Is the Jewish
“Kahal” the Modern “Soviet”?
The Soviet is
not a Russian but a Jewish institution. Nor is it the invention of Russian Jews
of the present time, a new political device which has been set up as a vehicle
of the ideas of Lenin and Trotsky; it is of ancient Jewish origin, a device
which the Jews themselves invented to maintain their distinctive racial and
national life after the conquest of Palestine by the Romans.
Modern
Bolshevism, which is now known to be merely the outer cloak of a long-planned coup
to establish the domination of a race, immediately set up the Soviet form of
government because the Jews of all countries who contributed to Russian
Bolshevism had long been schooled in the nature and structure of the Soviet.
The Soviet
appears in the “Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion” under the ancient name
of KAHAL. In the Seventeenth Protocol this passage occurs:
“Even now our
brothers are under obligation to denounce apostates of their own family or any
person known to be opposed to the Kahal. When our kingdom comes,
it will be necessary for all subjects to serve the state in a similar manner.”
Anyone who is
acquainted with contemporary Jewish life knows what this denunciation of
apostates means. The bitterness of the persecution which falls upon a convert
to Christianity or upon the Jewish son or daughter of an orthodox family who
chooses to marry a Gentile, is without parallel among men. Very recently in a
western state a fine Jewish girl chose to marry a Gentile, who was a
newspaperman. From the time of her announcement of intention, the girl was
treated as an apostate. Had she died a most wretched death, had she descended
to a status of most ignominious shame, the feelings which her fate would have
aroused could not have been more terrible. A darkly solemn funeral service was
held for her, and on her bridal day she was declared to be dead to her people.
The case is very
far from being unusual. Perhaps one of the most moving descriptions of it is to
be found in the life of Spinoza, the great philosopher whom modern Jews are
fond of holding up for exhibition as a great ornament of their people. Spinoza’s
studies led him to question many of the dogmas the rabbis taught, those
“commandments of men” of which the New Testament speaks, and as Spinoza was
already a person of influence the very common Jewish tactic of bribery was
tried upon him.
There would be
some hesitation in using the words just set down—“the very common Jewish tactic
of bribery”—if they were not known to be true. There is no desire to cast
aspersions which grow out of malice. But Jewish history as written by Jews
provides mountains of proof that bribery was, while present knowledge amply
testifies that it still is, the favorite and most dependable weapon of the
Jews. A Jewish writer, Jacob Israel De Haan, a Dutch lawyer resident in
Jerusalem, has recently stated that one hope of a settlement of the Arab
agitation in Palestine is the ease with which the Arab press can be bribed. His
words are: “There is a strong agitation here among the Arabs against what they
call the Zionist peril. But the Arabs, especially the Arabian papers, are open
to bribe. This weakness will cause them, in the long run, to lose out against
us.”
So, young
Spinoza was offered an annual stipend of 1,000 florins if he would be silent
upon his convictions and from time to time show himself at the synagogue. This
he refused with high-minded scorn. He made ready to earn his bread by polishing
lenses for optical instruments. Upon this, he was excommunicated, a proceeding
which is thus described:
“The day of
excommunication at length arrived, and a vast concourse assembled to witness
the awful ceremony. It began by the silent and solemn lighting of a quantity of
black wax candles and by opening the tabernacle wherein were deposited the
books of the Law of Moses. Thus were the imaginations of the faithful prepared
for all the horror of the scene. The chief rabbi, the ancient friend and
master, now the fiercest enemy, of the condemned, was to order the execution.
He stood there pained, but implacable; the people fixed their eager eyes upon
him. High above, the chanter rose and chanted forth in loud lugubrious tones
the words of execration; while from the opposite side another mingled with
these curses the thrilling sounds of the trumpet. And now the black candles
were reversed and were made to melt drop by drop into a huge tub filled with
blood.” (Lewes: Biographical History of Philosophy.)
Then came the
final anathema. “‘With the judgment of the angels and of the saints, we
excommunicate, cut off, curse and anathematize Baruch de Espinoza, with the
consent of the elders and all this holy congregation, in the presence of the
holy books: by the 613 precepts which are written therein, with the anathema
wherewith Joshua cursed Jericho, with the curse which Elisha laid upon the
children, and with all the curses which are written in the law. Cursed be he by
day, and cursed be he by night. Cursed be he in sleeping, and cursed be he in
waking, cursed in going out, and cursed in coming in. The Lord shall not pardon
him, the wrath and the fury of the Lord shall henceforth be kindled against
this man, and shall lay upon him all the curses written in the Book of the Law.
The Lord shall destroy his name under the sun, and cut him off for his undoing
from all the tribes of Israel, with all the curses of the firmament which are
written in the Law * * * And we warn you that none may speak with him by word
of mouth nor by writing, nor show any favor unto him, nor be under one roof
with him, nor come within four cubits of him, nor read any paper composed by
him.’” (Pollock: Life of Spinoza.)
“As the blasting
words were uttered, the lights were all suddenly immersed in the blood, a cry
of religious horror and execration burst from all; and in that solemn darkness,
and to those solemn curses, they shouted Amen, Amen!” (Professor J. K. Hosmer:
The Jews.)
That is a
commentary on the decree of denunciation. It also throws a very strong light on
the pressure which is brought against many Jews who would cry out against the
anti-social ideas of their people, but who dare not because of the penalties it
would bring.
This
denunciation, as Protocol Seventeen orders, is to be made against anyone who is
“known to be opposed to the Kahal” or ancient Soviet system of the Jews.
After the
destruction of the Jewish state by the Romans, the Jews maintained a center in
the Patriarch; and after the dispersion of the Jews out of Palestine this
center of nationality was preserved in the Prince of the Exile, or Exilarch, an
office which is believed to persist to the present time, and which some believe
to be held now by an American Jew. In spite of all assertions to the contrary,
the Jews have never ceased to be “a people”; that is, a consciously united
racial group, different from all others, and with purposes and ideals which are
strictly of the Jews, by the Jews, and for the Jews in distinction from the
rest of the world. That they constitute a nation within the nations, the most
responsible Jewish thinkers not only declare but insist upon. And this is
wholly in accord with the facts as observed. The Jew not only desires to live
apart from other people, but he works with his own people as against others,
and he desires as much as possible to live under his own laws. In the city of New York today, the Jews have succeeded
in establishing their own court for the settlement of their own questions
according to their own laws. And that is precisely the principle of the
Soviet-Kahal.
From the first
century forward, as any reader can see by consulting the Jewish Encyclopedia,
the “community,” “assembly” or “Kahal” has been the center of Jewish life. It
was so earlier, in the time of the Babylonian captivity. And the last official
appearance of it was at the Peace Conference, where the Jews, in accordance
with their World Program, the only program that passed successfully and
unchanged through the Peace Conference, secured for themselves the right
to the Kahal for administrative and cultural purposes in addition to many other
privileges in countries where their activities had been a matter of protest.
The Polish question is purely a Jewish question, and Paderewski’s failure as a
statesmen was entirely due to his domination by Jewish influences. The Rumanian
question is likewise a Jewish question, and all Rumanians speak of the United
States as “The Jews’ Country” because they know through their statesmen the
terrific pressure which was exerted by American Jews against their country, a
pressure extending to the very necessities of life, and which compelled Rumania
to sign agreements which are as humiliating as those that Austria asked of Serbia,
out of which the World War grew. The Jewish Question is written all over the
forces that provoked the war, and over all the hindrances to peace which the
world has since seen.
Under the Kahal
or ancient Soviet, the Jews lived by themselves and governed themselves, doing
business with the government solely through their representatives. It was
communism in a more drastic form than has been seen anywhere in the world
outside Russia. Education, health, taxes, domestic affairs, all were under the
absolute control of a few men who constituted the ruling board. This board, as
the present-day Jewish hierarchy is supposed to be, was self- perpetuating, the
office often passing in an unbroken line of hereditary succession through many
generations. All property was in common, which however did not prevent the
leaders becoming rich. These Kahals or Soviets existed in Rome, France,
Holland, Germany, Austria, Russia, Denmark, Italy, Rumania, Turkey and England.
In the United States the idea has developed around the synagogue and around
national and international secret societies of Jews, of which more will be said
in succeeding articles.
The Kahal is the
traditional Jewish political institution during the dispersal of the race among
the nations. Its international aspect is to be seen in the higher councils.
These councils enlarged as the Jews spread over the world. The Jewish
Encyclopedia cites the Council of Three Lands, the Council of Four Lands, and
the Council of Five Lands, showing an international relationship in earlier
years. But like all such records, public view of them is not easily accessible
so far as they relate to modern times. The recent Zionist Congress in London,
where doubtless much business was done that pertained to the Jewish people
throughout the world, though not in public halls by any means, may be called
the Council of Thirty-Seven Lands, for the delegates to that congress came from
all parts of the world, from points remote as Lapland and South Africa, Persia
and New Zealand. The purpose of these World Councils was the unification of the
Jews, and the records of their assemblages run back through the centuries.
It is therefore
no new thing that has arisen in Russia. It is the imposition by the Jewish
revolutionists upon Gentile Russia of a form of control in which Judaism has
been schooled from the earliest times of its contact with the world. Soviet
Russia could not have been possible had not 90 per cent of the commissars been
Jewish. Soviet Hungary could not have been possible had not Bela Kun, the chief
Red, been a Jew, and had not 18 of his 24 commissars been Jews. The Jews are
the only group schooled in the erection and administration of the Kahal.
An Associated
Press dispatch under date of August 12 throws a light on the congeniality of
the Soviet system and the Jewish mind. Speaking of the Polish towns and
villages occupied by Bolshevik forces in their recent drive, the dispatch says:
“The local
Jewish parish populations already are said to be setting up Soviet and
Communist governments.”
Of course. Yet
this is in strange contrast with what we are constantly told through the press
of the sufferings of the Jews under the Soviet form and of their abhorrence of
the Reds. However, most of what we read concerning this in the public press is
Jewish propaganda, pure and simple, and the reports of men on the spot
contradict it all. One relief worker testifies that relief work in Poland is
frequently “hung up because some Jew landlord asks an exorbitant rent for his
premises,” while another testifies that though railroad fares in the supposedly
famine-stricken districts have gone up 1,000 per cent, the best and
highest-fare trains are “exclusively occupied by Jews.” He adds, of his trip
through Hungary, “The Hungarians have no money any more, but the Jews have.”
“But American
Jews abhor Trotsky and Sovietism” is the plea sometimes made.
Do they?
On page 9 of the
American Jewish World, of July 30, a letter signed “Mrs. Samuel Rush”
appears. It is headed: “Are We Really Ashamed of Trotsky?” Read a few excerpts
from it:
“I have read of
late several laments from editors of Jewish publications that the Jew is now
libeled as a radical.
“It is true that
many Jews are radicals. It is also true that some of the radical leaders are
Jews.
“But before
weeping over the downfall of the race, let’s think a bit.
“Trotsky himself
has never been represented as anything but a cultured man, a student of world
economics, a powerful and efficient leader and thinker who will surely go down
in history as one of the great men our race has given the world.
“* * * Very few
of us doubt any longer that behind the absurdities written about Russia is the
great truth that Russia is in that unsettled state which attends
reconstruction. There is a plan behind this seeming disorder, and out of the
upheaval will come order. It will not be utopia, but as good a government as
the undoubtedly high-minded practical idealists who are building for Russia can
build with the necessarily imperfect materials—human beings—with which they
must work.
“And one of the
leaders is Leon Trotsky!
“Are we really
ashamed of Trotsky?”
The lady is
evidently not ashamed of Trotsky, or Mr. Braunstein, as his real name is.
Or take Judge
Harry Fisher, of Chicago. While drawing a salary for work in the court, Judge
Fisher went abroad on Jewish relief work. His plans were changed somewhat after
his departure and he landed in Russia. He asserts in several interviews that he
was permitted to arrive in Russia on condition that he leave political matters
alone. There has been no such restriction placed upon him since his return to
the United States, for he appears as an open advocate of full trade relations with
the Soviet Government of Russia.
The Chicago Tribune
thus quotes him:
“‘We must leave
Russia alone’ he said in summarizing his views. ‘We should resume trade with
the Soviet. The Bolshevist Government is permanent. * * * While there are only
700,000 members of the Communist party, the peasants, who represent almost
100,000,000 people, are solidly back of the Lenin regime.’”
Among the Soviet
devices which the 100,000,000 peasants of Russia are said to be “solidly back
of,” is the following (it is particularly interesting in view of the fact that
Judge Fisher is judge of the Morals Court of Chicago):
“‘Some time ago,
it was published that the women of Russia had become national property,’ he
said. ‘That is untrue, but the ease with which marriage and divorce may be
effected makes for rapid changes. Everyone wanting to marry goes to what we
would call the city hall and registers.
“‘Inducements to
marry are great. When people are hard pressed for clothes and food they
sometimes make a pact to wed for a day.
“‘The next day
they go down to the city hall and register again. This time their names are put
side by side in the divorce book. That is all that is necessary to be divorced,
and they have had a good feed in the bargain.’”
Judge Harry
Fisher, of Chicago, who has returned from Jewish relief work abroad, evidently
is one with the others in not being ashamed of Trotsky.
Also Max Pine,
for many years secretary of the United Hebrew Trades of New York, had been
abroad in Soviet Russia as “a labor delegate.” He too had many good things to
say of the Soviets, among other things the strange contradiction that the Jews
are doing very well in Russia but are not pro-Bolshevik!
Here are three
persons from widely different spheres of life, yet each one of them indicates a
natural liking for the Kahal or Soviet, an admiration of its methods, and a
distinct good feeling towards its rulers. For Sovietism is the rankest form of
autocracy, and the marriage laws of Soviet Russia are in full harmony with the
program stated in the Protocols—
“We will break down
the influence of family life among the Gentiles.”
Whether the
Soviet-Kahals of Russia will succeed in completely undermining Russian family
life is extremely doubtful. The weakness of Soviet rule is the same as that of
the Protocols—a moral weakness that must eat like a cancer until it destroys
the institutions which it infests.
Russia today, viewed in the light of the Protocols, does not
represent the Judaic state, but it represents the
Gentile state seized by Jewish forces. There are three
degrees of action set forth in the Protocols. There is first
the secret process of breaking up the integrity of society by the admixture of alluring but disruptive ideas.
This is a work in which Gentile agitators are used. When the ideas have worked
sufficiently to break up society and explode in a
crisis, then as in Germany, the
forces that have worked in secret swiftly come to the front to take the reins
and guide the riot. In Germany this immediately
occurred upon the collapse which followed the armistice, but the Germans were
wise enough to know the meaning of the influx of Jews into all the official
positions of the former empire, and it was not long before they were
politically ousted. In Russia, however, the Jews sprang immediately into
official positions and have succeeded in remaining there. It began with Kerensky compelling the Czar to lay aside his crown; it continues with Trotsky and his armies at the throat of Europe.
But this seizure of a country, as was attempted in Germany, and
as was not only attempted but succeeded in Russia, is not the end of the
Program. It is only the beginning of its open or public phase. The Soviet-Kahal makes for the complete breaking up of
society, the entire cutting off of
co-operation and communication, the ruling of each little section in the way desired,
until the whole country lies helpless in isolated bits. The process includes, of course, the disintegration of
industry also, the massing of Gentiles into an army, and a general destruction
of morality and order. It is the Protocol program in its last stage before the reconstruction begins which shall make the conquered country a Jewish state.
The world has
not seen that last stage yet. It has not come, even in Russia. If the Russian
people waken from the daze into which they have been thrust, it will not come.
Jewish voices loudly proclaim that Soviet Russia has come to stay. The only
authoritative voice on that subject is the voice of Russia, and Russia has not
yet spoken. Today the world is trembling on the very verge of Real Russia’s
awakening, and with it a retribution most terrible upon the Sovietists.
The program of the Protocols once came near succeeding in
the French Revolution, but its essential immorality overreached itself. It has come a step nearer success in Russia, but there
too its defiance of the moral law will be its undoing. The Jewish Question
of today is being fought out in Russia and Poland, and the strength of the Jewish forces is largely and mostly
supplied from the United States of America. No wonder those small East European independencies which are fighting for
their lives refer to our country as “The
Land of the Jews.”
“We will show our
power to one,” say the Protocols. “In
order to demonstrate our enslavement of the Gentile governments of Europe, we
shall show our power to one of them by crimes of violence, that is, by a reign
of terror.” (Protocol Seven.)
One by one the
Gentile nations of Europe have been compelled to withdraw their troops from
Russia. One by one the
premiers of Europe have submitted to heavy
shackling of their official hands with regard to the Russian question. And
today the world looks on while little Poland,
apparently the second country on the list of Soviet victims, is made to feel
heavy vengeance for her daring to be independent of Jewish power. Russia has
been made to pay for her attempted independence of the Jew; Poland is now being made to pay. It is a flame, the
Jews of Eastern Europe hope, and many Jews of America also, which will sweep
round the world.
If the ruling
Jews of the world wished the Russian people freed, if they wished the flames of
Bolshevism to be quenched, if they wished Jewish participation in revolutionary
movements to be withdrawn, they could accomplish it in a week. What is going on today is going on by permission of
the Jewish world powers.
There is
apparently no desire to curtail a movement which
largely originated in American Jewry. This is the
program of “showing our power to one,” and the program will be followed out. The “showing,” however, is twofold;
it is a showing of power, but it is also a showing
of the people who wield the power, and in the end it might have been just as well had the power never been
coveted, attained, or used.
Anyone who
desires to test the exactitude of the Protocols’ estimate of human nature may
do so by observing his own reactions to the
Russian Bolshevist situation. It is
undeniable that there exists among all classes of
Gentiles in America a kind of admiration for the coup which Lenin and
Trotsky have managed on such a massive scale. The audacity of it, the ability to stay afloat thus long in defiance of
so many laws, have conspired to draw out unwilling
applause.
Consider then
this passage from the Tenth Protocol:
“The people feel an
especial love and respect toward the genius who wields political power, and they say of all his high-handed actions: ‘It is
base, but clever! It is a trick, but how he played it! So majestic! So
impudent!’
“We count on
attracting all nations to the constructive work of laying the foundations for
the structure planned by us. It is necessary for us
first of all to acquire the services of bold and fearless agents, who will
overcome all obstacles in our pathway.
“When we accomplish
our governmental coup d’etat, we will say to the people: ‘Everything has
gone badly, all have suffered. We will eliminate the cause of your
sufferings—nationality, frontiers and diversity of coinage. Of course you are free to pronounce sentence upon us,
but that can scarcely be just if you do so before giving a trial to that which
we offer you.’”
This is very
well conceived, and this is the way in which, up to this time, it has worked
out. But there will be a strong reaction set in. False promises like chickens
come home to roost. The real originators, the real purpose of the movement
hidden behind Bolshevism will become evident. And then the world will crush out
again the World Program which at times has seemed so near success.
There will
probably be more light upon this World Program as a result of the Russian
Kahal-Soviet system than from any other attempt
to realize it. For five generations the world has lived in a false light
supposed to be shed by the French
Revolution. It is now known that that revolution was not the Revolution of the
French People, but the disorders of a minority who sought to impose upon the French People the very Plan which is now
being considered. It was the French People who ultimately put down the
so-called French Revolution. And France, as a result
of that upheaval of a well-organized minority, has been bound by Jewish control
ever since.
The Russian Revolution will go down in history with no such false halo of romance around it. The
world now knows it for what it is. The world will soon
know whose was the money and whose were the brains that fostered it, and from
what part of the world the principal impetus came. The Russian upheaval is racial, not political nor economic. It conceals beneath
all its false socialism and its empty mouthings of “human brotherhood” a
clear-cut plan of racial imperialism, which is not
Russian, and which the common sense and interest of the world will
speedily stamp out.
[THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT, issue of 28 August
1920]