretended effort to
serve the working classes and promote great economic principles, for
which an active propaganda will be carried on through our economic
theories."
These quotations will illustrate the style of the Protocols in making
reference to the parties involved. It is "we" for the writers, and
"Gentiles" for those who are being written about. This is brought out
very clearly in the Fourteenth Protocol:
"In this divergence between Gentiles and ourselves in ability to think
and reason is to be seen clearly the seal of our election as the chosen
people, as higher human beings, in contrast with the Gentiles who have
merely instinctive and animal minds. They observe, but they do not
foresee, and they invent nothing (except perhaps material things). It is
clear from this that nature herself predestined us to rule and guide the
world."
This, of course, has been the Jewish method of dividing humanity from
the earliest times. The world was only Jew and Gentile; all that was not
Jew was Gentile.
The use of the word Jew in the Protocol may be illustrated by this
passage in the eighth section:
"For the time being, until it will be safe to give responsible
government positions to our brother Jews, we shall entrust them to
people whose past and whose characters are such that there is an abyss
between them and the people."