Bakunin on Marx and Rothschild

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

Sounds like the CSR....  :shock:

=========

Bakunin on Marx and Rothschild

"Himself a Jew, Marx has around him, in London and France, but especially in Germany, a multitude of more or less clever, intriguing, mobile, speculating Jews, such as Jews are every where: commercial or banking agents, writers, politicians, correspondents for newspapers of all shades, with one foot in the bank, the other in the socialist movement, and with their behinds sitting on the German daily press — they have taken possession of all the newspapers — and you can imagine what kind of sickening literature they produce. Now, this entire Jewish world, which forms a single profiteering sect, a people of blooksuckers, a single gluttonnous parasite, closely and intimately united not only across national borders but across all differences of political opinion — this Jewish world today stands for the most part at the disposal of Marx and at the same time at the disposal of Rothschild. I am certain that Rothschild for his part greatly values the merits of Marx, and that Marx for his part feels instinctive attraction and great respect for Rothschild.

This may seem strange. What can there be in common between Communism and the large banks? Oh! The Communism of Marx seeks enormous centralization in the state, and where such exists, there must inevitably be a central state bank, and where such a bank exists, the parasitic Jewish nation, which. speculates on the work of the people, will always find a way to prevail ...."

Source: Michael Bakunin, 1871, Personliche Beziehungen zu Marx. In: Gesammelte Werke. Band 3. Berlin 1924. P. 204-216. [My translation - UD].

http://www.connexions.org/RedMenace/Doc ... schild.htm

[/tab]

.
.
Mikhail Bakunin



Mikhail Alexandrovich Bakunin (30 May [O.S. 18 May] 1814 - 1 July 1876) (Russian: Михаи́л Алекса́ндрович Баку́нин; IPA: [mʲɪxɐˈil ˌbaˈkunʲin]) was a well-known Russian revolutionary and theorist of collectivist anarchism.

Born in the Russian Empire to a family of Russian nobles, Bakunin spent his youth as a junior officer in the Russian army but resigned his commission in 1835. He went to school in Moscow to study philosophy and began to frequent radical circles where he was greatly influenced by Alexander Herzen. Bakunin left Russia in 1842 for Dresden, and eventually arrived in Paris, where he met George Sand, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and Karl Marx.


Switzerland, Brussels, Prague, Dresden and Paris
Imprisonment, "confession", and exile
Escape from exile and return to Europe

Relocation to Italy
Having re-entered Western Europe, Bakunin immediately immersed himself in the revolutionary movement. In 1860, while still in Irkutsk Bakunin and his political associates had been greatly impressed by Giuseppe Garibaldi and his expedition to Sicily, during which he declared himself dictator in the name of Victor Emmanuel II. Following his return to London, he wrote to Garibaldi on 31 January 1862:

"If you could have seen as I did the passionate enthusiasm of the whole town of Irkutsk, the capital of Eastern Siberia, at the news of your triumphal march across the possession of the mad king of Naples, you would have said as I did that there is no longer space or frontiers".

Bakunin left London in November 1863 travelling by way of Brussels, Paris and Vevey (Switzerland) arriving in Italy on 11 January 1864. It was here that he first began to develop his anarchist ideas.


He conceived the plan of forming a secret organization of revolutionaries to carry on propaganda work and prepare for direct action. He recruited Italians, Frenchmen, Scandinavians, and Slavs into the International Brotherhood, also called the Alliance of Revolutionary Socialists.

By July 1866 Bakunin was informing Herzen and Ogarev about the fruits of his work over the previous two years. His secret society then had members in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Belgium, England, France, Spain, and Italy, as well as Polish and Russian members. In his Catechism of a Revolutionary of 1866, he opposed religion and the state, advocating the

" absolute rejection of every authority including that which sacrifices freedom for the convenience of the state.[14] "

Political beliefs
Bakunin's political beliefs rejected governing systems in every name and shape, from the idea of God downwards, and every form of external authority, whether emanating from the will of a sovereign or from universal suffrage. He wrote in Dieu et l'Etat (God and the State[22]), published posthumously in 1882:

" The liberty of man consists solely in this, that he obeys the laws of nature because he has himself recognized them as such, and not because they have been imposed upon him externally by any foreign will whatsoever, human or divine, collective or individual. "

Bakunin similarly rejected the notion of any privileged position or class, since

" it is the peculiarity of privilege and of every privileged position to kill the intellect and heart of man. The privileged man, whether he be privileged politically or economically, is a man depraved in intellect and heart. "

Bakunin's political beliefs were based on several interrelated concepts: (1) liberty; (2) socialism; (3) federalism; (4) anti-theism; and (5) materialism. He also developed a (resultantly prescient)[23] critique of Marxism, predicting that if the Marxists were successful in seizing power, they would create a party dictatorship "all the more dangerous because it appears as a sham expression of the people's will."[24]

 Liberty
By "liberty", Bakunin did not mean an abstract ideal but a concrete reality based on the equal liberty of others. In a positive sense, liberty consists of "the fullest development of all the faculties and powers of every human being, by education, by scientific training, and by material prosperity." Such a conception of liberty is "eminently social, because it can only be realized in society," not in isolation. In a negative sense, liberty is "the revolt of the individual against all divine, collective, and individual authority."[25]

 Collectivist anarchism
Bakunin's socialism was known as "collectivist anarchism," in which the workers would directly manage the means of production through their own productive associations. There would be "equal means of subsistence, support, education, and opportunity for every child, boy or girl, until maturity, and equal resources and facilities in adulthood to create his own well-being by his own labor."[26]

 Federalism
By federalism Bakunin meant the organization of society "from the base to the summit—from the circumference to the center—according to the principles of free association and federation."[26] Consequently, society would be organized "on the basis of the absolute freedom of individuals, of the productive associations, and of the communes," with "every individual, every association, every commune, every region, every nation" having "the absolute right to self-determination, to associate or not to associate, to ally themselves with whomever they wish." [26]

Anti-theologism
Bakunin argued that "the idea of God implies the abdication of human reason and justice; it is the most decisive negation of human liberty, and necessarily ends in the enslavement of mankind, in theory and practice." Consequently, Bakunin reversed Voltaire's famous aphorism that if God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent Him, writing instead that "if God really existed, it would be necessary to abolish Him."[22]

Materialism
Bakunin denied religious concepts of "free will" and advocated a materialist explanation of natural phenomena: "the manifestations of organic life, chemical properties and reactions, electricity, light, warmth and the natural attraction of physical bodies, constitute in our view so many different but no less closely interdependent variants of that totality of real beings which we call matter" (Selected Writings, page 219). The "mission of science is, by observation of the general relations of passing and real facts, to establish the general laws inherent in the development of the phenomena of the physical and social world." However, Bakunin rejected the notion of "scientific socialism," writing in God and the State that a "scientific body to which had been confided the government of society would soon end by devoting itself no longer to science at all, but to quite another affair... its own eternal perpetuation by rendering the society confided to its care ever more stupid and consequently more in need of its government and direction."[22]

Bakunin's concept of social revolution
Bakunin's methods of realizing his revolutionary program were consistent with his principles. The workers and peasants were to organize on a federalist basis, "creating not only the ideas, but also the facts of the future itself."[27] The worker's trade union associations would "take possession of all the tools of production as well as buildings and capital."[28] The peasants were to "take the land and throw out those landlords who live by the labor of others."[18] Bakunin looked to "the rabble," the great masses of the poor and exploited, the so-called "lumpenproletariat," to "inaugurate and bring to triumph the Social Revolution," as they were "almost unpolluted by bourgeois civilization."[29]

Critique of Marxism
The dispute between Mikhail Bakunin and Karl Marx highlighted the differences between anarchism and Marxism. Bakunin argued—against certain ideas of a number of Marxists–that not all revolutions need be violent. He also strongly rejected Marx's concept of the "dictatorship of the proletariat", a concept that Marx's modern adherents use to interpret to mean what would be described as a "workers democracy", but which also maintains the state in existence during the transition to the Marxist economical system of "communism".[30] Bakunin, "who had now abandoned his ideas of revolutionary dictatorship",[30] insisted that revolutions must be led by the people directly while any "enlightened elite" must only exert influence by remaining "invisible...not imposed on anyone...[and] deprived of all official rights and significance".[31] He held that the state should be immediately abolished because all forms of government eventually lead to oppression.[30]

" They [the Marxists] maintain that only a dictatorship—their dictatorship, of course—can create the will of the people, while our answer to this is: No dictatorship can have any other aim but that of self-perpetuation, and it can beget only slavery in the people tolerating it; freedom can be created only by freedom, that is, by a universal rebellion on the part of the people and free organization of the toiling masses from the bottom up. "
  — Mikhail Bakunin, Statism and Anarchism[32]

While both social anarchists and Marxists share the same final goal, the creation of a free, egalitarian society without social classes and government, they strongly disagree on how to achieve this goal. Anarchists believe that the classless, stateless society should be established by the direct action of the masses, culminating in social revolution, and refuse any intermediate stage such as the dictatorship of the proletariat, on the basis that such a dictatorship will become a self-perpetuating fundament. For Bakunin, the fundamental contradiction is that for the Marxists,

" anarchism or freedom is the aim, while the state and dictatorship is the means, and so, in order to free the masses, they have first to be enslaved.[33] "

However Bakunin also wrote of meeting Marx in 1844 that

" As far as learning was concerned, Marx was, and still is, incomparably more advanced than I. I knew nothing at that time of political economy, I had not yet rid myself of my metaphysical observations... He called me a sentimental idealist and he was right; I called him a vain man, perfidious and crafty, and I also was right.[34] "

Bakunin found Marx's economic analysis very useful and began the job of translating Das Kapital into Russian. In turn Marx wrote of the rebels in the Dresden insurrection of 1848 that "In the Russian refugee Michael Bakunin they found a capable and cool headed leader."[35] Marx wrote to Engels of meeting Bakunin in 1864 after his escape to Siberia saying "On the whole he is one of the few people whom I find not to have retrogressed after 16 years, but to have developed further."[36]

Bakunin was perhaps the first theorist of the "new class", the intellectuals and administrators forming the bureaucratic apparatus of the state. Bakunin argued that the "State has always been the patrimony of some privileged class: a priestly class, an aristocratic class, a bourgeois class. And finally, when all the other classes have exhausted themselves, the State then becomes the patrimony of the bureaucratic class and then falls—or, if you will, rises—to the position of a machine."[29]

Criticism
 Violence, revolution and "Invisible dictatorship"
Main article: Invisible dictatorship
Bakunin has been accused[who?] of being a closet authoritarian. In his letter to Albert Richard, he wrote that

" [t]here is only one power and one dictatorship whose organisation is salutary and feasible: it is that collective, invisible dictatorship of those who are allied in the name of our principle. "

However, Bakunin's supporters argue that this "invisible dictatorship" is not a dictatorship in any conventional sense of the word, as Bakunin was careful to point out that its members would not exercise any official political power:

" this dictatorship will be all the more salutary and effective for not being dressed up in any official power or extrinsic character.[31] "

Charles A. Madison claimed that

" He [Bakunin] rejected political action as a means of abolishing the state and developed the doctrine of revolutionary conspiracy under autocratic leadership– disregarding the conflict of this principle with his philosophy of anarchism. Madison contended that it was Bakunin's scheming for control of the First International that brought about his rivalry with Karl Marx and his expulsion from it in 1872. His approval of violence as a weapon against the agents of oppression led to nihilism in Russia and to individual acts of terrorism elsewhere– with the result that anarchism became generally synonymous with assassination and chaos.[37] "

Others reject this analysis, arguing that Bakunin never sought to take personal control over the International, the secret societies he organized were not subject to his autocratic power, and that he condemned terrorism as counter-revolutionary.[38]

Nationalism
Anarchist historian Max Nettlau described Bakunin's pan-slavism as being the result of a nationalist psychosis from which few are free. The publication of his Confession of 1851, written while a prisoner of the Tsar in the Peter-Paul fortress, was used to attack Bakunin because in it he asked the Emperor for forgiveness for his sins and begged him to place himself at the head of the slavs as both redeemer and father.

 Anti-semitism

Bakunin is often seen as a notable anti-semite since his death.[39] Bakunin used anti-Jewish sentiments during his argument with Karl Marx; he claimed that Marxian communism, along with international banking cartels associated with Rothschild, was part of Jewish system of global exploitation;

" This whole Jewish world, comprising a single exploiting sect, a kind of blood sucking people, a kind of organic destructive collective parasite, going beyond not only the frontiers of states, but of political opinion, this world is now, at least for the most part, at the disposal of Marx on the one hand, and of Rothschild on the other... This may seem strange. What can there be in common between socialism and a leading bank? The point is that authoritarian socialism, Marxist communism, demands a strong centralisation of the state. And where there is centralisation of the state, there must necessarily be a central bank, and where such a bank exists, the parasitic Jewish nation, speculating with the Labour of the people, will be found."

In regards to his perceptions of Jewry, Bakunin is not entirely isolated within early anarchism, as Pierre-Joseph Proudhon made similar remarks (though Proudhon was a mutualist, while Bakunin was a collectivist).[42] Proudhon's notebooks, for example, contain a passage in which he calls for the expulsion of the Jews from France, or their extermination.

 If you took the most ardent revolutionary, vested him in absolute power, within a year he would be worse than the Tsar himself.[21] "

Bakunin retired to Lugano in 1873 and died in Bern on July 1, 1876.



.

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

The Ultimate World Order — as Pictured in "The Jewish Utopia"

If the Communists think they are going to conquer all the nations
and set up a world government under a dictator of their own choosing they
may be in for a surprise. For their parent, the sect which originally launched
the Communist movement as an offshoot to accomplish a specific and temporary
purpose, has plans for an ultimate world order of its own; and this
sect, commonly called Zionist, now vastly overshadows the much cruder
Communist machine in skill, finance, organization and influence.
The Communist plan for rubbing out all national, religious, cultural
and racial lines and submerging the world in formless, characterless chaos
for easy domination is grandiose enough. To say that there is still another,
more grandiose plan beyond that for which the Communist machine was
set up is indeed to challenge the credulity of most of us, especially of us
Anglo-Saxons who are too busy with our humdrum routines to pull the
propaganda curtain aside and see the giant hiding there.
Not many years after I began studying the Communist movement,
trying to understand it, I noticed a hint that Communism was not to be
the ultimate world order. Heinrich Heine, German-Jewish poet and Communist
youth leader of the 1830s and 1840s (friend and co-revolutionary
of Karl Marx) spoke of Communism as temporary.*

Why and in what way temporary? What did this far-sighted master
strategist of revolution see as the successor to Communism? Is it not disturbing
enough that a machine dedicated to liquidating all opponents, wiping
out the nations as such and the best blood of the races and blending the
remnants into a faceless brown slob (see picture from a UNESCO book elsewhere
herein) — is it not disturbing enough that this the Communist machine
already enslaves nearly half the people of the world and is armed with
hydrogen bombs?

* The Heine prophecy of the destruction of Russia nearly a hundred
years before the event is so revealing and so amazing as to justify quoting
at some length. Note the picture of a nationless, raceless world, "one flock
and one shepherd . . . with an iron staff":

"Communism, though little discussed now and loitering in hidden garrets on miserable
straw pallets, is the dark hero destined for a great, if temporary, role in the modern
tragedy ....
"It would be war, the ghastliest war of destruction . . . The second act is the European
and the World Revolution, the great duel between the destitute and the aristocracy of
wealth; and in that there will be no mention of either nationality or religion; there will
be only one fatherland, the globe, and only one faith, that in happiness on earth . . .
How could the drama end?

"I do not know; but I think that eventually the great sea serpent (Britain) will have
its head crushed and the skin of the Northern Bear (Russia) will be pulled over its ears.
There may be only one flock and one shepherd — one free shepherd with an iron staff,
and a shorn-alike, bleating-alike human herd! . . .
"... The Gods are veiling their faces in pity on the children of man, their long-time
charges, and perhaps over their own fate. The future smells of Russian leather, blood,
godlessness and many whippings. I should advise our grandchildren to be born with very
thick skins on their backs."

If Communism is only temporary, what is to be the ultimate novus
ordo seclorum, the new order, of society if the successors to the Jewish revolutionaries,
Marx and Heine, accomplish their aim? Who are to be the
masters of the new order and what do they want to do with our children
and grandchildren?

It goes without saying that no man can escape concern about such a
scheme if it has powerful backing.

For years I have felt that somewhere there must be a master plan
showing what Heine and his fellow planners had in mind for us, after the
fires of Communism burn away the heritages of the various races and cultures,
religions and nations; after Communist monsters have killed out several
generations of what they rightfully call "the leadership personnel", all
who might have the intelligence, skill and courage to resist.

But I little expected ever to have this ultimate master plan, this chapter
beyond the Communist Manifesto, in my hands. Of the hundreds of documents
I have collected on activities of the Marxist revolutionaries — including
originals or photostats of official government reports, Intelligence
releases, Communist papers, Zionist organizational reports to their members,
Jewish histories of revolutions, biographies of their revolutionary leaders,
etc. — I have never seen anything comparable; for this small book sketches
the general outlines of the ultimate goal hundreds of years ahead, toward
which all the various activities of the Zionists and their "liberal" dupes are,
wittingly or unwittingly, contributing.

ZIONISM FROM TALMUD AND TORAH

Yet, the book was not marked secret; it was in plain English and in
the Library of the University of Texas. (And a friend has found a copy in
the Library of Congress, Washington, D.C., supposedly a copy which was
filed with application for copyright in 1932.)

It is a book of 118 pages, plus preface, notes and bibliography, entitled
The Jewish Utopia (not A Jewish Utopia, but THE Jewish Utopia), by
Michael Higger, a university professor, published by the Lord Baltimore
Press, Baltimore, Md., 1932, and copyrighted the same year by the author.
If the book is not marked secret, if it is in plain English, it is nevertheless
almost safe, for it is largely couched in the esoteric language which all
Jewish revolutionaries have used throughout known history, language found
even in their Torah, (the Books of Moses) and which Jewish writers imparted
to Communist literature. Their use of words which you and I take
to mean one thing but which their followers understand as meaning something
else, a system which our people little suspect, almost guarantees the security
of the document.

Here at last is the complete plan of the Zionists, in their own words,
for world domination.

The author speaks of "the righteous" and "the just". He says they shall
inherit the earth. He quotes the Prophets, the Books of Moses, etc. Who
would suspect that he had political revolution and total conquest in mind?

But read on and you find that the "righteous" are to be the Zionist Jews
and such gentiles as they may accept. All others shall perish.
That is what the author says repeatedly, on page after page. And
note that this book is not the creation of the Jewish Professor, Michael
Higger; he merely compiled it. It is the sum total of the prophecies, teachings,
plans and interpretations of the foremost rabbis and Jewish tribal
leaders of the past 2500 years — since the time of the Oral Law and the
beginning of the Babylonian Talmud, with its double standard for Jews and
non-Jews and its nationalistic, militant interpretation of the Torah (the
Books of Moses, the first five books of the Old Testament).

There is no mistaking who is meant by "the righteous". Mr. Higger
says even those Jews who fail to enter into the program of the Utopia
(which he reveals to be the same program of Socialism, brotherhood and
internationalism as that of the Zionists and involving much also that is
Communist) will be denied the Utopia. Even the non-conforming Jews
shall perish, along with the rest of us.

On page after page Mr. Higger's Jewish Utopia unfolds the ultimate
order. Some mighty force, with the ruler from the house of David on the
throne, is to take control of every life, every shekel's worth of property,
every acre of land, every nugget and coin; no child may live, none may
be born, if the Power objects.

And the regard in which The Jewish Utopia is held by the rabbinate
may be surmised from the printed Texas University Library seal inside
the front cover, (see photograph) which says the book was "Presented by
the Kallah of Texas Rabbis, 1939" to The Abraham I. Schechter Collection
of Hebraica and Judaica" of the University library.

I stated earlier that the book was in plain English. The fact is, it is
addressed throughout to students familiar with the Talmud, the teachings of
the foremost rabbis of Jewish history; it was not in the library proper but
in the Abraham I. Schechter collection, to which one may have access only
by special permission; and it was not, and is not, listed in the library catalogue.
We shall see presently the plan in detail. We would dismiss the entire
book as a daydream by an unbalanced mind but for the facts of history,
including current history, in which the Socialistic man-trap has caught this
and other countries and people, and is steadily sucking their blood.
The Jewish machine has men in the most powerful positions; protected
by the cowardice of leaders who fear to be called "anti-Semitic".
We are paralyzed by that atom-powered little scare word; we are children
afraid of the dark.

Apparently a good many Jews themselves are now fearful of the impending
bloodshed. I have known, and do know, many Jews; while the
Jewish temperament is incredibly true to pattern, there are many who
realize that they have found the Promised Land, their Utopia here in
tolerant, benevolent, rich America; and if we appeal to these, they might
well join us in the fight to keep America free.

Mr. Higger says those Jews who do not knuckle under and who are
not "tall and handsome" will be weeded out.

While our first concern is for the survival and continued freedom
of our children and grandchildren, we ought to find helpful allies among
the Jews. Several million Russian children and many millions of adults
have been beaten to death, shot or starved by the insane Marxist machine
called Bolshevism, or Communism; and the Zionists, Communists and their
foolish "liberal" dupes are far advanced with the Marxist Socialist program
in this threatened Republic.

So that the reader may not be asked to take my word, I am showing
several pages photographed from Mr. Higger's unique blueprint for conquest.

THE AIM

Professor Higger states his aim in the first paragraph of his Preface:

"For my main problem is to reconstruct an ideal social life on earth
as pictured by the rabbis of old."

He adds, later:

"An ideal society among the family of nations, as visualized by the
prophets, although not realized as yet, will ultimately be achieved. Nations
will come, nations will go. Dogmatic Christianity has come, dogmatic
Christianity will be gone. 'Isms' have created nations, 'isms' will destroy
nations. Capitalism has brought happiness and woes to mankind; Communism
may bring its paradise and hells to mankind. Doctrines have shaped
the destinies of peoples, doctrines may bring destruction to peoples. But
the millennium will come only when the nations of the earth direct their
efforts toward the visions of the prophets, and make function the teachings
of Amos, Isaiah and Micah."

Do Professor Higger and Talmudic rabbis interpret the Prophets as
do the Christians? Or do they believe that the Jewish Prophets of the Old
Testament were trying to keep their people dedicated to a religion of conquest;
trying to keep them united and moving toward political and economic
domination?

Let us keep the question in mind as we read; eventually we shall
find the answer.

Mr. Higger continues:

"A Jewish Utopia begins where Wells leaves off. It starts with the
world as the basis of the new social life. From that viewpoint, the rabbis
picture first a scheme of a transvaluation, of spiritual, intellectual, and
material values, and a complete spiritual transformation. Having laid this
foundation of the new, ideal order, the Jewish idealists proceed with the
rest of their plan, and complete the super-structure of their Utopia. In
that part of the structure there are, to be sure, a few common elements
in the rabbinic and other Utopias as the ideals of common interest and
mutual helpfulness; cooperation supplanting competition in the new social
order; the toil of industry being reduced to a minimum, and thus permitting
a higher cultural and intellectual life."

Obviously, some catastrophic change is in store for the world. Isms
will destroy nations. An ism has destroyed Russia in our life time — that
is, a secret organization successfully promoted an ism as a device for undermining
and capturing, and then gradually destroying, the Russian people,
their culture, economy, religion and already to a great extent, their best
racial stock.

From beginning to end, The Jewish Utopia emphasizes that what the
rabbis, the Talmud and the Old Testament were talking about was an earthly
regime, not a spiritual one but an ideal political, racial, economic and
social era (from the Jewish viewpoint) here on earth. And it is to be a
one-world state, conforming to a single ideology:

". . . Plato is chiefly concerned with what will hold the ideal city together.
The rabbis, on the other hand, are mainly interested in that ideology
which would hold the whole world, or the Universal State, together."

This concept of the Jewish religion as a conquering ideology, preparing
the world for a Jewish-dominated military-political state here on earth,
is not held by all the rabbis; but it is the Talmudic interpretation, as the
Utopia shows.

The author hints that his paradise will be a Socialist order for it is
to begin "where Wells leaves off" and H. G. Wells, a Socialist, idealized
Socialism. A Socialist regimented world order would kill the spirit, dry up
the ambitions, chain the imagination of the highly individualistic
Anglo-Saxon and his kinsmen of the Western world, and likewise his
friends in Asia, the Japanese and Chinese.

WHO IS TO JUDGE?

Higger says the term "righteousness" has all but lost its meaning in
the modern world; that "the Jewish Utopia is built upon this very term,
or idea, of righteousness . . . the Kingdom of God in this world will come
only when suffering mankind passes through the gate of righteousness".
This sounds not unlike a Christian, Anglo-Saxon or any other Utopia.
Idealization of righteousness is more or less universal. The Nordic, with
his "New England conscience", idealizes righteousness and sometimes practices
it. But we must ask by what standards righteousness is to be judged.

The Christian expects God and his own conscience to be the judge of righteousness;
the Anglo-Saxon, the Negro, the Japanese, surely would not want
to be judged righteous or unrighteous according to the wishes, ambitions
or whims of a worldly Jewish authority. On the other hand, we could hardly
expect ardently pro-Jewish Jews, including Talmudic rabbis, in their paradise,
to cede power to ardent Christians, individualistic Norsemen who
cherish their personal freedom, or the art loving Mediterraneans who likewise
must give vent to creative yearnings and who like a leisurely, unregimented
life. Hence, the Jewish regimenters are sure to encounter resistance.

"To understand the rabbinic conception of an ideal world it will help
us if we imagine a hand passing front land to land, from country to country,
from the Indian Ocean to the North Pole, marking 'righteous' or 'wicked'
on the forehead of each one of the sixteen hundred million inhabitants of
our earthly globe. We should then be on the right road toward solving
the major problems that burden so heavily the shoulders of suffering humanity.

For mankind should be divided into" two, and only two, distinct
and unmistakable groups, namely, righteous and wicked. To the righteous
would belong all that which God's wonderful world is offering; to the wicked
would belong nothing. In the future the words of Isaiah, in the language
of the rabbis, will be fulfilled: Behold, My servants shall eat, but ye shall
be hungry; behold, My servants shall drink, but ye shall be thirsty; behold,
My servants shall rejoice, but ye shall be ashamed. This is the force of
the prophecy of Malachi, when he said: Then shall ye again discern between
the righteous and the wicked, between him that serveth God and him that
serveth Him not."

But who is to direct the hand which marks on your forehead and mine,
on the forehead of each of our children and our loved ones, "righteous"
or "wicked"? Who is to say who may own property and who must die of
thirst and starvation? Who is to dictate such conformity? Who is to
deny us our own right "to choose?

Notice that Professor Higger considers that the Jewish Prophet Malachi
used the term righteous as referring to the same persons to whom he, Higger,
and the nationalistic rabbis would apply it today — righteous according to
the standards, aims and desires of the leaders who build toward a Jewish
paradise, a Jewish world order. That is not the Christian interpretation
of Malachi and the other Prophets, Jews though they were. The Talmudic
interpretation inspires the Jewish flocks to believe that the Prophets were
addressing their appeals to their own people, trying to whip them into unity
and consecrated devotion to the building of a Jewish world order.
The Talmud* tells the Jewish flocks that Moses was their militant,
conquering hero, and that the Mosaic Law which says love thy neighbor is
for the Jews only. It shows the Jewish people are not bound by any moral
requirement in dealing with gentiles.

"The Law Moses gave unto us as an heritage; it is an heritage for
us, not for them." (Sanhedrin 59 a.)

* There are two Talmuds, the Babylonian and the Jerusalem or Palestinian

Talmud. Any reference to the Talmud means the Babylonian Talmud
unless otherwise stated, for the other is rarely used. The Talmud consists
of many huge volumes. The English translation of it (from which I have
many photostats, showing how the Jews are free to deceive and outwit the
non-Jews, except where there is danger of reprisals) now apparently is
available for purchase by libraries and, possibly by gentile individuals. There
is also a single volume, of considerable size, called the Shulkan Aruch, a
compilation of excerpted teachings from the Talmud, which volume is in
common use among rabbis and seems to be available in most big city libraries.

"Ye are called men, but the goyim (gentiles) are not men, but beasts."

(Baba Mezia fol. 114 b.)

These quotations are translation's from the 9-volume German-language
edition of the Babylonian Talmud in the Library of Congress, Washington,
D.C.

GLORIFIES STEALTH AND DECEPTION

The Talmud is a many-volume compilation of Jewish history and
traditions and the teachings of the ancient rabbis. One of its most important
elements consists in interpretations of the Law of Moses by rabbis
over a period of centuries, in legal decision after legal decision. The
quotations above are from different rulings in different cases. Whereas
the Christian who accepts the Old Testament as either sacred or at least
historical, thinks of Moses as a great moral leader appealing to all the
world, the Talmudic rabbis consider Moses a great military commander.
By their interpretation, Moses kept the Children of Israel in the Wilderness
"forty years" so as to discipline his flock, raise up an army and train
it to goosestep. And, of course, the Old Testament does say that Moses'
soldiers fell on unsuspecting villagers and annihilated them, men, women
and children. The Books of Moses plainly glorify this slaughter and the
theft of the land from unsuspecting gentiles.*

Read especially the Books of Numbers and Deuteronomy, for additional
examples of how the Jewish adherents should take what they want.
"And we took all his cities . . . And we utterly destroyed them, as we
did unto Sihon, king of Heshbon, utterly destroying the men, women and
children of every city." (Deuteronomy 3:4-6)

Not only Zionism but Communism too acquired much of its "hatred
of Christians from the spirit of hatred kept alive by rabbis in the ghettos
of Europe and Russia — the constant repetition of "mine enemies" from
the Old Bible:

"And ye shall be saved from your enemies . . .". "And let thine enemies
be scattered; and let them that hate thee flee before thee."
The master-race concept, the zeal for conquest and self-adulation were
kept alive in the ghettos from their interpretation of the Torah:
"And it shall come to pass . . . that the Lord thy God will set thee
high above all the nations of the earth." (Deut. 26:19). "The Lord shall
establish thee a holy people . . ." (Deut. 28:9).

Read also in Exodus how Moses had his fellow Jews borrow jewelry
and other valuables from the Egyptians the day before they slipped out
of Egypt. They did not return the valuables.

* Historians now say that the Hittites whose peaceful villages were thus
attacked, were a fair, blond people speaking a language so much like early
German that many words were identical. The Hittites, like the Germans 1300
years or more B.C., also knew the secret of working iron.

We may sympathize with the racial or tribal pride of the Jewish men
in the wilderness when they resented the presence of a non-Jewish woman
in the tent of one of their brothers; but the example of bloody fanaticism
shown when "they stoned the couple to death because the woman was not
Jewish is a strange example indeed to come from those who cry loudest
for brotherhood (from us to them) and who are the first to condemn
such race pride (in non-Jews).

Whatever the Christian may think of the intent of Moses, the Talmud
teaches the Jews to believe that Moses was talking only to their ancestors,
not to the goyim, when he said Love thy neighbor; Thou shalt not steal, etc.
The Talmud gives adequate cause for the belief among the Jews that Moses
was a military leader, keeping the Children of Israel in the wilderness the
figurative forty-years so as to train them under the brief, rigid Ten Commandments,
which thus would be his police code to keep them in hand.
By this interpretation, Moses was indeed building an army of conquest.
The Talmud thus indicates that when Moses said Love thy neighbor
as thyself, he meant Love thy Hebrew neighbor; thou shalt not steal (from
thy Hebrew neighbor), etc.

If this is what many Jews believe and if the Torah is the core of
their religion, very well; it is their privilege to worship as they please, even
if they plan thereby to annihilate us. But let us open our eyes and defend
ourselves. We must not blame them if we let a small tribal group bring
about our destruction.

While the Encyclopedia Britannica (p. 771, Vol. 21, 1949 edition)
says ''The Talmud is still the authoritative and practical guide of the great
mass of the "Jews," still not all the rabbis accept the Talmud, with its
glorification of secrecy and cunning and its incitation to blood-letting and
conquest. Rabbi Elmer Berger, for instance, repudiates both the Talmud
and the Torah. In his Partisan History of Judaism (Devin-Adair Co., New
York, 1952) he attacks the Books of Moses as expressions of nationalistic
fanaticism, only partially based on historical fact. He shows that modern
Zionism springs from this ancient "Zionism".*

USES ESOTERIC TERMS

Mr. Higger leaves no doubt of his meaning in using the word "righteous".
The word as here used is a cabalistic, esoteric term. The whole
substance of the text shows that the "righteous" are those nations and
individuals who work with and for the Zionist world program. The author
even explains some of his key words, by direct definition. For instance:

"At the outset it should be pointed out that the terms redemption and
salvation have a radically different connotation from that which they have
in Christian theology . . . Jewish redemption stands for the physical liberation
and freedom of Israel. For the people of Israel will attain the height
of their spiritual functions and potentialities only through their attainment
of material freedom and liberty."

Redemption then for the Zionist has nothing to do with "redemption
from sin", nothing to do with his personal relationship with God and the
hereafter. It. refers to a political, military and geographical accomplishment,
the setting up of the state of Israel and the "liberation and freedom" of the
Jews.

The terms liberation and freedom, as used by Zionists, likewise are
consistently misinterpreted by gentiles, as is the Jewish term persecution.
A study of Jewish revolutions in many countries shows that the word persecution
is almost universally used to mean prosecution. Even those Jewish
writers who tell in detail about Jewish revolutionary and seditious activities
against the government of their host country, brand any punishment of the
guilty Jews, by courts of the land, as persecution. Notice that in the threevolume
History of the Jews in Russia and Poland by Simon Dubnow, one
of the foremost Jewish historians, though Dubnow relates with pride many
of the subversive, violent movements launched by Jews, he always brands
their punishment as persecution. Similarly, the Jewish press and planted
articles in the general press in America, during the trials of Jewish Communist
officials in Russia, Poland and Hungary during the past few years,
have treated the trials as persecution rather than prosecution. And the
courts and Stalin were anti-Semitic! (Stalin lived with Rosa Kaganovich,
sister of his close friend, Jewish Deputy Premier Lazar Kaganovich, though
there seems to be no record of any marriage.)

"All the treasures and natural resources of the world will eventually
come in possession of the righteous. This would be in keeping with the
prophecy of Isaiah: 'And her gain and her hire shall be holiness to the
Lord; it shall not be treasured nor laid up; for her gain shall be for them
that dwell before the Lord, to eat their fill and for stately clothing.' Similarly,
the treasures of gold, silver, precious stones, pearls, and valuable
vessels that have been lost in the seas and oceans in the course of centuries
will be raised up and turned over to the righteous . . . In the present era,
the wicked are ordinarily rich, having many comforts of life, while the
righteous are poor, missing the joys of life. But in the ideal era, the Lord
will open all the treasures for the upright, and the unrighteous will suffer.
God, the Creator of the world . . . will be happy, so to speak, only in the
era to come, when the world will be governed by the doings and actions of
the upright . . ."

Now we are beginning to catch broad panoramas of the Zionist Utopia,
the ultimate world order, as longed for by Professor Higger and the principal
rabbinical teachers of 2500 years: "Ye shall be hungry" unless you
are among the "righteous". "All the treasures and natural resources of the
world will eventually come in possession of the righteous."

Since only the righteous shall own property and all the rest of us shall,
in fact, perish, it is important to know who are to be judged righteous
and who unrighteous. Which of us are to be among the chosen, enjoying
the Kingdom of God here on earth; and which of us are to be among the
hundreds of millions of human beings denied even food and water?
'In general, the peoples of the world will be divided into two main
groups, the Israelitic' and the non-Israelitic. The former will be righteous;
they will live in accordance with the wishes of one, universal God; they will
be thirsty for knowledge, and willing, even to the point oj martyrdom, to
spread ethical truths to the world. All the other peoples, on the other hand,
will be known for their detestable practices,' idolatry and similar acts of
wickedness. They will be destroyed and will disappear from earth before
the ushering in of the ideal era. All these unrighteous nations will be
called to judgment, before they are punished and doomed. The severe
sentence of their doom will be pronounced upon them only after they have
been given a fair trial, when it will have become evident that their existence
would hinder the advent of the ideal era. Thus, at the coming of the Messiah,
when all righteous nations will pay homage to the ideal righteous leader,
and offer gifts to him, the wicked and corrupt nations, by realizing the approach
of their doom, will bring similar presents to the Messiah. Their
gifts and pretended acknowledgment of the new era, will be bluntly rejected.
For the really wicked nations, like the wicked individuals, must disappear
from earth before an ideal human society of righteous nations can be established."
(p. 37)

That makes it clear. Now we know that unless the United States
as a nation joins wholly, in fact and in spirit, in the Israel-Zionist movement
to promote the new social order, our nation is doomed (if the Zionists
win). The Zionists call the process of liquidating opposition, ''social surgery."

PLANS FOR ARMAGEDDON

It is Israel and associated nations, the Israelitic group, those nations
which help build the new social (or Socialist) order, which are to dominate
the world; the others must perish.

Notice that the "sin" specifically identified is that of idolatry. But
Mr. Higger makes clear that all those who are spared must worship the
Torah and the Israelitic god, in Jerusalem. Hence idolatry means any
other religious faith!

Higger and his fellow Zionists are not talking in figurative terms.
They are dealing in human blood, oceans of it:

''Hence, Israel and the other righteous nations will combat the combined
forces of the wicked, unrighteous nations under the leadership of Gog
and Magog. Assembled for an attack upon the righteous nations in Palestine
near Jerusalem, the unrighteous will suffer a crushing defeat and Zion
will thenceforth remain the center of the Kingdom of God. The defeat of
the unrighteous will mark the annihilation of the power of the wicked who
oppose the Kingdom of God and establishment of the new ideal era.

"This struggle will not be merely the struggle of Israel against her
national enemies but the climax of the struggle between the two general
opposing camps of the righteous and unrighteous. A saying in the name of
Rab states that the descendant of the house of David will appear as the
head of the ideal era only after the whole world will have suffered, for a
continuous period of nine months, from a wicked, corrupt government, like
the historical, traditionally wicked Edom."

The author minces no words here. Israel and her allies are to be the
victors; Israel is to become the center of "the Kingdom of God"—implying
that the world is to look on Israel as holy and worship its leader, "a
descendant of the house of David". Webster's dictionary defines an Edomite
as "one of the descendants of Esau, or Edom, the brother of Jacob".
You remember the account in the Old Testament, the Jewish Bible, which
glorifies Jacob's tricking and deceiving his half-brother, Esau, out of his
birthright. Esau is always pictured in Jewish literature as the gentile, and
the name is used as the code word for the gentile; Jacob the code word
for the Jew.*

Just as it is the nations who oppose, or even fail to support the Zionist
ambitions, who are to be destroyed, so is it the individuals failing or refusing
to cooperate, who must disappear:

"Who are the wicked? What constitutes wickedness, which is an
obstruction to the establishment of the Kingdom of God? No exact definition
of the terms can be formulated. A few rabbinic passages dealing with
the subject, however, give a general idea of the meaning of wicked and
wickedness, so far as a Jewish Utopia is concerned.

"First, no line will be drawn between bad Jews and bad non-Jews.
There will be no room for the unrighteous, whether Jewish or non-Jewish,
in the Kingdom of God. All of them will have disappeared before the advent
of the ideal era on this earth. Unrighteous Israelites will be punished
equally with the wicked of other nations. All the righteous, on the other
hand, whether Hebrew or Gentile will share equally in the happiness and
abundance of the ideal era."

[CrackSmokeRepublican]

An example of the use of the Jewish code words Esau and Jacob is
found in a sermon preached by Rabbi Leon Spitz during the Purim observances
in 1946 (quoted here from the American Hebrew of March 1, 1946) :
"Let Esau whine and wail and protest to the civilized world, and let Jacob raise his
hand to fight the good fight. The anti-Semite . . . understands but one language, and he
must be dealt with on his own level. The Purim Jews stood up for their lives. American
Jews, too. must come to grips with our contemporary anti-Semites. We must fill our jails
with anti-Semitic gangsters. We must fill our insane asylums with anti-Semitic lunatics. We
must combat every alien. Jew-hater. We must Harass and prosecute our Jew-baiters to the
extreme limits of the laws. We must humble and shame our anti-Semitic hoodlums to such
an extent that none will wish or dare to become (their) 'fellow-travelers'."
There are of course no laws against "anti-Semitism" except in the Communist
countries. Anti-Semitism. anti-Catholicism, anti-Protestantism, anti-
Irish, etc., are not crimes by our laws, though Jewish and "liberal" members
of Congress are introducing such Communist-type laws every year and coming
closer and closer to getting them enacted as Congress has less and less
understanding of or concern for principles, interfering more and more with
social attitudes and relationships of individuals, one to another.

[/tab]

.

Bakunin: Jews reign ... Too bad for anyone careless enough to displease them

Arthur P. Mandel, Michael Bakunin: Roots of Apocalypse, Praeger, New York 1981.

{p. 330} He must refute the charges of Hess and the rest of the "German Jews" who, he said, were all - except for Marx - out to get him. While he was "in no way either the enemy or the detractor of Jews," he told the editors of Le Reveil, to which he sent his response to Hess's criticism, he was convinced by "ethnographic history" that Jews were "par excellence exploiters of other peoples' labor" and, therefore, "completely opposed to the interests as well as the instincts of the proletariat." "I know very well," he went on, "that in frankly expressing my personal thoughts about the Jews I expose myself to enormous dangers. Many people share [these views], but very few dare to express them publicly, because the Jewish sect, far more formidable than Catholic Jesuits and the Protestants, constitute a real force in Europe today. They reign despotically in commerce and in the banks and have overrun three-quarters of the German press and a very significant part of the press of other countries. Too bad for anyone careless enough to displease them!" 86 {endnote 86: Bakounine, Oeuvres, vol. V, pp. 243-4}
{endquote}






(6) Mikhail Bakunin warns of the Marxist Dictatorship (1873)

Engels had clearly expressed the authoritarian principle inherent in Marxism, and leading to the dictatorial methods of Leninism:

Frederick Engels, On Authority, in Lewis S. Feuer (ed.), Marx & Engels Basic Writings on Politics & Philosophy, 1959.

"A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part by means of rifles, bayonets, and cannon - authoritarian means, if such there be at all; and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionaries." (p. 485).

This is a far cry from Marx' answer to Bakunin's warnings about this in the 1870s: in private notes in his copy of Bakunin's article he had written that the workers' state would be no more authoritarian than a trade union election. The above article by Engels was used by Lenin in his essay The State and Revolution. ==

Bertram D. Wolfe, Marxism: One Hundred Years in the Life of a Doctrine, Chapman & Hall, London 1967:

{p. 60} The International Workingmen's Association was originally founded by the British Labour Movement in collaboration with some workingmen's delegations from France. Marx had been called

{p. 61} in at first as a respected emigre from Germany, with a revolutionary past and a doctor's degree. ... Yet its congresses could and did outvote him and his faction, for Bakunin, Proudhon, and others who did not accept his every pronouncement, had more influence than he in France, Italy, Spain, Belgium, Holland, and Switzerland, while the English continued to have views distinctly their own. Marx had decided just before the Franco-Prussian War that he must pack a congress with his disciples, set it to be held in a country from which Bakunin was banned, strengthen the powers of the General Council over the affiliated movements, whose mere clearing-house and obedient servant it was supposed to be, then expel Bakunin and move the Headquarters of the General Council to far-off America, where Bakunin could not lay hands on it and where it would not require so much of Marx's attention and time.

The strategy for packing the congress was such that even a Lenin might have envied it. Marx picked The Hague, to which Bakunin could not go because he was wanted by the police of both France and Germany. Engels paid the fare of five members of the General Council who would side with Marx. Marx wrote to Kugelmann in Germany and to Sorge in America to send the largest possible delegations of the faithful, and as many blank credentials as possible which he might fill in with suitable names.
{endquote} ==

Michael Bakunin, Statism and Anarchy (1873), in Sam Dolgoff, Bakunin On Anarchy (Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1972).

{p. 329} The fiction of a pseudorepresentative government serves to conceal the domination of the masses by a handful of privileged elite ...

The differences between revolutionary dictatorship and statism are superficial. Fundamentally they both represent the same principle of minority rule over the majority in the name of the alleged "stupidity" of the latter and the alleged "intelligence" of the former,

{p. 330} Let us ask, if the proletariat is to be the ruling class, over whom is it to rule? In short, there will remain another proletariat which will be subdued to this new rule, to this new state. For instance, the peasant "rabble" who, as it is known, does not enjoy the sympathy of the Marxists who consider it to represent a lower level of culture, will probably be ruled by the factory proletariat of the cities. Or, if this problem is to be approached nationalistically, the Slavs will be placed in the same subordinate relationship to the victorious German proletariat in which the latter now stands to the German bourgeoisie

If there is a State, there must be domination of one class bv another and, as a result, slavery; the State without slavery is unthinkable - and this is why we are the enemies of the State.

What does it mean that the proletariat will be elevated to a ruling class? Is it possible for the whole proletariat to stand at the head of the government? There are nearly forty million Germans. Can all forty million be members of the govemment? In such a case, there will be no government, no state, but if there is to be a state there will be those who are ruled and those who are slaves.

The Marxist theory solves this dilemma very simply. By the people's rule, they mean the rule of a small number of representatives elected by the people. The general, and every man's, right to elect the representatives of the people and the rulers of the State is the latest word of the Marxists, as well as of the democrats. This is a lie, behind which lurks the despotism of the ruling minority, a lie all the more dangerous in that it appears to express the so-called will of the people.

Ultimately, from whatever point of view we look at this question we come alwavs to the same sad conclusion, the rule of the great masses of the people by a privileged minority. The

{p. 331} Marxists say that this minority will consist of workers. Yes possibly of former workers, who, as soon as they become the rulers of the representatives of the people, will cease to be workers and will look down at the plain working masses from the governing heights of the State; they will no longer represent the people, but only themselves and their claims to rulership over the people. Those who doubt this know very little about human nature.

These elected representatives, say the Marxists, will be dedicated and learned socialists. The expressions "learned socialist," "scientific socialism," etc., which continuously appear in the speeches and writings of the followers of Lassalle and Marx, prove that the pseudo-People's State will be nothing but a despotic control of the populace by a new and not at all numerous aristocracy of real and pseudoscientists. The "uneducated" people will be totally relieved of the cares of administration, and will be treated as a regimented herd. A beautiful liberation, indeed!

The Marxists are aware of this contradiction and realize that a government of scientists will be a real dictatorship regard!ess of its democratic form. They console themselves with the idea that this rule will be temporary. They say that the only care and objective will be to educate and elevate the people economically and politically to such a degree that such a government will soon become unnecessary, and the State, after losing its political or coercive character, will automatically develop into a completely free organization of economic interests and communes.

There is a flagrant contradiction in this theory. If their state would be really of the people, why eliminate it? And if the State is needed to emancipate the workers, then the workers are not yet free, so why call it a People's State? By our polemic against them we have brought them to the realization that freedom or anarchism, which means a free organization of the working masses from the hottom up, is the final objective of social development, and that every state, not excepting their People's State, is a yoke, on the one hand giving rise to despotism and on the other to slavery. Thev say that such a yoke-dictatorship is a transitional step towards achieving full freedom for the people: anarchism or

{p. 332} freedom is the aim, while state and dictatorship is the means, and so, in order to free the masses of the people, they first have to be enslaved

Upon this contradiction our polemic has come to a halt. They insist that only dictatorship (of course their own) can create freedom for the people. We reply that all dictatorship has no objective other than self-perpetuation, and that slavery is all it can generate and instill in the people who suffer it. Freedom can be created only by freedom, by a total rebellion of the people, and by a voluntary organization of the people from the bottom up.

The social theory of the antistate socialists or anarchists leads them directly and inevitably towards a break with all forms of the State, with all varieties of bourgeois politics, and leaves no choice except a social revolution. The opposite theory, state communism and the authority of the scientists, attracts and confuses its followers and, under the pretext of political tactics, makes continuous deals with the governments and various bourgeois political parties, and is directly pushed towards reaction.

The cardinal point of this program is that the State alone is to liberate the (pseudo-) proletariat. To achieve this, the State must agree to liberate the proletariat from the oppression of bourgeois capitalism. How is it possible to impart such a will to the State? The proletariat must take possession of the State by a revolution - an heroic undertaking. But once the proletariat seizes the State, it must move at once to abolish immediately this eternal prison of the people. But according to Mr. Marx, the people not only should not abolish the State, but, on the contrary, they must strengthen and enlarge it, and turn it over to the full disposition of their benefactors, guardians, and teachers - the leaders of the Communist party, meaning Mr. Marx and his friends - who will then liberate them in their own way. They will concentrate all administrative power in their own strong hands, because the ignorant people are in need of a strong guardianship; and they will create a central state bank, which will also control all the commerce, industry, agriculture, and even science. The mass of the people will be divided into two armies, the agricultural and the industrial, under the direct command of

{p. 333} the state engineers, who will constitute the new privileged political-scientific class.
{endquote}

Comment (Peter M.):

In the Soviet Union, these "state engineers" were called the nomenklatura; Djilas called them the "New Class". Trotsky called them "the Bureaucracy", and blamed Stalin; but Bakunin showed that they were an inherent part of the Marxist scheme.

(7) Mikhail Bakunin (c. 1871) on the Jews around Marx: "with one foot in the bank, the other in the socialist movement"

Guy A. Aldred, Bakunin (The Strickland Press, Glasgow, 1940; also Bakunin Press, London).

{p. 52} Appendices

1. - MARX AND BAKUNIN.

{p. 53} Bakunin wanted to be on good terms with Marx, for the sake of building up the International. He desired to devote himself henceforward exclusively to the Socialist movement. This was difficult because of Marx's injustice. Bakunin tells the story thus:-

"In the year 1848, Marx and I had a difference of opinion, and I must say that he was far more in the right of it than I. ... But there was one point in which I was right and he was wrong. As a Slav, I wanted the liberation of the Slav race from the German yoke. ...

"My ideals and aspirations could not fail to be displeasing to Marx ... he thinks that the Germans have a mission to civilise the Slavs, this meaning to Germanise them whether by kindness or by force. ..."

{p. 55} Ruhle points out that Bakunin endeavoured honestly to be on good terms with Marx and to avoid friction. He adds that Bakunin loved the peasants and detested intellectualism and abstract systems, with their dogmatism and intolerance. He hated the modern State, industrialism, and centralisation. He had the most intense dislike for Judaism, which he considered loquacious, intriguing, and exploitative. ... With justice, Bakunin says of Marx and his political circle:-

"Marx loved his own person much more than he loved his friends and apostles, and no friendship could hold water against the slightest wound to his vanity. ... in the circle of Marx's intimates there is very little brotherly frankness, but a great deal of machination and diplomacy. ... Marx is the chief distributor of honours, but is also incredibly perfidious and malicious ...

"As soon as he has ordered a persecution, there is no limit to the baseness and infamy of the method. Himself a Jew, he had round him in London and in France, and above all in Germany, a number of petty, more or less able, intriguing, mobile, speculative Jews (the sort of Jews you can find all over the place), commercial employees, bank clerks, men of letters, politicians, the correspondents of newspapers of the most varied shades of opinions, in a word, literary go-betweens, one foot in the bank, the other in the socialist movement, while their rump is in German periodic literature ... These Jewish men of letters are adepts in the art of cowardly, odious and perfidious insinuations. They seldom make open accusation, but they insinuate, saying they "have heard - it is said - it may not be true, but', and then they hurl the most abominable calumnies in your face.

{endquote; another translation of the last passage, by Ulli Diemer, is below} ==

Bakunin on Marx and Rothschild

Ulli Diemer

published in The Red Menace ezine

http://www.connexions.org/RedMenace/Doc ... schild.htm

"Himself a Jew, Marx has around him, in London and France, but especially in Germany, a multitude of more or less clever, intriguing, mobile, speculating Jews, such as Jews are every where: commercial or banking agents, writers, politicians, correspondents for newspapers of all shades, with one foot in the bank, the other in the socialist movement, and with their behinds sitting on the German daily press - they have taken possession of all the newspapers - and you can imagine what kind of sickening literature they produce. Now, this entire Jewish world, which forms a single profiteering sect, a people of blooksuckers, a single gluttonnous parasite, closely and intimately united not only across national borders but across all differences of political opinion - this Jewish world today stands for the most part at the disposal of Marx and at the same time at the disposal of Rothschild. I am certain that Rothschild for his part greatly values the merits of Marx, and that Marx for his part feels instinctive attraction and great respect for Rothschild.

This may seem strange. What can there be in common between Communism and the large banks? Oh! The Communism of Marx seeks enormous centralization in the state, and where such exists, there must inevitably be a central state bank, and where such a bank exists, the parasitic Jewish nation, which. speculates on the work of the people, will always find a way to prevail ...."

Source: Michael Bakunin, 1871, Personliche Beziehungen zu Marx. In: Gesammelte Werke. Band 3. Berlin 1924. P. 204-216. [My translation - UD]. ==

UD is Ulli Diemer:

Bakunin vs. Marx
By Ulli Diemer

http://www.connexions.org/RedMenace/Doc ... vsMarx.htm

==

Bakunin: Jews reign ... Too bad for anyone careless enough to displease them

Arthur P. Mandel, Michael Bakunin: Roots of Apocalypse, Praeger, New York 1981.

{p. 330} He must refute the charges of Hess and the rest of the "German Jews" who, he said, were all - except for Marx - out to get him. While he was "in no way either the enemy or the detractor of Jews," he told the editors of Le Reveil, to which he sent his response to Hess's criticism, he was convinced by "ethnographic history" that Jews were "par excellence exploiters of other peoples' labor" and, therefore, "completely opposed to the interests as well as the instincts of the proletariat." "I know very well," he went on, "that in frankly expressing my personal thoughts about the Jews I expose myself to enormous dangers. Many people share [these views], but very few dare to express them publicly, because the Jewish sect, far more formidable than Catholic Jesuits and the Protestants, constitute a real force in Europe today. They reign despotically in commerce and in the banks and have overrun three-quarters of the German press and a very significant part of the press of other countries. Too bad for anyone careless enough to displease them!" 86 {endnote 86: Bakounine, Oeuvres, vol. V, pp. 243-4}
{endquote}

http://mailstar.net/correctness.html

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s ... sv&ct=clnk

http://www.connexions.org/RedMenace/Docs/RM3-BakuninvsMarx.htm


.
.