(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Children's Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Bolshevism from Moses to Lenin"

BOLSHEVISM 

from 

MOSES to LENIN 




DIETRICH ECKART 



Copyright 1966 by Dr. William L. Pierce 



BOLSHEVISM 

from 

MOSES to LENIN 



A DIALOGUE BETWEEN ADOLF HITLER AND ME 

by Dietrich Eckart 
Translated from the German by William L. Pierce 

Reprinted from National Socialist World, Spring, 1966. 
Copyright 1966 by William L. Pierce 



EDITOR'S FOREWORD: The following material has been translated from a pamphlet 
found in the NSDAP Hauptarchiv. Its German title was Der Bolschewismus von Moses 
bis Lenin: Zwiegesprach 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, which 
is about twenty miles southeast of NCirnberg, 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 Volkischer 
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 
Vermachtnis (Munich, 1928 ff.) 



Der Bolschewismus is of interest to Americans today for three reasons. First, it is the 
last earthly work of 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. 



Second, it is instructive, as being representative of a certain category 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. 



Third, it is of considerable interest, even today, for its own sake. Although the last forty 
years have unfortunately provided us with considerably more experience of Jewish- 
Bolshevist activities, Eckart did quite well with the materials available to him in 1923. 
Of particular interest is his use of the Old Testament, as a history of the Jews, to throw 
light onto more recent Jewish activities. 



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 has slightly condensed the original material during his translation, omitting 
several of the more ragged portions and such things as untranslatable puns, as well as 
a few sections which have limited interest for present-day readers. Additional 
footnotes have been added by the editor in a few places, and these are so designated. 



"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. (3) 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. (4) 



"Yes indeed," he laughed bitterly, "now the people will seek to Dr. Cuno, and Dr. 
Schweyer, and Dr. Heim, (5) 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!' 



Thus will the charmers and wizards prattle on and on, till one night the blood sign will 
appear on all the Jewish houses, and the infuriated masses, led by the Jews, will 
swarm forth to smite all the firstborn in the land again as in Egypt." (6) 



"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. (7) 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. (8) The best, 
though, was the reward the Jews gave their stupid accomplices. Suddenly they began 
calling them 'rabble,' (9) 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! (10) 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.' "(11) 



"The Jews call our Sedan Day (12) 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. " 



"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'! (13) 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. (14) 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.' (15) 



"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'; (16) thus he was 
smarter than Wilhelm II, (17) 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 Pobelvolk, 
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. (18) 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." (19) 



"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 Pobelvolk 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.' 
(20) 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 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. (21) 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." (22) 



"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. (23) 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. 
(24) It was never their strong side to risk armed conflict. In the War of Liberation, (25) 
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." (26) 



"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'! (27) 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, Borne; (28) and 
Heinrich Heine sniffed out Germany's future from a toilet bowl. (29) 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 (30) 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. Brunn frankly 
admitted there that the Jews could have no German national spirit. (31) 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. (32) 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; (33) 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. (34) And another: 
'Whoever has to choose between his duties as an Englishman and as a Jew must 
choose the latter.' (35) And a third: 'Jews who want to be both patriotic Englishmen 
and good Jews are simply living lies.' (36) 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. (37) 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. 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. (38) 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. (39) 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.' (40) 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, (41) 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." 



"Okay. So they are neither national nor international," I acknowledged. "What, then?" 



"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." 



IV 



"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.' (42) 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. (43) 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 (especially in chapter 
five — Ed.). Sombart says that it leaves absolutely nothing to be desired in the way of 
clarity. (44) 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....' 
(45) To the Jews, Galilee was the land of the Gentiles, whose population 'sat in 
darkness,' as they impudently imagined. (46) 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.' (47) The Hebrews were so firmly convinced of the non- 
Jewish ancestry of Christ that they counted him among the especially hated 
Samaritans. (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'! (49) 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.' (50) The same with the Goethe Society. 'We tolerate no Jews among us,' 
said Goethe. (51) 'Their religion permits them to rob non-Jews,' he wrote. (52) 'This 
crafty race has one great principle: as long as order prevails, there is nothing to be 
gained,' he continued. (53) He categorically emphasized: 'I refrain from all cooperation 
with Jews and their accomplices.' (54) 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.'" 
(55) 



"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. (56) 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. (57) 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. (58) 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. (59) 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." (60) 



"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." 



VI 



"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 Pobelvolk. 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. 
(61) 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. 



"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.' (62) 
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." 



"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.' (63) And in Hamburg a preacher named Schwalb said: 'I consider 
myself a genuine Jew and have always considered myself thus'. (64) 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." 



"The Jew Goldmann," I put in, "stated their reason plainly enough. 'Luther has again 
brought the Old Testament to honor.'" (65) 



"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." (66) 



"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. (67) 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. (68) 



"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' so 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!" 



"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. 



"This ambiguity," I completed, "one finds even in Spinoza. (69) 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." 



"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! (70) 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. (71) 



"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." 



VII 



'"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 Pobelvolk 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.' (72) 
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 s\x-kab (73) wineskin; according to 
others, three kabs. The penis of Rabbi Papa was as large as one of the baskets of the 
inhabitants of Harpania.' (74) 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. (75) 



"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,' (76) 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!' (77) 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!' (78) 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, (79) 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.' (80) 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.' (81) 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.' (82) 



"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!" 



"From long years of experience," I brought out, "Dostoevski depicted the hair-raising 
conceit of the Russian Jew. (83) 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! (84) 
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." 



"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 'Pobelvolk' 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 (85) 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 (86) 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. (87) 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 (88) 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." 



VIM 



"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 it lies. If you will: the tragedy of 
Lucifer." 



Here the notes of Dietrich Eckart break off. 



FOOTNOTES 



(1) Strabo (Greek geographer and historian, ca. 63 B.C. — ca. 24 A.D.), Geographica. 

(2) Marcus Tullius Cicero, Oratio pro L. Flacco. In 59 B.C. Cicero defended the 
proconsul Flaccus, who, at the urging of Jews, was accused of corruption in 
connection with his administrative activity in Syria. 

(3) John 19:12. 

(4) Isaiah 19:2-3. 

(5) Three figures prominent in German politics in 1923: the German Chancellor, the 
Bavarian Minister of the Interior, and the founder and leader of the Bavarian People's 
Party, respectively. [Translator] 

(6) Exodus 12:7-13,29-30. 

(7) James K. Hosmer, The Jews (New York, 1885), p. 272. [Translator] 

(8) Exodus 12:35-36; Psalms 105:38 

(9) In the translation from the Hebrew of Exodus 12:38, that word which is rendered in 
the King James version as "mixed multitude" appears in the German Bible as 
"Pobelvolk, " meaning "rabble." [Translator] 

(10) In volume two, chapter 16 (page 384 of the 1783 London edition) of his History of 
the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Edward Gibbon reports: 

"From the reign of Nero to that of Antoninus Pius, the Jews discovered a fierce impatience of the 
dominion of Rome, which repeatedly broke out in the most furious massacres and insurrections. 
Humanity is shocked at the recital of the horrid cruelties which they committed in the cities of 
Egypt, of Cyprus, and of Cyrene, where they dwelt in treacherous friendship with the 
unsuspecting natives.... In Cyrene they massacred 220,000 Greeks; in Cyprus, 240,000, in Egypt, 
a very great multitude. Many of these unhappy victims were sawed asunder, according to a 
precedent to which David had given the sanction of his example. The victorious Jews devoured 
the flesh, licked up the blood, and twisted the entrails like a girdle round their bodies." 
[Translator] 

(11) Heinrich Graetz, Geschichte derJuden von den Altesten Zeiten (Breslau, 1853). 

(12) September 2. Sedan was the site of the great Prussian victory in the Franco- 
Prussian war, on this day in 1870. [Translator] 



(13) Genesis 41:43. 

(14) Genesis 46:7. 

(15) Genesis 45:18,20. 

(16) Exodus 1:6-10. 

(17) Emperor William II of Germany, who abdicated in 1918 after the Marxist-Jewish 
revolution in Germany led to the crumbling of her war effort and the loss of World War 
I. [Translator] 

(18) Joshua 6:25. 

(19) Friedrich Delitzsch, Die Grosse Tauschung: Kritische Betrachfungen zu den 
alttestamentlichen Berichten uber Israels Eindringen in Kanaan, Die 
Gottesoffenbarung vom Sinai, und die Wirksamkeit der Propheten (Stuttgart, 1920). 

(20) Isaiah 34. 

(21) Exodus 34:12; Deuteronomy 7:16. 

(22) Otto Hauser, Geschichte des Judentums (Weimar, 1921), p. 251 . 

(23) Hauser distinguishes "light" or "blond" men, or, as he says, men of noble race, 
from "dark" or "black" men of inferior race. Wherever he has occasion to mention a 
blond Jew in his book, he praises him to the sky. For my part, I have met some of the 
greatest rascals among blond Jews. 

(24) Werner Sombart, Die Juden und das Wirtschaftsleben (Leipzig, 191 1), p. 356. 

(25) Against Napoleon Bonaparte, 1813-1815. [Translator] 

(26) Hauser, op. cit., p. 376. 

(27) Arthur Schopenhauer, Parerga und Paralipomena II § 174. 

(28) Ludwig Borne (alias Lob Baruch), Briefe aus Paris (Hamburg, 1832), I. 

(29) Heinrich (alias Chaim) Heine, Deutschland, ein Wintermarchen (1844). 

(30) Zentralverein deutscher Staatsburger judischen Glaubens. [Translator] 

(31) Artur Brunn, Im Deutschen Reich (the periodical of the Zentralverein) 1913, No. 8. 

(32) Walther Rathenau, Berliner Kulturzentren, 1913. Rathenau was a Jewish war 
profiteer in World War I and later a minister in the Weimar government. He was 
executed by German patriots in 1922. [Translator] 



(33) A Jew-controlled, socialist government of Paris which lasted only from March 18 
to May 27, 1871, but which was responsible for thousands of horribly atrocious 
murders during this brief period. [Translator] 

(34) M.J. Wodeslowsky, Jewish World, January 1, 1909. 

(35) Joseph Cohen, Jewish World, November 4, 1913. 

(36) Jewish Chronicle, December 10, 1911. 

(37) Sombart, op. oil, pp. 32-33. 

(38) Ibid., p. 39 

(39) Five years after Der Bolschewismus was written — on June 2, 1928 — an article 
appeared in Liberty magazine, by the former head of the United States Secret Service, 
William J. Flynn, detailing the previously secret intrigues of Wilson, Baruch, et al. in 
1915 to engage the United States in the World War. But these treacherous 
proceedings pale into insignificance when compared to the activities of the Zionist 
Jews in 1916, following the negotiations between the British Government and world 
Jewry which led to the Balfour Declaration of 1917. 

In a pamphlet published in London in March 1936 by the New Zion Press and entitled 
Great Britain, The Jews, and Palestine, Samuel Landman, the well-known Zionist, 
states that these negotiations led to a "quid pro quo contract" in which Jewry agreed to 
use its influence to bring America into the war on Britain's side in return for Britain's 
guarantee that Palestine would be handed over to the Jews. He says that, once the 
negotiations were complete, "the change in official and public opinion as reflected in 
the American press in favor of joining the Allies in the War was as gratifying as it was 
surprisingly rapid." 

Eckart, of course, did not know the full story of these arrangements in 1923. 
[Translator] 

(40) Litman Rosenthal, American Jewish News, September 19, 1919. Rosenthal, 
writing in reminiscence of his attendance at the 1903 conference, blatantly lays bare 
the eager Jewish anticipation of a world war, eleven years before the fact. Nordau's 
speech continues "...let me tell you the following words as if I were showing you the 
rungs of a ladder leading upward and upward: Herzl, the Zionistic Congress, the 
English Uganda proposition, the future world war, the peace conference where with 
the help of England a free and Jewish Palestine will be created." [Translator! 

(41) Hauser, op. cit., pp. 484, 491. 

(42) Martin Luther, Von den Juden und ihren Lugen. Luther's words are more poetic in 
German: "Du bist nicht ein Deutscher, sondern ein Tauscher; nicht ein Welcher, 
sondern ein Falscher. " [Translator] 

(43) John 8:44. 



(44) Sombart, op. cit., p. 371 . 

(45) Matthew 23:15. 

(46) Matthew 4:15-16. 

(47) John 1:46; 7:52. 

(48) John 7:48. 

(49) Matthew 28:10. 

(50) Immanuel Kant, Anthropologie in pragmatischer Hinsicht (Konigsberg, 1798). 

(51) Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Wilhelm Meisters Wanderjahre. 

(52) Goethe, Das Jahrmarktfest zu Plundersweiler. 

(53) Ibid. 

(54) Goethe, Tag- und Jahresfeste. 

(55) Benjamin Disraeli, Conningsby (London, 1844). 

(56) Otto Weininger, Geschlecht und Charakter (Vienna and Leipzig, 1903). 

(57) Matthew 10:5-6. 

(58) I.e., Berlin Advertiser, a Berlin Newspaper. [Translator] 

(59) Moritz Goldstein, Kunstwart, March, 1912. 

(60) One is reminded here of what has happened to Wagner in recent years. If Eckart 
could have foreseen how Wagner's immortal operas would be someday perverted at 
Bayreuth, he would have been far more distressed than he was over Jewish 
"interpretations" of Goethe's writing. [Translator] 

(61) Anacletus II (1130-1138), Innocent II (1130-1143), Calixtus III (1168-1178), 
Clement VIII (1424-1428), Alexander VI (1492-1503), and even Pius XI (1922-1939). 
In addition, Gregory VI (1045-1046) and others may have been Jews or part-Jews. 
Anacletus II, Calixtus III, and Clement VIII are generally classified as antipopes. 
[Translator] 

(62) Giordano Bruno, Spacio delta Bestis Trionfante (1584). 

(63) In his lecture in 1894, entitled Umpires of the Jewish Question. 

(64) In his farewell sermon in March, 1894. 



(65) Nahum Goldmann, the well-known Russian Jewish Zionist who also had the 
unbelievable audacity to announce that the Jews "no longer recognize the right of any 
country to consider the question of the treatment of its Jewish population as an internal 
affair." 

(66) Schopenhauer, loc. cit. 

(67) Heinrich Heine, in his poem "Disputation." 

(68) Isaiah 61:6, Psalms 2:8. 

(69) Baruch Spinoza, the greatest Jewish philosopher (1632-1677). 

(70) Martin Luther died in 1546. His two principal anti-Semitic writings, Von den Juden 
und ihren Lugen and Vom Schem Hamphoras, appeared in 1543. A philo-Semitic tract 
by him was written in 1523. The modern reader may refer to Walther Linden, Luthers 
Kampfschriften gegen das Judentum (Berlin, 1936), which contains the complete text 
of Von den Juden und ihren Lugen and extracts from Vom Schem Hamphoras; or to 
E.V. von Rudolf, Dr. Martin Luther Wider die Juden (Munich, 1940), which has 
extracts from both. [Translator] 

(71) Matthias Erzberger (1875-1922) was a left-wing member of the Catholic Center 
Party. A collaborator with the Jews and Social Democrats during World War I, he 
favored the Versailles Treaty and became German vice chancellor in 1919. He was 
executed for his treasonable activities by German patriots in 1921. [Translator] 

(72) Doris Wittner, Ostijudische Antlitz, No. 252 (1920). 

(73) The kab is an ancient Hebrew unit of measure equivalent to about two quarts. 
[Translator] 

(74) Talmud, Baba Mecia, 84a. It is interesting to note that recent editions of the 
Talmud replace the word "penis" (mannliches Glied in German) with "waist" 
(Korperumfang in German). The 1933 Berlin edition translated by Lazarus 
Goldschmidt, for example, claims in a footnote to this passage that the appearance of 
mannliches Glied in earlier editions was due to a "mistake" in translation. One only 
needs, however, to read the material adjacent to this passage, with its distinctly smutty 
character, to see that the original translation was no "mistake." [Translator] 

(75) Talmud, Jabmuth, 60b. The exact words of Goldschmidt's 1931 Berlin Edition of 
Jabmuth are: Es wird gelehrt: R. Simon b. Johaj sagte: Eine Proselytin unter drei 
Jahren und einem Tage ist fur Priester tauglich, denn es heisst: und alle Kinder unter 
den Weibern, die die Beiwohnung eines Mannes nicht erkannt haben, lass fur euch 
leben... [Translator] 

(76) Talmud, Hulin, 91b. One really must take the trouble to look into the Talmud 
oneself, in order to believe the truly astounding things to be found therein. We have 
referred to Goldschmidt's German translation, published by the Judischer Verlag 
(Berlin, 1930-1936), but the Talmud is also available in English (with the exception of a 



few of the more perverse passages) from the Soncino Press (London, 1935). 
[Translator] 

(77) Sirach 36:2-12. 

(78) Schulchan Aruch, Orach Gaijim, 480. 

(79) Moses Mendelssohn (1729-1786) was a troll-like, hunchbacked, little Jew, 
originally a Talmudic scholar, who eventually displayed a vastly greater affinity for a 
fast buck than for the peculiar "wisdom" of the Talmud. Starting as a tutor in the house 
of a rich, Jewish silk merchant in Berlin, he soon became a partner in the business and 
amassed an enormous fortune. He was celebrated by his fellow Jews, as well as by a 
circle of Gentile admirers, however, as an extraordinarily pious and clever 
philosopher. [Translator] 

(80) Arthur Ruppin, Die Juden der Gegenwart (Berlin, 1904), p. 203 ff. 

(81) Luther, Von den Juden und ihren Lugen. 

(82) Ibid. 

(83) Feodor Dostoevski, An Author's Diary, (1876-1880) 

(84) Dostoevski spent five years in a Siberian prison camp at Omsk (1849-1854). 
[Translator] 

(85) Friedrich Ebert (1871-1925) was the Marxist leader of the Social Democrats. He 
collaborated with other traitors to bring about the German collapse of 1918 and 
became Reichsprasident under the new regime, in 1919. [Translator] 

(86) Kurt Eisner (1867-1919) was a Jewish journalist politician and Marxist leader in 
Bavaria. A principal organizer of the 1918 revolution (Dolchstoss), he became first 
president of the Bavarian republic. He was executed by a German patriot in 1919. 
[Translator] 

(87) The treaty of March 3, 1918, ending hostilities between Germany and Russia, was 
signed at Brest Litovsk. [Translator] 

(88) The Volkischer Beobachter was the official NSDAP newspaper, from December, 
1920, on. [Translator] 



Additional copies of Bolshevism from Moses to Lenin 

LIBERTY BELL PUBLICATIONS 
Box 21, Reedy, W.Va. 25270 USA 



This booklet is a reprint from the 

Spring, 1966 issue of 
NATIONAL SOCIALIST WORLD.