So you don't think freemasons have been conned?
An insight to the "THE PROTOCOLS OF ZION"
When an international mass circulation magazine like The Reader's Digest decides to run an article on the documents generally known as The Protocols, in which Eric Butler and The League of Rights are critically mentioned, there must be a purpose. About the same time as The Reader's Digest article, which basically regurgitates the view that these documents are either a forgery or a fabrication, the Oxford University Press released a publication, The Right Road, by Dr. Andrew Moore, senior lecturer in Australian history at the University of Western Sydney.
Moore's work is subtitled "A History of Right-Wing Politics in Australia", but its clear purpose is to suggest that it is "The Australian League of Rights" which is the main threat to what is termed "liberal democracy." Eric Butler receives special attention, it being claimed that he exercises considerable international influence. Blatant misrepresentations of the Social Credit movement and historical events are masked by what purports to be a carefully documented academic study.
We will not at this time attempt to analyze either The Reader's Digest article on The Protocols or Moore's work, The Right Road. But by coincidence we have recently received an article from a Canadian, Peter L. Lorden of Calgary, who offers some comments on The Protocols, which are appropriate:
It has been generally asserted for many years past that a document called The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion is a forgery. Supposedly a report of speeches given at the 1897 First Zionist Congress in Basle, it pictures an international Jewish conspiracy to undermine Christian institutions and pave the way for world domination. Gerald Krefetz remarked in his 1982 Jews and Money; the Myths and the Reality that the Protocols - "apparently the plagiarized concoction of a Russian religious mystic"- had long since been discredited as propaganda promoted by the Czarist secret police to justify their own anti-Semitism.
Yet if so long discredited, why have they become what he calls the most successful piece of propaganda in the twentieth century? "For a spurious document", says Krefetz, "it has had a remarkably long and influential life." Could this be due simply to continuing anti-Semitism? Indeed, it is hard to see how this document could have been a genuine record of speeches at the Congress. Would people clever enough to engineer such a global conspiracy as the Protocols reflect have been dumb enough to let an outsider take notes of their proceedings, let alone live to publish them? And is such a plot any more credible now than it was then? The recent decline of some big Jewish houses, coupled with the emergence of wealthy Asian conglomerates, seems rather to spoil the picture for those inclined to fantasize about an unstoppable international conspiracy guided only by Jewish financiers! But of course there has been an even more recent decline of all Asian conglomerates.
A book which became a best seller in 1972 - None Dare Call It Conspiracy, by Gary Allen shows in some detail how they had simultaneously financed both the Soviet Union (page 71) and the Third Reich (page 85), like people fattening birds for a cock-fight. The book is quite even-handed. While it indicts such Jewish luminaries as Rothschild, Warburg and Schiff's Kuhn Loeb and Company, it also assigns prominent roles to many Gentile houses, including Rockefeller's. (But, of course he too is a Jew).
David Rockefeller seems to have had a finger in everything. Many famous names in politics, Nixon and Kissinger, were alumni of his system, whose imperial reach was by NO means confined to the United States. (Apparently the surest way to wealth and power is on the coat-tails of a man who already has these things and will "look after" you so long as you do his bidding. Kruschev's downfall seems to have come about when he stopped doing it). Chase Manhattan Bank was formed by merging Warburg and Rockefeller units. How closely Jewish and Gentile "insiders" worked together is shown throughout the book. For instance, a roster of blue-chip American corporations, along with prominent politicians of both parties, joined the "insiders" in the immensely influential Council for Foreign Relations (page 88).
Allen's book makes a compelling case for the existence of a conspiracy - or at least a close working relationship between financiers of international clout. And an even greater centralization of money-power in the Western world has occurred since 1972. But isn't that inevitable given the current globalization? As to his thesis that the ultimate aim of the "insiders" was to create a totalitarian World Government in which they would control everything as a spider sitting in the center controls his web, we should note that co-operation between international financiers today - whatever it may have been in the past - is not necessarily of evil intent. And that a great many other people have long since come to see some kind of world government as a necessary goal. The next big war may be about who gets to control it!)
A SPURIOUS DOCUMENT?
What light does Allen's book, throw on the Protocols? A negative one, it would seem, in as much as he shows Gentile interests to have as much clout as the Jewish. Yet the Protocols are not to be dismissed so easily. For if they are false in one sense, a reader cannot help feeling that they are genuine in another! What makes them seem genuine is that they are not at all what one would expect from "a Russian religious mystic." They show too deep an understanding both of Gentile weaknesses familiar to us all and of the sort of mind set which might ruthlessly exploit them for sectarian gain. Fictional or not, they were written by somebody who knew very well the kind of men whose utterances they supposedly report. They express a wealth of hard-headed insight in a tone of arrogant superiority which is not unfamiliar to us either. We cannot quarrel with the comment of Henry Ford's Dearborn Independent - which publicized the Protocols in America around 1921 - that the work was "too terribly real for fiction, too well-sustained for speculation, too deep in its knowledge of the secret springs of life for forgery".
Then who did write the Protocols? We may never know that, but it seems improbable that either a mystic or a bigoted Russian policeman could have come up with an analysis so penetrating, and so unfailingly prophetic. "Spurious" the document may be, historically speaking. But as anyone familiar with current events will instantly recognize, many passages in it show a remarkable prescience.
That a document first published in 1905 should have predicted the collapse of European monarchies, the Bolshevik Revolution and World Wars yielding little change in territory but a big one on the map of international finance is surprising enough. That it should also have anticipated a Great Depression caused by the arbitrary cutting-off of credit, the resurgence of Israel, the current squeeze on countries with large external debt - and even hinted at today's explosion in "derivatives:" trading - has to impress any thoughtful reader. ("That's some "mystic"! Or he might echo the comment made in 1921 by Ford himself: "The only statement I have to make about the Protocols is that they fit into what has gone on in the world situation these sixteen years. They fit it now.)
The Protocols accurately reflect the plans of Meyer Amschel Rothschild, Adam Weishaupt, Albert Pike, Mazzini, etc.
THE PROTOCOLS DIGEST-ED
Since discourse in the Protocols is often disjointed, we have taken the liberty of grouping quotations (from Victor Marsden's 1934 edition) in what seems a logical order of subject. We have also tried to minimize the more offensive ones. Contemptuous references to goyim (the unfortunate Talmudic term for Gentiles, meaning cattle) are scattered throughout the work, as indeed one might expect if the author were a propagandist determined to present a malign image of Jewry. One might have preferred to omit such racism altogether, along with utterances more interesting to students of religious pathology than to the general reader. But the purported speaker's ultimate aim to see "the King-Despot of Zion as Patriarch of the World, is so central to the work that excluding it would give a wholly false impression. For those who ignore that side (as one can easily do by substituting Untermenschen for goyim and some other ideology for the Mosaic), the fascination of the document lies in its Machiavellian practicality, (its being virtually a manual for would-be dictators is probably why Adolf Hitler knew it so well.)
The document opens with a flat statement that all "rights" other than that of "might" are vacuous, that "freedom" is an empty word, and absolute despotism the only sensible form of government.
"The political has nothing in common with the moral . . . Our right lies in force . . . Violence must be the principle and a cunning make-believe the rule if we are to bring all governments into subjection to our super government".
"The French Revolution was wholly the work of our hands. . . We were the first to cry among the masses the words Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, since many times repeated by stupid poll-parrots. This helped us to destroy the natural aristocracy of the goyim, on whose ruins we have set up the aristocracy of our educated class headed by the aristocracy of money. . . Our subordinate agents are boring away at the last remnants of goy authority, striving to overthrow all established forms of order. . ."
"We have advertised sedition-mongers as martyrs for the common good, though none will be permitted under our rule. This has brought many liberals into the ranks of our 'cattle'. . ."
"Having used this freedom-shibboleth,we shall erase that word from the lexicon; when we come into our kingdom. Freedom of the Press, of speech, of association and conscience must disappear forever . . We define freedom as the right to do that which the law allows; this serves our aim very well, for we shall make the laws!"
"For our purpose, wars must not result in territorial gain, the true battlefield will be the economic. Our international rights will then wipe out national rights".
"We need an intensified centralization of government to facilitate our control . . . We must so ferment things that the peoples of the world will eventually cry out for one global government. . . Useless changes of government to which we instigated the goyim in undermining their state structures will have so disheartened the people that they will suffer serfdom under us rather than go backward. . . One-third of our subjects will keep the rest under observation from a sense of duty. . . The goyim are a flock of sheep and we are their wolves".
"Though we have sacrificed many of our people in pursuit of the goal of world-government, it has paid us. Each victim on our side is worth in the sight of God a thousand goyim".
"Our aim must be to debilitate the public mind by continually fomenting contradictory opinions and thus distract it from serious reflections which might cause resistance to our aims. . . Let the goyim be bewildered, for there is nothing so dangerous as personal initiative!"
"So that the true meaning of things shall not strike the goyim until the proper time, we shall mask it under an alleged ardent desire to serve the working classes. . If any States raise a protest against us, it is only pro forma and by our direction, for their anti-Semitism is indispensable to us for the management of our lesser brethren".
"The Press is already in our hands. Not a single announcement will reach the public without our control. This we have already attained in large part through our control of those agencies by which all news items must pass. . . We shall put out our own journals, disguised as coming from elsewhere so that readers will in effect be following the flag we hang out for them; these will even be allowed to feign attacks on us, to convince people they are reading a free press.... Let them discuss themselves silly!"
"Distraction is one of our principal aims - through amusements gambling and games of all kinds. . . have we not very successfully turned the brainless heads of the goyim with 'progress' a fallacious idea except in terms of material invention, for truth is one and there can be no place in it for progress? "Progress" serves to obscure the truth so that none may know it except ourselves, the Chosen of God, its guardians".
"When we come into our Kingdom, it will be undesirable that there should exist any religion other than ours. We must therefore sweep away all other forms of belief . . . We have long taken care to discredit the priesthood of the goyim, whose influence falls lower day by day. But no one will ever bring our faith under discussion from its true point of view, since only we shall know that".
"We have bemused and corrupted the youth of the goyim by rearing them in principles and theories we know to be false".
"To destroy every collectivism except ours, we shall emasculate the universities. . . banning classical history and erasing from the memory of the goyim all historical facts unfavorable to us".
"To discourage independent thinking, our subjects will be schooled only for the occupations allotted to them. . . Students shall not busy themselves with questions of polity in which even their own fathers never had any power of thought".
"We shall choose goy administrators on their capacity for servile obedience".
"Ours is an invisible force, for which Gentile Freemasonry unknowingly serves as a screen. . . The aims of our organization of secret masonry are not even suspected by these goy cattle attracted to it".
"We shall multiply Masonic Lodges as a means of gathering under our eye all those goyim who (promise to become prominent in public activity), particularly all agents of international police, for these are useful both to enforce and to screen our activity. We puff up their foolish egotism, their need for any little success, in order to keep them in line, for these tigers in appearance have the souls of sheep . . . They are incapable of the analysis and observation required for foresight, hence the inevitable subjection to ours of the brute mind of the goyim".
"Who will ever suspect that all these people have been stage managed by us according to a political plan which no one has guessed at these many centuries?"
"Capital must be free to establish monopolies so that its leaders shall have political force".
"By centralizing in our own hands the money-power of the world, we can throw all goyim into the ranks of the proletariat . . The goy aristocracy benefited by having their people healthy and strong, we are interested in just the opposite".
"Hunger creates the right of capital to rule the worker. By want and envy and the hatred it engenders we shall move the mob. . . This hatred will be further magnified by the effect of an economic crisis, which will stop dealings on the changes and bring industry to a standstill. By creating this crisis we shall throw upon the street whole mobs of workers simultaneously in all the countries of Europe".
"We shall surround our government with a whole world of economists, bankers and millionaires, because in substance everything will be settled on the basis of figures".
"We must tear out of goyim heads the very principle of Godhead, replacing it with arithmetical calculation and material needs . . . We must put industry on a speculative basis, for in that is our strength".
"Economic crises have been produced by us through the goyim by no other means than the withdrawal of money from circulation. Huge pools of capital have stagnated, forcing States to borrow from them and thus become their bond-slaves. . . in twenty years, a State which has borrowed money at 5% has paid the whole sum in interest without reducing the debt. . . The State is thus forced to impoverish its masses in order to pay off rich foreigners. Why could those stupid goyim not have taken the money they needed from their own people".
"Goy governments could play tricks with internal loans but not the external, for they know that we shall demand all our money back".
(Wow! If a "Russian religious mystic" so long ago could show this good a grasp of money matters, maybe we should try to get one for our next Minister of Finance!)