WARNING: This is a Notorious Antisemitic Document!
The following material has been translated from a pamphlet found in the NSDAP Hauptarchiv. Its German title was Der Bolschewismus von Moses bis Lenin: Zwiegespräch zwischen Adolf Hitler und mir, and it was originally published in Munich in March 1924 from unfinished notes on which Dietrich Eckart had been working in the autumn of 1923.
Dietrich Eckart was born on March 23, 1868, in the Bavarian town of Neumarkt, twenty miles southeast of Nürnberg, and he died on December 26, 1923, in Berchtesgaden. He was a poet, a playwright, a journalist, scholar, and a philosopher, as well as a dedicated fighter for the National Socialist cause. Among his better-known works are his play Lorenzaccio and his translation and adaptation to the German stage of Ibsen's Peer Gynt. He was for a while editor of the Völkischer Beobachter, and he wrote the NSDAP song, with the famous words "Deutschland erwache," which later became a NSDAP byword.
The reader interested in more details of Eckart's life, as well as a fairly extensive sampling of his poetry, is referred to Alfred Rosenberg's book Dietrich Eckart: Ein Vermächtnis (Munich, 1928 ff.)
Der Bolschewismus is of interest today for several reasons. Firstly because, it is the last work of Eckart, the man who, as the intimate companion of Adolf Hitler during those critical, early years in Munich, helped prepare the spiritual foundations of National Socialism. Eckart had been seriously ill as he was writing the pamphlet, and his arrest and temporary imprisonment, as a consequence of the Munich putsch of November 9, 1923, were followed shortly by his death.
Secondly, it is instructive, as being representative of a certain type of propaganda. Eckart was a practical propagandist as well as an idealist and a poet, and Der Bolschewismus is an excellent example of his style. Aimed at the reader with the equivalent of a high-school education, it is skillfully contrived to avoid tediousness and maintain a relatively unsophisticated audience's interest while making a rather extensive, if not intensive, historical investigation of the "Jewish Question." It achieves this by relegating the great majority of documentary evidence to footnotes and by liberally interspersing historically significant points with spicy or amusing tidbits.
Eckart's notes for Der Bolschewismus were still in rather rough and unfinished form when he died, and this will be evident at a few places in the text which follows. The editor slightly condensed the original material during translation, omitting several of the more ragged portions as well as untranslatable puns and a few sections with limited interest for present-day readers.
A DIALOGUE BETWEEN ADOLF HITLER AND ME
"Yes!" he cried. "We've been on the wrong track!
Consider how an astronomer would handle a similar situation. Suppose that
he has been carefully observing the motion of a certain group of celestial
bodies over a long period of time. Examining his records, he suddenly
notices something amiss: 'Damn it!' he says. 'Something's wrong here.
Normally, these bodies would have to be situated differently relative to
one another; not this way. So there must be a hidden force somewhere which
is responsible for the deviation. And, using his observations, he performs
lengthy calculations and accurately computes the location of a planet
which no eye has yet seen, but which is there all the same, as he has just
proved. But what does the historian do, on the other hand? He explains an
anomaly of the same type solely in terms of the conspicuous statesmen of
the time. It never occurs to him that there might have been a hidden force
which caused a certain turn of events. But it was there, nevertheless; it
has been there since the beginning of history. You know what that force
is: the Jew."
"Yes, certainly," I replied, "but to prove it, to prove it! For the last fifty or hundred years, so far as I'm concerned, it's been obvious; indeed, a good deal further back, perhaps even in pre-Christian times..."
"My dear fellow," he replied to me, "we can read in Strabo [1] that already in his time, shortly after the birth of Christ, there was hardly a place to be found on the whole earth which was not then dominated by the Jews; dominated, he writes, not merely inhabited. Already decades earlier, Cicero [2] — at that time a great and powerful man, my friend! — suddenly lost his nerve when, in his well-known defense plea in the Capitol, he was obliged to point out the great influence and the cohesiveness of the Jews: 'Softly, softly! I want none but the judges to hear me. The Jews have already gotten me into a fine mess, as they have many another gentleman. I have no desire to furnish further grist for their mills.' Similarly, the influence of the Jews with Augustus was so great that they completely intimidated Pontius Pilate, who, as deputy of the Roman Emperor, was certainly not a nobody. Thus he said, 'For God's sake, away with this sordid Jewish affair!' as he reached for the washbasin and condemned Christ, whom he considered guiltless, to death (John 19:12). Considering these things, my friend, every child knows — or rather, could know — how late the hour already was at that time."
A reach for the Old Testament, a brief flipping of pages, and — "There," he cried, "the recipe from which the Jews always brew their hellish broth! We anti-Semites are really something. We manage to find out everything except that which is really important." Word for word, he emphatically read with a hard voice:
"And I will set the Egyptians against the Egyptians: and they shall fight every one against his brother and every one against his neighbor; city against city and kingdom against kingdom. And the spirit of Egypt shall fall in the midst thereof; and I will destroy the counsel thereof: and they shall seek to the idols, and to the charmers, and to them that have familiar spirits, and to the wizards (Isaiah 19:2-3).
"Yes indeed," he laughed bitterly, "now the
people will seek to Dr. Cuno, and Dr. Schweyer, and Dr. Heim, [3]
and whatever other charmers and wizards they have. When asked why Germany
has become a pigsty these gentlemen will answer reproachfully, 'You
yourselves are to blame. You have no more good breeding, no faith, only
selfishness and conceit. Now you will try to put the blame on the Jews.
It's always been like that when you have needed a scapegoat. Then everyone
has jumped on the Jews and persecuted them unmercifully. And just because
they had the money, and because they were defenseless. Is it any wonder
that a few individual Jews are behaving in a reprehensible manner now?
After all, one finds some black sheep in every group. As if there weren't
a good number of decent Jews! Look at their piety, their sense of family
responsibility, their sober way of life, their readiness to make
sacrifices, and, above all, their ability to stick together! And you? At
one another like dogs and cats: sheer insanity!'
"Remember how it was here in Munich during
the communist takeover?" I interjected. "The houses of the Jews certainly
weren't marked with blood, but there must have been a secret arrangement,
because among all those who suffered the misfortune of a house search not
one was a Jew. As a matter of fact, one of the stupid Red troopers who had
me by the hair answered my sarcastic question by explaining that it was
forbidden to search the Jewish houses.
"And in 1871, in Paris, the Jewish defense
also ran according to plan. There the communists destroyed whatever they
could, but the many places and houses of the Rothschilds remained
completely intact. [4]
All this enables us to understand the place in Exodus according to which
'a mixed multitude' also left Egypt with the Jews."
"In Egypt the scoundrels' scheme succeed
only about halfway," he finished. "The Egyptians became masters of the
situation at the last moment and sent the 'mixed multitude' to the devil,
together with the Jews. There must have been a desperate struggle. The
slaughter of the firstborn reveals that clearly enough. Just as they have
done with us, the Jews had won the great lower stratum of the population
for themselves — 'Liberty, Equality, Fraternity!' — until one night they
sent out the order, 'Down with the bourgeois! Kill them, the dogs!' but
things didn't turn out so well as they had expected. That portion of the
Egyptian nation that had remained patriotic turned the tables and booted
Moses, Cohn, and Levi out of the country, followed by the inhabitants whom
they had incited. During this exodus they carried along as much stolen
booty as they could manage, the Bible reports with satisfaction. It also
reports, in no uncertain terms, that the Egyptians were glad to be rid of
them (Exodus 12:35-36; Psalms 105:38). The best, though, was the reward
the Jews gave their stupid accomplices. Suddenly they began calling them
'rabble,' [5]
whereas formerly they had called them 'comrade' and pretended to love
them. Imagine the faces these deluded ones must have made in the desert
when they heard this."
"The murder of seventy-five thousand
Persians, in the Book of Esther, no doubt had the same Bolshevist
background," I answered. "The Jews certainly didn't accomplish that all by
themselves."
"No more," he confirmed, "than the dreadful
bloodbath over half the Roman Empire, which took place during the reign of
Emperor Trajan. Hundreds of thousands of non-Jewish nobles in Babylonia,
in Cyrenaica, in Egypt, and on Cyprus butchered like cattle, most of them
after the most abominable torture! [6]
And today the Jews still rejoice over that. 'If only the various centers
of rebellion had cooperated,' triumphs the Jew Graetz, 'then perhaps they
would have already been able to give the Roman colossus its death blow at
that time.'" [7]
"The Jews call our Sedan Day [8]
celebration barbarous," I remarked. "But they find entirely in order the
fact that, year in and year out, they still, after all this enormous time,
celebrate in the synagogues their heroic deed concerning the seventy-five
thousand Persians, in the feast of Purim." [9]
"None of this evidence seems to make any
impression on us, however," he said dryly. "One would think us deaf and
blind.
"Before the first clash with the Egyptians,
the head scoundrel, the modest Joseph, had pretty well prepared: the seven
lean cows, all the granaries filled, the people raging with hunger, the
reigning Pharaoh a perfect flunky of the Jews, and Joseph, with a corner
on the grain supply, 'ruler over all the land'! (Genesis 41:43). All the
lamentations of the Egyptians were in vain; the Jew held the warehouse
closed with an iron fist until they, in return for a bit of bread, were
obliged to give away first their money, then their cattle and their land,
and finally their freedom. And suddenly the capital was swarming with
Jews; old Jacob was there, and 'his sons, and his sons' sons with him, his
daughters, and his sons' daughters, and all his seed' — the entire
hodgepodge (Genesis 46:7). And Joseph 'wept a good while' for joy.
Afterward, he said to his brothers: 'ye shall eat the fat of the land,'
and 'the good of all the land of Egypt is yours.' (Genesis
45:18,20)
"But some time after this glorious Egyptian
citizen of the Jewish faith, one hundred and ten years old, had died, the
old Pharaoh also passed away and was succeeded by another Pharaoh, who
'knew not Joseph,' and, seeing the multitude of Jews, who meanwhile had
grown very powerful, he became quite frightened. He feared lest: 'when
there falleth out any war, they join also unto our enemies' (Exodus
1:6-10); thus he was smarter than Wilhelm II, [10]
who hoped for their support. The Jews must work, he decided. In all
seriousness, work. 'Unmerciful,' wailed the Jewish chronicler. No wonder
that they breathed vengeance. After all, for what did one have the
Pöbelvolk, if not to do the work?
"By now, the Egyptians had forgotten dear
Joseph, who was dead and gone but there was no lack of others on whom to
blame the state of affairs, namely the landowners, the industrialists, the
bourgeois. According to the Jews, no one else was responsible.
'Proletarians of all countries, unite!' And the masses believed it and
turned on their own flesh and blood for the sake of the 'chosen people,'
who had brought on all their distress in the first place. But to us they
touchingly read aloud in school the beautiful story of Joseph and his
brothers. No doubt many teachers 'wept a good while.' It's enough to drive
one to despair."
He paused with a dark look at the Book of
Hate.
"And so it goes, through the entire Old
Testament," he began again. "Indeed, I'm telling you nothing new, but we
must bring it home to ourselves as often as possible in order to be able
to negate the constant hypocritical babble. Really, the Book of Joshua
should suffice; such a thing of uninterrupted genocide, of bestial
cruelty, of shameless rapacity and cold-blooded cunning — Hell incarnate!
And everything in the name of Jehova, in fact, according to his express
wish! When the city of Jericho fell victim to the Jews through the
treachery of the harlot Rahab, neither man nor beast, neither young nor
old remained among the living; only the harlot was spared. She and her
whole, noble family were rewarded with the privilege of living in Israel
(Joshua 6:25). And what good-natured peoples they were who, one after
another, were completely exterminated! Delitzsch, who has thoroughly
investigated that period, writes, for example, about the Canaanites: on
all the hills, under every shady tree, they rendered adoration and
reverence to the sun god and to the salutary goddess Aschera; and he
compares this beautiful, poetic custom with the pious way of our Catholic
villagers, serving the Almighty in remote mountain chapels." [11]
"Joshua alone," I emphasized, "was
responsible for the massacre of thirty-one kings, with all their people.
Among those nations exterminated in these predatory raids were several who
had yielded themselves trustingly to him. Each time the sinister words,
'let none survive,' were heard. I am inclined to believe that the
Pöbelvolk or at least their descendants, must have still been the obedient
shock troops of the Jews, not because the work was so atrocious, but
because the children of Israel have always let deluded Gentiles do their
dirty work, particularly where danger was involved. Besides, they would
not have been strong enough to subdue the peoples to whom they were
opposed, without the bellicose enthusiasm of their brutalized
comrades.
"Of particular interest is the evident
satisfaction with which the Jews have deliberately enumerated each of the
slain kings one is reminded of the prophet Isaiah. In one place, he raves
as if possessed: 'The Lord is angry at all the Gentiles; he will deliver
them to the slaughter; their land will became burning pitch; it will
become a wasteland, soaked with their blood; there will be no nobles in
the land; their princes will die out' (Isaiah 34). Between Isaiah
and Joshua were hundreds of years, but in that whole time the infernal
rage of the Jews against non-Jewish royalty hadn't changed a
bit."
"And in all eternity nothing will change,"
he proceeded, "so far as the attitude of the Jews toward our kings and our
leaders is concerned. To destroy them is their eternal sin, and when they
can't accomplish this by force, then they will use cunning. Whenever we
have a strong leadership, the Jews are obliged to keep their noses clean.
Our leadership can be truly strong, however, only if it is based
completely in our people; only if it concerns itself with the welfare of
the least among them just as much as with that of the wealthiest of them;
only if, in the firm conviction of its own worth, it bars every alien
influence from the beginning; only if it is not merely national, but is
also social, down to its very bones. No matter what others may say, I
assert this: a time will come when all the elite nations of the world will
have such a leadership; and then everyone will be astonished to see that,
instead of grating on one another as has previously been the case, they
will treat one another with respect and consideration. For then there will
be no more whipping up of land greed, of an itching for power, of
suspicion — sentiments which exist in unmixed form only in the isolated
few, and not in the more trusting general populace, anyhow. There will be
an end to the lying praise of an indiscriminate human brotherhood, which
would be possible, if at all, only under the supposition that one had from
the first excluded that eternal mischief-maker, the Jew. But had this been
done, there would be no need to push the universal brotherhood idea; the
various peoples would find themselves compatible of their own
accord."
"Tell me," I interrupted him; "strictly
speaking, do you consider the Jew to be national, or
international?"
"Neither," was the answer. "One who really
feels international has as much regard for the rest of the world as he
does for his own nation. Were our so-called international swarms really
like that — fine. But I fear that they are secretly more concerned with
the attitude of the rest of the world toward themselves than with their
own attitude toward the world. Internationalism requires basically good
intentions. But the Jew fundamentally and completely lacks these. He
hasn't the remotest idea of classifying himself with the rest of humanity.
His aim is to dominate others in order to extort from them at his leisure.
Were he really interested in comradeship, he has had the longest and most
abundant opportunity for it. Jehovah's command to him to make no alliances
with foreign peoples, but, on the contrary, to devour one after the other,
went straight to his heart (Exodus 34:12; Deuteronomy 7:16). Everywhere
one greeted him with cordiality, at first: in ancient Egypt, in Persia, in
Babylonia, in Europe; the cloven hoof appeared everywhere. The early
Germanic conquerors found him with a number of arrogated rights and made
no move to dispossess him of these. He was allowed to do business wherever
and however he wanted, even in the slave trade, toward which he has always
been peculiarly inclined. Like everyone else, he could hold public office,
including the magistracy; and his so-called religion was protected by the
state. Thus wrote Otto Hauser, who is an excellent source of fascinating
illuminations regarding the Jews." [12]
"I should say so!" I nodded. "One must
partake of him with caution though, otherwise one may not see the black
forest for the 'blond' trees. [13]
On the whole, I prefer Werner Sombart, even though his Berlin lectures
swarm with Jews."
"Now, he says the same thing!" he cried.
"According to him the Jews were by no means always second-class citizens.
In antiquity one even found them often with special privileges which
absolved them from certain duties, such as military service. [14]
It was never their strong side to risk armed conflict. In the War of
Liberation, [15]
the Jews of Deutsch-Krone, in Pomerania, sent a petition to the king,
requesting permission to remain home from the campaign in return for
money. In this petition they argued that ten thousand talers would be of
much more use in the war effort than the frankly questionable fighting
ability of a Jew. The petition was accepted, not only from them, but also
from the Jews of five more of the seven Prussian districts." [16]
"Yes, I know that place in Hauser," I added;
"it is authentic. He also quotes there from Mayer's Encyclopedia, however,
a statement which calmly claims that the Jews, through their heroic spirit
in the War of Liberation, proved themselves as worthy German
citizens."
"Just as they did in the World War," he
winked expressively. "If I had my way, I'd require placards to be hung in
all the schools, at every street corner, and in every public room, on
which would be printed nothing but Schopenhauer's description of the Jews:
'Great masters of the lie'! [17]
There is no better description. And it applies without exception to every
Jew equally, whether high or low, stock exchange tycoon or rabbi, baptized
or circumcised. Our servile people! Provoked for thousands of years! And
the innocents are taken in again and again by this blatant swindle. It is
understandable that they become surly with the Jews, but only after the
latter have shamelessly abused their naive good nature and plundered them
to the skin with their usury and fraud. And that has been the case
everywhere: in the old Roman Empire, in Egypt, in Asia, later in England,
Italy, France, Poland, Holland, Germany, and even, as Sombart writes, 'in
the Iberian peninsula, where the Jews have experienced so many
blessings'!
"And the game they're playing today, they
have been at for two thousand years," he continued. "I think that suffices
to characterize the nature of Jewish internationalism. Now we still have
left to consider the national feeling of the Jews. Naturally not that of
the one for Germany, of the other for England, and so on. Not many mice
are to be caught with that bait any longer. 'Send me a box full of German
soil, so that I can at least symbolically defile the accursed country,'
wrote the German Jew, Börne; and Heinrich Heine sniffed out Germany's
future from a toilet bowl. [18]
The physicist, Einstein, whom the Jewish publicity agents celebrate as a
second Kepler, explained he would have nothing to do with German
nationalism. He considered 'deceitful' the custom of the Central
Association of German Citizens of Jewish Faith of concerning themselves
only with the religious interests of the Jews and not with their racial
community also. A rare bird? No, only one who believed his people already
safely in control, and thus considered it no longer necessary to keep up
pretenses. In the Central Association itself, the mask has already fallen.
A Dr. Brünn frankly admitted there that the Jews could have no German
national spirit. [19]
We always mistake their unprincipled exertions to accommodate themselves
to all and everyone for impulses of the heart. Whenever they see an
advantage to be gained by adopting a certain pose, they never hesitate,
and certainly wouldn't let ethical considerations stand in their way. How
many Galician Jews have first become Germans, then Englishmen, and finally
Americans! And every time in the twinkling of an eye. With startling
rapidity they change their nationality back and forth, and wherever their
feet touch, there resounds either the 'Watch on the Rhine,' or the
'Marsellaise,' or 'Yankee Doodle.' Dr. Heim does not once question the
fact that our Warburgs, our Bleichroders, or our Mendelssohns are able to
transfer their patriotism as well as their residence of today to London or
to New York on the morrow. 'On the sands of Brandenburg an Asiatic horde!'
Walther Rathenau once blurted out about the Berlin Jews. [20]
He forgot to add that the same horde is on
the Isar, the Elbe, the Main, the Thames, the Seine, the Hudson, the Neva,
and the Volga. And all of them with the same deceit toward their
neighbors. Our charmers and wizards, however, distinguish between
respectable and not-so-respectable, between settled and newly immigrated,
between western and eastern Jews, and if worse comes to worst, they shrug
their shoulders and mutter, 'Every country has the Jews it deserves.' It
means nothing to them that it was a Jew who coined this fine-sounding
phrase. Nor that in the case of Germany, considering the quality of the
Jews we have 'deserved,' it becomes a resounding slap in the face. 'All
Israel stands openly in the British camp!' announced the American union
leader Samuel Gompers in 1916. And that includes the German Jews too, as
the American, Ford, well knew. He has written of the faithlessness of the
so-called 'German' Jews toward the country where they live, of the fact
that they have united themselves with the rest of the world's Jews toward
the ruin of Germany. 'Why?' jeers the Jew. 'Because the German is a vulgar
scoundrel, a backward, medieval creature, who hasn't the faintest idea of
our worth. And we should help such rabble? No, he has the Jews he
deserves!' Such arrogance is indeed staggering to behold."
I reminded him of Russia. "Before the
revolution, the Jews condemned her as a downright sewer of vileness, even
though they were the evident vermin in that sewer; now, the same Jews are
at the helm, and, wuppdiwupp, the same Russia is a great
nation."
"In the year 1870," he rejoined, "we Germans
had the privilege of being a great people. The Jews considered that the
time had arrived for replacing the French emperor, who had become
undependable, with a pliable president. This also seemed an excellent
opportunity to establish the Commune; [21]
thus the 'heroic German people.' No wonder that right behind our
princes and generals a pack of gesticulating Jewish financiers rode into
Paris. Meanwhile, though, we have sunk back down into the pack again. The
press, 'that select tool of the Anti-christ,' as Bismarck called it, has
designated us as 'Boches' and as 'Huns.' But have patience! The more
quickly we approach Bolshevism, the more glorious we will become again.
And one fine day it will be the English and the French who are the
scoundrels. One doesn't need spectacles to see that. 'I am a British
subject but, first and foremost, a Jew,' screamed a Hebrew years ago in a
large English-Jewish newspaper. [22]
And another: 'Whoever has to choose between his duties as an Englishman
and as a Jew must choose the latter.' [23]
And a third: 'Jews who want to be both patriotic Englishmen and good Jews
are simply living lies.' [24]
That they could venture things of that sort so openly indicates how
overrun with Jews England already was then."
"The stronghold of European Jewry had its
origin in the period between Cromwell and Edward VII," I emphasized.
"Since then, however, the center of Jewish activity seems to have been
transferred to America. They have had a good footing there for a long
time. Sombart maintains that it was Jewish money which made the first two
voyages of Columbus possible. [25]
A Jew, Luis de Torres, is supposed to have been the first European to step
on American soil. And, topping everything else, the Jews have recently
claimed Columbus himself as one of them."
"That's not surprising," he laughed.
"Everyone who has somehow played a role in the world, the dear Lord
included, is a Jew. [26]
They even have Goethe and Schopenhauer on their list. And blessed be he
who believes it. For my part, I contest them Columbus as well as Torres;
ocean travel was much more hazardous then than now."
"According to Hauser," I replied, "Columbus
was an Aryan, perhaps even of German descent."
"It's all the same to me," he responded. "As
far as I'm concerned, he could have been a Zulu, I'd sooner attribute his
deed to a Negro than to a Jew."
"Completely aside from that, it's clear that
they have had America by the throat for quite a while," I continued. "No
country, writes Sombart, displays more of a Jewish character than the
United States. [27]
We have already seen a consequence of this in the World War. In 1915, at a
time when the true Americans hadn't the slightest thought of a war against
us and, in fact, were so disposed toward us that any indication of a
possible conflict of interest could have been smoothly and amicably
settled, a secret advisory committee met with President Wilson for the
sole purpose of preparing the country for war against Germany. [28]
And who was the chief wire-puller in these nefarious activities, which
were set into motion a full two years before the engagement of the United
States in the war? The previously unknown Jew, Bernard Baruch. 'I believed
that the war would come, long before it came,' he later calmly explained
to the special committee of Congress which confirmed all this. And no one
got up and beat the crafty scoundrel to a pulp."
"The resolution of the Jewish high command
many years ago to unleash the World War is well authenticated," he said.
"At the sixth Zionist Congress in Basel, in 1903, the president, Max
Nordau, proclaimed: 'Herzl knows that we stand before a tremendous
upheaval of the whole world.' [29]
Good old Herzl! What an idealist! Our charmers and wizards were filled
with awe at the thought of this noble patriarch. The scoundrel knew,
however, what his filthy people had in mind for us!"
"But Herzl was a Zionist," I
interjected.
"He was a Jew!" he said, striking the table
with his fist. "The word Jew says everything. There is no need for any
further distinction! 'God's chosen people' want to have their own 'God's
country' again. Catch that: 'again'! God's people and God's country,
neither of which, in reality, ever existed! Every portrayal ridicules for
its depravity that general state of affairs which existed for some six
hundred years in Palestine, till the Assyrians put an end to the mischief.
Can you call that a country? Can't one accept the Old Testament as the
authority on the matter? First we read of the uninterrupted murders and
plunderings of the other peoples of Palestine, which, naturally, took many
years. Then right up to the last, with the most abominable vileness, one
state of anarchy followed another. The pinnacle, the flowering, the glory
of Jewish statesmanship, namely, King David, was such a rascal that even
the unprecedented villainy of the letter condemning Uriah was not enough
for him; on his deathbed he urged his son to murder his old war comrade,
Joab.
"When Cyrus gave the Jews permission to
return to Palestine (from their Babylonian 'captivity') the overwhelming
majority ignored Zion and remained in immeasurably rich Babylonia.
Completely content there, they continued their financial speculations and
other activities."
"In the year 1267," I informed him, "there
were only two Jewish residents in Jerusalem. Up to the World War, the
number of Jews in all Palestine had grown to only 12,000, [30]
even though they had been free to return there since ancient times and
certainly weren't lacking travel expenses. The remaining twenty or so
millions — exactly how many is difficult to ascertain, since the Jews
themselves do the counting — fatten themselves upon the sweat of others
all over the world. It is hard to understand how tiny Palestine can hope
to accommodate this enormous crowd."
"That's not necessary," he retorted. "The
point is that it is now official. Israel has remembered itself. Its chains
are cast aside. The sun of a new God's state rises over Zion. What an act!
Finally liberated from bondage! Everyone is numbed with awe. The Jews
grin."
"They have already issued a resolution...."
I wanted to continue.
"Yes indeed," he cried, "if anywhere, this
is where the cat jumps out of the bag! The resolution of the Pan-Jewish
Conference of 1919, in Philadelphia!: 'The Jews are citizens of the new
Jewish state of Palestine, but at the same time they have complete rights
of citizenship of whatever countries they choose to live in.' One must
read that non plus ultra of arrogance twice, indeed, a hundred
times, in order to be sure one isn't dreaming. Imagine instead: 'The
English are citizens of Great Britain. Each Englishman who chooses to live
in Germany or France or Italy retains all his rights of English
citizenship, but at the same time he has the complete rights of
citizenship of the country in which he is living.' Now ask yourself what a
scream of indignation, not we or the French or the Italians, but the Jews
themselves would raise if the English people had actually made such a
resolution! The Pan-Jewish Congress, however, issued its resolution as
categorically as a command.
"This assembly comprised representatives of
all the Jews of the world, including the Zionists. Their intentions were,
in short, that the Jews should stay where they were and that the new Zion
should simply have the purpose, first, to strengthen their political
backbone, second, to gratify their arrogance, and last but most important,
to provide them a state where they could carry on their dirty business
without fear of detection.
"I think we can form a pretty good idea of
Jewish nationalism from this." "In terms of our customary concepts," he
shrugged, "it really can't be defined. It is a rank growth over the whole
earth, sometimes advancing slowly, sometimes leaping ahead in great
bounds. Everywhere it sucks voraciously at the lifeblood of the planet.
What was in the beginning a swollen abundance will become in the end
nothing but dried-up sap. Zionism is the visible, surface aspect. It is
connected underground to the rest of the monstrous growth.
"And nowhere is there to be found a trace of
opposition to this thing."
"One might say," I laughed, "that the wolves
have split themselves into two packs. It has been agreed that one of these
shall abandon the land of the sheep in order to go live somewhere, quite
among themselves, as pure vegetarians."
"There is one thing above all of which we
must always keep in mind," he tendered, "one thing of which we must always
remind ourselves: 'Great masters of the lie'! One need only forget
Schopenhauer's words for an instant in order to begin slipping under the
influence of their deceptions. To be sure, we also lie but, in the first
place, not as a matter of habit and, in the second place, clumsily. Any
really experienced judge of human nature is able to detect the lie of an
Aryan, even a very shrewd one. Sherlock Holmes himself, however, would be
at a loss when confronted with the Jewish cold-bloodedness in deception. A
Jew is only embarrassed when he inadvertently blurts out the truth. If he
should happen to deliberately tell the truth, it is always with a mental
reservation, thus making a lie even of the truth."
"Indeed, Luther," I replied, "said to the
Jews: 'You are not a German, but a deceiver, not a Frenchman, but a
faker.' [31]
His synonym for Jew was 'liar'!"
That's what everyone who knows them says of
them." he rejoined, "from the Pharaohs up to Goethe and our time. It has
been said in every dead and living language: in Greek, Latin, Persian,
Turkish, English, French, or what have you. One would hope that these
universal condemnations, throughout the whole world, would give our
charmers and wizards at least a little to think about. God forbid! Not
even Christ was able to reach them. He stood there among the cringing
Jewish rabble, his eyes flashing, the very image of scorn, and his words
fell among them like whiplashes: Ye are of your father the devil, and the
lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning and
abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh
a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar and the father of it (John
8:44). But to our charmers and wizards that means no more than the
unintelligible stammering of a child."
"They delude themselves by believing that to
be only a stern but well-meaning lecture of the Lord to his beloved people
of Israel," I underscored his irony.
"Christ," he continued with a raised voice,
"was never other than perfectly straightforward and frank. God, not to
feel the fact that there two fundamentally different worlds opposed one
another! In Palestine after the Babylonian captivity there was a great
lower stratum of non-Jews ruled over by Jewish moneylenders, powerful
through their usury. One can read that in the book of Nehemiah. Sombart
says that it leaves absolutely nothing to be desired in the way of
clarity. [32]
The outstanding point is that the real population, composed of oppressed
peasants, was of an entirely different race than the Hebrews. Gradually
the Jews forced their religion on them. Christ himself growled about that:
'Woe onto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye encompass sea and
land to make one proselyte...' (Matthew 23:15).To the Jews, Galilee was
the land of the Gentiles, whose population 'sat in darkness,' as they
impudently imagined (Matthew 4:15-16). They said: Can there any good thing
come out of Nazareth?' and 'Art thou also of Galilee? Search, and look:
for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet' (John 1:46; 7:52). The Hebrews were
so firmly convinced of the non-Jewish ancestry of Christ that they counted
him among the especially hated Samaritans (John 7:48). We live and learn!
There are many more such examples."
One could hardly recommend a better policy
than that which lets each man find salvation in his own fashion," I
stressed. "The tacit assumption in that policy, though, is that each man's
fashion should involve some sort of decent sentiment, some genuine belief,
and not just a contemptible Phariseeism. This distinction should have been
expressly emphasized long ago. It wasn't, and the religion of the
moneychanger has received the benefit of this misguided tolerance. Christ
was not so tolerant. With a whip he put a stop to the business of the
children of the devil, even though he had said, 'Love your
enemy'!"
"Yes," he replied, "but we must understand
what Christ meant by 'enemy.' We can love an honorable and decent enemy,
even a brutal one, who is frank and forthright in his enmity. And at the
same time we can beware of him. But Christ never dreamed that we should
love men whom no love whatever could dissuade from their implacable
determination to poison us, body and soul. Indeed, he himself did not do
that. On the contrary, he continued to strike with his whip as hard as he
could. And the words that he flung with indignation into the faces of the
rabble breathed of irreconcilability itself. To me, he acted very proudly
in the founding of his religion: there was very little contradiction
between his sermons and his deeds! Why, then, have the 'pious' never
followed his example? They least of all. They mercilessly persecute even
their decent adversaries — as a matter of fact, only their decent
adversaries. Their eyes remain closed to the most cunning bunch of
swindlers in existence. The Bavarian People's Party, for instance, knows
quite well that we are defending the Christian foundations of our nation
without mental reservations. They also know, however, that we can make no
common cause with them as long as they adhere to their present policies.
And so they turned to the Jews, hoping to remain in power with their help.
They surprised themselves. Dripping with friendliness at first, the Jews
turned on them murderously when they had gotten the upper
hand."
"That was inevitable," I agreed with him.
"Fortunately, the Jews would not be able to provide us with that same sort
of dreadful experience, for we do not betray and murder our own flesh and
blood for the sales of profit. So far as we are concerned, the Bavarian
People's party could even remain in office, provided they clean the manure
out of they pigsty and perceive the correctness of our views. We are not
willing to tear ourselves apart just for power. But we want Germanism, we
want genuine Christianity, we want order and propriety, and we want these
things so firmly established that our children and grandchildren can
remain satisfied with them."
"They consider that impossible," he said,
"and therefore they consider our program nothing but empty phrases, of no
more sincerity than the empty phrases with which they consciously try to
peddle themselves to the people. But our goals are not only possible, they
are certain, even if we don't attain them tomorrow. But first a beginning
must be made. So far, never and nowhere has there been a truly social
state. Everywhere and always the upper crust has leaned much more strongly
to the principle, 'what is yours, is mine,' than to, 'what is mine, is
yours.' These wise ones have only themselves to blame for the fact the
lower stratum, full of rage, now is committing the same error. The Jew is
able to take advantage of both these groups. One of them provides for his
affairs, the other carries them out. Therefore, we oppose them both. We
will put an end to unfair privileges as well as to slavery."
"Decidedly," I replied. "Our front stands
against both left and right. A strange situation; from two directions we
must ward off attackers who also fight one another. The Reds scream at us
as reactionaries, and to the reactionaries we are Bolsheviks. From both
sides the Jew directs the attack on us. The lower stratum doesn't see him
yet and, thus, hates us from sheer stupidity; the upper stratum sees him
but thinks it can serve its own selfish purposes with him and thus, shoots
us in the back more from unscrupulousness than stupidity. One really needs
a good deal of faith under such circumstances in order to maintain one's
courage."
"Which we have, God be thanked, in a hundred
ways," he said, laughing, as he stretched himself. "No words were spoken
more directly to our hearts than 'Be not afraid'! (Matthew 28:10) And that
was supposed to have been said by a Jew? Those creatures of eternal fear?
Crazy!"
"Every time new and promising opportunities
for meddling have arisen," he brought out, "the Jew has been immediately
involved. He has demonstrated an uncanny ability to sniff out like a
bloodhound anything which was dangerous to him. Having found it, he uses
all his cunning to get at it, to divert it, to change its nature, or, at
least, to deflect its point from its goal. Schopenhauer called the Jew
'the dregs of mankind,' 'a beast,' 'the great master of the lie.' How does
the Jew respond? He establishes a Schopenhauer Society. Likewise, the Kant
Society in his work, in spite of the fact that — or, rather, because —
Kant summarily declared the Jewish people to be a 'nation of
swindlers.' [33]
The same with the Goethe Society. 'We tolerate no Jews among us,' said
Goethe. 'Their religion permits them to rob non-Jews,' he wrote.
'This crafty race has one great principle: as long as order prevails,
there is nothing to be gained,' he continued. He categorically emphasized:
'I refrain from all cooperation with Jews and their accomplices. [34]
All in vain; the Jewish Goethe Society is still there. It would be there
even if he himself had expressly forbidden such knavery."
"With exactly the same right," I
interjected, "the two of us could join a Talmud Society. What impudence
that would require! Inconceivable."
"Not to the Jew," he replied. "To him
impudence has no meaning. He is only able to think in terms of advantage
or disadvantage, profit or loss. One must approach him with a different
sort of measuring stick."
"Our charmers and wizards," I rejoined, "all
fall for their trick. Goethe, Kant, Schopenhauer seem to be nothing but
babblers to them."
"Bah, Goethe!" he interrupted
contemptuously. "Not even the saintly Thomas Aquinas is able to reach
these people. The great father of the Church has described in his writings
our relationship with the Jews in terms of a voyage on a ship. The Jews,
embarked on the same vessel with the Christians, play a characteristic
role: while the Christians are occupied with sailing the ship, the Jews
plunder the storeroom and bore holes in the hull. St. Thomas recommends
that they should be relieved of their booty and chained to the rudder.
What an atrocity! How un-Christian! Poor Jews! One can learn so much from
them! At least, according to Drs. Heim and Schweyer. And so the world goes
on, governed with the same wisdom as in the time of Joseph's
Pharaoh."
"Namely, by statesmen," I completed, "who
are so busy ruling that they completely fail to notice that not they but
others actually rule; by men like Czar Nicholas,
who indulged himself in the same self-deception and got a bullet in the
head for it. As early as 1843 Disraeli gave us a hint of what we should
expect there. 'The mysterious Russian diplomacy is organized by Jews,' he
boasted. Also, 'the mighty revolution which is in the making in Germany is
evolving entirely under the leadership of Jews.'" [35]
"Most of our revolutions," he said, "whether
initially with desirable goals or not, have evolved under Jewish
leadership. The revolutions of vulgar predisposition were, for the most
part, the work of Jews; and those with loftier tendencies were soon
subverted into a darker course by Jews. In the case of the struggling
young Christianity, for example, the Jews, quick as a flash, began hanging
onto its coattails. Consider Paul, properly called Schaul, who was a
rabbinical student. That Schaul first chose the Roman-sounding name,
Saulus, and then had himself renamed Paulus gives cause for thought. Still
more, the fact that in the beginning he persecuted the fledgling Christian
community with first-rate ferocity. I don't know: mass murderers who later
become saints is that not too much of a marvel? Indeed, the Jew
Weininger supposed that Christ had also originally been a
criminal. [36]
But, my God, a Jew could say that a hundred times, and it still need not
be true on that account.
"As a Jew, Paul certainly knew that of all
the peoples of the world the Jews, first and foremost, needed their souls
saved. 'Go not ... to the Gentiles, ... But go rather to the lost sheep of
the house of Israel,' demanded Christ (Matthew 10:5-6). Paul ignored it.
He went to the Greeks and the Romans and brought them his 'Christianity.'
A 'Christianity' with which the Roman Empire became unhinged. 'All men are
equal! Brotherhood! Pacifism! No more privileges!' And the Jew
triumphed."
"I always think," I spun the thread further,
"of the admirable Herr Levine in the Berliner Lokalanzeiger. [37]
He suddenly burst out one day, as if in rapture: only a Jew could have
done that; could have, with Paul's impudence, put himself in the middle of
the Capitol and there expounded a doctrine which must bring about the
utter ruin of the Roman Empire! That's what the man said, word for word; I
still remember it perfectly."
"It certainly hits the nail on the head," he
rejoined. "It may be a long time yet before Christianity recovers from
Paul. Oh, what gullible souls we are! A Jew murders hundreds of
Christians; suddenly he notices that the rest only become even more
zealous; the well-known light dawns on him; he pretends to be converted,
throws himself into the great pose, and behold: even though he deviates in
nearly all his doctrines from the other apostles, we listen devoutly to
his sermons. The simple teachings of the Master, which the most childlike
mind might comprehend, we must have 'explained' to us by a
Hebrew."
"The Jew," I replied, "certainly must be
tempted to say, 'Why are you so stupid that you let everyone make fools of
you?' And there are many charmers and wizards who, on account of his
extraordinary cunning, or 'spirituality' as they call it, look upon him
with timid admiration."
"If it depended on mere possessions," he
returned, "they would be justified. Someone named Goldstein once boasted
that the Jews administer the spiritual property of the German
people. [38]
A pity that he didn't add how they administer it.
"Well, let us be thankful that there will
always be men who, for example, will read Goethe through the eyes of
Goethe and not through the slimy spectacles of Goldstein. They may not be
professors, but perhaps vagabonds of a sort. A breed, anyway, which will
not become extinct and through which the original Goethe will be safely
preserved. The Jews can then quietly 'administer' the new Goethe. It will
not be begrudged them." [39]
"Suppose, however," I interjected anxiously,
"the 'vagabonds' also listen credulously to them and fall into the
trap?"
"It lies in the nature of the 'vagabond,'"
he laughed, "to have a heart so full that it matters not how his head
happens to be persuaded; it will always be his heart that determines the
outcome. They feel intuitively that which the clever, despite their
understanding, are not able to see. And they preserve it. One may deceive
their heads, but not even they have authority over their
spirits."
"And, you see," he pounded on the table,
"they alone are to be thanked that at least part of our Christian
heritage, as well as our other cultural legacy, has survived
administration by the Jews. Where are they? Where were they? Among high
and low, among the kings and the soldiers, among the popes and the
mendicant friars, among the learned and the illiterate, everywhere. But
not among the nothing-but-rich; but not among the nothing-but-clever; but
not among the greedy and the insatiable; but not among the Pöbelvolk. Here
the Jew is at home. Whatever appears here in the way of spiritual
possessions he matter-of-factly administers; it is his own. Just as
everything was transformed into gold for King Midas, every deep and
meaningful word is turned into filth at his touch. But for the others, for
the..."
"Vagabonds of the spirit," I threw to
him.
"Everything remains as of old," he nodded.
"There have been popes of Jewish blood. [40]
Also there has seldom or never been a shortage of other dignitaries of the
same descent in the Church. Was that which they stood for Catholicism? No,
it was Judaism. Let's take just one thing: the selling of indulgences. The
very essence of the Jewish spirit. We are both Catholics, but dare we not
say that? Are we really supposed to believe that there has never been
anything in the Church with which one can find fault? Just because we are
Catholics, we say it. That has nothing to do with Catholicism. We know
that Catholicism would have remained intact even if half the hierarchy had
consisted of Jews. A number of sincere men always held it high, though
often only secretly, many times even against the pope. Sometimes there
were many such men, sometimes few.
"The investigation of the Jew and his
activities should have been the alpha and the omega of our historians.
Instead, they investigate the bowel movements of the past.
"Karl the Great favored the Jews at every
turn. It seems to me that his slaughter of the 4500 Saxons at Verden — the
best German blood — and his Jewish advisers had something to do with one
another.
"The notorious insanity of the Crusades bled
the German people of six million men. Finally the Hohenstaufen, Frederick
II, succeeded through mere negotiation, without striking a blow in
securing the Holy Land for Christendom. What did the curia do? Full of
hatred, they hurled the ban of excommunication on Frederick and refused to
recognize his treaty with the sultan, thus neutralizing his great success.
It seems that, to those pulling the strings, the incidental bloodletting
was more important than the avowed objective of the Crusades.
"At last came the Children's Crusade. Tens
of thousands of children sent against the victorious Turkish army, all to
be destroyed. I can't believe that the idea for that absurdity originated
in a non-Jewish mind. I am always reminded of the murder of the children
of Bethlehem and the slaughter of the Egyptian firstborn. I would give
anything for a photograph of the priest who preached that Crusade, and his
flunkeys.
"Well, how about now?" I interrupted him.
"In Russia one Catholic priest after another is tortured to death by the
Jewish beast; hundreds have already been liquidated; the Church is taking
its last gasp; but Rome cannot bring herself to call the child by its real
name. Many times she has made a small start in that direction — but only
to be immediately squelched. Catholicism wants to speak; Jewry paralyzes
its tongue."
"Rome," he replied, "will pull herself
together, but only if we pull ourselves together first. And one day it can
be said that the Church is whole again."
"Since those who are responsible for the
trouble will have been discovered!" I cried. "Since the disguised Hebrew,
together with his cuckoo eggs, will have been thrown out of the Christian
community! He has set not only the Egyptians but also the Christians
against one another so that 'they shall fight every one against his
brother, and every one against his neighbor,' and he is still at this
game. He works from the outside, carefully building his pitfalls and
making his destructive influence felt in the press. But he also works from
the inside, where he is even more dangerous, in the mask of the Christian
minister. The Christian confessions swarm with Jewish and half-Jewish
clergymen, the Protestant denominations even more so than the Catholic.
They already feel so sure of victory in the Protestant churches that in
Dresden a certain Pastor Wallfisch had the impudence to announce publicly:
'I am a Jew and will remain one; yes, now that I have learned the
Christian beliefs I have become more than ever a true Israelite.' [42]
And in Hamburg a preacher named Schwalb said: 'I consider myself a genuine
Jew and have always considered myself thus'. [43]
Where that sort of thing is possible, Christianity might as well let
itself be buried.
"Luther's spirit seems to be completely
played out among our Protestants. On the question of all questions, the
Jewish question, they either hush him completely or try to tone him down.
One of the most well meaning among their theologians, Professor Walther,
calls Luther's attitude toward the Jews 'so offensive that it must arouse
not only confused astonishment among Christians but also great indignation
among Jews.' Those Christians with a confused astonishment wouldn't have
found themselves in that state if they had not previously let themselves
be confused by the Jews. And as for the great indignation of the Hebrews,
we are not grieved a bit. Where, by the way, has that indignation been
apparent? So far, Israel has been quiet as a mouse about it. They have
always praised Luther greatly as the enemy of Rome. Heine began a
ceremonious hymn of joy to the Reformer with the words, 'Luther, you dear
man.'"
"He had good reason," he jeered. "All Jews
have good reason to celebrate Luther and to ignore his anti-Semitism.
Without intending to do so, he paved the way for them, and how! The more
they extol his authority, the less the world notices his error. That he
later cursed them as a pestilence is indeed bitter to them, but — how many
people are even aware of his condemnation of the Jews."
"Instead of to dishonor," was the reply.
"His translation to the German language might have been of some use; as it
is, it has grievously damaged the German power of discernment. Lord in
heaven, what a halo now surrounds Satan's 'Bible'! Luther's poetry
sparkles so that even the incest of Lot's daughters has been given a
religious shimmer. Jehova's command to be fruitful and multiply had to be
obeyed by these two pious maidens — at any price!"
Schopenhauer expressed a similar opinion," I
confirmed. "He said that if one wants to understand the Old Testament one
must read it in the Greek version. There it has an entirely different
tone, an entirely different color, with no presentiment of Christianity!
Contrasted with the Greek, Luther's translation seems 'pious'; also 'often
erroneous, indeed, sometimes intentionally, and delivered throughout in a
churchly, edifying tone.' Luther has permitted himself changes 'which one
could call forgeries' and so on." [45]
"Not Luther," he raised his finger. "The
rabbis who helped him with the entire translation introduced changes and
forgeries. Hebrew is a difficult language. Luther translated a certain
word, for example, as 'racial kinsman.' But then the rabbi came in and
said that the word means 'neighbor.' And so we have the translation: 'Love
thy neighbor as thyself,' rather than, as it should be: 'Love thy racial
kinsman as thyself.' A small piece of cunning, but — it served its purpose
of giving the Jews the aspect of real humanitarians."
"Yes, even Luther was taken in by the
'chosen people,'" I replied. "He looked upon the Old Testament as divine
revelation. He approached the book with infatuation, convinced that it
could contain nothing but sheer preciousness. Then he began wading into
the vile thing. After a few steps he blinked his eyes, bewildered. He was
stunned. That just couldn't be so! It must have some other meaning! And
so, with perfectly honest intentions, he read between the lines what
simply wasn't there. Everywhere he managed to see allusions to Christ,
although nothing could be farther from the Jews' actual thoughts on the
matter. Their Messiah is no 'lamb's tail,' Heine jeered at Christ, no
scorner of earthly existence. [46]
On the contrary, their Messiah is a brutal dog who will conquer the earth
for his Jews; he is the 'prince of this world.' Page after page it says:
'Ye shall eat the riches of the Gentiles, and in their glory shall ye
boast yourselves,' or 'Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for
thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy
possession.' One of these is a statement of a 'divinely inspired' prophet,
the other a 'deeply spiritual' psalm (Isaiah 61:6, Psalms 2:8).
"Credulously, Luther viewed everything in a
rosy light. This became easier for him when, in the middle of the great
morass, he came to passages like: 'Ye will have no permanent existence
among the nations, and the soles of thy feet shall find no rest,' and 'Ye
will be an abomination among all peoples.' Compassion seized him. "The
Jews,' he thought to himself, 'have become untrue to their godly doctrine,
but they will again find their way home to it.' It never occurred to him
that these direly threatening sermons served only the purpose of holding
the Jews to their course.
"On the other hand, many passages of
apparently lofty stamp have quite a different purpose: namely, they serve
as a protective cover. He later recognized this Jewish tactic, but only in
the living Hebrews, not in their Bible. 'The Jews desire to make all their
affairs ambiguous, so that nothing about them is really certain,' he said.
If one belabors them for an especially low-minded passage, they can
indignantly point at one which is dripping with loving kindness. Heine,
for example, writes an utterly vulgar poem about Germany; five minutes
later he is praising 'the dear homeland' to the skies. A matter of
changing mood? Oh, dear God I suppose that we are to believe that an old
street whore often finds herself in the mood to sing the 'Ave Maria,' or
that a basically honest fellow is often in the mood to steal. What
nonsense!"
"This ambiguity," I completed, "one finds
even in Spinoza. One can hardly imagine a bolder, more outspoken world
view than his; but his ethics would horrify a pig. 'In all things seek
that which is advantageous' is the quintessence of his moral philosophy —
the genuine Jewish viewpoint." [Image: Baruch Spinoza, the greatest Jewish
philosopher (1632-1677)]
"It is the most terrible tragedy," he said
sadly, "that Luther bears the responsibility for such a dire development —
the consequence of deeds committed in perfect innocence — that today all
civilization is in danger of running aground on it. The greatest German
the unsuspecting cause of the German collapse; Luther, the mighty opponent
of the Jews, the one who most disastrously paved the way for them —
incomprehensible, I tell you, incomprehensible. To happen too late by a
paltry ten or twenty years! To first become awake to the Jews shortly
before his death, when everything had already been determined! [47]
Previously, body and soul for the traitors! Then the Hebrews had still
been 'cousins and brothers of our Lord' to him, while we Christians were
only 'brother-in-law and strangers.' Wringing his hands, he entreated the
populace to associate with them in a 'decent and proper' manner. To him
they were exalted above the Apostles! The late Erzberger couldn't have
carried on more absurdly. [48]
"Only not for an instant as sincerely," I
stopped him. "If Luther had been a contemporary of Erzberger, he wouldn't
have had to find out about the purpose of the Jewish hush-money first, in
order to see through Judaism. As early as his student days he would have
promptly leaped with both feet into the battle against the devil's
brood."
"My God," he immediately resumed, "one
cannot blame him. A lot has happened in the last four hundred years. But
there is one thing to remember: popular instinct was more alert then than
nowadays. All along the line mistrust of the Jews was quite firm. Luther
was a man of the people, the son of simple folk. His predilection of many
years toward the Jews is a bit misleading; one must take into account a
certain naivete, a lack of worldliness, the result of his stay in the
cloister. The same rule seems to have applied here as elsewhere: too much
studying ruined his vision. Nevertheless, Luther was a great man, a giant.
With a shock which pierced the twilight he saw the Jews as we have only
begun to see them today. But, unfortunately, too late, and even then not
there, where he had done the most damage — in Christianity. Oh, had he
only seen them there; had he only seen them in his youth! Then he would
not have attacked Catholicism, but, rather, the Jews behind it! Instead of
a wholesale condemnation of the Church, he would have let his whole,
passionate impetus fall on the true villains. Instead of glorifying the
Old Testament, he would have branded it as the arsenal of the Antichrist.
And the Jew — the Jew would have stood there in his abominable nakedness,
as an eternal warning. He would have been obliged to get out of the
Church, out of society, out of the halls of the princes, out of the
castles of the knights and the houses of the citizens. For Luther had the
strength and the courage and the overpowering will. It would never have
come to the splitting of the Church or to the war which, in accordance
with the wishes of the Hebrews, spilled Aryan blood in torrents for thirty
long years."
"'And I will set the Egyptians against the
Egyptians: and they shall fight every one against his brother and every
one against his neighbor,'" he ground out. "What hatred, what demonic
hatred! That's not human; what is it?"
"That, my friend," I joked, "is the
'geniality of the heart' of which the Jew, Fritz Kahn, has spoken, through
which 'Israel has become the ethical mother of mankind.' These fellows are
really quaint in their impudence. Kahn has called Moses 'an almost unique
phenomenon in the history of civilized peoples: a national hero without
weapons.' At the same time he reproves us with the remark that 'on stormy
nights the distressed wail of widows may be heard around the bronze heroes
of our market places,' that is, around the statues of Prince Eugene,
Marshal Blucher and so on. I wonder what he thinks Moses used to massacre
the Egyptian firstborn, if not weapons. Gumdrops, perhaps? Or were they
smothered to death from sheer love? Apparently, we are to believe that the
Pöbelvolk consisted entirely of baby sitters and wet nurses.
"Well, all these fellows operate the same
way at least. They don't even bother to deny anything; instead they flatly
maintain exactly the opposite."
"That tactic seems to work quite well with
our men of learning,' he growled. "The Jews say whatever they please; it
is all gospel to our scholars. They wouldn't think of trying to verify
anything; the fact that it appears in print is enough for them. A certain
Jewess called the Talmud 'a grandiose, monumental work of the spirit,' a
'heroic monument of ideas, to which the millennia have given the breath of
their experience.' [49]
Immediately upon encountering such a gem, the German professor whips out
his notebook — and the next day his students have devoured and digested
the new tidbit. That's the way it goes in our gymnasia. They are all
designed, so they say, to turn out nothing but geniuses; instead, one
lackey after another is graduated."
"A few hours spent browsing in the Talmud,"
I proceeded, "is quite sufficient to remove any doubt about the Jews. It
is understandable that they have only the most inordinate praise for the
book. When they peep into it their own peculiar nature peers back out at
them. And that, of course, is the greatest source of joy for them. Thus,
in essence, every Jew is a Talmudist, even if he has never looked at the
Talmud. It makes no difference when it was written; in fact, it needn't
have been written at all. The first Jew comprised all its essential
ingredients. The Jewish leaders fully understand that, but they only say
it metaphorically. 'The Talmud is an unimpeachable authority,' trumpeted
the rabbi Dr. Gronemann, before a Hanover tribunal in 1894. 'The legal
doctrines of the Talmud have precedence,' a Professor Cohen imperiously
told a criminal court in Marburg in 1888. And he added — now pay attention
to this! — that it applied also to non-believing Jews who, however, were
nonetheless still a part of the Jewish community, 'since they acknowledge
the moral doctrines of the Talmud.' A masterpiece! From time to time the
fellows blurt out a real secret in their babbling, but we just don't pay
attention. 'Whatever it is in the Talmud we acknowledge to have absolute
precedence over the whole law of Moses,' a group of so-called reformed
Jews testified in Paris in 1860, with the concurrence of the Alliance
Israelite. And a rabbi, Dr. Rahmer, has written in Pierer's Encyclopaedia
that the Schul Aruch, a kind of Talmud for home use, has been 'taken on by
the Israelitisch community as an authoritative guide for religious
practice.' Taken on? Such a wag! Pretty soon I'll be 'taking on' the
features of Dietrich Eckart."
"Lord," he said, "whoever doesn't become
sickened and nauseated upon making a closer acquaintance with the Talmud
can put himself on display in a circus side show."
"The local side show," I remarked, "has
certain limits on the degree of abnormality it will exhibit. The young
student from Tubingen who could gulp down half-a-dozen toads with gusto
has been its greatest attraction till now. No one, though, has a stomach
capable of digesting even this one passage from the Talmud: "Rabbi Johanan
said the penis of Rabbi Ishmael was as large as a six-kab [50]
wineskin; according to others, three kabs. The penis of Rabbi Papa was as
large as one of the baskets of the inhabitants of Harpania.' [51]
The high-minded competitive zeal of the three old rabbis could knock an
unprepared person off his chair."
"One finds a whole series of such
pleasantries in this magnificent example of a religious book," he said
disgustedly. "The real clincher, however, is that non-Jewish girls 'who
are less than three years and one day old' are considered 'suitable' for
rabbis, since Moses had written: 'But all the women children that have not
known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves,' namely, for the
rabbis. [52]
"The most abominable perversity and the most
tedious syllable-thrashing in the same breath. What goes on within Jewish
heads must really be frightful."
"They," I returned, "are of a contrary
opinion on that. Otherwise their mirror image, the Talmud, wouldn't inform
us that 'the Israelites are more pleasing before God than the
angels,' [53]
or that 'the world was created on behalf of the Israelites alone,' or that
'whoever slaps a Jew in the face has struck God himself,' or that 'the sun
illuminates the earth and the rain makes it fertile only because
Israelites live on it,' and more of the same sort of
modesty."
"I really doubt that there is any sort of
medical encyclopaedia which contains terms suitable for describing the
Jewish megalomania," he said. "But what an incredible talent they have for
disguising it!"
"Their book Sirach," I completed, "howls:
'Terrify all peoples; lift your hand up against strangers, that they may
see your power. The fire of wrath must burn them. Crush the heads of the
princes, who are our enemies!' (Sirach 36:2-12). And the Schulchan
Aruch rages: 'Pour out, oh Lord, your fury over the goyim, who do not know
you, and over the kingdoms which do not invoke your name. Pursue them in
wrath and extinguish them beneath God's heaven!' (Schulchan Aruch, Orach
Gaijim, 480). They make the same threat in both places, with the
distinction that the Schulchan Aruch emphasizes that all must be
exterminated who do not swear on Jehova."
"And with such an abominable moral doctrine
on his conscience," he began to boil, "that marvel of modern Jewry, Moses
Mendelssohn, [54]
had the impudence to assert that 'dominion over the earth belongs by right
to Jewry.' Because of their religion! As a trained Talmudist he certainly
knew his way around in the whole, vile thing — those extracts we have just
quoted are only a tiny fraction — but he still ... oh, this lying, this
utterly mendacious pack, the very essence of the lie!"
"All Berlin," I said, "buzzed with praise
for the 'wise', for the 'noble' Moses. But Goethe wasn't deceived: 'Jewish
trivia!' was his comment on the pious trickery. It struck no one as odd
that the incomparable Moses philosophized himself in the twinkling of an
eye from a simple, private tutor to the powerfully wealthy founder of the
banking house of Mendelssohn, thus avoiding by a wide detour the eye of
the needle. This benefactor of mankind slyly promoted the idea that the
Jewish people constitute a religious community only. Today this still
constitutes a favorite nostrum of the Jews. A certain Dr. Ruppin has
revealed why. 'Special laws against the Jews,' he tells us as he chuckles
and rubs his hands together, 'have always been directed against the
religious aspects of Jewry, since this sphere of activity provided the
only easily conceivable target for legislation. Anti-Semitism, has never
really been inimicable to the Jewish religion, but has been indifferent to
it.' [55]
So! We now have an admission that their 'religion' serves a very useful
diversionary purpose. Anyone, however, who has become acquainted with it
has found out that what the Jews call their religion coincides exactly
with their character."
"That's what they themselves say," he said.
"They are incessantly boasting, too, that their religion is such a
masterful creation that it stands alone in the world. Then bring the
Talmud forward! It contains the Jewish religion in its purest form —
theology, dogmatics, morality, everything together in the same place. Why
do they hold back the magnificent book so nervously, if indeed 'the
millennia have given the breath of its existence' to it? As born
benefactors of mankind they should have long since made it accessible to
the general populace. Instead, it still hasn't been completely translated,
even today. And who in the devil has read what there is of it? One would
think they are afraid some medieval church is still waiting to burn it for
heresy.
"Some religion! This wallowing in filth,
this hate, this malice, this arrogance, this hypocrisy, this pettifogging,
this incitement to deceit and murder — is that a religion? Then there has
never been anyone more religious than the devil himself. It is the Jewish
essence, the Jewish character, period!"
"Luther," I interjected, "expressed his
opinion of it plainly enough. He urges us to burn the synagogues and
Jewish schools and to heap earth on the remains 'so that no man would ever
again see one stone or cinder of them.' God would forgive us for what we
formerly had tolerated through our ignorance — 'I hadn't known it myself,'
he wrote — but now that we were aware of what went on, we dared not, at
any price, protect these buildings 'wherein they slander, curse, spit on,
and revile both Christ and us.' We could hardly speak more strongly
ourselves. He also urged the destruction of their houses, for they carried
on there the same way as in their schools. 'Some may feel,' he complained,
'that my judgment is too harsh. It is, if anything, too lenient, for I
have seen their writings.' [56]
"Our school inspectors apparently haven't
seen them, nor have our charmers or wizards."
"Burning their synagogues, I am afraid,
would have been of little avail," he shrugged. "Even if there had never
been a synagogue, a Jewish school, an Old Testament, or a Talmud, the
Jewish spirit would still have been there and had its effect. It has
always been there. Every Jew ever born has embodied it. And that is even
more pronounced with the so-called enlightened Jews. Heine belonged,
certainly, among the most enlightened, but he had just as much insane
arrogance as the greasiest Galician kike. Moses Mendelssohn passed for a
downright wonder of wisdom. Yet, lo and behold, he found it actually
shocking that the Jews still didn't have the dominion over the earth which
was due them!" [57]
"Yes, indeed, and what a religion!" he said
scornfully. "It is the character of a people which determines the nature
of their religion, not the other way around."
"Dostoevski," I continued, "was compassion
itself but, like Christ, he took exception to the Jews. With foreboding,
he asked what would happen in Russia if ever the Jews should get the upper
hand there. Would they even approximately give the natives the same rights
they themselves enjoyed? Would they likewise allow them to pray in the
manner they wished or would they not simply make slaves of them? Still
worse, 'wouldn't they skin and fleece them?' Wouldn't they even
exterminate them, as they had so often done with other peoples in their
history?"
"Ah, could our workers but share his
forebodings, particularly those who hope for salvation from the Soviets!"
he cried. "Famine, mass graves, slavery, Jewish whips. Whoever goes on
strike is hanged. 'Come hither, all ye who are weary and heavy laden.' How
they whistle, the dogs! And how fine that sounds, in front of the curtain!
Behind it, however, lurk the pampered 'Pöbelvolk' the Red Army, the dregs
of non-Jewish humanity."
"The toll of Russians sacrificed since the
beginning of Bolshevik domination is estimated by the authorities at about
thirty million," I answered. "Those who weren't summarily executed fell to
famine and disease. Were they all bourgeois? Only an imbecile could
believe that. Who among us then has the most to suffer? The thousands who
every day stand for long hours at their various occupations. Capitalists
are hardly a majority among them. But that hasn't dawned on our workers.
In their eagerness to be the masters, they let themselves be led about by
the nose like children.
"Ebert [59]
has thundered against capitalism his whole life. Now he is president. And?
At every street corner banks sprout from the ground like mushrooms. That
is certainly a fact. Everyone sees it. Anyone can reach out and touch it.
But does that lead anyone to smell a rat? Not on your life!
"The first thing the Jew Eisner [60]
did after the revolution was have the banks guarded by the army.
Capitalists smuggled their enormous hordes of money out of the country for
months, and he didn't raise a finger to stop them. He felt it was more
important to travel to the Socialist Congress in Switzerland and there
place the entire guilt for the world war on Germany. Do penance, he said,
and the French will forgivingly clasp you to their hearts. Quite likely!
Experience has gloriously confirmed it."
"The same Eisner," he nodded, "who, at the
beginning of the war, sent a flood of telegrams to the other Social
Democrat leaders, entreating them to remain true to the Kaiser. A
disgraceful stab in the back must be avoided at all costs, said he. It
went like that until the Treaty of Brest Litovsk. [61]
Up till then all German Jews were inspired monarchists. But then came the
about-face. The Moor had done his duty and crushed Czarist Russia; now for
him to crush himself. The rest is silence. Visible to all eyes, the Jew
also made his bid in Germany.
"Oh, workers! To let yourselves be thus
deceived! Things are different than which innocents let themselves dream.
The Communist Party in Germany still has fewer than a quarter of a million
members; yet it owns over fifty newspapers. What that costs is simply
incalculable. Millions. Who pays these enormous sums? We National
Socialists have our hands full just keeping our one Beobachter [62]
going. If we had an arrangement with the Jews, we would have a prodigious
number of party newspapers in an instant. Are there comrades who doubt
that? I'd like to meet one. And, look here, this is the incredible thing:
they know that the Jews are secretly behind things, but they act as if it
weren't so at all. Is that honest? Can that lead to a happy outcome? To
rush to destruction unsuspectingly is one thing, but to do it knowingly
and to single out one's grimmest enemy as an accomplice is
another."
"I'd like to know," I remarked, "what the
comrades would say if one proved to them in black and white that the
Junkers or the big industrialists have had a secret moral philosophy of
the most abominable sort since the time 'x'. Their rage would be
unimaginable. 'Aha!' everyone would roar. 'With principles like that it is
no wonder the devils torment us so! Imagine that! How can anyone be that
mean and vile? The whole bunch of them should be exterminated!' They would
carry on like that, as if possessed, and rightly so. But, on the other
hand, when one shows them that the Jews have, in their official religious
books, the most hair-raising statements about the plundering and murder of
all Gentiles, it makes no difference at all to them. They either dispute
it or, when that seems hopeless, say that most Jews haven't been that
religious for a long time and don't concern themselves with that stuff
anymore. It never occurs to them that the Jewish character is the source
of their vile literature."
"But this," he said, "tops it all: all — and
I mean all — social injustices of any significance in the world today can
be traced back to the subterranean influence of the Jews. The workers
seek, therefore, to eliminate with the help of the Jews those evils which
none other than the Jews themselves have consciously and deliberately
established. One can imagine what kind of help they will
receive."
"Behold the modest Joseph!" I rejoined. "His
influence on the Pharaoh caused the Egyptians dreadful distress, from
which they later thought they would free themselves with the help of
Moses. I must admit that the episode does not lack a certain grim
humor."
"The truth," he said, "is, indeed, as you
once wrote: one can only understand the Jew when one knows what his
ultimate goal is. And that goal is, beyond world domination, the
annihilation of the world. He must wear down all the rest of mankind, he
persuades himself, in order to prepare a paradise on earth. He has made
himself believe that only he is capable of this great task, and,
considering his ideas of paradise, that is certainly so. But one sees, if
only in the means which he employs, that he is secretly driven to
something else. While he pretends to himself to be elevating mankind, he
torments men to despair, to madness, to ruin. If a halt is not ordered, he
will destroy all men. His nature compels him to that goal, even though he
dimly realizes that he must thereby destroy himself. There is no other way
for him; he must act thus. This realization of the unconditional
dependence of his own existence upon that of his victims appears to me to
be the main cause for his hatred. To be obliged to try and annihilate us
with all his might, but at the same time to suspect that that must lead
inevitably to his own ruin — therein lies, if you will, the tragedy of
Lucifer." - THE END -
"Okay. So they are neither national nor
international," I acknowledged. "What, then?"
"Giordano
Bruno called the Jews 'such a pestilential, leprous, and publicly
dangerous race that they deserved to be rooted out and destroyed even
before their birth.' [41]
This genial philosopher was burned at the stake. For his heresy? Opponents
of the Church were swarming in Italy during his time, yet he, the most
impartial of them, was seized." [Image: Giordano Bruno
(1550?-1600)]
"The Jew Goldmann," I put in, "stated
their reason plainly enough. 'Luther has again brought the Old Testament
to honor.'" [44]
[Image: Nahum Goldmann (1894-1982)]
"No, you are right," he said. "The Jew often plays
the role of a benefactor only in order to accomplish his destructive aims
without notice. It's always been that way.
"From long years of experience," I brought out,
"Dostoevski depicted the hair-raising conceit of the Russian Jew. [58]
For a long time he lived with all kinds of convicts, including several
Jews, sleeping on the same wooden bunks with them. Everyone treated these
Jews in a friendly manner, he reported, not even taking offense at their
raving-mad manner of praying. Probably their own religion had once been
like that, thought the Russians to themselves, and they quietly let the
Jews do as they pleased. But, on the other hand, the Jews haughtily
rejected the Russians, didn't want to eat with them, and looked down on
them. And where was this? In a Siberian prison! All over Russia Dostoevski
found this antipathy and loathing of the Jews for the natives. Nowhere,
however, did the Russian people resent their behavior, indulgently
believing it to be a part of the Jewish religion." [Image: Feodor
Dostoevski (1821-81)]
