‘International Jewry’? What was that prior to 1939? And what is it now?

Discuss the alleged Nazi genocide or other wartime atrocities without fear of censorship. No bullying of fellow posters is allowed at RODOH. If you can't be civil, please address the argument and not the participants. Do not use disparaging alterations of the user-names of other RODOH posters or their family members. Failure to heed warnings from Moderators will result in a 24 hour ban (or longer if necessary).
User avatar
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9627
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am

Re: ‘International Jewry’? What was that prior to 1939? And what is it now?

Post by been-there »

The Waldheim affair

The most sensational of all post-war, racist, anti-German/Austrian persecution campaigns.

Kurt Waldheim was United Nations Secretary-General from 1972 to 1981.
Prior to his role at the UN he had unsuccessfully sought election as President of Austria in 1971.
After the end of his tenure as UN Secretary-General he sought again to become President of Austria and in June 1986 was successful. During his campaign for the Austrian presidency, what became known internationally as the "Waldheim affair" began.

In March 1986, the World Jewish Congress has alleged that Waldheim lied about his WW2 service.
The World Jewish Congress (WJC) claimed that its organisation had discovered that the United Nations War Crimes Commission had concluded after the war that Waldheim was implicated in Nazi mass murder. The WJC argued that Waldheim should be arrested. This transformed the 'Waldheim affair' into the most sensational of all post-war Nazi accusations and persecutions.

Waldheim called the allegations, which grew in magnitude in the ensuing months, “pure lies and malicious acts”. Nevertheless, he admitted that he had known about German reprisals against partisans: "Yes, I knew. I was horrified. But what could I do? I had either to continue to serve or be executed."
He said that he had never fired a shot or even seen a partisan. His former immediate superior at the time stated that Waldheim had "remained confined to a desk".
Former Austrian chancellor Bruno Kreisky, of Jewish origin, denounced the actions of the World Jewish Congress as an "“extraordinary infamy”, adding that Austrians would “not allow the Jews abroad to ... tell us who should be our President”.

Part of the reason for the controversy was Austria's refusal to address its national role in the Holocaust. Austria refused to pay compensation to Nazi victims, and from 1970 onwards refused to investigate Austrian citizens who were senior officers in the Third Reich.

In 1994, a former Mossad officer Victor Ostrovsky stated in his book The Other Side of Deception that Jewish Mossad agents had doctored Waldheim's file while he was serving as Secretary-General to implicate him in Nazi crimes.
These false documents were then conveniently "discovered" by Benjamin Netanyahu in the UN file and this triggered the "Waldheim Affair".
Ostrovsky wrote that this was motivated by Waldheim's criticism of Israel's war in Lebanon.
Despite Jewish attempts to discredit Ostrovsky and to deny his service in Mossad, it was confirmed when the Israeli government unsuccessfully attempted to stop publication of the book.

In view of the ongoing international controversy, in 1988 the Austrian government decided to appoint an international committee of historians to examine Waldheim's life between 1938 and 1945. Their report found no evidence of any personal involvement in those crimes.

Curiously the discredited Jewish 'Nazi hunter' and liar of his own wartime record Simon Wiesenthal, defended Waldheim. For this he was sharply criticized by the World Jewish Congress and others. He gave "adamant defence of Waldheim" and made "public, personal attacks against the WJC investigators" and for that the WJC assisted in tarnishing his then prominent global reputation.
Simon Wiesenthal had publicised the fact that the investigative committee had found no evidence that Waldheim took part in any war crimes. The International Committee in February 1988 concluded that Waldheim could not have stopped what was going on in Yugoslavia and Greece even if he had known.

Despite this, under pressure from the Jews who effectively control many aspects of US policy, Waldheim was banned from entry into the USA.
Get that!! World Jewry got America to ban entry to a head of state on exaggerated charges and malicious lies that had been initiated by bogus, Mossad forgeries!!! :o :?
Thus it was that, despite the false and exaggerated nature of the accusations, on 27th April 1987 the United States Department of Justice and the United States Department of State announced that evidence amassed in an investigation conducted by the Justice Department's Office of Special Investigations (OSI) had established a prima facie case that Waldheim participated in Nazi-sponsored persecution during World War II and therefore that his entry into the United States was prohibited by federal statute. This marked the first time that a head of state had been put on an immigration watchlist.

According to the Jewish-controlled and policed wikipedia page that this account is based upon, it claims there that “throughout his term as President (1986–1992), Kurt Waldheim was officially deemed persona non grata by the United States and officially or informally, by nearly every other nation in the world outside the Arab world”.

Yet it also admits the contradicting fact that in 1994, Pope John Paul II awarded Waldheim a knighthood in the Order of Pius IX and also bestowed upon his wife a papal honour.

Kurt Waldheim died on June 14th 2007, at the age of 88 from heart failure. In a speech at the St. Stephen's Cathedral in Vienna, Federal President Heinz Fischer called Waldheim "a great Austrian" who had been wrongfully accused of having committed war crimes. Fischer also praised Waldheim for his efforts to solve international crises and for his contributions to world peace.

As a young adult at the time of the 'Waldheim affair', I didn't follow the case in any detail but was aware of it. I was made to believe that a ‘lying, unrepentant ex-Nazi’ had successfully been elected President of Austria and therefore was manipulated to erroneously conclude Austria was populated by a majority of 'Nazi sympathisers'.
Also the mass-media amplification of the World Jewish Council's persecution of Waldheim made me aware of the 'war-crimes' accusations but not that they were unsubstantiated and were proven false.
I discovered that only today.

This demonstrates how the old term International Jewry is a description of a phenomena that still exists.
It also demonstrates how it operates; how it can successfully manipulate public perceptions; and how it can persecute, discredit and defame anyone who these Jews choose to target.

"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Would you like to financially contribute to the upkeep of RODOH? Please kindly contact Scott Smith ([email protected]). Any and all contributions are welcome!

User avatar
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9627
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am

Re: ‘International Jewry’? What was that prior to 1939? And what is it now?

Post by been-there »

Matthew Berlow, perfidious, pro-Israeli, zionist Jewish lawyer.

A top lawyer has been slammed by legal watchdogs for a bizarre plot to discredit a Palestinian pressure group.
Matthew Berlow played a key part in faking a graffiti attack at his home then used the bogus incident to smear the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign.
He now faces a £500 fine for his part in the conspiracy after an initial probe by the reporter of the Law Society of Scotland.

Berlow knew his associate Ed Sutherland, a teacher at Belmont Academy, Ayr, had created a fake Facebook identity under the name Stevie Harrison to infiltrate the SPSC in January last year. Berlow and Sutherland are linked to Friends of Israel, which aims to promote the interests of the country in the UK.

The fake Palestinian supporting activist “Stevie Harrison” wrote a social media post highlighting vandalism daubed on Berlow’s home in Glasgow.
The post said: “A certain Jewish lawyer woke up this morning to find ‘Free Palestine’ spray-painted rather ­prominently – no idea who was responsible.”

Berlow fuelled the story of the fantasy attack by playing the victim and commenting on the post: “Idiocy. Typical SPSC behaviour criminal.”
He later admitted to the LSS that he knew the scenario to be faked. But he claimed he went along with it because the Harrison character was being used “to monitor various ­disruptive activities of the SPSC”.

A preliminary ruling found Berlow failed to maintain the standards of behaviour expected for a ­solicitor.

https://israelpalestinenews.org/top-pro ... ine-group/

.. .. .. .. .. ..

In 2018, Berlow was ordered to pay a fine of £1,750 and undergo diversity training after he called Palestine activists 'scummy racists' in an online argument on Facebook. The Law Society initially ordered Berlow to pay the fine and undergo training for damaging his own and the legal profession's reputation.
However, the decision was later overturned on appeal.

In a post on the SPSC website, organiser Mick Napier said the scandal was part of a wider campaign, describing Sutherland and Berlow as “foot soldiers in a legion of deception and dirty tricks”.

Scotland's Daily Record newspaper quoted Napier as saying: “We welcome the finding against Berlow but the gravity of the offense clearly merits more than a £500 rap on the knuckles.

“I believe those who have been defamed, including myself, should be awarded exemplary damages. We have been smeared as antisemitic and that is serious and quite unacceptable.
The LSS decided no damage had been done to myself or the SPSC, but I would urge it to ­reconsider this because the damage to our reputation, in accusing us of such criminal acts, is impossible to deny.”

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/scot ... -palestine
been-there wrote:
Mon Aug 17, 2020 10:34 am
A Scottish shabbat goy is being "investigated" for possibly committing a crime.
Religious studies teacher faces losing job after allegedly posting anti-semitic slurs online

A senior figure in a pro-Israel group faces losing his job as a religious studies teacher — after allegedly posting anti-Semitic slurs online. Edward Sutherland set up a fake social media page which he used to write inflammatory messages.

Now the Belmont Academy employee – head of religious and moral education at the Ayr school – is being investigated over his fitness to be in the classroom by the General Teaching Council for Scotland (GTCS).

Edward Sutherland

However, his supporters have told the standards watchdog the site was a decoy created to lure bigots into making illegal comments.

Sources also say the page was used to monitor the activities of the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign (SPSC).
Sutherland was convener of the Confederation of Friends of Israel (COFIS), a lobby group and registered charity. He has stepped down while the investigation is underway.

He called himself Steven Harrison on the Facebook page which was created in 2018. ...COFIS says on its website: “We want to challenge the lies that are spread by hateful individuals and hate groups who claim to care about ‘the Palestinians’ but really just want to attack Israel.”

Sutherland could not be contacted for comment.

Edward Sutherland at a Friends of Israel stand

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scot ... YnvquP1GqU
What a despicable, immoral, conspiratorial, devious, dishonest mindset: making admittedly "illegal comments" to supposedly "lure bigots" into “making illegal comments”.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9627
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am

Re: ‘International Jewry’? What was that prior to 1939? And what is it now?

Post by been-there »

Further evidence that the elite of 'International Jewry' in the 1930's had no regard for the lives of the majority of Jews whose lives were to be disrupted (and even ended) by the elite Jews' desire for war and for a Jewish state in the Middle East.

Chaim Weizmann it turns out "hated" fellow Jews. He treated them with "contempt" and "enmity" and hated having to live with them, even though he himself lived in luxury in the specially designed mansion built for him in Israel.

As a reminder, here is something Chaim wrote during the orgy of mass-murder and cultural destruction in Europe that he was hugely instrumental in unleashing:
Chaim Weizmann wrote:“We are not afraid to confess that this war is our war and that it is waged for the liberation of Jewry...
Stronger than all fronts together is our front, that of Jewry.
We are not only giving this war our financial support on which the entire war production is based, we are not only providing our full propaganda power which is the moral energy that keeps this war going.
The guarantee of victory is predominantly based on weakening the enemy forces, on destroying them in their own country, within the resistance.
And we are the Trojan horses in the enemy's fortress.
Thousands of Jews living in Europe constitute the principal factor in the destruction of our enemy. There, our front is a fact and the most valuable aid for victory.”

And yet Chaim Wiezmann who admitted WW2 was a Jewish war — promoted by Jews, funded and propagandised by and for Jews, and surreptitiously/deceitfully fought by Jews — ironically “hated” Israel and found the Eastern European Jews who invaded and occupied it, "repellant". He actually hated the vast majority of the colonialist, invader, settler Jews who he had engineered to come to occupied Palestine to create his 'Jewish' state. And he openly showed them that, treating them with “enmity” and “contempt”.

A new biography reveals these contradictions in this man who was one of the leading purveyors and pimps of world war for Jewish self-interests. He comes across as a self-centred, dishonest, manipulative, hateful person who used everyone around him and dropped them when they were of no further use to him.

And yet these Jewish authors believe “Weizmann comes out well from our book”!!! :o :?

The founding father of the Jewish state
was a serial cheater who hated Israel

New biography in Hebrew on Chaim Weizmann casts a new light on Israel’s first president

| By Ofer Aderet | Sept. 12th, 2020 |

There is a new Hebrew-language biography of Weizmann, The founding father by historians Motti Golani, from Tel Aviv University, and Jehuda Reinharz, from Brandeis. The Weizmann who emerges from their book’s 1,000 pages is light-years away from Weizmann the symbol, the person behind the famous Balfour Declaration, and the first president of the State of Israel.

Prof. Golani tells Haaretz. “We discovered a person who is capable of quarreling, who has desires, who makes mistakes, fails and doesn’t tell the truth. In short: a human being,” he says, summing up the most comprehensive study ever made of Weizmann. This was a decade-long endeavor in which the two biographers left no stone unturned anywhere in the world, when it came to their subject.

Golani: “If you want to understand who Chaim Weizmann was in broader contexts, you also have to address his relationships with women. From these contexts we learned that this man had one major passion in his life. It wasn’t for women. Or for science. It was for Zionist activity. For its sake he sacrificed his family, his health, his profession — and his women.”

He had a passion for Zionism, but not necessarily a desire to fulfill it himself.
“Weizmann did not want to live in the Land of Israel. But, ...[his] life ...the whole is rife with contradictions.”

Indeed, it’s worth dwelling on the contradictions in Weizmann’s life. It’s hard not to be taken aback by the disparity between the prodigious effort he invested in promoting the Zionist enterprise — worldwide travels, meetings with the high and mighty – with the aim of establishing a Jewish state in the Land of Israel, and the repulsion he felt at life in that land. Golani and Reinharz did not recoil from dealing with this directly and without embellishment.
“Weizmann sought to lead the realization of the Zionist vision more than to live it. One foot here, one foot there” — although mostly there, in London.

It’s hard to blame Weizmann, a British elitist who lived in surpassing comfort in London, for his intense dislike he had for Rehovot, where he established his research center (the Sieff Institute, now known as the Weizmann Institute of Science) as well as his private residence in Palestine in the 1930s. His wife wanted things in Rehovot to be as they were in London, but the meager level of culture in the former ruled that out, he himself noted.

“He’s despondent and thinks that the level of morality and aesthetics in Palestine is inferior,” his colleague in the Zionist movement’s leadership, Arthur Ruppin, observed.

Weizmann did not hesitate to commit to writing, in letters and other personal documents, his inability and lack of desire to live in the Land of Israel, where he only moved permanently after he was made the state’s first president, in 1949. He wrote that he was shocked to the depths of his soul by the conditions in the country. When he did live there, he wrote in 1935, it was not out of free will but because of his Zionist duty. He confessed that he lacked the courage, the strength and the devotion rooted in love that helps one overcome such difficulties. What did he mean, exactly?

Golani: “Weizmann found it difficult to tolerate life in this country — the blunt language, the lack of manners, the disrespect and the weather. He was ready to lay down his life for the country — but to live here was a different matter.” Archival documents led Golani and Reinharz to conclude that Weizmann literally counted the days until his return to London. (During World War II, he was on the move between London and the United States.)

The solution he found was possible at the time only for a person of means like himself: to be constantly on the go and yet, when compelled to live in Palestine, to bring Europe there with him — in the form of an estate designed for him by preeminent Jewish-German architect Erich Mendelsohn, at an exorbitant cost: an architectural masterpiece built on a hill in Rehovot, which is now part of the campus of the Weizmann Institute.

But Weizmann didn’t always succeed in sequestering himself in his Middle Eastern “Europe”. On one Purim festival, he remarked, he felt as if he was “a mourner among bridegrooms” unable even to smile. The country was going wild with joy, he noted, and wondered why. He himself was in physical and spiritual “depression”. Life in the “small village” as he termed Rehovot, was not to his liking.

As the new biography shows abundantly, the alienation Weizmann felt was not only from the country itself but — and mainly — from the [Jewish] people in it. Thus, in 1935, he wrote that the country was filled with tourists and visitors of all kinds, and that it was not possible to avoid them, despite efforts to keep them at a distance. Indeed, he noted, he was heartily fed up with the place, particularly when it was overrun with swarms of pesky, troublesome [Jewish] visitors. He’d be happy to leave, he added. “Uninvited guests” was his term for those who sought him out like pilgrims, hoping to see the man of vision and action.

Romantic hypochondriac
Weizmann was repelled even by the [Jewish] immigrants in Palestine who had come from Eastern Europe, which is especially noteworthy because they were flesh of his flesh. He himself was born in 1874 to a traditional, observant Jewish family in the town of Motol, in what is today Belarus, then part of the Russian Empire; he was the third of 15 siblings (three of whom died in childhood). His father, Oser, was a merchant and Torah scholar. At 18, Weizmann left to study chemistry in Germany and Switzerland, and from that point on he felt estranged from Eastern European Jewry, where his own origins lay.

“He turned his back on them and ignored them, even when he struggled on their behalf,” Golani explains. “He wasn’t able to hide his repulsion from those who weren’t like him, from those whom he used to resemble,” the authors write. He was offensive and condescending toward them, to the point of enmity and contempt. He also spoke with overt disdain about his rivals in the Zionist movement and the Yishuv (the pre-state Jewish community in the Land of Israel), in a way that was in stark contrast to his varied diplomatic skills.

The Weizmann portrayed by Golani and Reinharz comes across as unhealthy, both physically and mentally — if it’s possible to separate the two. Between handshakes with Winston Churchill and intense conversations with Lord Balfour, between a fiery speech at the Zionist Congress and a meeting in the White House, lurked a different Weizmann. A leader prone to gloominess, dejection and anxiety, even when he walked tall, radiated charisma and displayed an exuberant sense of humor.
“He was prone to frequent mood swings. Within an hour’s time he could be elated and then feel sorry for himself,” Reinharz says.

“Nothing would divert him from the political and diplomatic activity in which he had been caught up since the Great War [WW1], when the Zionist horizon opened to new possibilities. Not a loving woman, not his family, his wife, his sons, his mother, his brothers and his sisters, not his scientific career, not his health, not the intolerable comportment of the Jewish masses in Eastern Europe, London and New York. Not even the ongoing pestering of Zionist functionaries who made his life miserable — nothing would stand in his way.”

...He was not only aloof in terms of his relationship with his wife and children. His insensitivity extended also to his mother and his siblings. ...His emotional stinginess and/or disability regarding familial relations is reflected in his reaction to the sudden death of his younger sister Mina...

...Weizmann also behaved callously with his friends and confidants, whether personal or professional. “What was true regarding his family was all the more true regarding his social circle,” the authors write. “...he would mercilessly attack those who stood in his way, even if in the past they had been close friends. In the best case he only severed his contact with them. At worst, he would harbor lifelong resentment, harboring on intense dislike”.

Ego battles and spitting
On May 13th, 1939, two days before the White Paper was due to be published, Weizmann was invited to the residence of Malcolm MacDonald, Britain’s colonial secretary in the government of Neville Chamberlain. This time he departed from the norms of diplomacy and did not attempt to conceal his anger.
...Once they were inside, Weizmann lashed out at MacDonald, saying that the politician’s father must be turning over in his grave. Ramsay MacDonald, of the Labour Party, had been prime minister four years earlier. Summing up afterward, Weizmann noted that he had spat at MacDonald and that the latter had reacted with English restraint, as though it were raining. At the end of the meeting, he shattered etiquette by turning his back on MacDonald and leaving without saying goodbye or shaking his host’s hand.

Eight years later, Weizmann again mobilized himself, this time in a different arena. On the eve of the United Nations vote on the Palestine partition plan, on November 29, 1947, he worked day and night behind the scenes in New York to ensure that it would be passed. At the time, Weizmann held no official position in the movement. He acted alone and without any authority as a “one-person delegation,” as the biographers describe him. Two other delegations represented the state-in-the-making and the Jewish people – the former headed by Moshe Sharett, who would become Israel’s first foreign minister; the latter, of the Jewish Agency, was led by the American Rabbi Abba Hillel Silver.
Weizmann loathed them both. If we’re not careful, he wrote to Doris May, his secretary, we’re liable to get a Jewish state with Silver as president and Ben-Gurion as prime minister, God help us.

https://www.haaretz.com/misc/article-pr ... -1.9144888
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9627
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am

Re: ‘International Jewry’? What was that prior to 1939? And what is it now?

Post by been-there »

(that is, banned in English. You can buy it in French! :? )


The culture of critique

By Kevin MacDonald

Softcover book. 513 pages. $27.95

http://ihr-store.com/ihrstore/index.php ... cts_id=127

How have Jews acquired such great power and influence in the United States?
In this meticulously referenced and compel­lingly argued study, a professor of psychology at California State University (Long Beach) explains how Jews have profound­ly shaped American society, politics and culture in conformity with Jewish group interests. This monumental study — with source notes, bibliography and index — is the most important examination of the “Jewish question” to appear in many years. This paperback edition includes a powerful 66-page preface.


MacDonald claims that evolutionary psychology provides the motivations behind Jewish group behaviour and culture. Through the series, MacDonald asserts that Jews as a group have biologically evolved to be highly ethnocentric and hostile to the interests of white people. He asserts Jewish behaviour and culture are central causes of antisemitism, and promotes conspiracy theories [explanations] about alleged Jewish control and influence in government policy and political movements.

The first books constitute what is known as MacDonald's "trilogy." In this trilogy he describes Judaism as a "group evolutionary strategy" to enhance the ability of Jews to out-compete non-Jews for resources. He argues that Judaism fosters in Jews a series of marked genetic traits, including above-average verbal intelligence and a strong tendency toward collectivist behaviour. MacDonald also notes a negative shift in tone from the first book to the third, and attributes it to having learned more, read more, and "changed greatly" in that time.

The trilogy was followed by additional writings on the topic published by the Occidental Quarterly, a periodical MacDonald currently edits:

• Understanding Jewish influence: a study in Ethnic Activism

• Can the Jewish model help the West survive?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cul ... que_series
Kevin MacDonald is a retired Professor of Psychology at California State University-Long Beach.
After receiving a Masters degree in evolutionary biology, he received a Ph. D. in Bio-behavioural Sciences, both at the University of Connecticut.
Since assuming his position at California State University-Long Beach, his research has focused on developing evolutionary perspectives on culture, developmental psychology and personality theory, the origins and maintenance of monogamous marriage in Western Europe, and ethnic relations (group evolutionary strategies).
He is the author of more than 100 scholarly papers and reviews, and he is the author of Social and Personality Development: An Evolutionary Synthesis (1988), A People That Shall Dwell Alone: Judaism as a Group Evolutionary Strategy (1994), Separation and Its Discontents: Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism (1998), and The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements (1998).
He has also edited three books, Sociobiological Perspectives on Human Development (1988), Parent-Child Play: Descriptions and Implications (1994), and Evolutionary Perspectives on Human Development (2004). Cultural Insurrections, a collection of essays, appeared in 2008.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9627
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am

Re: ‘International Jewry’? What was that prior to 1939? And what is it now?

Post by been-there »

Then (1942):
Earlier (1915-1921):
"What I hear from [Albert Einstein] is not exactly encouraging, for it shows the impossibility of arriving at a lasting peace with Germany without first totally crushing it. Einstein says the situation looks to him far less favourable than a few months back. The victories over Russia have re-awakened German arrogance and appetite. The word 'greedy' seems to Einstein best to characterize Germany. Einstein does not expect any renewal of Germany out of itself; it lacks the energy for it, and the boldness for initiative. He hopes for a victory of the Allies, which would smash the power of Prussia and the dynasty...
Einstein and Zangger dream of a divided Germany
—on the one side Southern Germany and Austria, on the other side Prussia. We speak of the deliberate blindness and the lack of psychology in the Germans."
— R. Romain, La Conscience de l'Europe, Volume 1, pp. 696ff.
English translation from A. Foelsing, Albert Einstein: A Biography, Viking, New York, (1997), pp. 365-367.
See also: Letter from A. Einstein to R. Romain of 15 September 1915, The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Volume 8, Document 118, Princeton University Press, (1998);
and Letter from A. Einstein to R. Romain of 22 August 1917, The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Volume 8, Document 374, Princeton University Press, (1998).

"It does seem to me that our kinfolk [Jews] really are more sympathetic (at least less brutal) than these horrid Europeans. Perhaps things can only improve if only the Chinese are left, who refer to all Europeans with the collective noun 'bandits.'"
— 22nd March 1919.
— Letter from A. Einstein to Paul Ehrenfest of 22 March 1919, English translation by A. Hentschel, The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Volume 9, Document 10, Princeton Univsersity Press, (2004), pp. 9-10, at 10.
"This phenomenon [i. e. Anti-Semitism] in Germany is due to several causes. Partly it originates in the fact that the Jews there exercise an influence over the intellectual life of the German people altogether out of proportion to their number. While, in my opinion, the economic position of the German Jews is very much overrated, the influence of Jews on the Press, in literature, and in science in Germany is very marked, as must be apparent to even the most superficial observer. This accounts for the fact that there are many anti-Semites there who are not really anti-Semitic in the sense of being Jew-haters, and who are honest in their arguments. They regard Jews as of a nationality different from the German, and therefore are alarmed at the increasing Jewish influence on their national entity."
— Albert Einstein, 17th June 1921.
"Jewish Nationalism and Anti-Semitism", The Jewish Chronicle, p. 16.

I'll confess it, like thousands of other typical Jewish kids of my generation, I was reared as a Jewish nationalist, even a quasi-separatist. ...I saluted a foreign flag, dressed in a uniform reflecting its colours, sang a foreign national anthem, learned a foreign language, learned foreign folk songs and dances, and was taught that Israel was the true homeland...
More tacitly and subconsciously, I was taught the superiority of my people to the gentiles who had oppressed us. We were taught to view non-Jews as untrustworthy outsiders, people from whom sudden gusts of hatred might be anticipated, people less sensitive, less intelligent, and less moral than ourselves.
We were also taught that the lesson of our dark history is that we could rely on no one.
~~Stephen Steinlight | October 1st 2001

One of the most powerful people in America — who uses his wealth and influence to influence the outcome of Presudential elections — said the following while on a trip to Israel in July 2010. Sheldon Adelson said that he regretted serving in the American military instead of the Israeli military, and that he hoped his son would one day be a sniper in the Israeli army, stating:
“I am not Israeli. The uniform that I wore in the military, unfortunately, was not an Israeli uniform. It was an American uniform, although my wife was in the IDF and one of my daughters was in the IDF … our two little boys, one of whom will be bar mitzvahed tomorrow, hopefully he’ll come back — his hobby is shooting — and he’ll come back and be a sniper for the IDF.”
https://imeu.org/article/quick-facts-to ... on-adelson

Here above we have evidence of:
1. prominent and famous so-called 'German' Jews in 1915, seeing their country as alien to them and wanting to see its defeat in war and wishing it to be "totally crushed", divided and its power "smashed".

2. a prominent and famous so-called 'German' Jew showing in 1919 that he saw Europeans as racially inferior to 'Jews', and acknowledging that in 1921 other 'Jews' in Germany "exercised an influence over the intellectual life of the German people altogether out of proportion to their number" and that there was an "increasing Jewish influence on [the German] national entity".

3. in 1942 evidence of International Jews represented by Dr. Chaim Weizmann, admitting that the entire anti-German war production was based upon international Jewish financial support. He also admitted that the war of 1939 to 1945 was waged by international Jews, using propaganda and using Jews in Europe as a resistance movement or as 'fifth column' enemy within.

4. And of the same mentality continuing today among a claimed MAJORITY of the American people who primarily identify themselves as being 'Jews'.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9627
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am

Re: ‘International Jewry’? What was that prior to 1939? And what is it now?

Post by been-there »

Yes, there is a World Zionist Congress — and it’s meeting right now

By ALISON WEIR October 21st, 2020

The average American often knows extremely little about Zionism, even though the Zionist movement
has played a major role in the world — and in the U.S. itself — for over a century…

Some have the impression that ‘world zionism’ is an antisemitic conspiracy theory…
while the World Zionist Congress is in session, with 720 delegates from over 30 countries…

And the WZC is just one of many international Zionist entities that work for Israel…

I’m sometimes astounded at the fact that a major political movement over a century old is so little known among Americans – especially since it has had a momentous impact on the world in general and on the U.S. in particular, causing multiple wars, vast population displacement, and global instability.

In my travels around the US, I’ve found that most Americans know extremely little about Zionism. I would guess that the vast majority of Americans could not define the term (that was certainly my situation for most of my life), and that a great many may not have even heard of it.

And among those who have heard the term, many may think it refers to some antisemitic conspiracy theory.

Read the article here: https://israelpalestinenews.org/yes-the ... AYMMNoLDYM
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9627
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am

Re: ‘International Jewry’? What was that prior to 1939? And what is it now?

Post by been-there »

Here is an interesting anomoly: if a non-Jew writes about the role of Jews in the Russian revolution he is accused of anti-semitism. Presumably this is like Afro-Americans calling each other the n word, but getting extremely upset and shouting ’racist’ if a white person does that.

So ...Here is an Israeli article by an American Jew on the role of Jews in the Russian revolution. Look and learn. :D
A Ukranian election poster in Yiddish from 1917 reads “Vote for the United Jewish Socialist Workers’ Party.”

Was the Russian revolution Jewish?

By SETH J. FRANTZMAN NOVEMBER 15, 2017 — The Jerusalem Post

A hundred years after the Bolsheviks swept to power, historians and contemporaries still struggle to understand the prominent role played by Jews.

On April 9, 1917, a train pulled into a station at Thayngen, a Swiss town on the German border. There was a group of 32 Russians on board and the customs officials confiscated chocolate and sugar from them. The passengers were exceeding the legal limit on importation of goods. Then the train shuffled in to Gottmadingen on the German side of the border. Two German soldiers boarded the passenger cars and separated the Russians from the rest, moving them to second- and third-class berths.
The “Russians” were an eclectic group, including 10 women and two children. Their names would have been known in left-wing and revolutionary circles of the time, so some traveled under aliases.
...The vivacious French feminist Inessa Armand sang and cracked jokes with Radek, Ravich and Safarov. Eventually their shouting angered the leader of the group, who poked his head into their berth and scolded them. The leader was Vladimir Lenin, and he was taking his small group by sealed train for a weeklong journey that would end at Finland Station in St. Petersburg. Half a year later Lenin and some of his cohorts would be running a new state, the Russian Soviet Republic.

Some observers saw Lenin and his band as a motley group of Jewish revolutionaries. Alexander Guchkov, the Russian minister of war in the Russian Provisional Government after Tsar Nicholas II abdicated in March 1917, told the British military attaché General Alfred Knox that “the extreme element consists of Jews and imbeciles.” Lenin’s train had included 19 members of his Bolshevik party, several of his allies among the Mensheviks and six Jewish members of the Jewish Labor Bund. Almost half the passengers on the train were Jewish.
Yet history has largely forgotten them. Catherine Merridale’s recent Lenin on the Train doesn’t delve into the preponderance of Jews. A recent article in The New Yorker about “Lenin and the Russian Spark,” chronicling 100 years since the journey, entirely discounts the Jewish aspect of the revolutionaries.

The reason for this is complicated and tied up with notions of antisemitism as well as attempt by the revolutionaries themselves to whitewash their ethnic and religious differences. Even though Lenin often praised Jews in his circle, his wife Nadezhda Krupskaya’s own Reminiscences of Lenin (1933) sought to remove these touchy subjects in line with Soviet policy.

A hundred years after the Russian Revolution, there is nostalgia and renewed interest in those figures who led it and the tragedies it unleashed. The 2016 Spanish film The Chosen follows Ramon Mercader, the assassin of Leon Trotsky, and this year’s British film The Death of Stalin turns that event into something of a comedy. In Russia, a new series looks at Leon Trotsky. Producer Konstantin Ernst told the Guardian, “I think he [Trotsky] combines everything: good and evil, injustice and bravery. He’s the archetypal 20th-century revolutionary. But people shouldn’t think that if Trotsky had won and not Stalin, things would have been better, because they wouldn’t have been.”

The question of “what might have been” is uniquely tied to Trotsky because he often symbolized the anti-Stalinist, the wild revolutionary with global impulses and intellectual imagination, as opposed to the doer and statist Stalin with his murderous purges. Part of that motif is tied up in Trotsky’s Jewishness and the larger number of Jewish revolutionaries, activists and followers who were attracted to Communism in the late 19th century.

The role of Jews in the Russian Revolution, and by extension Communism writ large, has always been a sensitive subject because antisemitic voices often painted Soviet Communism as a Jewish plot, or “Jewish Bolshevism.” When Alexander Solzhenitsyn began work on a book called 200 Years Together, he was criticized for touching this taboo issue.
His own comments to the press didn’t help the matter, claiming two-thirds of the Cheka (secret police) in Ukraine were Jewish.
“I will always differentiate between layers of Jews. One layer rushed headfirst to the revolution. Another, to the contrary, was trying to stand back. The Jewish subject for a long time was considered prohibited.” Unsurprisingly, his book has been posted in PDF form on antisemitic websites. [N.b. this Jewish author fails to tell his readers that this final book of Solzhenitsyn is the only book of his that is not published in English translation. Yet he tells his readers that unpublished translations mean the website is anti-semitic? :roll: ]

On October 16, the Jewish Museum and Tolerance Center in Moscow hosted an exhibition called “Freedom for All? The History of One People in the Years of Revolution.” With exhibitions and first-person accounts, it focused on Jewish luminaries of the era, such as Trotsky, Julius Martov, Marc Chagall, Vera Inber, Simon Dubnov and Vasily Shulgin.

Dubnov, born in 1860 in what is now Belarus, was an enthusiastic Jewish activist. A professor of Jewish history in St. Petersburg (then called Petrograd), he supported Jewish self-defence units and literature and thought the revolution would bring equality. However, he left in dismay in 1922, eventually settling Riga, Latvia. He [died] in 1941. Before his death he reflected on Jews like Trotsky who joined the Revolution.
“They appear under Russian pseudonyms because they are ashamed of their Jewish origins. It would be better to say that their Jewish names are pseudonyms; they are not rooted in our people.”

Winston Churchill agreed. In a piece in the Illustrated Sunday Herald in 1920, he broadly stereotyped Jews as either “international” communists, loyal nationalists or Zionists. He called it the “struggle for the soul of the Jewish people” and claimed the Jewish role in the Russian Revolution “probably outweighs [the role] of all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews.”

Churchill claimed that the driving power came from Jewish leaders, who eclipsed their counterparts. He named names: Maxim Litvinoff, Trotsky, Grigory Zinoviev, Radek, Leonid Krassin. He called this tendency “astonishing” and accused Jews of playing “the prominent, if not indeed the principal part in the system of terrorism” that had then become known as “red terror” or the suppression of those in the Soviet Union who deviated from the communist line.

One of those whom Churchill singled out for opprobrium was Bela Kun, the Hungarian Jew who briefly played the leading role in Hungary when it was a Soviet republic in 1919. Kun fled when Hungary was invaded by Romania, fleeing to the Soviet Union where he was put in charge of the Revolutionary Committee in Crimea along with Rosalia Zemlyachka. Their regime there was responsible for murdering around 60,000 people. Kun was arrested during Stalin’s purges, accused of promoting “Trotskyism” and executed in 1938. His life was symbolic of so many others: a young revolutionary whose idealism was colored by the murderous methods of Communism and who ended up a victim of the very regime he sought to create, like so many Jewish revolutionaries, accused of being counter-revolutionaries.

HOW DID it all go so wrong? To look for some answers, YIVO Institute for Jewish Research held a conference on Jews in and after the Russian Revolution earlier this month in New York City. In the introduction to the conference they note the paradoxical role of Jews and their fate during the revolution.
“The Russian Revolution liberated the largest Jewish community in the world. It also opened the floodgates for the greatest massacre of Jews before the Second World War amid the civil war and its aftermath in 1918 to 1921.” However, Jews also “entered into nearly every sphere of Russian life while, in time, much of the singular richness of Jewish cultural life in Russia was flattened, eventually obliterated.”

The roughly three million Jews of the Soviet Union at the time of the revolution constituted the largest Jewish community in the world, but they were only around 2% of the USSR’s population. They were concentrated in the Pale of Settlement (a western region of Imperial Russia) and in Ukraine and Belarussia, where they were 5% to 10% of the population, whereas in Russia itself the 1926 census found only 600,000 Jews.

As a group in the vastness of the USSR, they were one of the largest minorities, alongside Georgians, Armenians, Turks, Uzbeks, Kazakhs, Kyrgiz, Tartars, Moldovians, Poles and Germans. None of these other groups played such a central role in the revolution, although members of many of them rose to senior levels. Stalin was a Georgian. Felix Dzerzhinsky, who established the Soviet secret police, was a Polish aristocrat.

Given the Soviet Union’s complexity and predilection for numerous layers of bureaucracy it is a difficult to quantify the number of Jews throughout senior leadership positions during and just after the revolution of 1917. Half of the top contenders in the Central Committee of the Communist Party to take power after Lenin’s health declined in 1922 – Lev Kamenev, Trotsky and Zinoviev – were Jewish. Yakov Sverdlov, the chairman of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee from November 1917 to his death in 1919, was Jewish. Born in 1885, he had joined the Russian Social Democratic Party in 1902 and became a member of the Bolshevik faction with Lenin early on. Like others of his generation he took part in the 1905 revolution. His father converted to Russian Orthodoxy.

The large number of Jews in leading parts of the party was not lost on those non-Jews around them. V.M. Molotov, the powerful foreign minister of the Soviet Union under Stalin, made many remarks about Jews to Felix Chuev in a series of conversations between 1969 to 1986 that became the basis for the 1991 book Molotov Remembers. He recalled that as Lenin lay dying “at the time Jews occupied many leading positions, though they made up only a small percentage of the country’s population.” Of Zinoviev, he recalled, “He didn’t even look like a Jew.”

Antisemitism was an issue within the party. Molotov recalled in 1912 when he was at the Russian newspaper Pravda, “We received a letter from [Nikolay] Krestinsky. He wrote that Lenin was an antisemite.” This was because Lenin had opposed the Mensheviks, a separate communist faction.
“Almost all the Mensheviks were Jews. Even among the Bolsheviks, among the leaders there were many Jews. Generally, Jews are the most oppositional nation. But they were inclined to support the Mensheviks.”

Molotov also claimed that many of the men around Stalin had Jewish wives.
“There is an explanation. Oppositionist and revolutionary elements formed a higher percentage among Jews than among Russians. Insulted, injured and oppressed, they were more versatile. They penetrated everywhere, so to speak.” He claimed that Jews were more “active” than average Russians.
“Biding their time, they sniff around, stir things up, but are always prepared.” Molotov also acknowledged Zionism’s pull on Jews. “The Jews had long struggled for their own state under a Zionist flag. We, of course, were against Zionism. But to refuse a people the right to statehood would mean oppressing them.”

The fork in the road of history that led some Jews in the Russian Empire to embrace Zionism and many others to embrace various leftist revolutionary movements that eventually led to the Soviet Union was reached in the 19th century. Beginning in 1827, the Russian Empire sought to modernize its army through a universal draft. Jews had to serve 25 years and their own communities had to choose approximately four conscripts for every 1,000 members of the community (1,500 to 3,000 a year), according to the YIVO Encyclopedia.

Although non-Jews served the same amount of time, Jews were recruited at age 12 and not 18 like others, which led to their “Russification.”
Tsar Alexander II abolished this system and allowed Jews to move out of the Pale of Settlement into Russian cities, such as Moscow and St. Petersburg.
“As a result of these policies, many Jews became more involved in the cultural and intellectual life of Russia,” notes the Centre for Israel Education in Atlanta. After Alexander II was assassinated in 1881, a wave of hundreds of pogroms swept the country.
New restrictions were imposed, limiting where Jews could live and work. This helped cause a vast migration of Jews abroad, including 2.3 million who left for the New World between 1881 and 1930.
When Theodor Herzl visited the Russian Empire in 1903, he met Count Witte, the minister of finance. According to Leonard Schapiro, who authored The Role of the Jews in the Russian Revolutionary Movement in 1961, Herzl found that “50% of the membership of the revolutionary parties was Jewish.” Herzl asked Witte why.
“I think it’s the fault of our government. The Jews are too oppressed.” Schapiro argues that Jews moved into revolutionary circles as they gained access to intellectual circles. Ironically then, the more Jews gained wealth and freedom in the empire, the more they also awakened to their predicament and joined the slow gurgling rebellion against the ancient regime.

Distinct choices emerged among Jews. Many, like former Israel prime minister Golda Meir’s family, went to the New World. Around 40,000 decided to move directly to the Land of Israel, becoming the leading members of what became known as the First Aliya. Among those were men like Joseph Trumpeldor, who was born in Pyatigorsk, Russia, in 1880 and moved to Ottoman Palestine in 1911 after serving in the Russian army. Isaac Leib Goldberg, the founder of the Hovevei Zion movement in 1882, was born in Poland in 1860 but grew up under the Russian Empire, and played and influential role in Zionist circles, co-founding Haaretz in 1919.

Immigrant Jews founded the Society for the Support of Jewish Farmers and Artisans in Syria and Eretz Israel in 1890, which helped settle Rehovot and Hadera. Often called the “Odessa Committee,” this group had over 4,000 members. Similarly, the Bilu group founded in Kharkov sent its members to found Gedera in Palestine.
Jews embraced self-defence in reaction to the pogroms as well. The writer Leon Pinsker from Odessa was emblematic of that awakening, turning from embracing assimilation to realizing that Jews would always suffer antisemitism as the proverbial outsiders.
Pinsker’s friend Meir Dizengoff, a veteran of the Russian army, was the first mayor of Tel Aviv. Among the founders of the first self-defense organization in Palestine, called Hashomer, were Alexander Zaid from Siberia and Yitzhak Ben-Zvi from Poltava in Ukraine.

Of those millions who chose to stay under the empire, many fought for Jewish rights in Russia. Maxim Vinaver, a resident of St. Petersburg from 1906 to 1917, was born in 1862 in Warsaw. A lawyer, he founded the Party of Popular Freedom (Constitutional Democratic Party-Kadets) and was chairman of the League for the Attainment of Equal Rights for the Jewish People in Russia (Folksgrupe). Described as a “tall, imposing, cultured man” by the Russian Jewish Encyclopedia, he was elected to the first State Duma created in the wake of the 1905 revolution. He arrived alongside 12 other Jewish deputies out of 478. Two of these Jews were Shmaryahu Levin and Leon Bramson, who had the support of the Jewish Labor Bund. Levin went on to support the creation of the Technion in Israel, and Bramson helped found ORT. Another Jew elected was Nissan Katznelson, a friend of Herzl.

Vinaver came to lead the group of Jews in the Duma and pressed for equality of minorities in the empire. “We Jews represent one of the nationalities which have suffered more, yet never once have we spoken only about ourselves. For we consider it to be inappropriate to speak just of this and not of civil equality for all,” he said in a speech.
Vinaver created and chaired a cornucopia of Jewish groups, including the Jewish National Group, the Jewish Society for the Encouragement of the Arts and Jewish Historical-Ethnographic Society. In contrast to Jews who gravitated toward more radical communist groups, or toward Zionism, Vinaver represented those who sought equality in the empire in a milieu that was proudly Jewish.

Trotsky’s 1930 autobiography My Life sought to downplay his Jewishness. Lessons at school on the Jewish people “were never taken seriously by the boys,” he writes in discussing his Jewish classmates. Although he admits the discriminatory atmosphere of the 1880s and he lost a year of schooling due to anti-Jewish quotas, he writes, “In my mental equipment, nationality never occupied an independent place, as it was felt but little in everyday life.”
Furthermore, he argues that although “national in-equality probably was one of the underlying causes of my dissatisfaction with the existing order, it was lost among all the other phases of social injustice. It never played a leading part, not even a recognized one in the lists of my grievances.”

Of particular interest, Trotsky never mentions the word “Jew” after his fifth chapter dealing with his early education up to the year 1891. Despite being surrounded by Jews, he buries this ethnic and religious issue entirely.
How could he skip over the Jewish context when it was all around him? Stepan Mikoyan, born in 1922, a test pilot and son of prominent Stalin-era politician Anastas Mikoyan, wrote an autobiography in 1999. In it, he calls Stalin a “militant antisemite.” Molotov, however, insisted that Stalin was “not an antisemite… he appreciated many qualities in the Jewish people: capacity for hard work, group solidarity and political activeness.”
However, being from a non-Russian minority, Stalin always seemed suspicious of this other minority group. When he [Trotsky] was commissar of nationalities from 1917 to 1924, he was called upon to investigate a “mess,” according to Molotov. He didn’t appoint a single Jew to the committee and Lenin wondered why. Trotsky’s aversion to seeing himself in a Jewish context likely derived from the early disputes in 1904 when the revolutionaries had to decide whether Jews would be included as a distinct group in the organization.

FOR THE Jewish revolutionaries, the years from 1904 to the revolution were spent in a fever of activity. In 1904, a dispute at the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party between Julius Martov and Lenin led to the creation of Lenin’s Bolsheviks and Martov’s Mensheviks.
Martov was Jewish, as were many Mensheviks. At the heart of the debate that led to the split in the RSDLP was a dispute over whether the General Jewish Labor Bund (the “Bund”), which had cofounded the RSDLP in 1898, could remain an autonomous group. This was a harbinger of things to come. Eventually those Bund leaders, such as Mikhail Liber, who sought to remain part of the revolution, but distinctly Jewish, would be sent into exile or shot in the 1930s. Martov left Russia in 1920, calling the civil war that erupted after the revolution a “growing bestiality of men.” He died in exile. Some Jewish Bundists remained in the USSR and rose to senior positions. Israel Leplevsky from Brest-Litovsk became minister of internal affairs of Ukraine before being arrested and shot in 1938. David Petrovsky from Berdychiv became an influential economic planner until being arrested and shot in 1937. His wife, Rose Cohen, a founder of the Communist Party of Great Britain, was also shot.

Trotsky’s life before the revolution is more instructive of the networks of Jewish Bolsheviks. Arrested in 1906, he was sent into exile by the tsarist state. He escaped and made his way to Vienna, where he became friends with Adolph Joffe. Joffe came from a family of Jewish Crimean Karaites and became an editor of Pravda. Close friends for the rest of their lives, they opposed the more lenient attitude of their fellow Jews Kamanev and Zinoviev on the Central Committee in 1917, opposing the inclusion of other socialist parties in the government that emerged after the revolution. Trotsky was expelled from the Central Committee in 1927 along with Zinoviev. He went into exile in 1929 and was assassinated on Stalin’s orders in 1940. Joffe committed suicide in 1927; his wife Maria and daughter Nadezhda were arrested and sent to labor camps and were not released until after Stalin’s death in 1953.

Late in life, as many thousands of Jews were being executed in the purges by Stalin, not as Jews but as leading communists, Trotsky penned several thoughts on Jewish issues. He said that in his early days, “I rather leaned toward the prognosis that the Jews of different countries would be assimilated and that the Jewish question would thus disappear.” He argued, “Since 1925 and above all since 1926, antisemitic demagogy – well camouflaged, unattackable – goes hand in hand with symbolic trials.” He accused the USSR of insinuating that Jews were “internationalists” during show trials.

The Central Committee of the USSR is instructive as an indicator of the prominence of Jews in leadership positions. In the Sixth Congress of the Bolshevik Russian Social Democratic Labor Party and its Central Committee elected in August 1917, we find that five of the committee’s 21 members were Jewish. This included Trotsky, Zinoviev, Moisei Uritsky, Sverdlov and Grigori Sokolnikov. Except for Sverdlov, they were all from Ukraine. The next year they were joined by Kamenev and Radek. Jews made up 20% of the central committees until 1921, when there were no Jews on this leading governing body.
The high percentage of Jews in governing circles in these early years matched their percentage in urban environments, politburo member Sergo Ordzhonikidze told the 15th Congress of the party, according to Solzhenitsyn. Most Jews lived in towns and cities due to urbanization and laws that had kept them off the land.

Jewish membership in top circles continued to decline in the 1920s. By the 11th Congress, only Lazar Kaganovich was elected to the Central Committee in 1922 alongside 26 other members. Subsequently few Jews served in these leadership positions. In 1925 there were four Jews out of 63 members. Like the rest of their comrades, almost all of them were killed in the purges. Others elected in 1927 and 1930 were shot as well, including Grigory Kaminsky, who came from a family of blacksmiths in Ukraine. With the exception of Lev Mekhlis and Kaganovich, few senior communist Jews survived the purges.

During the 1936 Moscow Trials, numerous defendants were Jewish. Of one group of 16 high-profile communists at a show trial, besides Kamenev and Zinoviev, names like Yefim Dreitzer, Isak Reingold, Moissei and Nathan Lurye and Konon Berman-Yurin ring out as Jewish. In a twisted irony, some of these Bolsheviks who had played a prominent role executing others, such as NKVD Director Genrikh Yagoda, were themselves executed. Solzhenitsyn estimates that Jews in leading positions went from a high of 50% in some sectors to 6%. Many Jewish officers in the Red Army also suffered in the purges. Millions of Jews would remain in Soviet territories, but they would never again obtain such prominent positions in the USSR.
In a July 1940 letter, Trotsky imagined that future military events in the Middle East “may well transform Palestine into a bloody trap for several hundred thousand Jews.” He was wrong; it was the Soviet Union that was a bloody trap for many of those Jews who had seen salvation in communism and thought that by total assimilation and working for a zealous greater good they would succeed.
Instead, many ended up being murdered by the system they helped create.

WITH 100 years of hindsight it is still difficult to understand what attracted so many Jews to communism in the Russian empire. Were their actions infused with Jewishness, a sense of Jewish mission like the tikkun olam and “light unto the nations” values we hear about today, or were their actions strictly pragmatic as a minority group struggling to be part of larger society? The answer lies somewhere in the middle.

Many Jews made pragmatic economic choices to leave for the New World when facing discrimination and poverty. Others chose to express themselves as Jews first, either through Jewish socialist groups or Zionism. Still others struggled for equality in the empire, so they could remain Jews and be equal. One group sought a radical solution to their and society’s predicament, a communist revolution, and one that would not include other voices such as the Bund or Mensheviks, but solely that of their party. They had no compunction at murdering their coreligionists. They were not more or less ethical than their non-Jewish peers. How can we explain their disproportionate presence in the leadership of the revolution? It would be as if the Druse minority in Israel made up half of Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet, or Armenians were half of Emmanuel Macron’s government in France.

Perhaps the only way to understand some of it is to recognise that at Nelson Mandela’s 1963 Rivonia trial in South Africa five of the 13 arrested were Jewish, as were around one quarter of the 1960s Freedom Riders in the US. The 20th century was a century of Jewish activism, often for non-Jewish causes and often without an outwardly “Jewish” context. The Freedom Riders didn’t go as a “Jewish voice for African- Americans,” they went as activists for civil rights.

We prize minorities today who act for social justice as minorities, but the 20th century required a more nuanced approach. The situation Jews were born into in the 19th-century Pale of Settlement has no parallel with today’s Jewish experience. But despite economic hardship there was a spark in this community amidst unique circumstances of radical change that impelled it forward to leadership in numerous sectors in Russia and abroad.

https://m.jpost.com/magazine/was-the-ru ... xljylPIfVc
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 29 guests