... on reality
"Dear Sirs: A. Mr. John Sherman has written us from a town in Ohio, U.S.A., as to the profits that may be made in the National Banking business under a recent act of your Congress (National Bank Act of 1863), a copy of which act accompanied his letter. Apparently this act has been drawn upon the plan formulated here last summer by the British Bankers Association and by that Association recommended to our American friends as one that if enacted into law, would prove highly profitable to the banking fraternity throughout the world. Mr. Sherman declares that there has never before been such an opportunity for capitalists to accumulate money, as that presented by this act and that the old plan, of State Banks is so unpopular, that the new scheme will, by contrast, be most favorably regarded, notwithstanding the fact that it gives the national Banks an almost absolute control of the National finance. 'The few who can understand the system,' he says 'will either be so interested in its profits, or so dependent on its favors, that there will be no opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantages that capital derives from the system, will bear its burdens without even suspecting that the system is inimical to their interests.' Please advise us fully as to this matter and also state whether or not you will be of assistance to us, if we conclude to establish a National Bank in the City of New York...Awaiting your reply, we are." (Rothschild Brothers. London, June 25, 1863.)
------------------------------------
"The division of the United States into two federations of equal force was decided long before the Civil War by the High [Jewish] Financial Powers of Europe. These bankers were afraid of the United States, if they remained in one block and as one nation, would attain economical and financial independence, which would upset their financial domination over the world. The voice of the Rothschilds predominated. They foresaw tremendous booty if they could substitute two feeble democracies, indebted to the Jewish financiers, to the vigorous Republic, confident and self-providing. Therefore, they started their emissaries to work in order to exploit the question of slavery and thus to dig an abyss between the two parts of the Republic. Lincoln never suspected these underground machinations. He was antiSlaverist, and he was elected as such. But his character prevented him from being the man of one party. When he had affairs in his hands, he perceived that these sinister financiers of Europe, the Rothschilds, wished to make him the executor of their designs. They made the rupture between the North and the South imminent! The master of finance in Europe made this rupture definitive in order to exploit it to the utmost. Lincoln's personality surprised them. His candidature did not trouble them; they though to easily dupe the candidate woodcutter. But Lincoln read their plots and soon understood, that the South was not the worst foe, but the Jew financiers. He did not confide his apprehensions, he watched the gestures of the Hidden Hand; he did not wish to expose publicly the questions which would disconcert the ignorant masses.
Lincoln decided to eliminate the international banker by establishing a system of loans, allowing the States to borrow
directly from the people without intermediary. He did not study financial questions, but his robust good sense revealed to him,
that the source of any wealth resides in the work and economy of the nation. He opposed emissions through the international
financiers. He obtained from Congress the right to borrow from the people by selling to it the 'bonds' of the States. The
local banks were only too glad to help such a system. And the Government and the nation escaped the plots of the foreign
financiers. They understood at once, that the United States would escape their grip. The death of Lincoln was resolved upon.
Nothing is easier than to find a fanatic to strike. The death of Lincoln was the disaster for Christendom, continues Bismarck. There was no man in the United States great enough to wear his boots. And Israel went anew to grab the riches of the world. I fear that Jewish banks with their craftiness and tortuous tricks will entirely control the exuberant riches of America, and use it to systematically corrupt modern civilization. The Jews will not hesitate to plunge the whole of Christendom into wars and chaos, in order that 'the earth should become the inheritance of Israel.'" (La Vieille France, No. 216, March, 1921)
----------------------------
In his novel Coningsby (London, 1844), Disraeli drew a picture form the life of the Jews ruling the world from behind the thrones as graphic as anything in the Protocols of Nilus. Many believe, and it has been proved to most, Coningsby was a plagiarism of a Byzantine novel of the XVIIth century. The passage in which Rothschild (Sidonia) describes this is as follows:
"If I followed my own impulse, I would remain here," said Sidonia. "Can anything be more absurd than that a nation should apply to an individual to maintain its credit, and with its credit, its existence as an empire and its comfort as a people; and that individual one to whom its laws deny the proudest rights of citizenship, the privilege of sitting in its senate and of holding land; for though I have been rash enough to buy several estates, my own opinion is that by the existing law of England, an Englishman of Jewish faith cannot possess the soil.' 'But surely it would be easy to repeal a law so illiberal.' 'Oh! as for illiberality, I have no objection to it if it be an element of power. Eschew political sentimentality. What I contend is that IF YOU PERMIT MEN TO ACCUMULATE PROPERTY, AND THEY USE THAT PERMISSION TO A GREAT EXTENT, POWER IS INSEPARABLE FROM THAT PROPERTY, and it is in the last degree impolitic to make it in the interest of any powerful class to oppose the institutions under which they live. The Jews, for example, independent of the capital qualities for citizenship which they possess in their industry, temperance, and energy and vivacity of mind, are a race essentially monarchical, deeply religious and shrinking themselves from converts as from a calamity, are ever anxious to see the religious systems of the countries in which they live, flourish; yet since your society
has become agitated in England and powerful combinations menace your institutions, you find the once loyal Jew invariably
arrayed in the same ranks as the leveller and the latitudinarian, and prepared to support rather than tamely continue under a system which seeks to degrade him.
The Tories lose an important election at a critical moment; 'Its the Jews who come forward to vote against them. The Church is alarmed at the scheme of a latitudinarian university, and learns with relief that funds are not forthcoming for its establishment; a Jew immediately advances and endows it. Yet the Jews, Coningsby, are essentially Tories. Toryism indeed is but copied from the mighty prototype which has fashioned Europe. And every generation they must become more powerful and more dangerous to the society which is hostile to them. Do you think that the quiet humdrum persecution of a decorous representative of an English university can crush those who have successively baffled the Pharaos, Nebuchadnezzar, Rome, and the feudal ages?
The fact is YOU CANNOT DESTROY A PURE RACE OF WHITE ORGANIZATION. It is a physiological fact; a simple law of nature, which has baffled Egyptian and Assyrian kings, Roman emperors, and Christian inquisitors. No penal laws, no physical tortures, can effect that a superior race should be absorbed in an inferior, or be destroyed by it. The mixed persecuting races disappear, the pure persecuted race remains. And at this moment in spite of centuries, or tens of centuries, of degradation, the Jewish mind exercises a vast influence on the affairs of Europe. I speak of theirlaws, which you still obey; of their literature, with which your minds are saturated; but of the living Jewish intellect.
You never observe a great intellectual movement in Europe in which the Jews do not greatly participate. The first Jesuits were Jews; that mysterious Russian diplomacy which so alarms Western Europe is organized and principally carried on by Jews; that mighty revolution (of 1848) which will be in fact [followed] by a second an greater Reformation, and of which so little is as yet known in England, is entirely developing under the auspices of Jews, who almost monopolize the professorial chairs of Germany. Neander the founder of Spiritual Christianity, and who is Regius Professor of Divinity in the University of Berlin, is a Jew. Benary, equally famous and in the same university, is a Jew. Wehl, the Arabic Professor of Heidelberg, is a Jew. Years ago, when I was in Palestine, I met a German student who was accumulating materials for the history of Christianity and studying the genius of the place; a modest and learned man. It was Wehl; then unknown, since become the first Arabic scholar of the day, and the author of the life of Mohamet. But for the German professors of this race, their name is legion. I think there are more than ten at Berlin alone.
I told you just now that I was going up to town tomorrow, because I always made it a rule to interpose when affairs of state were on the carpet. Otherwise, I never interfere. I hear of peace and war in the newspapers, but I am never alarmed, except when I am informed that the sovereigns want treasure; then I know that monarchs are serious. A few years back we were applied to by Russia. Now there has been no friendship between the Court of St. Petersburg and my family. It has Dutch connections which have generally supplied it; and our representations in favor of the Polish Jews, a numerous race, but the most suffering and degraded of all the tribes, have not been very agreeable to the Czar. However circumstances drew to an approximation between the Romanoffs and the Sidonias. I resolved to go myself to St. Petersburg. I had on my arrival an interview with the Russian
Minister of Finance, Count Cancrin; I beheld the son of a Lithuanian Jew. The loan was connected with the affairs of Spain; I resolved on repairing to Spain from Russia. I travelled without intermission. I had an audience immediately on my arrival with the Spanish minister Senior Mendizabel; I behold one like myself, the some of Nuevo Christiano, a Jew of Aragon. In consequence of what transpired at Madrid, I went straight to Paris to consult the President of the French Council; I beheld the son of a French Jew, a hero, an imperial marshal and very properly so, for who should be military heroes if not those of the Jewish faith.'
'And is Soult a Jew?' 'Yes, and others of the French marshals, and the most famous Massna, for example; his real name was Mannasheh: but to my anecdote. The consequence of our consultations was that some northern power should be applied to
in a friendly and mediative capacity. We fixed on Prussia, and the President of the Council made an application to the Prussian minister, who attended a few days after our conference.
Count Arnim entered the cabinet, and I beheld a Prussian Jew. So you see, my dear Coningsby, that THE WORLD IS GOVERNED BY
VERY DIFFERENT PERSONAGES FROM WHAT IS IMAGINED BY THOSE WHO ARE NOT BEHIND THE SCENES.' (pp. 249252)
Rollin, Pierred Leroux, and a group of socialists, among whom was Maurice Joly [His father was Philippe Lambert Joly,
born at Dieppe, AttorneyGeneral of the Jura under LouisPhilippe for ten years. His mother Florentine Corbara Courtois, was the
daughter of Laurent Courtois, paymastergeneral of Corsica, who had an inveterate hatred of Napoleon I. Maurice Joly was born in
1831 at LonsleSaulnier and educated at Dijon: there he had begun his law studies, but left for Paris in 1849 to secure a post in
the Ministry of the Interior under M. Chevreau and just before the coup d'etat. He did not finish his law studies till 1860.
Joly, some thirty years younger than Cremieux, with an inherited hatred of the Bonapartes, seems to have fallen very largely under his influence. Through Cremieux, Joly became acquainted with communists and their writings. Though, until 1871 when his ambition for a government post turned him into a violent communist, he had not in 1864 gone beyond socialism, he was so impressed with the way they presented their arguments that he could not, if the chance were offered, refrain from imitating it.
And this chance came in 18641865, when his hatred of Napoleon, whetted by Cremieux, led him to publish anonymously
in Brussels the Dialogues aux Enfers entre Machiavelli et Montesquieu. In this work he tells us, 'Machiavelli represents the policy of Might, while Montesquieu stands for that of Right: Machiavelli will be Napoleon, who will himself describe his abominable policy.' It was natural that he should choose the Italian Machiavelli to stand for Bonaparte, and the Frenchman Montesquieu, for the ideal statesman: it was equally natural that he should put in the mouth of Machiavelli some of the same expressions which Venedey had put in it, and which Joly had admired. His own view was: 'Socialism seems to me one of the forms of a new life for the people emancipated from the traditions of the old world. I accept a great many of the solutions offered by socialism; but I reject communism, either as a social factor, or as a political institution. Communism is but a school of socialism. In politics, I understand extreme means to gain one's ends, in that at least, I am a Jacobin."
----------------------------------------------------
"Freemasonry was a good and sound institution in principle, but revolutionary agitators, principally Jews, taking advantage of its organization as a secret society, penetrated it little by little. They have corrupted it and turned it from its moral and philanthropic aim in order to employ it for revolutionary purposes. This would explain why certain parts of freemasonry have remained intact such as English masonry.
In support of this theory we may quote what a Jew, Bernard Lazare has said in his book: l'antisemitiseme: 'What were the
relations between the Jews and the secret societies? That is not easy to elucidate, for we lack reliable evidence. Obviously they did not dominate in these associations, as the writers, whom I have just mentioned, pretended; they were not necessarily the soul, the head, the grand master of masonry as Gougenot des Mousseaux affirms. It is certain however that there were Jews in the very cradle of masonry, kabbalist Jews, as some of the rites which have been preserved prove. It is most probable that, in the years which preceded the French Revolution, they entered the councils of this sect in increasing numbers and founded secret societies themselves. There were Jews with Weishaupt, and Martinez de Pasqualis. A Jew of Portuguese origin, organized numerous groups of illuminati in France and recruited many adepts whom he initiated into the dogma of reinstatement. The Martinezist lodges were mystic, while the other Masonic orders were rather rationalist; a fact which permits us to say that the secret societies represented the two sides of Jewish mentality: practical rationalism and pantheism, that pantheism which although it is a metaphysical reflection of belief in only one god, yet sometimes leads to kabbalistic tehurgy. One could easily show the agreements of these two tendencies, the alliance of Cazotte, of Cagliostro, of Martinez, of Saint Martin, of the comte de St. Bermain, of Eckartshausen, with the Encyclopedists and the Jacobins, and the manner in which in spite of their opposition, they arrived at the same result, the weakening of Christianity. That will once again serve to prove that the Jews could be good agents of the secret societies, because the doctrines of these societies were in agreement with their own doctrines, but not that they were the originators of them." (Bernard Lazare, l'Antisemitisme. Paris, Chailley, 1894, p. 342; The Secret Powers Behind
Revolution, by Vicomte Leon De Poncins, pp. 101-102).