THE ENEMY OF OUR ENEMIES
A Critique of Francis Parker Yockey’s The Enemy of Europe (section 5)
by Professor Revilo P. Oliver
THE THIRD SIDE OF THE COIN
WE HAVE, I think, followed Yockey and Robertson in drawing logical conclusions from the evidence before us. But all of our evidence–what we are told and what we are not told–comes from either Russian or Jewish sources. We do not have even a simple choice between stories told by two habitual liars, for when they disagree, both may still be lying, each in his own interest. And the world’s masters of deceit are wily and subtle.
When travelling carnivals toured our country, the yokels were regularly fleeced by what was known as the shell game, which had many variations. In one variation, the sucker was led to believe that he had been given, inadvertently, a glimpse of the obverse of a coin and so could confidently bet on what would appear on the reverse when the shell was lifted, but, of course, when the coin was exposed, one with a different reverse had been substituted by a bit of prestidigitation.
When we ponder the Soviet enigma, one possibility always occurs to us, that internal rot within the empire may have gone much farther than we have been permitted to suspect by our sources–may have gone so far that what seems a monolithic state has some inner and hidden weakness great enough to affect its foreign policy. That speculative conjecture, however, we have always dismissed as gratuitous, since there was no plausible evidence to support it.
The periodical called Fortune, in its issue for 29 June 1981, published an astonishing article, entitled “Russia’s Underground Millionaires,” by a Jew, Konstantin Simis, formerly a Soviet lawyer and official in the Ministry of Justice, who says that in 1977, when the manuscript of a book that is to be published in this country was found in his apartment, he was invited to leave Russia and join his son, a professor in an American university.
According to this article, the Soviet is as rotten politically as the United States, although, of course, there are superficial differences. Corruption within the Communist Party we naturally take for granted, but here we are told of massive corruption of the Communist administration by bribery from outsiders, almost all of them Jews. There are distinct analogies to the almost universal political corruption that was established in this country in 1917 by the crackpots and mutton-heads who tried to prohibit our people from drinking alcoholic beverages.
We are told that there functions efficiently within the Soviet an enormous black market with its own factories, its own distribution-system, and its own retail outlets, operating comfortably by virtually wholesale bribery of Communist managers and police, and operated by capitalists, almost all of them Jews, who accumulate what are large fortunes by any standard and store their surplus wealth in gold, jewels, and other things that are intrinsically valuable. A typical entrepreneur, who was arrested, through some mischance, by the Secret Police, was found to have in his possession such valuables to the amount of 350,000,000 rubles, which, at current exchange, would equal $546,000,000.
This great essor of Jewish enterprise, according to the author, began “in the mid-1930s” with such talented entrepreneurs and masqueraders as Isaac Bach, who, while officially only a supervisor in a small workshop and paid as such by the state, was secretly a capitalist worth some $135,720,000, “owning at least a dozen factories manufacturing underwear, souvenirs, and notions, and operating a network of stores in all the republics of the Soviet Union.” Such surreptitious business flourished, it should be noted, while Lazar Moseevich Kaganovich was Stalin’s Deputy Premier in charge of industry, and naturally continued to flourish under his successor in that office, Benjamin Dimschitz, another Jew. (41a) And it has now reached the high financial level shown by the one example mentioned above, which, we are given to understand, was not at all extraordinary, except that the apostle of free enterprise either neglected to bribe all the officers of the Secret Police concerned or was rashly careless in some way that made it too awkward for them to cover up for him.
(41a. Dimschitz (or Dymshits) is the only Soviet official of very high rank whom Wilmot Robertson (op. cit., p. 456, n. 16) recognizes as a Jew. It’s evidently a matter of the right man in the right place. What is extremely curious is that he is not even mentioned in the list published by Candour, to which I shall refer in note 48, below.)
The commercial activities of those energetic Jewish businessmen interest us only because they are all categorically prohibited by Soviet law, which provides for the guilty minimum penalties of years of imprisonment in slave labor camps. It necessarily flourishes through a vast system of pay-offs and the like (42) that would do credit to the genius for organization shown by American politicians. There are “tens of thousands of such factories” owned by capitalists of the black market, but almost all of them are actually state factories, operated by managers appointed by the Communist government, who fulfill their quotas and then turn to production for the capitalists, using, of course, the machinery provided by that state, their working staff, and sometimes materials provided by the state, although the production for the black market is usually of better quality and uses better materials. The manager must be given his cut, of course, and so must the workmen, who are often employed on overtime. All government inspectors must be bribed, and so must all local agents of the Secret Police, especially those in the branch that is expressly charged with policing industry. Much of the raw material must be obtained from nominally state establishments, with, of course, a corresponding round of cuts and bribes. The retail outlets are, for the most part, state stores which handle black-market goods surreptitiously, and so managers and bookkeepers and clerks must be given their cuts and massive bribery must keep inspectors and agents of the police in line. And, of course, it is necessary to put the fix on the bureaucrats who preside over the inspectors and agents. In short, the Communist empire must be a seething mass of political corruption. And after all such business expenses, the promoters reap huge profits and become enormously wealthy.
(42. When Franklin Roosevelt was gabbling about the “Four Freedoms” to entertain the boobs during the Jewish Crusade Against Europe, knowledgeable “New Dealers” defined the Four Freedoms as the rake-off, the pay-off, the shakedown, and the fix. There are technical differences between these four aspects of government in a “democracy,” but we need not define them here.)
The “tens of thousands of factories,” we are told, are chiefly in Moscow, Odessa, Riga, Tiflis, and other major cities in which are concentrated the Jews now in Russia–some three million of them, according to Jewish sources, who are now being “discriminated against” by the Soviet, it not being explained why they are only half as numerous as the Jews who were “discriminated against” by the Czarist regime, under which they owned half the industry of Russia, We may assume that free enterprise is providing good incomes for a large part of the three million, perhaps most of them in one way or another.
Despite the massive bribery of Communist officials, something more is required for this vast clandestine business, which must be conducted without written records, and in which sums that may amount to hundreds of thousands of rubles exchange hands without documents of any kind or witnesses, “in an atmosphere of complete trust,” such as could never exist among legitimate business men in this country. The explanation is given by the author: it is “the sense of national identity among Jewish underground businessmen,” who may not be eager to migrate to their race’s capital in Palestine, but “feel a blood relationship with it” and contribute money (in American currency!) to it. If the commercial honesty that is dictated by a sense of racial solidarity, which Aryans can only envy as they reflect with shame on the egotistic venality and financial opportunism of their own people, is reinforced by Jewish racial courts, the kahal, which some anti-Jewish writers allege to be secretly maintained in Jewish colonies, the writer gives no hint of them. (42a)
(42a. Jews vehemently deny the existence of the kahal and denounce as “anti-Semitic” the Jew, Jacob Brafmann, who wrote the most extensive and detailed description of the quasi-religious racial courts. His work has been translated into German, with a learned commentary by Dr. Siegfried Passarge, Das Buch vom Kahal, 2 vols., Leipzig, 1928. See also the work of the Argentine writer, Hugo Wast, whose essay and novel, El Kahal, is also published in Mexico (Editorial Diana, 6th edition, 1964). Wast describes the operation of the Jewish tribunal in modern Argentina, and says “El Kahal es un soberano invisible y absoluto,” which regulates the entire life of Jews, “comercio, pol¡tico, religión, vida privada en sus detalles más minuciosos.” He says that the disciplinary powers are vested in a secret tribunal, Beth Din, which, I gather, operates with the summary powers and secrecy of the Westphalian Vehmgerichte of the Thirteenth to Sixteenth Centuries, which will be familiar to many readers from the description, doubtless with romantic amplification, in Sir Walter Scott’s Anne of Geierstein. The supreme kahal of the Jews, with jurisdiction over all colonies of the international race, sits in New York City, according to Wast. American attorneys who have handled litigation between Jews who have tried to swindle each other are certain no kahal is now in operation, but notice an odd convention in such matters, e.g., a bitterly resentful and injured Jew will not denounce his adversary for smuggling or fraud in income-tax reports, although he has proof in his possession.)
One limitation on the felicity of Jewish capitalists in Russia is the need to observe some discretion in pubic display of their wealth, since too much ostentation has brought some of them to the attention of Communist authorities not on their payroll, with sad results. Prudent financiers limit their public expenditures to what they can pretend was legitimate income, e.g., from winning tickets in a state lottery, and amass their wealth in gold, jewels, and similar articles they can easily hide. Foreign money can be obtained, but would have no advantage in Russia. We may guess that the Rockefeller banks in Russia probably assist capitalists to transfer abroad holdings that they can enjoy when it pleases them to “defect” from Russia. The author suggests that the vast investments in gold and jewels, if not made for a miser’s satisfaction in mere possession, may perhaps be held in anticipation of “the downfall of the Soviet régime.”
If we accept Simis’s account of the vast wealth of Soviet Jewry and the pervasive corruption of Soviet government in all its functions, including the Secret Police, it will be obvious that the ingenuity, secrecy, and bribery that maintains the capitalists’ clandestine businesses could also promote a secret and formidable revolutionary underground, capable of striking suddenly and perhaps decisively. And that will alter all our estimates of the probable future of the Soviet and of its capacity to wage a major war. We accordingly wonder whether some credence may not be due to some reports about efficient and ostensibly Christian “undergrounds” in the Soviet. The reports once put out so industriously by evangelists who pretended to solicit funds for such organizations can be dismissed as mere sucker-bait, but, if Simis is right, such organizations could exist. (42b)
(42b. If we believe Paul R. Vaulin, The Regiment of Kitezh (Mobile, Alabama, 1977), Russia is now honeycombed by a formidable conspiracy of Christians, who have penetrated the Soviet bureaucracy and even the Secret Police, having placed or enlisted secret agents in strategic posts, and counting on exciting a revolt of “a quarter of a billion [Russian] men” when the time comes. Two colleagues of the author on the faculty of the University of South Alabama certify that the narrative “describes actual events,” was written by “an American agent” who was dropped by parachute into Soviet territory in May 1972, and was copied from his manuscript, which “was smuggled out of the USSR by an American student.” They further certify that Satan prevented the publication of the book by a commercial publisher, so that it had to be published privately “without the permission of Satan.” If there is any truth to the story, the Soviet Secret Police have become hopelessly inefficient and stupid. There is an implication that the Christians’ god keeps the conspiracy invisible to Communist eyes, and it would seem that Satan hasn’t been able to wake up the Politburo.)
We can neither affirm nor deny the accuracy of Simis’s story. If that number of Fortune has reached Russia, his report has probably been denounced in Pravda as an “outrageous Fascist lie” and perhaps even as “anti-Semitic,” with many “proofs” of its spuriousness; if it hasn’t been, it will be, at least when his book is published. All that we can do is say that the story is amazing, and put it down as another question mark around the enigma.
AT THE WAILING WALL
We must grant that the evidence for the Jews’ supposed loss of authority in Russia is meager and unsubstantial. Self-appointed “Kremlinologists” (!) expound to us the intentions behind certain Soviet policies, but mind-reading is always a hazardous business. It is true, for example, that Russia has supplied some weapons to the Semitic and largely Semitic countries that are menaced by the Jews’ constant aggression and implacable hatred. (The Arabs and their allies, by the way, have always to pay cash to the Soviet, while the Jews have only to requisition all the equipment they want from their Americans serfs.) We are told that Russia clearly intends to impede the plan, of which the Jews openly boast, to make Jerusalem the capital from which Yahweh’s Race will rule the whole world; but, for aught we know to the contrary, the subtle minds of Russia’s rulers may be cozening the Arabs and planning eventually to betray them, as the Americans, for example, betrayed Chiang Kai-shek.
The nominally American government in Washington is in a fever of anxiety over the supposed plight of the three millions of the Self-Chosen People in Soviet territory, and claims to be squandering American resources as bribes to the Russians to increase the privileges granted to Jews (but no other race), in the hope that soon the whole three millions will follow the 200,000 who have recently flown from the Soviet and, after touching ground in Israel, flocked into the United States, except for a minority, who, after getting a whiff of their tribesmen in Israel, promptly flew back to their Soviet homes. (43) One cannot be impressed by the ostensible reasons for a policy of which the net result is further to augment American subsidies to the Soviet while simultaneously augmenting the saturation of our country with Jews.
(43. It is true that the Russians do not seem eager to welcome them back. The Daily World, 8 January 1979, reported that 300 Jews, who had left the Soviet, fled to Italy after they had a good look at the ant-heap in Israel. They were appealing to the “United Nations,” evidently in the hope that the clowns in that circus would intercede and obtain for them permission to return home.)
The other evidence is much noise and very few facts, all of them no better than the facts on which are based the Jews’ assurance to the British that in the United States the wicked “Neo-Nazis” are on the verge of stuffing ten or twenty millions of God’s persecuted darlings into crematoria. (44) The Americans have had the awful audacity to investigate a rather grandiose, but typical, Jewish hoax and expose its absurdity. (45) What the British may be stupid enough to believe, I do not know, but the imminence of a real “holocaust” in the United States will be considered unlikely by the hapless Americans, who cringe before the Jewish Terror; who see the homes of men who dare disbelieve the hoax besieged by mobs of Jews screaming for their blood and threatening to burn them and their families in their houses; who know that Presidents and Vice Presidents of the United States who dared mutter in private some lack of reverence for Jews were hounded from their office and forced to resign; who know that no business man dares offend our masters, not even by subscribing to a journal that does not have kosher approval, for even if it comes to a post office box under an assumed name, the spies will learn his identity and the Jews stealthily or openly will destroy his business and perhaps his family… It would be idle to go on enumerating what is known by everyone who ventures to raise his eyes and look about him. My point is that Americans should know that the fact that Professor Butz has not yet been murdered and all copies of his book destroyed by the F.B.I. is not satisfactory proof that the United States is persecuting the People of God. And it may not be amiss to consider Jewish lamentations about Russia with critical intelligence rather than faith.
(44. See above, p. 73.)
(45. On the hoax about the “six million Jews” who are said to have been exterminated in Germany before they migrated to the United States and a few other lands and began to collect for their deaths from the Germany they had ruined, the pioneer work was that of Paul Rassinier, who had been himself an inmate of a German concentration camp and later spent years in touring Europe vainly in search of someone who had actually seen one of the famous “gas chambers,” for which the basis, of course, was only the Germans’ attempts to control with disinfectants the epidemics of typhus brought into the camps by Jews and their body lice. See Rassinier’s Lemensonge d’Ulysse (Paris, 1950) and its sequels, Ulysse trahi par les siens (Paris, 1961), Le v‚ritable proces Eichmann (Paris, 1962), and Le drame des Juifs europaens (Paris, 1961). An English translation of the last of these was published by Steppingstones, Silver Spring, Maryland, 1975, which issued in the following year a translation of the book on the Eichmann trial (which Rassinier had originally intended to entitle aptly, “Les maitre-chanteurs de Nuremberg”), now published by the Historical Review Press, Chapel Ascote, Ladbroke, Southam, Warwickshire. I understand that translations of Rassinier’s several books are assembled in Debunking the Genocide Myth, published by the Institute for Historical Review, Torrance, California. The fullest and most systematic demolition of the infamous hoax, which has been used to extort forty billion dollars or more from the helpless people of Germany, is the masterly work of Professor Arthur R. Butz, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, published by Historical Review Press, s.a. (1976), and available from Liberty Bell Publications; an American edition is published by the Institute for Historical Review in California. An especially notable work in German is Der Auschwitz Mythos (Tubingen, Grabert, 1979; available from Liberty Bell Publications) by Judge Wilhelm Stäglich, who thus brought on himself pseudo-legal vengeance by the Jews’ puppet government in Bonn, which tried to make him penniless and did succeed in depriving him of half of his meager income. The author of a smaller volume on the same subject is now in prison in Germany for having dared to contradict God’s Master Race. A very useful and handsomely illustrated book is William N. Grimstad’s The Six Million Reconsidered, s.l.&a. (1977), which has been reprinted by the Historical Review Press in England and in the United States by the Institute for Historical Review. Perhaps the most noteworthy aspect of the “six million” hoax is the hoaxers’ contempt for the simple-minded Aryans: they did not take the trouble to make their various fictions plausible or consistent. The point, of course, is that Aryans must be so trained that their minds will freeze and all thought stop whenever one of God’s People speaks to the curs.)
One bit of evidence adduced by Wilmot Robertson is the publication of the Ukrainian Academy of Science (in 1963) of a book that spoke of Jews without reverence, and he adds that the Soviet authorities did not suppress the book until after “world opinion,” as manufactured by Jewish journalists, began to howl. The suppression, however, does not satisfy the Jews, who now wax indignant that its Satanic author was, after a time, permitted to return to his employment, instead of being liquidated or starved to death. (46)
(46. See, e.g., the article by Dr. Spier that I cite below.)
Although as late as 1979 the Jews were still assuring themselves in some of their racial publications that their tribe was flourishing in the Soviet and that 400,000 of them ensconced in Moscow alone were joyful, (47) they are now telling themselves in their own publications, as well as in “our” press (which they own or otherwise control) that the international people are being “persecuted” by the vile Russians, in whose country they have chosen to reside. The volume of this propaganda is enormous, and it would be a waste of time to notice slight differences in the pitch of what is just one unending screech, but, if we dare be so evil as to look at a few specimens intelligently, we may derive some hints from them.
(47. A clever twist in propaganda was used by Aaron Vergelis, editor of the periodical in Yiddish that is lavishly financed by the Soviet. In his tour of this country in January 1979, he assured his Jewish audiences from coast to coast that “Soviet Jews are building a new and happy life in their [sic!] multi-national homeland,” and that propaganda that the Jews are not living high on the hog in the Soviet is really a form of “anti-Semitism” spread by “anti-Communists” to incite hostility to the Soviet and to encourage the nasty “anti-Semitic” elements in the United States. “Anti-Sovietism,” he proclaimed with Talmudic subtlety, “is the greatest anti-Semitism.” His speeches were widely reported in the frankly Jewish press and summarized in the Daily World, 30 January 1979.)
A yell by Kevin Klose in the Washington Post, 15 July 1979, headed “Soviet Jews are Fearful of Rising Anti-Semitism,” brings us the shocking news that many more Russians are now being given positions in the Russian universities and other “institutions of higher learning where Jews have traditionally excelled.” A book published in only five hundred copies “calls Zionism ‘the worst form of fascism’ “–a statement which should be good for a laugh even in Russia. Another, of which 45,000 copies were printed, “alleges that ‘Zionist centers’ control Western media.” One gathers that Russians should not be told of the Jews’ virtually total dominion over the press and boob-tubes of the United States, Britain, France, and other Western nations. Chief among the horrors that are giving the three million Jews in Russia nervous palpitations are two letters one or more diabolic Russians may have produced on a mimeograph and are clandestinely circulating to some “members of the Moscow intelligentsia.” One of these horrid letters declares that “both in the U.S. Senate and the Central Committee of the Communist Party there is a powerful Zionist lobby.” Americans know about the Senate and the rest of “their” government in Washington, where, according to the press of 36 July, Reagan, “personally ordered” everyone to cease and desist from criticizing the Jews’ terrorist bombing of Lebanon and slaughter of the Semites who don’t understand that the Jews have a right to their homes and lives–acts which some misguided men thought tactless at the very time that the United States was about to rush another big shipment of our best weapons to Israel, for which Reagan has “a very special affection.” We wonder, however, whether the mimeographed letter was as accurate about Russia as about the country that once was ours. A second letter, furtively typewritten and copied on a mimeograph, says that Brezhnev’s wife is a Jewess–as everyone in and out of Russian has long known–and that there are only three “real Russians” among thirteen members of the ruling Politburo. There is no claim that the second statement is not equally true, but Klose reports a rumor that “Russophiles,” persons so wicked that they love their own country, expecting that Brezhnev will soon depart from this world, are manoeuvering “within secret ‘higher circles’ of the [Communist] party…to heighten traditional Russian antagonism and force Jews from such positions of power and influence as they now hold.” Just as though God’s People didn’t have a prescriptive right to “power and influence” over the lower races!
What interests us is the claim, in the mimeographed sheet that is being clandestinely passed around to a few Russians, that the Russians have only three representatives in the Politburo. The journal founded by the late A.K. Chesterton, Candour, published in its issue for Nov.-Dec. 1978 a list, obtained from Russian sources, of the members of the Politburo. This shows twenty-one men besides Brezhnev, and the score is: Russians, 6; race unascertained, 1; Jews, 14, including the Minister of Defence, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Chief of the Secret Police, and two others, who are among “the most powerful men in the USSR.” (48) Date and place of birth are given and the real names of the Jews, most of whom operate under aliases in public, as is their custom. Candour’s informant adds that “90% of the Soviet Ambassadors are Jews,” and lists twelve examples. Since I am unfortunately deprived of the revelations from on high that enable so many in the “right wing” to know whatever they want to believe, I cannot affirm either the accuracy of inaccuracy of the list in Candour, but if the list contains no more than a fair percentage of truth, it would seem that the international race has prematurely rushed to its Wailing Wall, perhaps from sheer force of habit.
(48. It is odd that Candour and the clandestine mimeographed sheet that scares the Jews in Russia agree only on Kosygin as a loyal Russian. Candour’s source had no information about Romanov, and, what is most remarkable, Suslov, who is one of the three “real Russians” on the mimeographed sheet, is identified in Candour as a Jew, born in 1902 in the principal city of Azerbaijan, whose real name is Suess and who is the principal representative in Russia of the B’nai B’rith that operates in the United States and watches of the Aryan sheep. Cf. note 41a above.)
TOD UND VERKLŽRUNG
The most nearly sober of the current lamentations is a long article by Ruben Ainsztein in the well-known and widely influential British periodical, New Statesman. On the cover of the issue for 18 December 1978, where it is illustrated by a photographic montage that shows the evil face of Hitler behind the evil face of Stalin, the article is entitled, “Soviet Union Today: Anti-semitism Institutionalized,” but above the article itself appears the apocalyptic title, “The End of Marxism-Leninism.” The author naturally does not miss a chance to reiterate the Jews’ great “Holocaust” hoax, and he assures us that “Only Stalin’s mysterious [!] death saved the Jews who had survived Hitler’s Final Solution from annihilation.” He then speaks of the awful book that Robertson mentioned, but without quite telling us that it was suppressed in 1963. His featured evidence, however, is a confidential memorandum to certain committees in the Communist Party, allegedly written by Valery Nikolayevich Yemelyanov, and presumably typewritten or mimeographed, of which Jewish agents were able to filch part in January 1977. (49) In that memorandum Yemelyanov reportedly not only said unkind things about the sacrosanct race, but even proposed the formation of an international organization to unite civilized men of the West to oppose and perhaps avert the consolidation of Jewish control over the entire planet.
(49. Further information about the memorandum that Yemelyanov hoped to keep confidential is given in a despatch from Jerusalem published in the Daily Telegraph, Britain’s largest conservative newspaper, on 9 March 1978. One of the Ministers in the Israeli government moaned that the stolen memorandum was “an all-out declaration of war against the Jews” by the one man who wrote it.)
I naturally cannot tell whether Yemelyanov did indeed express such evil thoughts, but I note that in a long article in the Jewish Chronicle (London), 25 July 1980, Dr. Howard Spier complacently remarks that the “paranoid” Professor Yemelyanov had been fired from his academic position and incarcerated in a “”psychiatric hospital.” (50) That sounds to me as though the Children of God still had influence in the Soviet Union, but it does not prevent Dr. Spier from chattering with fear about the likelihood of pogroms because, although “overt antisemitism” is not feasible in Russia today, there are Russians who regret that it is not and who even dare to write articles with “racial overtones,” which are “thinly disguised antisemitism” and therefore offensive to Yahweh’s Master Race.
(50. Poor Yemelyanov must have been released from the madhouse after Spier wrote, for a few lines in the Spanish press in January 1981 reported that he had been arrested and imprisoned for “racism,” presumably shortly before. Since Yemelyanov is, so far as we know, the only man in the Soviet Union who has dared to suggest (in a confidential memorandum) actual opposition to the Jews, it may be assumed that if he were publicly crucified, the three million tribesmen in Soviet territory, who are now quaking with terror, could sleep o’nights.)
Among the innumerable shrieks of the Jewish Banshee, none is better written or more coherent than Robert Wistrich’s article on the wickedness of Stalin in the Jewish Chronicle, 22 February 1980. Like Ainsztein, Wistrich identifies Stalin as the serpent who appeared in the Soviet Eden and, after beguiling the Slavic Eve by justly equating disrespect for Jews with cannibalism and making it punishable by death, finally gave effect to the evil thoughts he had secretly harbored in his black soul for a long time and slyly sold her the deadly apple of patriotism. The article is noteworthy for the relative absence of the usual hysteria and for its author’s respect for logic, and especially because it identifies, as did Yockey, the hanging of the eleven Jews in Prague as the turning point of Stalin’s policy: “for the first time, antisemitism and anti-Zionism openly fused.” The trials in Prague were a first step toward “Stalin’s own Final Solution of the Jewish question–mass deportations to Siberia….The plan was foiled [sic!]” by the opportune death of Stalin. Stalin’s policy was reversed, he is now discredited, and his monuments “have been pulled down,” but the terrible thing is that “Stalin’s heirs…studiously avoided mentioning antisemitism in the catalogue of his crimes.” And that means, oh horrors! that we “must reckon with the return of the pogrom traditions of the Tsarist State under a thin veneer of Marxist-Leninist verbiage.”
Two of the best articles, which I have mentioned, and numerous others assert that Stalin intended in his own mind to solve Russia’s Jewish problem by either transporting the aliens to Siberia, as Wistrich says, or by exterminating them, as Ainsztein claims, presumably by finding engineers and chemists who could overcome the practical obstacles to constructing and operating “gas chambers,” such as are celebrated in the Jews’ great hoax about the “six million.” (51) The evidence that Stalin had in petto a plan to become the Antichrist (52) is both meager and in conflict with all of his career before he was seventy-three, but we must remember that Dzhugashvili began his career as a theological student and doubtless acquired early the arts of dissimulation and hypocrisy, in which he must have perfected himself. There can be no doubt but that he was a highly intelligent man, so it is out of the question that he could ever have taken seriously the Marxist religion, which he used to manipulate the misfits, simpletons, idealists, and other crackpots over whom he climbed to power, and to outwit his fellow thugs. (53) So talented a man could have concealed even from Jews his opinion of them, but it is also possible that he, like Luther and many other men, trusted the Jews during the greater part of his career and changed his mind only late in life.
(51. The choice of this number may have some special significance. In the early years of this century, and especially during the administration of President Taft, American busybodies were a-twitter over the supposed plight of the six million dear Jews who were “imprisoned” in Czarist Russia because they preferred not to leave it.)
(52. It must be remembered that the term ‘antichrist’ does not specifically refer to the christ called Jesus who is the hero of the “New Testament.” A christ is, of course, a divinely-appointed King of the Jews, who will lead his race to a solution of the Gentile problem by exterminating Aryans and the like, except for some who may be spared for slavery. The apocalyptic fantasies of the Jews call for the appearance of an ‘antichrist,’ i.e., a particularly disrespectful and wicked goy, before the appearance of the real christ, who will put the lower races in their place. An ‘antichrist,’ therefore, is a powerful adversary of the Jews, except, of course, in Christian terminology.)
(53. It goes without saying that Communist leaders do not believe in Communism. An acute young American, Duane Thorin, who had been intensively interrogated while a prisoner, stated the facts concisely in A Ride to Pannunjom (Chicago, Regnery, 1956): “Intellects that failed to see through the falsities of communism were so arrested that they were of only limited use in the totalitarian state.” Czeslaw Milosz in The Captive Mind (New York, 1953) devotes a chapter to the practice of ketman by the more intelligent Communist professionals as they jostle for places on the ladder: like Moslem and Christian theologians, they feign a belief in the orthodox doctrine of their sect and try to catch each other out by devising Talmudic quibbles as traps to obtain admissions that will justify a charge of heresy.)
The best proof that Stalin was or became inimical to the Self-Chosen People is that a pack of Jewish physicians tried to poison him a few weeks before he died suddenly, reportedly of a “cerebral haemorrhage.” They would not have done so without good reason. It is true that some persons believe the story that the physicians were innocent, but they do so on the usual grounds that Jews are “righteous” people, and without reflecting that nothing could be more righteous than killing goyim that get in the way of God’s Own. As all Christians well know, that is the lesson that is taught throughout the “Old Testament,” which seems such an appalling record of crime to persons who read it without Faith. (54) The virtually infinite superiority of their race is taken for granted and openly avowed by Jews today. (55) The Holy People, for example, did not hesitate to boast over the French radio of their cleverness in poisoning a thousand German officers by slyly putting arsenic in the bread they baked for them. (56) And, as everyone known, Begin, who is now dropping bombs on the civilian population of Lebanon in preparation for conquest and annexation of that helpless country, early distinguished himself by his efficiency in killing goyim, such as the English men, women, and children whom he blew up by planting a bomb in their hotel. For such valiant deeds he is sometimes criticized adversely by “aunt-eye-see-mights,” who do not understand that his victims were just English pigs and probably should have been butchered anyway. (57)
(54. Christians, I understand, find especially edifying the tale that is told about Moses in Exodus, 2.11-15, 19; 4.19-20. Seeing an Egyptian treat a Jew harshly, Moses found an opportunity to catch the goy alone and, after looking all around to make sure no one could see them, rubbed him out, probably by stealing up behind him and stabbing him in the back. Moses hid the body in the sand, but when he found that someone had seen him after all and would turn stool-pigeon, his chutzpah failed him and he took it on the lam across the border into a foreign country, where, passing himself off as an Egyptian, he lay low for many years until God came to his hide-out and told him the heat was off in Egypt and the cops were no longer looking for him.)
(55. According to the press, Dr. Michael Wyschogrod, Professor of Philosophy in the City University of New York, frankly told a conference sponsored by the National Conference of Christians and Jews that there was a vast difference between harming a Jew and killing goyim, because “what happens to the Jewish people is not quite the same” as what happens to other people in that there is “an element of the divine” in Jewish history that makes it special. He admitted that “humanists” and other irreligious persons would think the racial distinction “a scandal,” but that is because they do not “grasp the uniqueness of Jewish history.” Dr. Wyschogrod also told his audience what makes that uniqueness: the fact that a Jew is always a detached limb of his race and only secondarily an individual. “I am first a member of the Jewish people,” he declared, “and only secondarily Michael Wyschogrod.” That, of course, is something an Aryan can never understand, for while he may feel a loyalty to, or a duty towards, a class or nation, he can do so only as an individual, and even the strongest effort of the imagination will not enable him to think of himself as having the relation to his race that a member of his body bears to him. The conference was reported in The Christian News, 30 April 1981, p. 15.)
(56. See the Toronto Daily Star, 9 March 1968.)
(57. Cf. note 38 above.)
The heroic physicians, like the Lopez who was the personal physician of Queen Elizabeth I and tried to poison her, were caught, but we shall never know whether they had colleagues who were more successful. It is, of course, not unusual for men of Stalin’s age to die of natural causes, but a sudden death that occurs so soon after an unsuccessful attempt at assassination, and occurs so opportunely–should we say providentially?–for a man’s deadly enemies will always arouse suspicions.
When a great monarch dies, there is always a bitter struggle for power among the diadochi, and from what we know of Communists and given the impossibility of dividing the empire, we may be certain that the contest in Russia was especially vicious, but the essential facts concerning it remain secret. Eventually Khrushchev, whatever his antecedents, (58) came out on top, having pleased his henchmen by vituperating the man who had saved Russia, the Soviet, and Communism from the German invasion. In 1961, he ejected ignominiously from its tomb the body of the architect of Russia’s position as a world-power, had his monuments and memorials destroyed, and even carried post-mortem hatred so far as to change the name of Stalingrad, the site of Russia’s most celebrated victory. Such spitting on a national hero and the sheer fury of the posthumous vengeance taken on him, must have had a deeper motive than a mere courting of popularity among the serfs, as sometimes happens in “democratic” countries. In fact, the vitriolic denunciation of Stalin for “tyranny” was a somewhat hazardous gambit, since it might encourage discontent with that tyranny, which was continued with only superficial changes. What the motive was, however, we cannot determine: it may have been known only to the inner circle of the Politburo and must remain an enigma for us.
(58. I refuse to debate the vexed question whether or not Khrushchev was really a Jew masquerading as a Slav. The evidence on both sides of the question is suspect.)
In sum, then, the evidence before us warrants the conclusion that for a period of about six months–from early November 1952 until 5 March 1953–Dzhugashvili-Stalin openly showed a certain hostility toward the Jews that he had doubtless meditated for some time before putting it into practice. (59) It is reasonable to conjecture that he may have intended or wished to put into practice the stated principles of Zionism. During those six months or more, the Jews seem to have lost the power to control Russian policy, and it may be they did not subsequently recover their dominance over it. (60) There is evidence that Russians are now permitted to occupy in the universities and bureaucracy positions that Jews want.
(59. The earlier stages of the affair that reached its climax with the hanging of the eleven Jews in Prague are uncertain. The most important of these Jews, Rudolf [nice Germanic name, Gothic hrôth-wulfs!] Slánsky, was arrested on a charge of treason on 27 November 1951, but the Czech executive who had formally ordered the arrest, Kópriva, was himself arrested on 23 January 1952, thus producing a neat confusion to keep everyone puzzled.)
(60. By far the most complete and objective treatment of the whole question known to me is the late Andrey Diky’s Jews in Russia and in the USSR, s.l.a. [1978?]. When I last heard, copies could be obtained from L. Volovlikoff, P.O. Box 8082, Ottawa, Ontario. This work is based on Russian and Ukrainian sources not generally available, especially periodicals, and its author makes every effort to be fair and more than fair to the Jews, giving them the benefit of every doubt. In an appendix, pp. 297-319, the author lists the officials of the eleven principal organs of the Soviet government from 1932 to 1939. Here are the totals: Jews, 447; non-Jews, 68; race undetermined, 34.)
For the rest, we can only note that there is not the slightest indication that the present regime in Russia intends to accept the theory of Zionism, as it would surely do, if it wished to rid its territory of Jews. Hitler, to be sure, accepted Zionism and made great efforts to foster it, and the Jews will never forgive him for having taken them at their word, but nevertheless a regime that is really anti-Jewish would not overlook the enormous advantage it would obtain by officially supporting Zionism. (61)
(61. As we all know–or should know–the premise on which the Zionist movement was founded, and on the basis of which support for it (including the Balfour Declaration) was solicited, was that Jews and Europeans represent incompatible races and cultures, and that the presence of the aliens in Europe will always result in irremediable tension and animosities, to the distress of all concerned. The only solution, therefore, was the creation of a “homeland” to which all Jews could emigrate and in which they could form a nation that would have a geographic unity corresponding to its spiritual unity. See the writings of the founder of Zionism, Theodor Herzl, in his Tagebucher (Berlin, 1922-23) and the passages that were suppressed in the German edition but restored by Marvin Lowenthal in his translation of excerpts (New York, 1956). Herzl’s diaries record his negotiations with various European monarchs and prime ministers and his reactions to their attitudes, and I can find in his writings no indication that he was not sincere in his purpose. He did obtain from the British government in 1903 the offer of East Africa as the desired homeland, and was bitterly disappointed when the Jewish Congress rejected the offer. As is well known, the National Socialist government of Germany made great efforts to obtain a homeland for the Jews in Palestine, Madagascar, and in a large part of the territory of the former Russian Empire; these efforts were successively frustrated by Great Britain, France, and the defeat of Germany in 1945. — It is faintly amusing that Kevin Klose, in the article about “Anti-Semitism” in the Soviet that I mentioned above, lists a report that when the Russians grant exit visas to the Jews who wish to emigrate, they maliciously give preference to the ones who will head for the United States instead of remaining in the national ghetto, where they could enjoy “family [i.e., racial] reunification.)
We are here interested in Yockey. From the foregoing it will appear that he, more alert and perspicacious than other observers, was right in his analysis of the situation in Europe and the world in 1948-52, when he wrote The Enemy of Europe. He did not foresee the sudden death of Stalin, and it can be argued that if Stalin had survived for a lustrum after 1953, Yockey’s prognosis would have been fully verified and the history of Europe and of the entire world would have taken a far different direction.
Yockey did not live to witness the official denigration and vilification of Stalin that began in 1961. You may wish to determine in your own mind what conclusions he would have drawn from that astonishing reversal of Russian propaganda, and whether or not he would have revised The Enemy of Europe to take it into account.
Cont’d in Section 6