Revilo Oliver-Critique of Yockey’s The Enemy of Europe (3)

THE ENEMY OF OUR ENEMIES

A Critique of Francis Parker Yockey’s The Enemy of Europe (section 5)

go to first section

by Professor Revilo P. Oliver

THE THIRD SIDE OF THE COIN

WE HAVE, I think, followed Yockey and Robertson in drawing logical conclusions from the evidence before us. But all of our evidence–what we are told and what we are not told–comes from either Russian or Jewish sources. We do not have even a simple choice between stories told by two habitual liars, for when they disagree, both may still be lying, each in his own interest. And the world’s masters of deceit are wily and subtle.

When travelling carnivals toured our country, the yokels were regularly fleeced by what was known as the shell game, which had many variations. In one variation, the sucker was led to believe that he had been given, inadvertently, a glimpse of the obverse of a coin and so could confidently bet on what would appear on the reverse when the shell was lifted, but, of course, when the coin was exposed, one with a different reverse had been substituted by a bit of prestidigitation.

When we ponder the Soviet enigma, one possibility always occurs to us, that internal rot within the empire may have gone much farther than we have been permitted to suspect by our sources–may have gone so far that what seems a monolithic state has some inner and hidden weakness great enough to affect its foreign policy. That speculative conjecture, however, we have always dismissed as gratuitous, since there was no plausible evidence to support it.

The periodical called Fortune, in its issue for 29 June 1981, published an astonishing article, entitled “Russia’s Underground Millionaires,” by a Jew, Konstantin Simis, formerly a Soviet lawyer and official in the Ministry of Justice, who says that in 1977, when the manuscript of a book that is to be published in this country was found in his apartment, he was invited to leave Russia and join his son, a professor in an American university.

According to this article, the Soviet is as rotten politically as the United States, although, of course, there are superficial differences. Corruption within the Communist Party we naturally take for granted, but here we are told of massive corruption of the Communist administration by bribery from outsiders, almost all of them Jews. There are distinct analogies to the almost universal political corruption that was established in this country in 1917 by the crackpots and mutton-heads who tried to prohibit our people from drinking alcoholic beverages.

We are told that there functions efficiently within the Soviet an enormous black market with its own factories, its own distribution-system, and its own retail outlets, operating comfortably by virtually wholesale bribery of Communist managers and police, and operated by capitalists, almost all of them Jews, who accumulate what are large fortunes by any standard and store their surplus wealth in gold, jewels, and other things that are intrinsically valuable. A typical entrepreneur, who was arrested, through some mischance, by the Secret Police, was found to have in his possession such valuables to the amount of 350,000,000 rubles, which, at current exchange, would equal $546,000,000.

This great essor of Jewish enterprise, according to the author, began “in the mid-1930s” with such talented entrepreneurs and masqueraders as Isaac Bach, who, while officially only a supervisor in a small workshop and paid as such by the state, was secretly a capitalist worth some $135,720,000, “owning at least a dozen factories manufacturing underwear, souvenirs, and notions, and operating a network of stores in all the republics of the Soviet Union.” Such surreptitious business flourished, it should be noted, while Lazar Moseevich Kaganovich was Stalin’s Deputy Premier in charge of industry, and naturally continued to flourish under his successor in that office, Benjamin Dimschitz, another Jew. (41a) And it has now reached the high financial level shown by the one example mentioned above, which, we are given to understand, was not at all extraordinary, except that the apostle of free enterprise either neglected to bribe all the officers of the Secret Police concerned or was rashly careless in some way that made it too awkward for them to cover up for him.

(41a. Dimschitz (or Dymshits) is the only Soviet official of very high rank whom Wilmot Robertson (op. cit., p. 456, n. 16) recognizes as a Jew. It’s evidently a matter of the right man in the right place. What is extremely curious is that he is not even mentioned in the list published by Candour, to which I shall refer in note 48, below.)

The commercial activities of those energetic Jewish businessmen interest us only because they are all categorically prohibited by Soviet law, which provides for the guilty minimum penalties of years of imprisonment in slave labor camps. It necessarily flourishes through a vast system of pay-offs and the like (42) that would do credit to the genius for organization shown by American politicians. There are “tens of thousands of such factories” owned by capitalists of the black market, but almost all of them are actually state factories, operated by managers appointed by the Communist government, who fulfill their quotas and then turn to production for the capitalists, using, of course, the machinery provided by that state, their working staff, and sometimes materials provided by the state, although the production for the black market is usually of better quality and uses better materials. The manager must be given his cut, of course, and so must the workmen, who are often employed on overtime. All government inspectors must be bribed, and so must all local agents of the Secret Police, especially those in the branch that is expressly charged with policing industry. Much of the raw material must be obtained from nominally state establishments, with, of course, a corresponding round of cuts and bribes. The retail outlets are, for the most part, state stores which handle black-market goods surreptitiously, and so managers and bookkeepers and clerks must be given their cuts and massive bribery must keep inspectors and agents of the police in line. And, of course, it is necessary to put the fix on the bureaucrats who preside over the inspectors and agents. In short, the Communist empire must be a seething mass of political corruption. And after all such business expenses, the promoters reap huge profits and become enormously wealthy.

(42. When Franklin Roosevelt was gabbling about the “Four Freedoms” to entertain the boobs during the Jewish Crusade Against Europe, knowledgeable “New Dealers” defined the Four Freedoms as the rake-off, the pay-off, the shakedown, and the fix. There are technical differences between these four aspects of government in a “democracy,” but we need not define them here.)

The “tens of thousands of factories,” we are told, are chiefly in Moscow, Odessa, Riga, Tiflis, and other major cities in which are concentrated the Jews now in Russia–some three million of them, according to Jewish sources, who are now being “discriminated against” by the Soviet, it not being explained why they are only half as numerous as the Jews who were “discriminated against” by the Czarist regime, under which they owned half the industry of Russia, We may assume that free enterprise is providing good incomes for a large part of the three million, perhaps most of them in one way or another.

Despite the massive bribery of Communist officials, something more is required for this vast clandestine business, which must be conducted without written records, and in which sums that may amount to hundreds of thousands of rubles exchange hands without documents of any kind or witnesses, “in an atmosphere of complete trust,” such as could never exist among legitimate business men in this country. The explanation is given by the author: it is “the sense of national identity among Jewish underground businessmen,” who may not be eager to migrate to their race’s capital in Palestine, but “feel a blood relationship with it” and contribute money (in American currency!) to it. If the commercial honesty that is dictated by a sense of racial solidarity, which Aryans can only envy as they reflect with shame on the egotistic venality and financial opportunism of their own people, is reinforced by Jewish racial courts, the kahal, which some anti-Jewish writers allege to be secretly maintained in Jewish colonies, the writer gives no hint of them. (42a)

(42a. Jews vehemently deny the existence of the kahal and denounce as “anti-Semitic” the Jew, Jacob Brafmann, who wrote the most extensive and detailed description of the quasi-religious racial courts. His work has been translated into German, with a learned commentary by Dr. Siegfried Passarge, Das Buch vom Kahal, 2 vols., Leipzig, 1928. See also the work of the Argentine writer, Hugo Wast, whose essay and novel, El Kahal, is also published in Mexico (Editorial Diana, 6th edition, 1964). Wast describes the operation of the Jewish tribunal in modern Argentina, and says “El Kahal es un soberano invisible y absoluto,” which regulates the entire life of Jews, “comercio, pol¡tico, religión, vida privada en sus detalles más minuciosos.” He says that the disciplinary powers are vested in a secret tribunal, Beth Din, which, I gather, operates with the summary powers and secrecy of the Westphalian Vehmgerichte of the Thirteenth to Sixteenth Centuries, which will be familiar to many readers from the description, doubtless with romantic amplification, in Sir Walter Scott’s Anne of Geierstein. The supreme kahal of the Jews, with jurisdiction over all colonies of the international race, sits in New York City, according to Wast. American attorneys who have handled litigation between Jews who have tried to swindle each other are certain nokahal is now in operation, but notice an odd convention in such matters, e.g., a bitterly resentful and injured Jew will not denounce his adversary for smuggling or fraud in income-tax reports, although he has proof in his possession.)

One limitation on the felicity of Jewish capitalists in Russia is the need to observe some discretion in pubic display of their wealth, since too much ostentation has brought some of them to the attention of Communist authorities not on their payroll, with sad results. Prudent financiers limit their public expenditures to what they can pretend was legitimate income, e.g., from winning tickets in a state lottery, and amass their wealth in gold, jewels, and similar articles they can easily hide. Foreign money can be obtained, but would have no advantage in Russia. We may guess that the Rockefeller banks in Russia probably assist capitalists to transfer abroad holdings that they can enjoy when it pleases them to “defect” from Russia. The author suggests that the vast investments in gold and jewels, if not made for a miser’s satisfaction in mere possession, may perhaps be held in anticipation of “the downfall of the Soviet régime.”

If we accept Simis’s account of the vast wealth of Soviet Jewry and the pervasive corruption of Soviet government in all its functions, including the Secret Police, it will be obvious that the ingenuity, secrecy, and bribery that maintains the capitalists’ clandestine businesses could also promote a secret and formidable revolutionary underground, capable of striking suddenly and perhaps decisively. And that will alter all our estimates of the probable future of the Soviet and of its capacity to wage a major war. We accordingly wonder whether some credence may not be due to some reports about efficient and ostensibly Christian “undergrounds” in the Soviet. The reports once put out so industriously by evangelists who pretended to solicit funds for such organizations can be dismissed as mere sucker-bait, but, if Simis is right, such organizations could exist. (42b)

(42b. If we believe Paul R. Vaulin, The Regiment of Kitezh (Mobile, Alabama, 1977), Russia is now honeycombed by a formidable conspiracy of Christians, who have penetrated the Soviet bureaucracy and even the Secret Police, having placed or enlisted secret agents in strategic posts, and counting on exciting a revolt of “a quarter of a billion [Russian] men” when the time comes. Two colleagues of the author on the faculty of the University of South Alabama certify that the narrative “describes actual events,” was written by “an American agent” who was dropped by parachute into Soviet territory in May 1972, and was copied from his manuscript, which “was smuggled out of the USSR by an American student.” They further certify that Satan prevented the publication of the book by a commercial publisher, so that it had to be published privately “without the permission of Satan.” If there is any truth to the story, the Soviet Secret Police have become hopelessly inefficient and stupid. There is an implication that the Christians’ god keeps the conspiracy invisible to Communist eyes, and it would seem that Satan hasn’t been able to wake up the Politburo.)

We can neither affirm nor deny the accuracy of Simis’s story. If that number of Fortune has reached Russia, his report has probably been denounced in Pravda as an “outrageous Fascist lie” and perhaps even as “anti-Semitic,” with many “proofs” of its spuriousness; if it hasn’t been, it will be, at least when his book is published. All that we can do is say that the story is amazing, and put it down as another question mark around the enigma.

AT THE WAILING WALL

We must grant that the evidence for the Jews’ supposed loss of authority in Russia is meager and unsubstantial. Self-appointed “Kremlinologists” (!) expound to us the intentions behind certain Soviet policies, but mind-reading is always a hazardous business. It is true, for example, that Russia has supplied some weapons to the Semitic and largely Semitic countries that are menaced by the Jews’ constant aggression and implacable hatred. (The Arabs and their allies, by the way, have always to pay cash to the Soviet, while the Jews have only to requisition all the equipment they want from their Americans serfs.) We are told that Russia clearly intends to impede the plan, of which the Jews openly boast, to make Jerusalem the capital from which Yahweh’s Race will rule the whole world; but, for aught we know to the contrary, the subtle minds of Russia’s rulers may be cozening the Arabs and planning eventually to betray them, as the Americans, for example, betrayed Chiang Kai-shek.

The nominally American government in Washington is in a fever of anxiety over the supposed plight of the three millions of the Self-Chosen People in Soviet territory, and claims to be squandering American resources as bribes to the Russians to increase the privileges granted to Jews (but no other race), in the hope that soon the whole three millions will follow the 200,000 who have recently flown from the Soviet and, after touching ground in Israel, flocked into the United States, except for a minority, who, after getting a whiff of their tribesmen in Israel, promptly flew back to their Soviet homes. (43) One cannot be impressed by the ostensible reasons for a policy of which the net result is further to augment American subsidies to the Soviet while simultaneously augmenting the saturation of our country with Jews.

(43. It is true that the Russians do not seem eager to welcome them back. The Daily World, 8 January 1979, reported that 300 Jews, who had left the Soviet, fled to Italy after they had a good look at the ant-heap in Israel. They were appealing to the “United Nations,” evidently in the hope that the clowns in that circus would intercede and obtain for them permission to return home.)

The other evidence is much noise and very few facts, all of them no better than the facts on which are based the Jews’ assurance to the British that in the United States the wicked “Neo-Nazis” are on the verge of stuffing ten or twenty millions of God’s persecuted darlings into crematoria. (44) The Americans have had the awful audacity to investigate a rather grandiose, but typical, Jewish hoax and expose its absurdity. (45) What the British may be stupid enough to believe, I do not know, but the imminence of a real “holocaust” in the United States will be considered unlikely by the hapless Americans, who cringe before the Jewish Terror; who see the homes of men who dare disbelieve the hoax besieged by mobs of Jews screaming for their blood and threatening to burn them and their families in their houses; who know that Presidents and Vice Presidents of the United States who dared mutter in private some lack of reverence for Jews were hounded from their office and forced to resign; who know that no business man dares offend our masters, not even by subscribing to a journal that does not have kosher approval, for even if it comes to a post office box under an assumed name, the spies will learn his identity and the Jews stealthily or openly will destroy his business and perhaps his family… It would be idle to go on enumerating what is known by everyone who ventures to raise his eyes and look about him. My point is that Americans should know that the fact that Professor Butz has not yet been murdered and all copies of his book destroyed by the F.B.I. is not satisfactory proof that the United States is persecuting the People of God. And it may not be amiss to consider Jewish lamentations about Russia with critical intelligence rather than faith.

(44. See above, p. 73.)

(45. On the hoax about the “six million Jews” who are said to have been exterminated in Germany before they migrated to the United States and a few other lands and began to collect for their deaths from the Germany they had ruined, the pioneer work was that of Paul Rassinier, who had been himself an inmate of a German concentration camp and later spent years in touring Europe vainly in search of someone who had actually seen one of the famous “gas chambers,” for which the basis, of course, was only the Germans’ attempts to control with disinfectants the epidemics of typhus brought into the camps by Jews and their body lice. See Rassinier’s Lemensonge d’Ulysse (Paris, 1950) and its sequels, Ulysse trahi par les siens (Paris, 1961), Le v‚ritable proces Eichmann (Paris, 1962), and Le drame des Juifs europaens (Paris, 1961). An English translation of the last of these was published by Steppingstones, Silver Spring, Maryland, 1975, which issued in the following year a translation of the book on the Eichmann trial (which Rassinier had originally intended to entitle aptly, “Les maitre-chanteurs de Nuremberg”), now published by the Historical Review Press, Chapel Ascote, Ladbroke, Southam, Warwickshire. I understand that translations of Rassinier’s several books are assembled in Debunking the Genocide Myth, published by the Institute for Historical Review, Torrance, California. The fullest and most systematic demolition of the infamous hoax, which has been used to extort forty billion dollars or more from the helpless people of Germany, is the masterly work of Professor Arthur R. Butz, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, published by Historical Review Press, s.a. (1976), and available from Liberty Bell Publications; an American edition is published by the Institute for Historical Review in California. An especially notable work in German is Der Auschwitz Mythos (Tubingen, Grabert, 1979; available from Liberty Bell Publications) by Judge Wilhelm Stäglich, who thus brought on himself pseudo-legal vengeance by the Jews’ puppet government in Bonn, which tried to make him penniless and did succeed in depriving him of half of his meager income. The author of a smaller volume on the same subject is now in prison in Germany for having dared to contradict God’s Master Race. A very useful and handsomely illustrated book is William N. Grimstad’s The Six Million Reconsidered, s.l.&a. (1977), which has been reprinted by the Historical Review Press in England and in the United States by the Institute for Historical Review. Perhaps the most noteworthy aspect of the “six million” hoax is the hoaxers’ contempt for the simple-minded Aryans: they did not take the trouble to make their various fictions plausible or consistent. The point, of course, is that Aryans must be so trained that their minds will freeze and all thought stop whenever one of God’s People speaks to the curs.)

One bit of evidence adduced by Wilmot Robertson is the publication of the Ukrainian Academy of Science (in 1963) of a book that spoke of Jews without reverence, and he adds that the Soviet authorities did not suppress the book until after “world opinion,” as manufactured by Jewish journalists, began to howl. The suppression, however, does not satisfy the Jews, who now wax indignant that its Satanic author was, after a time, permitted to return to his employment, instead of being liquidated or starved to death. (46)

(46. See, e.g., the article by Dr. Spier that I cite below.)

Although as late as 1979 the Jews were still assuring themselves in some of their racial publications that their tribe was flourishing in the Soviet and that 400,000 of them ensconced in Moscow alone were joyful, (47) they are now telling themselves in their own publications, as well as in “our” press (which they own or otherwise control) that the international people are being “persecuted” by the vile Russians, in whose country they have chosen to reside. The volume of this propaganda is enormous, and it would be a waste of time to notice slight differences in the pitch of what is just one unending screech, but, if we dare be so evil as to look at a few specimens intelligently, we may derive some hints from them.

(47. A clever twist in propaganda was used by Aaron Vergelis, editor of the periodical in Yiddish that is lavishly financed by the Soviet. In his tour of this country in January 1979, he assured his Jewish audiences from coast to coast that “Soviet Jews are building a new and happy life in their [sic!] multi-national homeland,” and that propaganda that the Jews are not living high on the hog in the Soviet is really a form of “anti-Semitism” spread by “anti-Communists” to incite hostility to the Soviet and to encourage the nasty “anti-Semitic” elements in the United States. “Anti-Sovietism,” he proclaimed with Talmudic subtlety, “is the greatest anti-Semitism.” His speeches were widely reported in the frankly Jewish press and summarized in the Daily World, 30 January 1979.)

A yell by Kevin Klose in the Washington Post, 15 July 1979, headed “Soviet Jews are Fearful of Rising Anti-Semitism,” brings us the shocking news that many more Russians are now being given positions in the Russian universities and other “institutions of higher learning where Jews have traditionally excelled.” A book published in only five hundred copies “calls Zionism ‘the worst form of fascism’ “–a statement which should be good for a laugh even in Russia. Another, of which 45,000 copies were printed, “alleges that ‘Zionist centers’ control Western media.” One gathers that Russians should not be told of the Jews’ virtually total dominion over the press and boob-tubes of the United States, Britain, France, and other Western nations. Chief among the horrors that are giving the three million Jews in Russia nervous palpitations are two letters one or more diabolic Russians may have produced on a mimeograph and are clandestinely circulating to some “members of the Moscow intelligentsia.” One of these horrid letters declares that “both in the U.S. Senate and the Central Committee of the Communist Party there is a powerful Zionist lobby.” Americans know about the Senate and the rest of “their” government in Washington, where, according to the press of 36 July, Reagan, “personally ordered” everyone to cease and desist from criticizing the Jews’ terrorist bombing of Lebanon and slaughter of the Semites who don’t understand that the Jews have a right to their homes and lives–acts which some misguided men thought tactless at the very time that the United States was about to rush another big shipment of our best weapons to Israel, for which Reagan has “a very special affection.” We wonder, however, whether the mimeographed letter was as accurate about Russia as about the country that once was ours. A second letter, furtively typewritten and copied on a mimeograph, says that Brezhnev’s wife is a Jewess–as everyone in and out of Russian has long known–and that there are only three “real Russians” among thirteen members of the ruling Politburo. There is no claim that the second statement is not equally true, but Klose reports a rumor that “Russophiles,” persons so wicked that they love their own country, expecting that Brezhnev will soon depart from this world, are manoeuvering “within secret ‘higher circles’ of the [Communist] party…to heighten traditional Russian antagonism and force Jews from such positions of power and influence as they now hold.” Just as though God’s People didn’t have a prescriptive right to “power and influence” over the lower races!

What interests us is the claim, in the mimeographed sheet that is being clandestinely passed around to a few Russians, that the Russians have only three representatives in the Politburo. The journal founded by the late A.K. Chesterton, Candour, published in its issue for Nov.-Dec. 1978 a list, obtained from Russian sources, of the members of the Politburo. This shows twenty-one men besides Brezhnev, and the score is: Russians, 6; race unascertained, 1; Jews, 14, including the Minister of Defence, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Chief of the Secret Police, and two others, who are among “the most powerful men in the USSR.” (48) Date and place of birth are given and the real names of the Jews, most of whom operate under aliases in public, as is their custom. Candour’s informant adds that “90% of the Soviet Ambassadors are Jews,” and lists twelve examples. Since I am unfortunately deprived of the revelations from on high that enable so many in the “right wing” to know whatever they want to believe, I cannot affirm either the accuracy of inaccuracy of the list in Candour, but if the list contains no more than a fair percentage of truth, it would seem that the international race has prematurely rushed to its Wailing Wall, perhaps from sheer force of habit.

(48. It is odd that Candour and the clandestine mimeographed sheet that scares the Jews in Russia agree only on Kosygin as a loyal Russian. Candour’s source had no information about Romanov, and, what is most remarkable, Suslov, who is one of the three “real Russians” on the mimeographed sheet, is identified in Candour as a Jew, born in 1902 in the principal city of Azerbaijan, whose real name is Suess and who is the principal representative in Russia of the B’nai B’rith that operates in the United States and watches of the Aryan sheep. Cf. note 41a above.)

TOD UND VERKLŽRUNG

The most nearly sober of the current lamentations is a long article by Ruben Ainsztein in the well-known and widely influential British periodical, New Statesman. On the cover of the issue for 18 December 1978, where it is illustrated by a photographic montage that shows the evil face of Hitler behind the evil face of Stalin, the article is entitled, “Soviet Union Today: Anti-semitism Institutionalized,” but above the article itself appears the apocalyptic title, “The End of Marxism-Leninism.” The author naturally does not miss a chance to reiterate the Jews’ great “Holocaust” hoax, and he assures us that “Only Stalin’s mysterious [!] death saved the Jews who had survived Hitler’s Final Solution from annihilation.” He then speaks of the awful book that Robertson mentioned, but without quite telling us that it was suppressed in 1963. His featured evidence, however, is a confidential memorandum to certain committees in the Communist Party, allegedly written by Valery Nikolayevich Yemelyanov, and presumably typewritten or mimeographed, of which Jewish agents were able to filch part in January 1977. (49) In that memorandum Yemelyanov reportedly not only said unkind things about the sacrosanct race, but even proposed the formation of an international organization to unite civilized men of the West to oppose and perhaps avert the consolidation of Jewish control over the entire planet.

(49. Further information about the memorandum that Yemelyanov hoped to keep confidential is given in a despatch from Jerusalem published in the Daily Telegraph, Britain’s largest conservative newspaper, on 9 March 1978. One of the Ministers in the Israeli government moaned that the stolen memorandum was “an all-out declaration of war against the Jews” by the one man who wrote it.)

I naturally cannot tell whether Yemelyanov did indeed express such evil thoughts, but I note that in a long article in theJewish Chronicle (London), 25 July 1980, Dr. Howard Spier complacently remarks that the “paranoid” Professor Yemelyanov had been fired from his academic position and incarcerated in a “”psychiatric hospital.” (50) That sounds to me as though the Children of God still had influence in the Soviet Union, but it does not prevent Dr. Spier from chattering with fear about the likelihood of pogroms because, although “overt antisemitism” is not feasible in Russia today, there are Russians who regret that it is not and who even dare to write articles with “racial overtones,” which are “thinly disguised antisemitism” and therefore offensive to Yahweh’s Master Race.

(50. Poor Yemelyanov must have been released from the madhouse after Spier wrote, for a few lines in the Spanish press in January 1981 reported that he had been arrested and imprisoned for “racism,” presumably shortly before. Since Yemelyanov is, so far as we know, the only man in the Soviet Union who has dared to suggest (in a confidential memorandum) actual opposition to the Jews, it may be assumed that if he were publicly crucified, the three million tribesmen in Soviet territory, who are now quaking with terror, could sleep o’nights.)

Among the innumerable shrieks of the Jewish Banshee, none is better written or more coherent than Robert Wistrich’s article on the wickedness of Stalin in the Jewish Chronicle, 22 February 1980. Like Ainsztein, Wistrich identifies Stalin as the serpent who appeared in the Soviet Eden and, after beguiling the Slavic Eve by justly equating disrespect for Jews with cannibalism and making it punishable by death, finally gave effect to the evil thoughts he had secretly harbored in his black soul for a long time and slyly sold her the deadly apple of patriotism. The article is noteworthy for the relative absence of the usual hysteria and for its author’s respect for logic, and especially because it identifies, as did Yockey, the hanging of the eleven Jews in Prague as the turning point of Stalin’s policy: “for the first time, antisemitism and anti-Zionism openly fused.” The trials in Prague were a first step toward “Stalin’s own Final Solution of the Jewish question–mass deportations to Siberia….The plan was foiled [sic!]” by the opportune death of Stalin. Stalin’s policy was reversed, he is now discredited, and his monuments “have been pulled down,” but the terrible thing is that “Stalin’s heirs…studiously avoided mentioning antisemitism in the catalogue of his crimes.” And that means, oh horrors! that we “must reckon with the return of the pogrom traditions of the Tsarist State under a thin veneer of Marxist-Leninist verbiage.”

Two of the best articles, which I have mentioned, and numerous others assert that Stalin intended in his own mind to solve Russia’s Jewish problem by either transporting the aliens to Siberia, as Wistrich says, or by exterminating them, as Ainsztein claims, presumably by finding engineers and chemists who could overcome the practical obstacles to constructing and operating “gas chambers,” such as are celebrated in the Jews’ great hoax about the “six million.” (51) The evidence that Stalin had in petto a plan to become the Antichrist (52) is both meager and in conflict with all of his career before he was seventy-three, but we must remember that Dzhugashvili began his career as a theological student and doubtless acquired early the arts of dissimulation and hypocrisy, in which he must have perfected himself. There can be no doubt but that he was a highly intelligent man, so it is out of the question that he could ever have taken seriously the Marxist religion, which he used to manipulate the misfits, simpletons, idealists, and other crackpots over whom he climbed to power, and to outwit his fellow thugs. (53) So talented a man could have concealed even from Jews his opinion of them, but it is also possible that he, like Luther and many other men, trusted the Jews during the greater part of his career and changed his mind only late in life.

(51. The choice of this number may have some special significance. In the early years of this century, and especially during the administration of President Taft, American busybodies were a-twitter over the supposed plight of the six million dear Jews who were “imprisoned” in Czarist Russia because they preferred not to leave it.)

(52. It must be remembered that the term ‘antichrist’ does not specifically refer to the christ called Jesus who is the hero of the “New Testament.” A christ is, of course, a divinely-appointed King of the Jews, who will lead his race to a solution of the Gentile problem by exterminating Aryans and the like, except for some who may be spared for slavery. The apocalyptic fantasies of the Jews call for the appearance of an ‘antichrist,’ i.e., a particularly disrespectful and wicked goy, before the appearance of the real christ, who will put the lower races in their place. An ‘antichrist,’ therefore, is a powerful adversary of the Jews, except, of course, in Christian terminology.)

(53. It goes without saying that Communist leaders do not believe in Communism. An acute young American, Duane Thorin, who had been intensively interrogated while a prisoner, stated the facts concisely in A Ride to Pannunjom (Chicago, Regnery, 1956): “Intellects that failed to see through the falsities of communism were so arrested that they were of only limited use in the totalitarian state.” Czeslaw Milosz in The Captive Mind (New York, 1953) devotes a chapter to the practice of ketman by the more intelligent Communist professionals as they jostle for places on the ladder: like Moslem and Christian theologians, they feign a belief in the orthodox doctrine of their sect and try to catch each other out by devising Talmudic quibbles as traps to obtain admissions that will justify a charge of heresy.)

The best proof that Stalin was or became inimical to the Self-Chosen People is that a pack of Jewish physicians tried to poison him a few weeks before he died suddenly, reportedly of a “cerebral haemorrhage.” They would not have done so without good reason. It is true that some persons believe the story that the physicians were innocent, but they do so on the usual grounds that Jews are “righteous” people, and without reflecting that nothing could be more righteous than killinggoyim that get in the way of God’s Own. As all Christians well know, that is the lesson that is taught throughout the “Old Testament,” which seems such an appalling record of crime to persons who read it without Faith. (54) The virtually infinite superiority of their race is taken for granted and openly avowed by Jews today. (55) The Holy People, for example, did not hesitate to boast over the French radio of their cleverness in poisoning a thousand German officers by slyly putting arsenic in the bread they baked for them. (56) And, as everyone known, Begin, who is now dropping bombs on the civilian population of Lebanon in preparation for conquest and annexation of that helpless country, early distinguished himself by his efficiency in killing goyim, such as the English men, women, and children whom he blew up by planting a bomb in their hotel. For such valiant deeds he is sometimes criticized adversely by “aunt-eye-see-mights,” who do not understand that his victims were just English pigs and probably should have been butchered anyway. (57)

(54. Christians, I understand, find especially edifying the tale that is told about Moses in Exodus, 2.11-15, 19; 4.19-20. Seeing an Egyptian treat a Jew harshly, Moses found an opportunity to catch the goy alone and, after looking all around to make sure no one could see them, rubbed him out, probably by stealing up behind him and stabbing him in the back. Moses hid the body in the sand, but when he found that someone had seen him after all and would turn stool-pigeon, his chutzpah failed him and he took it on the lam across the border into a foreign country, where, passing himself off as an Egyptian, he lay low for many years until God came to his hide-out and told him the heat was off in Egypt and the cops were no longer looking for him.)

(55. According to the press, Dr. Michael Wyschogrod, Professor of Philosophy in the City University of New York, frankly told a conference sponsored by the National Conference of Christians and Jews that there was a vast difference between harming a Jew and killing goyim, because “what happens to the Jewish people is not quite the same” as what happens to other people in that there is “an element of the divine” in Jewish history that makes it special. He admitted that “humanists” and other irreligious persons would think the racial distinction “a scandal,” but that is because they do not “grasp the uniqueness of Jewish history.” Dr. Wyschogrod also told his audience what makes that uniqueness: the fact that a Jew is always a detached limb of his race and only secondarily an individual. “I am first a member of the Jewish people,” he declared, “and only secondarily Michael Wyschogrod.” That, of course, is something an Aryan can never understand, for while he may feel a loyalty to, or a duty towards, a class or nation, he can do so only as an individual, and even the strongest effort of the imagination will not enable him to think of himself as having the relation to his race that a member of his body bears to him. The conference was reported in The Christian News, 30 April 1981, p. 15.)

(56. See the Toronto Daily Star, 9 March 1968.)

(57. Cf. note 38 above.)

The heroic physicians, like the Lopez who was the personal physician of Queen Elizabeth I and tried to poison her, were caught, but we shall never know whether they had colleagues who were more successful. It is, of course, not unusual for men of Stalin’s age to die of natural causes, but a sudden death that occurs so soon after an unsuccessful attempt at assassination, and occurs so opportunely–should we say providentially?–for a man’s deadly enemies will always arouse suspicions.

When a great monarch dies, there is always a bitter struggle for power among the diadochi, and from what we know of Communists and given the impossibility of dividing the empire, we may be certain that the contest in Russia was especially vicious, but the essential facts concerning it remain secret. Eventually Khrushchev, whatever his antecedents, (58) came out on top, having pleased his henchmen by vituperating the man who had saved Russia, the Soviet, and Communism from the German invasion. In 1961, he ejected ignominiously from its tomb the body of the architect of Russia’s position as a world-power, had his monuments and memorials destroyed, and even carried post-mortem hatred so far as to change the name of Stalingrad, the site of Russia’s most celebrated victory. Such spitting on a national hero and the sheer fury of the posthumous vengeance taken on him, must have had a deeper motive than a mere courting of popularity among the serfs, as sometimes happens in “democratic” countries. In fact, the vitriolic denunciation of Stalin for “tyranny” was a somewhat hazardous gambit, since it might encourage discontent with that tyranny, which was continued with only superficial changes. What the motive was, however, we cannot determine: it may have been known only to the inner circle of the Politburo and must remain an enigma for us.

(58. I refuse to debate the vexed question whether or not Khrushchev was really a Jew masquerading as a Slav. The evidence on both sides of the question is suspect.)

In sum, then, the evidence before us warrants the conclusion that for a period of about six months–from early November 1952 until 5 March 1953–Dzhugashvili-Stalin openly showed a certain hostility toward the Jews that he had doubtless meditated for some time before putting it into practice. (59) It is reasonable to conjecture that he may have intended or wished to put into practice the stated principles of Zionism. During those six months or more, the Jews seem to have lost the power to control Russian policy, and it may be they did not subsequently recover their dominance over it. (60) There is evidence that Russians are now permitted to occupy in the universities and bureaucracy positions that Jews want.

(59. The earlier stages of the affair that reached its climax with the hanging of the eleven Jews in Prague are uncertain. The most important of these Jews, Rudolf [nice Germanic name, Gothic hrôth-wulfs!] Slánsky, was arrested on a charge of treason on 27 November 1951, but the Czech executive who had formally ordered the arrest, Kópriva, was himself arrested on 23 January 1952, thus producing a neat confusion to keep everyone puzzled.)

(60. By far the most complete and objective treatment of the whole question known to me is the late Andrey Diky’s Jews in Russia and in the USSR, s.l.a. [1978?]. When I last heard, copies could be obtained from L. Volovlikoff, P.O. Box 8082, Ottawa, Ontario. This work is based on Russian and Ukrainian sources not generally available, especially periodicals, and its author makes every effort to be fair and more than fair to the Jews, giving them the benefit of every doubt. In an appendix, pp. 297-319, the author lists the officials of the eleven principal organs of the Soviet government from 1932 to 1939. Here are the totals: Jews, 447; non-Jews, 68; race undetermined, 34.)

For the rest, we can only note that there is not the slightest indication that the present regime in Russia intends to accept the theory of Zionism, as it would surely do, if it wished to rid its territory of Jews. Hitler, to be sure, accepted Zionism and made great efforts to foster it, and the Jews will never forgive him for having taken them at their word, but nevertheless a regime that is really anti-Jewish would not overlook the enormous advantage it would obtain by officially supporting Zionism. (61)

(61. As we all know–or should know–the premise on which the Zionist movement was founded, and on the basis of which support for it (including the Balfour Declaration) was solicited, was that Jews and Europeans represent incompatible races and cultures, and that the presence of the aliens in Europe will always result in irremediable tension and animosities, to the distress of all concerned. The only solution, therefore, was the creation of a “homeland” to which all Jews could emigrate and in which they could form a nation that would have a geographic unity corresponding to its spiritual unity. See the writings of the founder of Zionism, Theodor Herzl, in his Tagebucher (Berlin, 1922-23) and the passages that were suppressed in the German edition but restored by Marvin Lowenthal in his translation of excerpts (New York, 1956). Herzl’s diaries record his negotiations with various European monarchs and prime ministers and his reactions to their attitudes, and I can find in his writings no indication that he was not sincere in his purpose. He did obtain from the British government in 1903 the offer of East Africa as the desired homeland, and was bitterly disappointed when the Jewish Congress rejected the offer. As is well known, the National Socialist government of Germany made great efforts to obtain a homeland for the Jews in Palestine, Madagascar, and in a large part of the territory of the former Russian Empire; these efforts were successively frustrated by Great Britain, France, and the defeat of Germany in 1945. — It is faintly amusing that Kevin Klose, in the article about “Anti-Semitism” in the Soviet that I mentioned above, lists a report that when the Russians grant exit visas to the Jews who wish to emigrate, they maliciously give preference to the ones who will head for the United States instead of remaining in the national ghetto, where they could enjoy “family [i.e., racial] reunification.)

We are here interested in Yockey. From the foregoing it will appear that he, more alert and perspicacious than other observers, was right in his analysis of the situation in Europe and the world in 1948-52, when he wrote The Enemy of Europe. He did not foresee the sudden death of Stalin, and it can be argued that if Stalin had survived for a lustrum after 1953, Yockey’s prognosis would have been fully verified and the history of Europe and of the entire world would have taken a far different direction.

Yockey did not live to witness the official denigration and vilification of Stalin that began in 1961. You may wish to determine in your own mind what conclusions he would have drawn from that astonishing reversal of Russian propaganda, and whether or not he would have revised The Enemy of Europe to take it into account.

***

THE DYING AND THE DEAD

IF YOCKEY had not been hounded to death by the Jews and were alive today, would he take again, without variation, the oath he took in 1946 when he left Wiesbaden, where he could no longer endure the obscene spectacle of the foul murders that the Americans were committing to please the Jews?

“I will go from one end to the other of my beloved Europe. I know well that I shall be going only to a churchyard, but I know, too, that the churchyard is dear, very dear, to me. Beloved dead lie buried there. Every stone over them, every bomb-crater containing the pulverized bones of these dead, tell me of a life once so ardently lived, so passionate a belief in its own achievements, its own truth, its own battles, its own knowledge, that I know, even now I know, that I shall fall down and kiss those stones, those endless ruins, this blood-drenched, sacred earth, and weep. But I surely also know that then, despite a convulsive rage at the perpetrators of this crime, I will again stand erect over this European graveyard and swear the solemn oath that to my last breath I will fight tooth and nail against those who attempted, in vain to be sure, to destroy the cradle of our Western Culture, with its unmatched accomplishments, with its deeds unique in the annals of Humanity. This, I, Francis Yockey, do solemnly swear!”

Do men die of broken hearts?

The physical scars of the Suicide of the West have been effaced. The ruins have been replaced by restorations or new structures that often do not show the grotesquely anti-human vulgarity of Jewish art. The intellectual and spiritual devastation, however, not only remains but grows apace. It reminds us of H. G. Wells’ anticipation of nuclear warfare: the atomic bombs he imagined produced a stead chain-reaction, so that their craters constantly grew large and spread wider, gnawing away the countryside, mile after mile. Or perhaps a better analogy would be an endemic disease that slowly but steadily destroys a dwindling and dying race.

Even a cursory survey of Europe today would require a volume, but we may permit ourselves a few hurried glimpses.

In Germany, the Jews did not insist on their original plan, set forth in Theodore Kaufman’s Germany Must Perish!, (62) that after their Huns had overwhelmed Germany, the surviving Germans would all be surgically sterilized to ensure the prompt extermination of a nation that had offended the Sons of the Covenant. That Final Solution might have seemed objectionable to “an-tie-see-mites.” So the good work was entrusted, in Germany as in other Aryan nations, to the demoralizing and disintegrating effects of what Yockey calls “culture-distortion”: “democracy” (i.e., government by organized crime), “education” (i.e., sabotage of children’s minds), usury, financial piracy, drug-addiction, promiscuity, miscegenation, mongrelization, promotion of superstition and irrationality, and the other blessings Americans now enjoy. That is working very well in Germany. A statistician has calculated that if all things continue as they now are, in ninety years the only living Germans will be senescent and past the age of reproduction.

(62. Newark, New Jersey, 1941; reprinted s.l.&a., and available from Liberty Bell Publications. Kaufman’s book is an excellent and most instructive specimen of Jewish thinking. He wrote before his tribe had invented the Holohoax, and so he can only scream that the Germans are militaristic and have produced such awfully wicked philosophers as Nietzsche; that makes them “an execrable people” and they must be exterminated, one and all. He prides himself on his tender heart, which makes him recommend that instead of having all the Germans massacred at once, the survivors, men, women, and children, should be herded together and sexually mutilated by surgeons (he even computes how many will be needed for the godly work) so that they cannot reproduce their damned species. In Schuld und Schicksal (Munich, 1962), J.G. Burg, a Jew who was born in Germany and lived throughout the war in Germany or adjacent territories, believes that Kaufman’s book was part of a concerted effort by the Jews’ master minds to exasperate the Germans and thus incite pogroms to help create “world opinion” for a war against Germany and for dispossession of the inhabitants of Palestine in favor of the Jews, and Burg supports his conclusion with photographic reproductions of documents in German and Yiddish. He quotes (p. 72) Chaim Weizmann as having said in 1934, “I would much rather see the annihilation of the Jews in Germany than failure to make Israel a land for the Jews.” Weizmann (who became the first president of “Isra‰l” when it was finally established in 1948) in October 1934 mobilized Jewish pressure on the British government to make Britain frustrate Hitler’s proposal that Jews who wished to leave Germany should be permitted to go to Palestine or whithersoever they wished, taking with them one thousand pounds sterling and goods to the value of 20,000 marks, the remainder of their holdings (if any) to be paid for in regular installments over a period of years. Several subsequent efforts by Hitler to help the Zionists attain their professed goal were frustrated by Britain and her allies, obviously in obedience to Jewish commands. It was the failure so to exasperate the Germans that they would resort to pogroms that made it necessary to invent the “Holocaust” hoax. It is noteworthy that, with the exception of Burg and a very few others, the Jews do not seem to regard as immoral the efforts of Weizmann and other Elders of Jewry to procure the “annihilation of the Jews in Germany,” who numbered about 500,000; presumably the sacrifice of those Jews would have been “good for the Jewish people,” and that is all that matters.)

In Germany, as in other Western nations, the Jews are resorting to pseudo-legal terrorism as well as mob violence to enforce belief in their “Holocaust” hoax, and they are more or less committed to the slovenly version of the tale that they used as a pretext for the obscene and savage murders committed by the British and Americans at Nuremberg. That fiction was an improvement on earlier versions, (63) but it relied on the perjury of a German traitor who had been an American spy throughout the war, and was so carelessly contrived that it could not resist critical examination. (64) Since the exposure of the great hoax, there has been a belated attempt to produce “witnesses,” who, I estimate, are as numerous as the individuals, many of them Aryans, who have reported their vacations aboard “flying saucers” or their confabulations with little green or cerise men from Mars or elsewhere. The principal burden of the attempts to enforce belief in the incredible, however, is the doctrine that it is an “insult to the Jewish people” to disbelieve whatever they choose to tell the lower races.

(63. According to the Courrier du Continent, a valuable little bulletin published at Lausanne, in its issue for May 1981, a delightful early version of the “Holocaust” hoax was given by a Jew residing in Sweden, Dr. Stefan Szende, in a book published at Zurich in 1944. According to this version, hundreds of thousands of Jews were exterminated by the cruel Germans at Belzec (a small town about twenty-eight miles south-southeast of Lublin), where the Germans had constructed a vast underground installation, including huge halls, built entirely of metal, with floors that could be raised or lowered by machinery. Each floor was a triumph of engineering, so large that several thousands of dear Jews could be packed on it, nude, at one time. The elevator then descended until the Jews were immersed into water to their waists, when a powerful electric current was introduced into the water, electrocuting them instantly. Then the elevator went up to a station at which a further application of electricity incinerated and presumably vaporized all the thousands of corpses, and the machine was ready for a new batch of several thousand. Presumably this version was thought too complimentary to the Germans’ famous talent for engineering and applied science, just as the claims that Germans had exterminated 40,000,000 or 12,000,000 Jews were considered a bit hazardous mathematically and the figure was reduced to the 6,000,000 in the current version.)

(64. See the works cited in note 45 supra.)

We should not err, as do so many anti-Jewish writers, by interpreting this Jewish terrorism in terms of our own mentality and so regarding it as a consciously evil fraud. As several Jews told the National Conference of Christians and Jews, “normal [i.e., Aryan] ethical standards” are “irrelevant” in such matters. (65) I do not profess to understand the Jewish mentality, but it may be that one aspect of it was revealed by Professor Eric Goldman of Princeton University, if he was correctly quoted as contending that history is a “weapon” to be employed for “determining people’s ideas and attitudes,” and that a respectable historian has a “responsibility…for making sure that he writes history in such a way as will bring about the kind of action that he wants.” Professor Goldman even made the frightening claim that his equation of history with propaganda was the view of “most historians [!].” (66) One can imagine no more total contrast to the Aryan conception of history as an effort to recover, as accurately as possible, the absolute truth about what actually happened: Von Ranke’s famous standard of a perfectly objective description of the past wie es eigentlich gewesen wäre, and James Harvey Robinson’s addendum that history should also determine objectively, if possible, wie es eigentlich geworden wäre. It is quite possible that to the Jewish mentality what actually happened appears completely irrelevant, and our interest in ascertaining historical truth may seem to be just another odd manifestation of our mental inferiority. The only thing that matters is what you can make your subjects believe, including, perhaps, the mass of your own race. To us, that seems reprehensible deception, but it is quite possible that to the Jewish mentality “truth” is whatever is good for God’s People. (67) That may be why Jewish forgeries and hoaxes seem to us so amazingly careless, and we wonder why their contrivers disdained the relatively small amount of work that would have been required to make their fabrication consistent and plausible: to them it seemed apodictic that people ought to believe what is good for the Jewish people without thinking about it. The tales in the “Old Testament,” for example, are attempts to simulate an historical record, but is seems never to have occurred to the rabbis to make them internally consistent and less absurd. (68) And the nonchalance appears today. When Professor Butz’s masterly exposure of the Jews’ Holy Hoax about the Germans was first published, Jews residing in the United States and holding professorships in American universities, who must surely have learned from observation of their goy colleagues what we consider to be the academic standards of integrity, began at once to denounce as “an infamous lie” a book of which they had never even seen a copy, and did so without even taking the trouble to ascertain its title, which they gave as “The Fabrication of a Hoax” or “The Holocaust Never Happened,” and urging that such disgrace to the academic profession be “rooted out” and presumably exterminated. The venomous hatred is, of course, only natural, but what is significant is that the learned professors did not take the two minutes of time for a phone call by which they could have learned the title of the book they were denouncing so hysterically. To us simple-minded Aryans, that seems amazing.

(65. Reported in The Christian News; see note 55 supra.)

(66. Goldman is quoted by Professor James J. Marin in his section of the impressive biographical monument, Harry Elmer Barnes (Colorado Springs, Myles, 1968), p. 241. That Goldman may be right about the majority of persons who now call themselves historians is suggested by the fact that the once-respected American Historical Association, which turns a penny now and then by renting out its membership list, crawled on its yellow belly in abasement and apology when it found it had rented the list to the Institute for Historical Review in Torrance, California, which wickedly conducts historical research that does not bear the Kosher seal of approval.)

(67. This attitude carries over, of course, into the Judaic religions, such as Christianity with its ostentatious repudiation of the “wisdom of this world” and its exaltation of the believing nitwit above the rational and learned seekers of the truth. A good example is Augustine, who must have known that he was lying (by “pagan” standards, at least) when he assured his open-mouthed congregation that he, as a missionary, had saved the souls of a whole nation of Africans, who had eyes in their chests and mouths where a man’s neck would be but no heads, organs for which good Christians would presumably have no use. The same spirit appears in the numerous ecclesiastics who, during the Middle Ages, equipped a cathedral, monastery, or church with one of the many foreskins clipped from the infant Jesus when he was circumcized or a bottle of the Virgin Mary’s milk or another Holy Shroud. The contriver of the imposture could tell himself, perhaps sincerely, that he was helping save the souls of many yokels by stimulating the tourist trade and augmenting his revenues.)

(68 It is true that when the “Old Testament” tales, in the form that they had around the beginning of the first century B.C., were translated from Hebrew and Aramaic into the koine dialect of Greek, thus forming the Septuagint, the translators did make some superficial efforts to clean up some absurdities in addition to converting the stories to monotheism. For example, the author of the myth about Esther gave the stupid Persian king the name of Assueras or Ahasuerus or something like that, a purely fictional and non-Persian name. The translators make him Artaxerxes, which was safe enough, since there were three Persian monarchs of that name, who ruled between 484 and 337 B.C., and that sounded plausible to persons who had no real knowledge of Persian history. In the story of God’s unsuccessful attempt to murder Moses (Exod. 4.24), the translators reflected that it was undignified for the creator of Heaven and Earth to be lurking about a desert inn, and they accordingly made the terrorist “an agent of the Lord,” which is certainly less grotesque. The Hebrew text underwent some censorship after the Septuagint was made; for example, in the tale of Esther there were several deletions, including the passage in which Esther explains to Yahweh how repugnant to a Jewess is coitus with an uncircumcized man, although, of course, she remains faithful to her duty to manipulate in the interests of her race the goy whom she has attracted sexually.)

The continuous rewriting of history, so graphically described in George Orwell’s 1984, may seem to the racial mentality of Jews no more that a common-sense provision for ensuring “social justice” and the like. For example, a Jew recently wrote a book to prove that no tribe of savages ever practices anthropophagy: all stories of cannibalism, except in a few cases of acute hunger (e.g., the Donner Party in California), were invented by the nasty “race prejudice” of the swinish Aryans. (69) I don’t know whether that claim is important for Jewish purposes, but if it is, it is surely a proof of the evils of “racism” that it isn’t feasible as yet to have all books of history and ethnology that mention cannibals dumped down a “memory hole” into ever-burning incinerators in all the libraries of the world. So far as I know, this attitude toward historical facts has never been systematically investigated, but Samuel Roth, the eminent and courageous Jew to whom we owe so much, touches on it in his references to the “Old Testament.” (70) But, I repeat, we must not be misled by the emotional binges of writers who hate Jews and cannot consider the problem objectively. Whatever tampering with facts may seem to us, we must remember that to the Jews it is simply an expression of their righteousness, however little we may be able to comprehend such an attitude. It is strictly comparable to the mentalities, equally alien and mysterious to us, that Professor Haas studied in his fundamentalDestiny of the Mind. (71)

(69. Professor W. Arens, The Man-Eating Myth (Oxford University [!], 1980.)

(70. See note 29. Roth discussed the expurgations and falsifications of the stories on pp. 25-51, 57-62 of his book. These chapters and part of a chapter were omitted in the reprint to avoid sending Christian holy men into fits.)

(71. See above, p. 17. n. 19.)

So much has to be said in explanation of the recent imposition of righteousness in Germany. The puppet government in Bonn has ordered its courts to find that it is a criminal offense to doubt even the most impossible parts of the Holohoax, on the grounds that such doubt “denies to every Jew the respect to which he is entitled.” (72) Men are now serving long prison sentences for having dared to express such doubts, and recently the Bonn government’s Thought Police raided the homes of almost 500 Germans who were suspected of having in their possession books, pamphlets, or leaflets of which the Master Race disapproves. It is also a criminal offense in Germany to doubt the “authenticity” of “Anne Frank’s Diary,” a hoax contrived with such contempt for the Aryan mind that it contains such blatant internal contradictions that it could not impose on any reader who has even a modicum of critical intelligence. (73) And the exercise of normal intelligence is a criminal offense even though the Bonn government’s own criminological laboratory reported that the manuscript was written throughout in the hand of a single author, who made many of his revisions with a pen that had not been manufactured before the supposed “martyrdom” of the young Jewess who is supposed to have written it. And there are rumors that the Jews are demanding that all mail that comes into Germany be opened and censored, lest some vile correspondent abroad say something that might start ratiocination in the dumm Kopf of a cringing German. Such is the plight of Germany today.

(72. The decision of the German Supreme Court is quoted in the Jews’ “intellectual” periodical, Patterns of Prejudice, January 1980, pp. 32f. The article goes on to demand more stringent legislation in Germany to “plug the loopholes” in existing laws and make certain that Aryan curs do not even think improper thoughts.)

(73. If you want to make sure that you didn’t overlook any of the ridiculous contradictions in the yarn, see Ditlieb Felderer’s incisive booklet, Anne Frank’s Diary (Torrance, California, Institute for Historical Review, 1979).)

The British have not yet sunk so low, but one has misgivings for the future. They destroyed their empire, sacrificed the lives of 357,000 persons, permanently depleting their racial vitality through the loss of much of their best blood, and inflicted painful and often irremediable wounds on 370,000 more; they disrupted their society and demoralized their whole population; and they impoverished themselves and their descendants, perhaps forever. All this they did to punish the Germans for having wanted to have a country of their own, and I wonder whether many Englishmen expected gratitude from the Jews. If they did, what were their sentiments when they read recently in William R. Perl’s The Four Front War that among the dastardly persecutors of God’s Race the vile British are second only to the vile Germans? Maurice Samuel was right: nothing that Aryans can do will ever satisfy his insatiable race.

Americans, remembering the old British tradition of gentlemen, are wont to assume that British politicians must be somehow morally superior to the gangsters of the great syndicate of organized crime that rules the United States. That is a mistake: the only difference is that the subordinate gangs, which stage competition on the lower levels, are called “Conservative” and “Labor,” instead of “Republican” and “Democratic.” Their activities correspond, even in detail, to the treason and looting that James Farrel has clearly described in his new book, The Judas Syndrome. (74)

(74. San Francisco, Fulton-Hall, 1980. The author skirts warily around the edges of the race problem, but he does consider the sheer insanity of importing into our overpopulated land ever growing hordes of black savages, mestizos from Puerto Rico, Cuba, and Mexico, and Mongoloids from southeast Asia in the guise of “refugees.” The obvious result will necessarily be a situation like that described in Jean Raspail’s “chilling novel about the end of the white world,” The Camp of the Saints, of which the English translation, published by Scribner’s in 1975, had so large a sale that it is now out-of-print in both cloth-bound and paperback editions. (Guess why!).)

The British, no less than the other Aryan nations, are driven by the death-wish that has been so deeply and perhaps ineradicably implanted in their subconscious minds. Not content with liquidating their empire, they began to import into their already overcrowded and overpopulated island hordes of anthropoid vermin from all over the world, from black savages to turban-wearing Asiatics. Any rational man could have predicted from the very first the inevitable consequence of the wholesale importation of racial enemies, but now, as well-organized mobs, directed by portable radios, surge through large quarters of British cities, burning and looting and killing, the Anglo-Saxon and Celtic boobs are astonished and listen, open-mouthed, to their government betrayers as they chatter about “unemployment” and, with almost incredible effrontery, claim that there are no “racial overtones” to race riots. The solution, of course, will be to surfeit the vermin with yet more blood sucked from the veins of the tax-paying serfs, who do not seem even to remember that they once had a country of their own. No one, so far as I have heard, has even dared to suggest what should be obvious even to schoolboys: the architects of the policy that imported the racial enemies and the loud-mouthed holy men and “humanitarians” who approved and endorsed that policy are either (a) conscious traitors, who intended the consequences of their acts, or (b) so feckless and feeble-minded that they must henceforth be excluded from influencing national policy in any way.

Traitors have imposed on the befuddled British a “Race Relations Act” to make certain that the white population, which is being dispossessed, does not openly resent the hordes of alien invaders. Englishmen are now in prison for having been so bold as to assert that their race is fit to live. And although the British, who are still a majority on what was once their island, are harassed by economic pressures and deafened by the clamor of their dervishes and the rest of the rabble of world-improvers, their bovine acceptance of their degradation makes one wonder whether the imprisoned men were not mistaken in the belief they expressed. Christians, of course, must be expected to obey the command of the Jew they worship: “Love yourenemies and slaughter mine” (Luke 6.27 & 19.27). But Christians are a minority in Britain, estimated by competent observers at less than one-fifth of the white population. What of the other minority that should be dominant, the intellectually superior minority that has enjoyed the incomparable advantages of the British public schools and of Oxford or Cambridge? They evince no more comprehension of reality than the religious. The gods first make mad those whom they would destroy. And we can only behold with painful catharsis the tragedy of a nation which once had an empire on which the sun never set, and which, in Herculean madness, reduced itself to a mass of frightened sheep, huddled together on a small island on which the sun will someday set for the last time.

The “Race Relations Act,” to be sure, has some loopholes, and Englishmen who hire competent solicitors expert in such matters can still make some appeal to facts and reason without going to gaol, although, of course, they expose themselves to surreptitious chastisement. The Jews, needless to say, are agitating for legislation to “plug the loopholes” in the existing tyranny.

As mere specimens of the English way of life today, we may note the following. The Jews burned the printing establishment in Uckfield, Sussex, that had been printing magazines and books that do not bear the Kosher seal of approval. One of the arsonists, caught by his own arrogant overconfidence, pled the privilege of his race to destroy their enemies, but found that arson, even with such noble motives, was still technically illegal in Britain, and he received, from an apologetic magistrate, the minimum sentence. He was found to be an old hand in Yahweh’s service, having been identified as one of the burglars who, equipped with forged credentials as telephone repairmen, “cased” the apartment of David Irving, the author of The Destruction of Dresden, and were later caught red-handed in the burglary, equipped with tools from the British post offices. The daily press in Britain suppressed mention of the deplorable arrest and trial of the high-minded arsonist. (75)

(75. The trial was concisely reported in the local Sussex Express, 17 April 1981. The newspaper, doubtless hoping to be thrown a bone, interpolated the remark: “To say the publications handed to the judge [to justify the arsonist's pious deed] were ‘vile and evil’ was a masterly understatement,” The incident was also reported in the small weekly publication, Focal Point (London), 30 May, which inter alia observes that since the trail and sentencing took place hurriedly and without the knowledge of the victims of the arson, the purported specimens of their publications that were exhibited to the judge and newspaper may well have been forgeries. That would be only normal! My knowledge of the incident I next mention comes from a document prepared by the victim’s solicitor and letters from friends.)

The masters of Britain naturally have their own corps of terrorists, special police, doubtless Englishmen willing to do anything for a small salary, paid by the bovine taxpayers. On 16 April 1981, these goons raided the apartment of an Anglo-Saxon in Brighton who, they said, was suspected of having in his possession a small booklet that did not show proper reverence for God’s Race. Since he was at his place of employment, as they doubtless knew, they smashed open the door of his apartment and turned everything upside down, looking vainly for the horrible booklet. Frustrated in their suspicions, they departed with a large package that doubtless contained his expensive camera, the money he had left in a drawer of his desk, and other fenceable property, leaving the broken door open, so that they could claim that someone must have entered the apartment after them. At latest information, the victim, just an Anglo-Saxon, to be sure, has vainly petitioned for redress.

Britain has indeed been blessed with righteousness. An Englishman’s home was once his castle; now it is his kennel.

We must cross the Channel to la belle France for the most accurate measure of Europe today. In the historic land of liberté, Professor Robert Faurisson of the University of Lyons, maintaining the now antiquated tradition of intellectual integrity in academic circles, stated publicly that the Jews’ infamous hoax about the “six million” was a preposterous hoax. (76) Squads of Jews attacked him on the campus and burst into his classrooms to make it impossible for him to conduct classes, while the authorities of the university beamed approval. He and his publishers and even newspapers that had printed his replies to their defamation of him were prosecuted in the French courts for “insulting” the Jewish nation by doubting one of the lies by which it most conspicuously exhibits its racial solidarity as a super-organism. He has been beset by multiple prosecutions in the French courts, and he has thus far been sentenced to a public recantation of his veracity and fines that will amount to one million francs in the new currency (one hundred million in the old.) His total savings as a university professor with a family amount, he says, to about two thousand francs. And other prosecutions are still pending. The French system of justice doubtless hopes that it can drive the Aryan dog to suicide, but if that does not work, it will probably be wiser than the Inquisition that permitted Galileo to survive and will have Faurisson doused with gasoline and burned in a public square, while Jews dance merrily about the pyre.

(76. It is said that the Institute for Historical Review will publish English translations of Professor Faurisson’s major articles in an issue of its Journal. Presumably it will do so unless the Jews, who have made one attempt to burn down the building in which the Institute is located succeed in a new attempt.)

It is a nice irony that Professor Faurisson’s only support, so far as is known, comes from a Jew, who has disobeyed his race, and a few French “leftists.” He would doubtless have been supported by Professor François Duprat, if the Jews, as they openly boast, had not preferred to punish that man for his denial of the Holy Hoax by blowing up the automobile in which he and his wife were riding. The “New Right” in France, of which we once entertained some hopes, (77) has been taught a lesson by the Jews, who broke into one of their conferences and clubbed them, permanently crippling one man, while the French police looked on benevolently. The few French champions of Western science and rationality now slip quietly away from their universities or homes to meet, almost furtively, in secluded parts of the countryside, fearing raids by the Jews or the French police; and they are doing their best to pretend they never heard of Professor Faurisson. It’s embarrassing, butcourage, mon ami, le pauvre diable n’est pas encore mort, mais il le sera bientôt.

It is easy to foresee the future. The simplest way out of the disconcerting fact that so many of the “six million” whom the Germans exterminated are alive and conspicuous in such capacities as that of the President of the “European Parliament” will be to claim that the Germans did indeed kill them, but they, being Yahweh’s pets, naturally arose from the dead after three days or some other appropriate period of time.

The next step is easy. As Douglas Reed observed in The Controversy of Zion, to the Jews “the world is still flat and Judah, its inheritant, is the center of the universe.” (78) Surely, there can be no greater insult to the Jewish nation that to doubt the word of its god, who made the world a flat cake of mud and placed above it the sun and moon, balls of fire floating in the upper atmosphere, so that he could stop them whenever he wanted to help his Holy People massacre the inhabitants of a country they wanted to steal. French courts of justice will surely repress the vile “racists” who cast doubt on Yahweh’s words, and a few million-franc fines, supplemented by burning a few incorrigibly sane Frenchmen at the stake, will establish righteousness throughout the beautiful land oû l’oui résonne.

(78. See above, note 4. The passage I have quoted occurs on p. 105 and continues, “The ruling sect has been able, in great measure, to impose this theory of life on the great nations of the West, as it originally inflicted The Law on the Judahites themselves.” Reed goes on to point out that Jews’ mission in this world is based on the promise Yahweh made to Israel: “I will destroy all the people to whom thou shalt come,” (Exod. 23.27). Reed’s is, on the whole, an excellent book, marred only by some charitable efforts to temper the wind for Jesus’s lambs. Incidentally, he makes the interesting suggestion (p. 207) that Herzl, the founder of modern Zionism (see note 51 supra) whom Samuel Roth described as “probably the first honest Jew in the pubic life of the world in two thousand years,” may have been eliminated by Jews who wanted to take over and pervert his Zionist movement.)

And then one more step. Yahweh told Moses, “I have made thee a god to Pharaoh [i.e., the unnamed king of the Egyptiangoyim].” Now it is only proper that the “Sons of the Living God” should be the gods of the lower races and be worshipped by them. It requires no great effort of the imagination to picture thousands of French men and women assembled in Notre Dame, in obedience to the orders of their courts and government, to worship bare-footed rabbis seated on the alters. (79) And the choir will sing the inspired words of the prophecy: “And Israel shall rule the world forever.”

(79. Ralph Perier in Liberty Bell, November 1980, p. 22, has called attention to the extraordinary emotional fixation of the Jews, as shown in passages he cites from both the “Old Testament” and the Dead Sea Scrolls, which demands not only that other races, and especially Aryans, shall become their abject slaves, but shall demonstrate their submission by using their tongues to lick the dirt from the Jews’ bare feet. No other race, so far as I know, has ever shown that bizarre lust. Perier also quotes, “Israel shall rule the world forever,” from Gaster’s translation of the Dead Sea Scriptures, where it is the climax of an imagined war in which the Greeks and Romans (i.e., Aryans) are totally exterminated, but also survive to do the desired licking.)

Fantastic? Less so than what has now actually happened in Germany, Britain, and France would have seemed before the Suicide of Europe.

Such is a hurried bird’s-eye view of the continent that was, for Yockey, “the sacred soil of Europe,” the homeland of our civilization. He was young when he was hounded to death, and he did not live to see the Europe of today. Perhaps we should say of him, as Tacitus said of Agricola, felix opportunitate mortis.

THE EPITAPH

Yockey’s hopes and his striving seem vain and futile in the desolation of today. He appealed to a manhood and an intelligence that had died on a thousand battlefields and have become bodiless wraiths, drifting on the shifting mists of time. But he will be remembered–if there are any to remember us–as a man who sought to resurrect Europe and, in the end, gave his life for the dead. His memory will be honored in the future–if we have a future–as that of a man whose lucid mind enabled him to see the vapidity of the verbiage about “world peace,” brotherhood,” “human rights,” and the rest of the hallucinatory fictions that are used by evangelists, politicians, and other swindlers to benumb the minds of their victims. He was a man who had the courage to state the grim truth that a nation’s survival depends on its spiritual cohesion and its will to power–to naked, undisguised, unmitigated power, power over others.

A nation, a civilization, a race that has lost the will to conquer and dominate has lost its will to live–has lost the vitality that makes it fit to live in a world in which the inexorable laws of nature provide that only the strong and resolute shall survive. Yockey summoned our race to put down its opium-pipes and look outside its den of dreams to the real world, in which it will soon have no choice but to fight belatedly or perish ignominiously. It was not his fault that the drugged minds could not respond, could not comprehend.

After Imperium was republished by The Truth Seeker (New York) in 1962, Yockey’s work, which had been almost completely suppressed and was known only to the few individuals who had the luck to find, and the means to purchase, copies of books that had become extremely rare, became more widely known and accessible to those who wished to know it. It inspired untrammeled minds.

In the late 1960s, some youthful enthusiasts formed the Francis Parker Yockey Society, and, since it was not kept secret, they, few as they were, alarmed the boobherds of more than one local newspaper, ever on the watch for an outbreak of common sense. It was the young men’s intention to erect a monument to Yockey, and, after much deliberation, they decided it should bear these words:

TO THE MEMORY OF

FRANCIS PARKER YOCKEY

AUTHOR OF IMPERIUM

WHO FOUGHT THE GOOD FIGHT TO THE BITTER END

Ço sent Rodlanz que la mort l’entreprent, …

Sour l’erbe vert si s’est colchiez adenz,

Dessoz lui met s’espede e l’olifant.

The lines from the great Chanson may be translated thus:

And then, when Roland felt death coming upon him, he

lay down on the green grass, placing his sword and his horn

beneath his body, and with his face against the earth.

EPILOGUE, THE ERNIYES

In 1945, in the devastated and desolate land of a nation of heroes, the American Army forced a German physician to save the life of a captive who had tried to commit suicide. The wretched man, who had surrendered in the mistaken belief that he was surrendering to civilized human beings, had contrived to find a piece of wire and twist it tightly about his throat in the hope of escaping the long, lingering, and exquisite tortures for which the self-righteous sadists reserved him.

The German physician grimly did what he was compelled to do, but he was a man. He looked the commanding officer in the eye and said calmly: “You Americans have done more than violate the law of nations. You have committed hybris. God will punish you, and if there is no god, Nature will.”

Yes, Nature will.

To Americans who do not enjoy leading a precarious and degraded existence in the filth and stench of a multi-racial society, it will seem that Nature has already done so. But, in the vernacular phrase, they haven’t seen anything yet.

When the syndicate of organized crime that governs the witless and spineless Americans began to tax the serfs for “aid” to “underdeveloped nations,” rushing American food and medical skill to accelerate the savages’ already prodigious rate of breeding, giving them American equipment and American engineers to industrialize their jungles, and naturally inciting them to rape and murder the Aryans caught in the newly independent “nations,” the ineluctable consequences of that policy were obvious to every man who could perform simple arithmetical calculations.

I did no more that state a patent fact, long known to thoughtful observers, when, in an article published in 1963, (80) I wrote: “At the present rate, the globe, sometime between A.D. 2000 and 2005–that is to say, within forty years–will be infested by 5,000,000,000 anatomically human creatures, the maximum number for which food can be supplied by even the most intensive cultivation. And then, to keep the globe inhabitable at that bare subsistence level, it will be necessary to kill every year more people than now live in the United States–kill them with atomic bombs or clubs, as may be most convenient.”

It will be less than twenty years now.

(80. American Opinion, December 1963, p. 23. The fact was obvious from the “exponential” increase in the world’s population of non-Aryans and the geographic determination of the amount of arable land on the planet. But the ineluctable process of nature could have been, and was, foreseen long before the “population explosion” actually occurred. Sixty-seven years ago, before the First World War and while our race’s absolute superiority and dominion over the planet seemed assured forever, the great and forgotten American philosopher, Correa Moylan Walsh, wrote in the first volume of his Climax of Civilization: “A return will set in of the re-active pressure of nature upon mankind…. The struggle for existence will again become sharp and bitter…. But woe to the people which has not men that will stand up and fight without flinching. Those countries where the moral decay shall have gone deepest, where the proved stock shall have died out and given way to poor stock, where the greatest effeminization of men shall have taken place (for the masculinization of women will be no compensation), where the strong and the wise and the shrewd shall gain no more of wealth, power, and influence than the weak, silly, and incompetent, all being equal,–those will go to the wall. And when this fate shall have overtaken most of our western white men’s countries, our cycle of civilization will be completed.”)

Meanwhile, the Americans, eager to show they have elephant-sized hearts and canary-sized brains, are importing into their already overpopulated and befouled country hordes of racial enemies who quite frankly boast that they will take over for themselves entire states and groups of states, expelling or killing the stupid Aryans, for whose idiotic generosity they have a supreme and justified contempt. For the details, I must again refer you to James Farrell’s The Judas Syndrome. (81)

(81. See above, note 74. Since savages are constantly pouring into Florida from Haiti, I cannot forebear to notice a little-known historical fact. Abraham Lincoln, who was not a man without foresight and conscience, although he presided over the fratricidal war of aggression that ended the American Republic, actually began to put into practice his determination to export all Blacks from this country. On 31 December 1862, he approved contracts with entrepreneurs, chiefly from financial circles in New York City, to export 5000 Negroes to Haiti and resettle them there, at a cost to the government of fifty dollars a head. The contracts were carried out, but many of the Blacks were subsequently brought back to this country by “do-gooders” eager to afflict the white population.)

And now the promoters of “aid” to “underdeveloped nations” have discovered what they knew all along, that they hastened a catastrophe from which the opium of superstition and maudlin sentimentality will provide no refuge. The Club of Rome, which had been busy fostering international “understanding” and international looting, hired experts from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to report on “the predicament of mankind,” and published the results in The Limits to Growth(London, 1972). What emerges from the report is a desperate hope that catastrophe can be postponed by de-industrializing the “emergent nations” and finding ways to kill off a large part of the prolific anthropoids, so that global starvation will not begin in 2000. There are many graphs to show the possible effects of miracles: if, for example, the yield of food by arable land were doubled by some inconceivable means, the starvation crisis could be postponed to 2024. The shock to tender minds is cushioned by speculations about the invention of “perfect” means of birth control, which will be made “available” to everyone–”available” being an euphemism for making the use of such means compulsory, which, being impossible, in turn means mandatory abortions, which are equally impossible of application to the most prolific races–and that makes nonsense of the bland assumption that all races are equal and are to be equally reduced. Talk about reducing the birth rate globally is mere verbiage: everyone who knows anything about the non-white races (except Jews) knows that the only practical means of control requires an enormous increase in the death-rate.

The Club of Rome’s report also made projections that simply ignored the crucial question of food, and these showed that even if manna showered from the skies, essentially the same crisis and struggle for life would occur at approximately the same time from the exhaustion of the natural resources of our insanely exploited and ravaged earth, and also that if that factor be disregarded, the planet is being so polluted by its anthropoid parasites that, at no distant date, it will cease to sustain their life.

Some glimmering of reality penetrated even the fog in Washington and produced the Global 2000 report which, officially endorsed by the Secretary of State, calls for the elimination of two billion (2,000,000,000) human beings by the year 2000 to avert the otherwise inevitable chaos. The report is naturally evoking screams from the holy men, who like to orate about the day when Jesus will pop out of the clouds and raise Hell, but naturally cannot bear to think about reality, and from a wide variety of others, who find such ideas bad for their businesses. (82) There is much that can be criticized adversely in the report, but not the statistics, and it is the statistics that excite hysterical denials on the grounds that they are unpleasant. The gang in Washington is, of course, trying to use the report for its own purposes, but that is quite another matter.

(82. A particularly odd yell of blind indignation is the booklet, Global 2000, published by the “National Democratic Policy Committee” = the “U.S. Labor Party” = the mysteriously financed operations of one Lyndon LaRouche. The booklet is well worth reading for its sophistries.)

One thing is quite certain: the population of the globe is going to be drastically reduced within the next twenty years as the struggle for life begins in earnest. Christians will, no doubt, go on bleating about “the sanctity of human life,” especially the lowest forms of it, but they might as well expound that silly notion, which only our race has ever taken seriously, (83) to a typhoon or an erupting volcano. The forces of nature do not listen to idle talk. Neither do mammals who must kill or be killed–unless they are degenerate and have lost the will to live.

(83. The even more absolute doctrine of the “sanctity of all life” appeared in the “Orthodox” religions of India and Buddhism while the Aryans were still dominant. In polyphyletic India of today, individuals who humanely avoid injuring the lice they remove from their hair associate with individuals who are votaries of Kali and believe that the highest religious merit is obtained by treacherously murdering a man whose confidence they have cleverly won. Such is the charming diversity of a multi-racial society.)

The population of the globe is going to be drastically reduced, and in the course of that reduction, it is virtually certain that the inferior races will become extinct, as Darwin foresaw, although not in the way he anticipated. (84) The only question is which races will not survive the inevitable war for survival.

(84. See above, note 3.)

Every species of mammal capable of conscious thought thinks itself as in some way superior, but a claim to racial superiority is particularly congenial to our race, which for long had proof of it in the mastery of the whole world which it suicidally discarded. Aryans still pride themselves on the superiority of their civilization, and it is undoubtedly superior, aesthetically, morally, intellectually, i.e., in terms of its own values, so that ’superiority’ is merely a tautology. We must face the brutal fact that the only real superiority is biological, and is shown by a species’ ability to survive and increase at the expense of others.

The colored races naturally multiply as do rabbits. In the coming struggle for survival they may eat each other, if they run out of white meat, but they will breed so rapidly that they will survive, unless a superior power makes an intensive effort to exterminate them.

The Jews, whose racial cohesion has made them a super-organism, are undoubtedly a superior species. Beginning as a wretched gang of marauders, they, in only 2500 years, scattered throughout the world while retaining with undeviating concentration the super-organic unity of their purpose, and achieved virtual mastery of the globe. That you may disapprove of their methods or their character is irrelevant. They have given proof of biological superiority. One wonders whether that superiority will enable them to consummate their total triumph or whether the super-organism is too inflexible, its instincts too fixed and rigid to cope with an entirely novel situation, so that the multiplex organism will perish in the chaos it has created, exulting, perhaps, in the total destruction in which it will also be destroyed.

So far as one can extrapolate from the present, disregarding our pathetic hopes for a psychological and biological miracle, there is one race which, by its own fatuity and degeneracy, seems likely to become extinct less than a century after it was master of the world.

END