World Revolution: Plot Against Civilization - Nesta Webster |
Bolshevism—Role of the Jews—The Protocols of Nilus—German Organisation.
But now we come to the further question—who are the modern Illuminati, the authors of the plot? What is their ultimate object in wishing to destroy civilization? What do they hope to gain by it? It is this apparent absence of motive, this seemingly aimless campaign of destruction carried on by the Bolsheviks of Russia, that has led many people to believe in the theory of a Jewish conspiracy to destroy Christianity. And indeed, if one examines the present regime of Russia apart from the revolutionary movement of the last 140 years, this provides a very conclusive solution to the problem. To the unprejudiced observer Bolshevism in Russia may well appear to be a wholly Jewish movement.
For many years before the present revolution the Jews, had played a leading part in the forces of disruption in that country. The correspondent of The Times at Odessa in 1905 described the riots that took place there at the end of October when "excited Jewish factory girls donned red blouses and ribbons and openly flaunted them in the faces of the Cossacks." Out of a population of 430,000 inhabitants over one-third were Jews, and about 15,000 took part in the rioting.
"The main part of these demonstrators were students and Jews; . . . excited Jews unblushingly exhibited Republican emblems," red flags were unfurled, the Russian national flag was dishonoured by having all colour except the strip of red torn from it, the Emperor's portrait was mutilated. In the fight that ensued over 400 Jews and 500 Christians were killed. The writer of this article further showed the demonstration to have been organized at headquarters; "amongst other Socialistic fraternities the Central Jewish organization located in Switzerland sent emissaries from its branches in Warsaw and Poland to Odessa."
Mr. Wickham Steed, in his book The Hapsburg Monarchy, quotes a letter written in this same year of 1905 by a semi-Jew on the question of the Jews in Hungary, in which this remarkable passage occurs:
"There is a Jewish question and this terrible race means not only to master one of the grandest warrior nations in the world, but it means, and is consciously striving, to enter the lists against the other great race of the north (the Russians), the only one that has hitherto stood between it and its goal of world-power. Am I wrong? Tell me. For already England and France are, if not actually dominated by Jews, very nearly so, while the United States, by the hands of those whose grip they are ignorant of, are slowly but surely yielding to that international and insidious hegemony. Remember that I am half a Jew by blood, but that in all I have power to be I am not."
Twelve years later this prophecy was terribly fulfilled. For, whatever the Jewish Press may say to the contrary, the preponderance of Jews amongst the Bolsheviks of both Hungary and Russia has been too evident to need further proof. The Executive of the Communist Government established in Hungary in March 1919 consisted in a Directorate of Five which included four Jews—Bela Kun, Bela Vago, Sigmund Kunn, and Joseph Pogany. The Secretary was another Jew—Alpari. Szamuelly, also a Jew, was the head of the Terrorist troops. In Russia Jews have again predominated. An article in The Times for March 29, 1919, stated that:
"Of the twenty or thirty commissaries or leaders who provide the central machinery of the Bolshevist movement not less than 75 per cent are Jews. . . .If Lenin is the brains' of the movement, the Jews provide the executive officers. Of the leading commissaries, Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kameneff, Stekloff, SverdlofI, Uritsky, Joffe, Rakovsky, Radek, Menjinsky, Larin, Bronski, Zaalkind, Volodarsky, PetrofT, Litvinoff, Smirdovitch, and •Vovrowsky are all of the Jewish race, while among the minor Soviet officials the number is legion."
In fact the Jewish Press has on occasions admitted this influence in Bolshevism. Thus in The Communist, a newspaper published in Kharkoff (number for April 12, 1919), we find Mr. M. Cohan boasting that,
". . . without exaggeration, it may be said that the great Russian social revolution was indeed accomplished by the hands of the Jews. . . . It is true that there are no Jews in the ranks of the Red Army as far as privates are concerned, but in the committees and in Soviet organizations, as Commissars, the Jews are gallantly leading the masses of the Russian proletariat to victory. . . . The symbol of Jewry, which for centuries has struggled against capitalism, has become also the symbol of the Russian proletariat, which can be seen even in the face of the adoption of the Red five-pointed star, which in former times, as it is well known, was "the symbol of Zionism and Jewry."
This star from the beginning of the Bolshevik revolution has decorated the caps of Lenin's guards.
Even in England the activities of Jews are clearly evident in the Bolshevik camp; the audiences at "red flag meetings" have been observed to contain a very large Jewish element, Jewish interrupters have been sent to shout down speakers at patriotic meetings, Jewish agitators have taken part in every riot and urged young British hooligans to violence, and, according to the admission of the Daily Herald, a very large number of its readers are Jews. The Jewish Chronicle has in fact frankly declared that:
"There is much in the fact of Bolshevism itself, in the fact that so many Jews are Bolsheviks, in the fact that the ideals of Bolshevism at many points are consonant with the finest ideals of Judaism."
In the face of all this overwhelming evidence on the ro1e of the Jews in the revolutionary movement, what wonder that the amazing Protocols of the Elders of Zion, first published in Russian by Sergye Nilus in 1902 and in English under the title of The Jewish Peril in 1920, came as a revelation and appeared to provide the clue to the otherwise insoluble problem of Bolshevism? Here was the whole explanation—a conspiracy of the Jewish race that began perhaps at Golgotha, that hid itself behind the ritual of Freemasonry, that provided the driving force behind the succeeding revolutionary upheavals, that inspired the sombre hatred of Marx, the malignant fury of Trotzky, and all this with the fixed and unalterable purpose of destroying that Christianity which is hateful to it. Is this theory true? Possibly. But in the opinion of the present writer it has not been proved—it does not provide the whole key to the mystery.
The only way in which the truth can be reached is by scientific investigation. And the first step in the process of establishing the authenticity or non-authenticity of the famous Protocols is to endeavour to trace their origin. Now to any one familiar with the language of Secret Societies the ideas set forth in the Protocols are not new; on the contrary, many passages have a strange ring of familiarity. To the present writer the thought that recurred at every page was: "Where have I read that before?" and by degrees the conviction grew: "But this is simply Illuminism!" So striking, indeed, are certain analogies not only between the code of Weishaupt and the Protocols, but between the Protocols and later Secret Societies, continuations of the Illuminati, that a continuity of idea throughout the movement becomes apparent. The following parallels may prove of interest as evidence of the theory that the Protocols are founded on much earlier models:
Compare excerpts from The Protocols (Jewish Peril) to those from Weishaupt's Illuminism (from Barruel and Robinson).
Excerpts from the Protocols:
A1. He who wants to rule must have recourse to cunning and hypocrisy (p. 3) . . . . We must not stop short before bribery, deceit, and treachery, if these are to serve the achievement of our cause (p. 6.).
B1. The end justifies the means. In making our plans we must pay attention not so much to what is good and moral, as to what is necessary and profitable (P. 4).
C1. With the Press we will deal in the following manner. . . . We will harness it and will guide it with firm reins; we will also have to gain control of all other publishing firms (p. 40). . . . . All news is received by a few agencies, in which it is centralized from all parts of the world. When we attain power these agencies will belong to us entirely and will only publish such news as we allow(p. 40). . . . . No one desirous of attacking us with his pen would find a publisher (p. 42).
D1. Our programme will induce a third part of the populace to watch the remainder from a pure sense of duty and from the principle of voluntary government service. Then it will not be considered dishonourable to be a spy; on the contrary, it will be regarded as praiseworthy (p. 65).
E1. We will transform the universities and reconstruct them according to our own plans. The heads of the universities and their professors will be specially prepared by means of elaborate secret programmes of action. . . . They will be very carefully nominated, etc. (p. 60).
F1. We intend to appear as though we were the liberators of the labouring man. . . . We shall suggest to him to join the ranks of our armies of Socialists, Anarchists, and Communists. The latter we always patronize, pretending to help them out of fraternal principle and the general interest of humanity evoked by our socialistic masonry (p. 12).
G1. In the so-considered leading countries we have circulated an insane, dirty, and disgusting literature (p. 49).
H1. Our Sovereign must be irreproachable (p. 86).
I1. In the place of existing governments we will place a monster, which will be called the Administration of the Super-government. Its hands will be outstretched like far-reaching pincers, and it will have such an organization at its disposal that it will not possibly be able to fail in subduing all countries (p. 22). Our International Super-government (p. 28).
Excerpts from Illuminism, from Robison and Barruel
A1. Apply yourselves to the art of counterfeit, to hiding and masking yourselves in observing others (Barruel, iii. 27, p. 40).
B1. The end sanctifies the means. The goodj/of the Order justifies calumnies, poisonings, murders, perjuries, treasons, rebellions; briefly, all that the prejudices of men call crimes (Barruel, iv. 182, 189,).
C1. We must take care that our writers be well puffed and that the reviewers do not depreciate them; therefore we must endeavour by every means to gain over the reviewers and journalists; and we must also try to gain the booksellers, who in time will see it is their interest to side with us (Robison, p. 191).
If a writer publishes anything that attracts notice, and is in itself just, but does not accord with our plan, we must endeavour to win him over or decry him (Robison, p. 194).
D1. Every person shall be made a spy on another and on all around him (Spartacus to Cato; Robison. p. 135).
E1. We must acquire the direction of education—of church management—of the professorial chair and of the pulpit . . . p. 191).
F1. We must preach the warmest concern for humanity and make people indifferent to all other relations (Robison, p. 191).
We must win the common people in every comer (Robison p. 194).
G1. We must try to obtain an influence ... in the printing-houses, booksellers' shops. . . . Painting and engraving are highly worth our care (Robison, p. 196. Note adds: "They were strongly suspected of having published some scandalous caricatures and some very immoral prints. They scrupled at no means, however base, for corrupting the nation.")
H1. An Illuminated Regent shall be one of the most perfect of men. He shall be prudent, foreseeing, astute, irreproachable (Instruction B. for the grade of Regent).
I1. It is necessary to establish a universal regime of domination, a form of government that will spread out over the whole world . . . (Barruel, iii. 97).
Compare excerpts from The Protocols (Jewish Peril) to those from the Permanet Instructions of the Alta Vendita (Haute Vente Romane, from Cretineau-Joly)
Excerpts from the Protocols:
A2. We will destroy the family life of the Gentiles (p. 31). . . . . We will also distract them by various kinds of amusement, games, pastimes, passions, public houses, etc. (p. 47).
B2. The people of the Christians, bewildered by alcohol, their youths turned crazy by classics and early debauchery, to which they have been instigated by our agents, . . . by our women in places of amusement—to the latter I add the socalled "society women "—thenvoluntary followers in corruption and luxury (p. 5).i
C2. The masonic lodge throughout the world unconsciously acts as a mask for our purpose (p. 16).
D2. Most people who enter secret societies are adventurers, who want somehow to make their way in life, and who are not seriously minded. With such people it will be easy for us to pursue our object, and we will make them set our machinery in motion (p. 52).
E2. We employ in our service people of all opinions and all parties; men desiring to re-establish monarchies, Socialists, etc. (p. 28).
F2. We have taken great care to discredit the clergy of the Gentiles in the eyes of the people, and thus have succeeded in injuring their mission, which could have been very much in our way. The influence of the clergy on the people is diminishing daily. Today freedom of religion prevails everywhere, but the time is only a few years off when Christianity will fall to pieces altogether (p. 64).
G2. We must extract the very conception of God from the minds of the Christians (p. 17). . . . We must destroy all professions of faith (p. 48).
Excerpts from Haute Vente Romaine:
A2. The essential thing is to isolate a man from his family, to make him lose his morals. ... He loves the long conversations of the cafes and the idleness of shows. . . . After having shown him how painful are his duties you will excite in him the idea of another existence (Piccolo Tigre to the Vente Piemontaise; Cretineau-Joly, ii, 120).
B2. Let us . . . never cease to corrupt . . . but let us popularize vice amongst the multitude. Let us cause them to draw it in by their five senses, to drink it in, to be saturated with it. . . . It is corruption en masse that we have undertaken . . . (Vindex to Nubius, Cretineau-Joly, ii. 147).
C2. It is upon the lodges that we count to double our ranks. They form, without knowing it, our preparatory novitiate (Piccolo Tigre to the Vente Supreme, Cretineau-Joly, ii. 120).
D2. This vanity of the citizen or ot the bourgeois for being enrolled in Freemasonry is something so banal and so universal that I am always full of admiration for human stupidity. .. . . (The lodges) launch amidst their feastings thundering anathemas against intolerance and persecution. This is positively more than we require to make adepts (Piccolo Tigre to Nubius).
E2. Princes of a sovereign house and those who have not the legitimate hope of being kings by the grace of God, all wish to be kings by the grace of a Revolution. The Duke of Orleans is a Freemason. A prince who has not a kingdom to expect is a good fortune for us (Piccolo Tigre to Nubius).
F2. There is a certain portion of the clergy that nibbles at the bait of our doctrines with a marvellous vivacity . . . (Nubius to Volpe, Cretineau-Joly, i1) . . . . It is corruption en masse that we have undertaken: the corruption of the people by the clergy and the corruption of the clergy by themselves, the corruption that ought to enable us one day to put the Church in her tomb (Vindex to Nubius; Cretineau-Joly, ii, 147).
G2. Our final end is . . . the destruction for ever of Catholicism and even of the Christian idea (Dillon, The War of Antichrist, etc., p. 64). . . . . In order to kill the old world surely we have held that we must stifle the Catholic and Christian germ (Piccolo Tigre to Nubius; Cretineau-Joly, ii. 387).
Compare the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, with the Anarchist Bakunin's Alliance Sociale Democratique
Excerpts from the Protocols
A3. We persuaded the Gentiles that Liberalism would bring them to a kingdom of reason (p. 14). . . . . We injected the poison of Liberalism into the organism of the State (p. 33). . . . . We preach Liberalism to the Gentiles (p. 55).
B3. We will entrust these important posts (government posts) to people whose record and characters are so bad as to form a gulf between the nation and themselves, and to such people who, in case they disobey our orders, may expect judgment and imprisonment. And all this is with the object that they should defend our interests until the last breath has passed out of their bodies (p. 26) . . . . We will pre-arrange for the election of . . . presidents whose past record is marked with some "Panama Scandal" or other shady hidden transaction (p. 34).
C3. Out of governments we made arenas on which party wars are fought out. . . . Insuppressible babblers transformed parliamentary and administrative meetings into debating meetings. Audacious journalists and impudent pamphleteers are continually attacking the administrative powers.
D3. We will create a ~ universal economical crisis. . . .* Simultaneously we will throw on to the streets huge crowds of workmen throughout Europe. These masses will then gladly throw themselves upon and shed the blood of those of whom, in their ignorance, they have been jealous from childhood, and whose belongings they will then be able to plunder (p. 14).
E3. We will make merciless use of executions with regard to all who may take up arms against the establishment of our power (p. 50). . . . . We must take no account of the numerous victims who will have to be sacrificed in order to obtain future prosperity (p. 51).
F3. The masonic lodge throughout the world unconsciously acts as a mask for our purpose (p. 16).
Excerpts from Bakunin's Social Democrat Alliance
A3. The fourth category of people to be employed thus described by Bakunin: "Various ambitious men in the service of the State and Liberals of different shades. With them one can conspire according to their own programme, pretending to follow them blindly."
B3. The third category of Bakunin thus described: "A great number of highly placed animals who can be exploited in all possible ways. We must circumvent them, outwit them, and by getting hold of their dirty secrets make of them our slaves. By this means their power, their connections, their influence, and their riches will become an inexhaustible treasure and a precious help in various enterprises" . . . . "In the same way with the fourth category: "We must take them in our hands, get hold of their secrets, compromise them completely in such a way that retreat will be impossible to them."
C3. The fifth category of Bakunin consists of: "Doctrinaires, conspirators, revolutionaries, all those who babble at meetings and on paper. We must push them and draw them on unceasingly into practical and perilous manifestations which will have the result of making the majority of them disappear whilst making a few amongst them real revolutionaries."
D3. The Association will employ all its means and all its power to increase and augment evils and misfortunes which must at last wear out the patience of the people and excite them to an insurrection en masse.
E3. In the first place must be destroyed the men who are most pernicious to revolutionary organization and whose violence and sudden death may most frighten the government.
F3. My friends, "abandon that absurd idea that I have been won over to Freemasonry. But perhaps Freemasonry would serve as a mask or as a passport . . . (Letter to Herzen and Ogareff, Correspondance de Bakounine.)
Through all these parallels the plan of World Revolution runs like a complot suivi and when we further compare them with the utterances of the modern Bolsheviks we see the plan carried right up to the present moment. 'Let us now consider how the Protocols of the Elders of Zion tally with the Bolshevist programme:
Excerpts from the Protocols
A4. It is expedient for the welfare of the country that the government of the same should be in the hands of one responsible person (p. 5). . . . . The system of government must be the work of one head.
B4. The despotism of capital which is entirely in our hands will hold out to it (the State) a straw, to which the State will be unavoidably compelled to cling . . . (p. 2.). . . . . On the ruins of natural and hereditary aristocracy we built an aristocracy of our-own on a plutocratic basis. We established this new aristocracy on wealth, of which we had control . . . (p. 8).
C4. Soon we will start organizing great monopolies—reservoirs of colossal wealth . . . (p. 22).
D4. Our government is in so exceedingly strong a position in the sight of the law that we may almost describe it by the powerful expression of dictatorship (p. 27).
E4. When we accomplish our coup d'Etat, we will say to the people: 11 Everything has been going very badly; all of you have suffered; now we are destroying the cause of your sufferings—that is to say, nationalities, frontiers, and national currencies. Certainly you will be free to condemn us, but can your judgment be fair if you pronounce it before you have had experience of what we can do for your good?" (p. 31).
F4. Our laws will be short, clear, and concise, requiring no interpretation, so that everybody will be able to know them inside out. The main feature in them will be the obedience required towards authority, and this respect for authority will be carried to a very high pitch.
G4. Then all kinds of abuse will cease, because everybody will be responsible before the one supreme power, namely, that of the sovereign (p. 56).
H4. We will make it clear to everyone that freedom does not consist in dissoluteness or in the right of doing whatever people please. . . . We will teach the world that true freedom consists only in the inviolability of a man's person and of his property, who honestly adheres to all the laws of social life (p. 83).
I4. In order to demonstrate our enslavement of the Gentile governments in Europe we will show our power to one of them by means of crimes of violence, that is to say, by a reign of terror (p. 25).
J4. We must destroy all professions of faith (p. 48).
K4. When the time comes for us to take special police measures by putting the present Russian system of the Okhrana in force . . . (P 67).
Excerpts from the writings of Lenin:
A4. How can we secure strict unity of will? By subjecting the will of thousands to the will of one (Lenin, The Soviets at Work, P.35).
B4. What is the first stage? It is the transfer of power to the capitalist class. Up to the March Revolution of 1917 power in Russia was in the hands of one ancient class, the feudalist-aristocratic-landowning class, headed by Nicholas Romanov. After that revolution, power has been in the hands of a different, a new class, namely, the capitalist class (the bourgeoisie) (Lenin, Towards Soviets, p. 8).
C4. We must improve and regulate the State monopolies . . . which we have already established, and thereby prepare for State monopolization of the foreign trade (Lenin, The Soviets at Work, P. 20).
D4. We advocate a merciless dictatorship (Lenin, The Soviets at Work, p. 40).
E4. We must study the peculiarities of the highly difficult and new road to Socialism without concealing our mistakes and weaknesses. We must try to overcome our deficiencies in time {The Soviets at Work, p. 18). . . . . What we have already decreed is yet far from adequate realization, and the main problem of today consists precisely in concentrating all efforts upon the actual, practical realization of the reforms which have already become the law, but have not yet become a reality {ibid. p. 20).
F4. Economic improvement depends on higher discipline of the toilers. ... To learn how to work—this problem the Soviet authority should present to the people in all its comprehensiveness (The Soviets at Work, p. 26).
G4. The revolution . . . demands the absolute . submission of the masses to the single will of those who direct the labour process {The Soviets at Work, p. 35).
H4. It mustt take some time before the ordinary representative of the masses will not only see . . . but come to feel that he must not just simply seize, grab, snatch— and that leads to greater disorganization {(The Soviets at Work, p. 36).
I4. We will turn our hearts into steel, which we will temper in the fire of suffering and the blood of the fighters for freedom. We will make our hearts cruel, hard, and immovable, so that no mercy will enter into them, and so that they will not quiver at the sight of a sea of enemy blood, etc. (Krasnaya Gazette, the official organ of the Petrograd Soviet of Workers, Red Army, and peasants' deputies, presided over by Zinovieff, alias Apfelbaum, a Jew. Date of August 31, 1918).
J4. Religion must be fought, if not by violence, at all events by argument (Bucharin, Programme of the World Revolution, p. 77).
K4. A highly organized intelligence department, or rather the renewed Okhrana of the old autocracy, is a necessary part of . . . this regime. Lenin was perfectly right to emphasize this before the last Soviet conference in Moscow (Dec. 1919) (Miliukov in The New Russia for February 12, 1920).
Parallels between the Protocols and Secret Societies
The foregoing parallels prove, therefore, a clear connection between the Protocols and former Secret Societies working for World Revolution, and also between the Protocols and Bolshevism. But they do not necessarily establish their authenticity. One possibility immediately suggests itself. Might they not be a forgery compounded by some one versed in the lore of Secret Societies? Supposing Nilus to have been a student of this subject and also, as he was known to be, a pronounced anti-Semite, it would not have been difficult for him to reconstruct the programme of World Revolution from earlier models, weaving into them at the same time the idea of a Jewish conspiracy.
Why, then, was this very obvious explanation not put forward by the Jews? Why, on the contrary, when it was suggested by the present writer in a newspaper article, did it meet merely with resentment? Here was a loophole indeed! But instead of using it the advocates of Jewry contented themselves with angry expostulations, or fell back on absurd explanations, as that the Protocols were invented by the Russian police or by the "Tzarist reactionaries" in London, or that they were copied from a notorious forgery by Goedsche—
Why choose a forgery when such admirable authentic models were at hand?—or again, the attempt was made to draw a red herring across the track by dwelling on Nilus' s personality and his own literary work, which had no bearing whatever on the question. The point was to prove whether the document which he purported to have discovered was genuine or not.
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.
The only line of defence, namely, that this document was the work of illuminized Freemasonry, and not of a purely Jewish association, has been rejected by the advocates of the Jews themselves, and the only conclusion that we can draw is either that the Protocols are genuine and what they pretend to be, or that these advocates put forward by the Jews have some interest in concealing the activities of Secret Societies in the past.
The question then arises: Were the Jews concerned in the organization of Illuminism and its subsequent developments? At present this is not clearly proved. It is true that Cagliostro was probably a Jew, that Kolmer who partly indoctrinated Weishaupt may have been a Jew, that a certain Simonini wrote to the Abbe Barruel in 1806 declaring that "the freemasons and the illumines were founded by two Jews"—whose names the author has forgotten!—that the Jewish financiers of Frankfurt may have contributed to the funds of the Illuminati or of the Duc d' Orleans, but all this rests so far on no contemporary documentary evidence.
The illumines referred to by Simonini may well have been the Martinistes founded, as it is known, by the Jew Paschalis and frequently referred to under this name. We should require more than such vague assertions to refute the evidence of men who, like Barruel and Robison, devoted exhaustive study to the subject and attributed the whole plan of the Illuminati and its fulfilment in the French Revolution to German brains. Neither Weishaupt, Knigge, nor any of the ostensible founders of Illuminism were Jews; moreover, as we have seen, Jews were excluded from the association except by special permission. None of the leading revolutionaries of France were Jews, nor were the members of the conspiracy of Babeuf.
The claim of the Elders of Zion to have inspired all revolutionary outbreaks since 1789 is not therefore at present substantiated by history, and it is not until the Alta Vendita from 1820 onwards that they can be proved to have taken an active part in the movement. Yet Monsignor Dillon, who clearly recognizes their importance as agents of this secret society, nevertheless attributes its efficient organization to "Italian genius."
From this date onward their role is, however, more apparent. In Germany before 1848 Disraeli himself declared them to be taking the lead in the revolutionary movement, and with the First Internationale they come forward into a blaze of light. Henceforth along the line of State Socialism their influence is no longer doubtful.
But whilst the question of Jewish organization from the beginning of the World Revolution remains obscure, the workings of illuminized Freemasonry are clearly visible. It is strange that in the controversy that has raged over the Protocols so little attention has been paid to the fact that the so-called Elders of Zion were admittedly masons of the 33rd degree of the Grand Orient.
Considered from this point of view, all their statements regarding the past history of the Revolution are substantiated by facts. For if by "we" is meant "illuminized Freemasons," then the assertion that "it is we who were the first to cry out to the people 'Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity'" is clearly accurate. Nothing can be truer than that since the French Revolution "the nations have been led from one disappointment to another," and that "the secrets of its preparatory organization were the work of our hands"—the hands of the Freemasons and Illuminati. If, then, the Protocols are genuine, they are the revised programme of illuminized Freemasonry formulated by a Jewish lodge of the Order.
But whilst the influence of the Jews cannot be proved throughout the early history of the society, German inspiration and organization is apparent from the very beginning. It was the German Weishaupt who founded the Illuminati with the aid of his German colleagues, it was the German Knigge who effected its alliance with French Freemasonry, German emissaries who introduced it to the lodges of the Grand Orient; it was this German Illuminism that inspired the campaign of universal corruption waged by the Alta Vendita and the anarchic fury of Bakunin; and again it was pan-Germanism, working by the methods of the Illuminati, that assured the success of Marx and Engels and secured control of all Socialist organizations up to the present day.
This revolutionary machine that threatens the peace of the world today, though manipulated in the past by men of all nationalities—French, Italian, Jewish, Russian, and in a few instances English—is primarily the work of German hands and is still mainly controlled by Germans with the aid of their Jewish allies. The German military authorities sent Lenin and the Jew Radek in a special train to Russia, German officers organized the Bolshevik armies, and German poison gas contributed to the final defeat of Wrangel.
It was also Germany who fanned the flames of civil war now raging in Ireland. Sinn Fein, which in its origins was largely a national and religious movement, is now being exploited by the International Atheist movement, whose "dark directory," as in 1884, "laughs at Ireland and her wrongs." For the plan of the conspiracy has always been to adopt a protege and enlist its aid as an ally. Hitherto the two proteges invariably selected have been Ireland and Poland. But now that Poland has dared to assert its independence Poland has been thrown to the wolves, and when the day comes, as it must come if the World Revolution triumphs, for Ireland to resist the tide of Bolshevism, then Ireland with all her national and religious aspirations will be thrown to the wolves likewise. The organization of the revolutionary movement is even now less in the hands of Sinn Fein than of the Irish Republican Brotherhood, modelled like its predecessors, the Fenians and the United Irishmen, on the Illuminati of Weishaupt.
The same organization is at work in India, and both are directed, not by Moscow, but by the invisible council which holds in its hands the threads of the whole conspiracy.
Bolshevist propaganda all over the world has been carried out by German organization and financed by German as well as by Jewish gold. "I affirm," wrote Bourtzeff, the Russian refugee, "that since August 1914, and in a relatively short lapse of time, the Germans handed over personally to Lenin more than 70,000,000 marks for the organization of Bolshevist agitation in the Allied Countries." Bernstein, a member of the German Social Democratic Party, has declared in the official organ of the party, Vorwarts, that he knew as far back as December 1917 that Lenin was in the pay of Germany. More recently, Bernstein has learnt from "a responsible person" that the sum given to Lenin was more than 50,000,000 gold marks, or £2,500,000. The Jewish Bolshevik emissaries to the recent Tours Congress, Abramovitch and Clara Zetkin, were discovered by the French authorities to have received money from Germany for the expenses of propaganda in France. The Jewish agitator is the tsetse fly carrying the poison germ of Bolshevism from the breeding-ground of Germany.
As long as England retains any belief in Carlyle's theory of "noble, patient, deep, pious, and solid Germany," the true cause of the evils now afflicting Europe will never be understood. Doubtless there are noble and pious elements in Germany, but let it not be forgotten that Germany holds within her a poison centre which has become a source of moral infection for the whole world. The campaign of militant atheism and moral corruption that is now being carried out systematically in our own country, in France, and in America, is of German devising.
Weishaupt in his apology for Illuminism said that "Deism, Infidelity, and Atheism were more prevalent in Bavaria than in any country he was acquainted with." Seventy years later, in 1846, Lord Shaftesbury, travelling in Germany, remarked:
"Here is a peculiarity among the German literati; professorial chairs are held and public lectures given by men of open, acknowledged, and boastful Atheism"; and if we are reminded that Disraeli had declared most of these professorial chairs at this date to be monopolized by Jews, let us note that Lord Shaftesbury goes on to say: "Nor does opinion frown them down. We have bad people in England, but few dare to parade their make-beliefs with ostentation and joy."
German Atheism and Jewish antagonism to Christianity have combined to form the great anti-religious force that is making itself felt in the world today.
Again, Internationalism, the policy of national suicide advocated by the modern revolutionaries, has been frequently attributed to the Jews, and it is obvious that a race without a country of its own must see in the propagation of Internationalism much to commend it; but the originator of Internationalist doctrines as they are preached today was not a Jew but a German—Anacharsis Clootz. The so-called "International Jew" is not in reality International at all; he is first a Jew and then a German—sometimes indeed he is a German first.
Internationalism, then, is simply another word for pan-Germanism, and it will always be noticed that advocates of Internationalism in this country betray a peculiar tendresse for Germany. As Mr. Adolphe Smith has well expressed it: "The Socialist and revolutionary doctrines . . . taught under the mantle of Marxism spread the idea that a Socialist has no country unless, of course, he has the good fortune to be a German."
"The doctrines of the older Socialists, the Socialists at whom Bismarck aimed by his anti-Socialist law, were now reserved for foreign exportation . . . abroad they were just what was wanted to disintegrate communities, to weaken the sense of nationality, and lessen the desire for strong armies of defence. ... In all fields of action the German as an Internationalist needs to be studied with far greater care than as yet has been bestowed on him."
The International doctrines of Weishaupt and of his disciple Clootz have served the cause of Germany well.
It will be urged, "But why should Germany encourage Illuminism, since she herself is now a victim of World Revolution?" True, the Spartacists of Germany today are undoubtedly the direct descendants of Spartacus Weishaupt from whom they take their name; Liebknecht and Rosa Luxembourg were both leading members of the Order. Inevitably those who handle poison gas are liable at moments to inhale its fumes. But Germany has Sparticism well under control—meanwhile it can be used as a bogey to prevent her disarmament by the Allies.
Between Berlin and Moscow the understanding is complete. Nicholas Lenin is not the controlling brain of the gigantic conspiracy. Great pains have been taken to represent the present dictator of Russia as a "Superman" of vast conceptions. Lenin's own writings refute this theory. Where in all his numerous pamphlets do we find a hint of genius or even of original thought? The writings of Robespierre bear at least the stamp of his personality. Babeuf, Illuminatus though he was, brought some native inspiration to bear on his diatribes, but from the days of Marx onwards revolutionary Socialism has always borne the same "machine-made" character and Lenin's pamphlets resemble nothing so much as the instructions of a bogus company promoter directing other would-be bogus company promoters how to "do the trick."
Mr. Wells has hastened to assure us that Lenin's writings are not representative of himself, that the great man must be seen to be appreciated; yet how is it that the many ardent pilgrims to the shrine of the deity at Moscow have never been able to bring back a single phrase uttered by the oracle that gives evidence of the slightest gleam of inspiration or of concern for the people of Russia? The one point that appears to occupy him is how to make the system work in spite of the opposition of the people.
Lenin, then, is neither a demagogue nor a superman, but the agent of the great German-Jewish company that hopes to rule the world.
How do the Germans and the Jews come to be allied in this design? Are not their aims mutually antagonistic. If we regard the Jewish plan asa racial conspiracy—yes. But there is no evidence to show that the whole Jewish race is concerned in it; on the contrary, many Jews in our own country, as in France, have shown themselves fearless opponents both of Germany and Bolshevism. Nor does religious fanaticism appear to enter into the question. The insistence on the idea of a Jewish Messiah is the least convincing part of the Protocols. It is not religious Jews, even Talmudic Jews, but apostate Jews who have thrown themselves into the revolutionary movement.
In the diatribe of Bucharin against religion quoted above, the Jewish faith is derided equally with that of the Christian or the Buddhist. Yet if we examine the plan of Bolshevism we shall see the motive for a certain section of the Jews to take part in it. Now the avowed plan of the Bolshevists is to do away with the right of private property and establish universal Communism. But the ruse of the conspiracy has always been to use words with a double meaning, and not only this, but with meanings diametrically opposed to each other.
Thus when they proclaim the "dictatorship of the proletariat" their real intention is to bring about the complete enslavement of the proletariat; when they talk of the "equality of sexes" what they really mean is to reduce women to a position lower than the rank of squaws. The word "constitution," as we have seen, has been employed throughout as the signal for crushing an attempt to introduce constitutional government or for overthrowing it when it has been established. In the same way the word "Communism" has a double meaning.
To the simple proletarian Communism conveys a very alluring idea, namely, that of "having everything in common." Of the real theory of Communism he has no conception, but the propagandist who tries to win him over to Communism knows very well. He knows, moreover, that Communism is a system which has been tried and in every instance found wanting, and that, on the lines which he advocates, can never succeed.
For the only form of Communism which it has ever been possible to carry out successfully is that practised by religious communities. Monasteries and nunneries are, of course, Communist, but the fact which makes this possible is that they are composed of people who have renounced all interest in earthly things and centre all their thoughts and desires on the Kingdom of Heaven. Secular Communism, by its insistence on materialism, eliminates the only factor that makes the system feasible—belief in God and the Hereafter. It is inconceivable that leading Communists should be unaware of this fundamental error in their teaching, or of the failure that has attended every attempt to put it into practice in the past—above all, of its colossal failure in Russia.
If, then, Communism or State Socialism has been proved impracticable, if, moreover, it is a system that no one who understands it can possibly want, who is to profit by establishing it? Sorel answered the question long ago —"A few professors who imagine they invented Socialism and a few Dreyfusard financiers." In other words, the Intellectuals who cherish the hope of being given official posts in the Socialist State which will give them an advantage over their fellow-men, and a few Jewish financiers.
Werner Sombart, summing up the system of the latter, says: "Their aim was to seize upon all commerce and all production; they had an overpowering desire to expand in every direction." The system of free trade was all part of this plan and can be traced back as far as Anacharsis Clootz, who was doubtless considering the interests of his friends the Jews when in his Universal Republic he advocated "all the peoples forming one nation, all the trades forming only one trade, all interests forming only one interest." It is easy to see that State Socialism may be merely the prelude to this scheme, and here M. Sorel and M. Copin Albancelli are curiously in accord.
"One formula," the latter wrote in 1909, "sums up the whole Collectivist propaganda: All for the State. All for the State! The people imagine that this means: All for All! and they march forward, intoxicated with hope, towards the conquest of this fallacious idea, not dreaming that the State being henceforth in the hands of the Jews 'all for the State' . . . will be 'all for the Jews! ' . . . The dictatorship imposed by the Jewish race will be a financial, industrial, and commercial dictatorship."
What could better describe the government of Russia today? The plan of wresting all capital out of private hands and placing it in the hands of the State, as under Communism, or in the hands of industrial syndicates as under Syndicalism, may well be the prelude to State Capitalism or to gigantic trusts controlled by international financiers. In this case the so-called war on capitalism is simply a war in favour of capitalism, of ruining all small holders of wealth or property in order to enrich a ring of multi-millionaries. A passage in Mr. Wells's articles on Russia lends colour to this theory:
"Big business is by no means antipathetic to Communism. The larger big business grows the more it approximates to Collectivism. It is the upper road of the few instead of the lower road of the masses to Collectivism."
Conversely, then, may not Communism be the lower road which the masses are being invited to follow leading to "big business," that is to say, to super-Capitalism? Once embarked on this road there can be no turning back. The present Capitalist system—that is to say, the system that aims at the distribution of capital amongst as large a number of hands as possible—having been destroyed by the workers' own folly in favour of concentration of capital in the hands of the State, they will be obliged to work or starve. Their new masters will have them completely at their mercy. It will be urged:
"But the workers will never stand this; they will rise against their tyrants and overthrow them! What government of this kind could maintain itself in power?"
But this is where the role of the German armies comes in. It is quite true that a group of international financiers could not of its own strength maintain itself in power against an enraged industrial proletariat, but if we imagine this financial power backed by a superb military system, if, in a word, we picture an alliance between Prussian militarism and international finance, the plan no longer appears impracticable.
It is this alliance that today menaces civilization, and it is an alliance of long standing, as we have seen in the earlier chapters of this book. The present campaign of anti-Semitism raging in Germany is largely a strategic manoeuvre with the object of reinstating Germany in the eyes of the world and throwing all the blame for both the war and the revolution on the Jews. Germany will not relinquish her Jews as long as they can help her towards the attainment of her dream of world-power. Nor will the International Jew forsake Germany as long as by her military strength she remains the horse to back.
Yet, formidable as this coalition may be, does it provide the whole force of Bolshevism? The organization— yes; but the force—no. In following the history of World Revolution one other factor, an immense factor, must be taken into consideration—the power of anarchy. All Bolshevists are not Jews or Germans; all are not inspired by Jews or Germans. The importance of the constitutional destructionist cannot be over-estimated.
It is essential to recognize that there are men and women in the world who will throw themselves into any subversive movement for sheer love of violence—it is idle to seek with them a motive. This has been so all through the revolutionary movement. For although down the line of State Socialism the influence of the Germans and the Jews is clearly evident, down the line of Anarchy, except for the original inspiration of Weishaupt and the agitations of Most and Hartmann, it is hardly to be found at all. Bakunin was the author of a polemique against the Jews; Sorel was an ardent anti-Dreyfusard; Lev Chorny, the Russian Anarchist, at the beginning of the present revolution warned the Russian people against the Jewish leaders of Bolshevism.
If modern Communism, that is to say, Marxian Socialism, is German and Jewish, Syndicalism and Anarchy are peculiar to the Latin and Slavonic races. It was this fearful element that contributed largely to the ferocity of Bolshevism, and, exploiting the native tendency of the Russian people towards violence, could inaugurate an orgy of blood and terror.
Bolshevism uses Syndicalism, like Anarchy, to establish its power, it encourages the General Strike, which Syndicalism exists apart from Bolshevism and is as much to be feared. If revolution breaks out in this country it will be a Syndicalist revolution—the General Strike with its fearful programme of sabotage and violence, its carnival of rioting and destruction. But it is not Syndicalism that will win the day. The lessons of history prove that anarchy, ephemeral in its essence, must always give way before organization. And if this organization is not supplied by the forces of law and order, it will be the iron bureaucracy of the German armies and the international financiers which will establish its domination over a ruined country and a helpless people.