5 April, 2006

Churchill on the Jews

Posted by alex in jewish hate & hypocrisy, Jewish Tyranny at 12:55 pm | Permanent Link

[Before he sold out to the jews, Churchill was a reporter who could see clearly enough the nature and threat the jews present. Chock full of good quotes to tax the Ashkenazi appeasers with.]

Illustrated Sunday Herald, February 8, 1920. Page 5.



Some people like Jews and some do not; but no thoughtful man can doubt the fact that they are beyond all question the most formidable and the most remarkable race which has ever appeared in the world.

Disraeli, the Jew Prime Minister of England, and Leader of the Conservative Party, who was always true to his race and proud of his origin, said on a well-known occasion: “The Lord deals with the nations as the nations deal with the Jews.” Certainly when we look at the miserable state of Russia, where of all countries in the world the Jews were the most cruelly treated, and contrast it with the fortunes of our own country, which seems to have been so providentially preserved amid the awful perils of these times, we must admit that nothing that has since happened in the history of the world has falsified the truth of Disraeli’s confident assertion.

Good and Bad Jews.

The conflict between good and evil which proceeds unceasingly in the breast of man nowhere reaches such intensity as in the Jewish race. The dual nature of mankind is nowhere more strongly or more terribly exemplified. We owe to the Jews in the Christian revelation a system of ethics which, even if it were entirely separated from the supernatural, would be incomparably the most precious possession of mankind, worth in fact the fruits of all other wisdom and learning put together. On that system and by that faith there has been built out of the wreck of the Roman Empire the whole of our existing civilisation.

And it may well be that this same astounding race may at the present time be in the actual process of producing another system of morals and philosophy, as malevolent as Christianity was benevolent, which, if not arrested, would shatter irretrievably all that Christianity has rendered possible. It would almost seem as if the gospel of Christ and the gospel of Antichrist were destined to originate among the same people; and that this mystic and mysterious race had been chosen for the supreme manifestations, both of the divine and the diabolical.

“National” Jews.

There can be no greater mistake than to attribute to each individual a recognisable share in the qualities which make up the national character. There are all sorts of men — good, bad and, for the most part, indifferent — in every country, and in every race. Nothing is more wrong than to deny to an individual, on account of race or origin, his right to be judged on his personal merits and conduct. In a people of peculiar genius like the Jews, contrasts are more vivid, the extremes are more widely separated, the resulting consequences are more decisive.

At the present fateful period there are three main lines of political conception among the Jews, two of which are helpful and hopeful in a very high degree to humanity, and the third absolutely destructive.

First there are the Jews who, dwelling in every country throughout the world, identify themselves with that country, enter into its national life, and, while adhering faithfully to their own religion, regard themselves as citizens in the fullest sense of the State which has received them. Such a Jew living in England would say, “I am an Englishman practising the Jewish faith.” This is a worthy conception, and useful in the highest degree. We in Great Britain well know that during the great struggle the influence of what may be called the “National Jews” in many lands was cast preponderatingly on the side of the Allies; and in our own Army Jewish soldiers have played a most distinguished part, some rising to the command of armies, others winning the Victoria Cross for valour.

The National Russian Jews, in spite of the disabilities under which they have suffered, have managed to play an honourable and useful part in the national life even of Russia. As bankers and industrialists they have strenuously promoted the development of Russia’s economic resources, and they were foremost in the creation of those remarkable organizations, the Russian Co-operative Societies. In politics their support has been given, for the most part, to liberal and progressive movements, and they have been among the staunchest upholders of friendship with France and Great Britain.

International Jews.

In violent opposition to all this sphere of Jewish effort rise the schemes of the International Jews. The adherents of this sinister confederacy are mostly men reared up among the unhappy populations of countries where Jews are persecuted on account of their race. Most, if not all, of them have forsaken the faith of their forefathers, and divorced from their minds all spiritual hopes of the next world. This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognisable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.

Terrorist Jews.

There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution, by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews. It is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders. Thus Tchitcherin, a pure Russian, is eclipsed by his nominal subordinate Litvinoff, and the influence of Russians like Bukharin or Lunacharski cannot be compared with the power of Trotsky, or of Zinovieff, the Dictator of the Red Citadel (Petrograd), or of Krassin or Radek — all Jews. In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astonishing. And the prominent, if not indeed the principal, part in the system of terrorism applied by the Extraordinary Commissions for Combating Counter-Revolution has been taken by Jews, and in some notable cases by Jewesses. The same evil prominence was obtained by Jews in the brief period of terror during which Bela Kun ruled in Hungary. The same phenomenon has been presented in Germany (especially in Bavaria), so far as this madness has been allowed to prey upon the temporary prostration of the German people. Although in all these countries there are many non-Jews every whit as bad as the worst of the Jewish revolutionaries, the part played by the latter in proportion to their numbers in the population is astonishing.

“Protector of the Jews.”

Needless to say, the most intense passions of revenge have been excited in the breasts of the Russian people. Wherever General Denikin’s authority could reach, protection was always accorded to the Jewish population, and strenuous efforts were made by his officers to prevent reprisals and to punish those guilty of them. So much was this the case that the Petlurist propaganda against General Denikin denounced him as the Protector of the Jews. The Misses Healy, nieces of Mr. Tim Healy, in relating their personal experiences in Kieff, have declared that to their knowledge on more than one occasion officers who committed offences against Jews were reduced to the ranks and sent out of the city to the front. But the hordes of brigands by whom the whole vast expanse of the Russian Empire is becoming infested do not hesitate to gratify their lust for blood and for revenge at the expense of the innocent Jewish population whenever an opportunity occurs. The brigand Makhno, the hordes of Petlura and of Gregorieff, who signalised their every success by the most brutal massacres, everywhere found among the half-stupefied, half-infuriated population an eager response to anti-Semitism in its worst and foulest forms.

The fact that in many cases Jewish interests and Jewish places of worship are excepted by the Bolsheviks from their universal hostility has tended more and more to associate the Jewish race in Russia with the villainies which are now being perpetrated. This is an injustice on millions of helpless people, most of whom are themselves sufferers from the revolutionary regime. It becomes, therefore, specially important to foster and develop any strongly-marked Jewish movement which leads directly away from these fatal associations. And it is here that Zionism has such a deep significance for the whole world at the present time.

A Home for the Jews.

Zionism offers the third sphere to the political conceptions of the Jewish race. In violent contrast to international communism, it presents to the Jew a national idea of a commanding character. It has fallen to the British Government, as the result of the conquest of Palestine, to have the opportunity and the responsibility of securing for the Jewish race all over the world a home and a centre of national life. The statesmanship and historic sense of Mr. Balfour were prompt to seize this opportunity. Declarations have been made which have irrevocably decided the policy of Great Britain. The fiery energies of Dr. Weissmann, the leader, for practical purposes, of the Zionist project, backed by many of the most prominent British Jews, and supported by the full authority of Lord Allenby, are all directed to achieving the success of this inspiring movement.

Of course, Palestine is far too small to accommodate more than a fraction of the Jewish race, nor do the majority of national Jews wish to go there. But if, as may well happen, there should be created in our own lifetime by the banks of the Jordan a Jewish State under the protection of the British Crown, which might comprise three or four millions of Jews, an event would have occurred in the history of the world which would, from every point of view, be beneficial, and would be especially in harmony with the truest interests of the British Empire.

Zionism has already become a factor in the political convulsions of Russia, as a powerful competing influence in Bolshevik circles with the international communistic system. Nothing could be more significant than the fury with which Trotsky has attacked the Zionists generally, and Dr. Weissmann in particular. The cruel penetration of his mind leaves him in no doubt that his schemes of a world-wide communistic State under Jewish domination are directly thwarted and hindered by this new ideal, which directs the energies and the hopes of Jews in every land towards a simpler, a truer, and a far more attainable goal. The struggle which is now beginning between the Zionist and Bolshevik Jews is little less than a struggle for the soul of the Jewish people.

Duty of Loyal Jews.

It is particularly important in these circumstances that the national Jews in every country who are loyal to the land of their adoption should come forward on every occasion, as many of them in England have already done, and take a prominent part in every measure for combating the Bolshevik conspiracy. In this way they will be able to vindicate the honour of the Jewish name and make it clear to all the world that the Bolshevik movement is not a Jewish movement, but is repudiated vehemently by the great mass of the Jewish race.

But a negative resistance to Bolshevism in any field is not enough. Positive and practicable alternatives are needed in the moral as well as in the social sphere; and in building up with the utmost possible rapidity a Jewish national centre in Palestine which may become not only a refuge to the oppressed from the unhappy lands of Central Europe, but which will also be a symbol of Jewish unity and the temple of Jewish glory, a task is presented on which many blessings rest.


  1. Similar posts:

  2. 12/18/06 Jews Declare War on Christmas 31% similar
  3. 01/15/20 Good Quote About Jews: Unlike Most Human Groups, Jews are a Malignant Cancer 30% similar
  4. 03/30/06 Between The Lines: “Stop Writing Me About the Jews” 27% similar
  5. 05/23/20 Why Are Jews Hated? 27% similar
  6. 02/03/07 Kevin Macdonald’s Latest on Jews, Immigration, Middle East 27% similar
  7. 10 Responses to “Churchill on the Jews”

    1. apollonian Says:

      Churchill Article Monument To Jew Mendacity, Conspiracy
      (Apollonian, 5 Apr 06)

      Brilliant article (posted above) to be analyzed regarding Churchill, a secularized Jew (or perhaps “half-Jew”) himself (see Judicial-inc.biz), supreme architect in the horrific assassination of Germany in the twentieth century. Churchill is thus shown so conveniently and sublimely sympathetic to Jews, conspirators, criminals, and murderers, mouthing platitudes which only enable and enhance the Judaic deception component to their conspiracies.

      Thus we see how lower-level Jews (as was Churchill so typically) and associated gentile accomplices think and function in their thematically confused and fallacy-laden way, so diabolically convenient and useful for topmost Judeo-“Sadducean” mastermind conspirators of such as the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR–see JBS.org).

      Churchill’s exposition, however useful, is very mixed for quality of insight as he observes so matter-of-factly the bolshevik conspiracy which he typically separates fm basic Talmudism, the Talmud being definitive Jew theology-aesthetics, antithesis to Christian New Testament (NT), which Talmud Churchill doesn’t mention as he could and should. (See Whtt.org.)

      Observe Churchill begins equivocating for the nature of Judaism versus Christianity fm 3rd paragraph in above article: “We owe to the Jews in the Christian revelation a system of ethics which, even if it were entirely separated from the supernatural, would be incomparably the most precious possession of mankind,….” Thus are the gentile masses placated and lulled by means of empty compliments and flattery which is actually so inaccurate and profoundly untrue, the half-Jew pretending to respect his victims and dupes.

      Next Churchill, the half-baked Jew, makes excuses for Zionism which was mere appendage-instrument of the same large conspiracy which had funded and sponsored the bolsheviks, these bolsheviks so denounced by Churchill, so selectively.

      And how wrong Churchill turned out to be, as the Zionists were and are equal conspiratorial counterparts to bolsheviks and “international bankers” as of United States Federal Reserve Bank (Fed) and Bank of England, both of which being crass counterfeiting scams run essentially by Jews. (See “Creature From Jekyll Island,” by G.E. Griffin.)

      “National” Jews, as Churchill described them, simply did and do not exist, all of them being co-conspirators with Zionists and bolsheviks, all Jews ultimately cooperating in the large, most basic Jew conspiracy regarding the Fed (Federal Reserve Bank) counterfeiting fraud. Churchill thus merely mouths and invokes a most pathetic wishful-thinking and conceit of the gentile “Sadducean” accomplices and their dupes among the people, especially elders, to the Jew-conspiracy.

      Thus Churchill never seriously or accurately analyzes Jews historically or psychologically in adequate and honest manner, or the Talmud for its anti-human, anti-Christ essence. Thus Churchill omits to point out Judaic-Talmudic theologic collectivism of which communism is mere secular offshoot and direct emanation.

      Churchill ends in plugging-endorsing the large general Jew conspiracy (for banking and Talmudism) including Zionism and the “National Jews,” this at mere price of obligatory denunciation of the bolsheviks, though he does so well emphasize the basic nature in most lurid terms, the one and most interesting feature for historical instruction.

      Churchill thus himself endorses, displays, and demonstrates the traditional Judaic mentality and conspiracy theory as it is too limited to bolsheviks and miserably applied regarding “National Jews” and Zionists.

      CONCLUSION: Thus Churchill criticizes effectively ONLY SOME Jews, as bolsheviks, while he actually enables the rest of the Jew conspirators for basic effectiveness and conspiracy as regarding the United Nations, Zionism, and the other arms of the Jew-conspiracy, an extremely instructive and revealing text indeed fm a significant historical figure, an infamous assassin of Christendom and Germany. Honest elections and death to the Fed. Apollonian

    2. GasJews Says:

      Churchill was a jew. His mother’s name was Jenny Jacobson. Jacob = Israel.

    3. Drin Shtino Says:

      Who is the author ,Mrs. Webster ,who Churchill alludes to as elucidating the jews role in the french revolution .If the book title is Known I would like to know that and the publishing house and dates as well.I thank you in advane for your anticipated aid in this matter.

    4. apollonian Says:

      I think it’s simply “The French Revolution” then with subtitle after a colon. Webster is famous and prolific author easily referenced; name is Nesta Webster, also authoress of “Secret Societies and Subversive Groups.” Webster book on F. Revolution is actively sold by John Birch Society at JBS.org.

    5. alex Says:


      The French Revolution, Then and Now

      A review of The French Revolution: A Study in Democracy
      by Nesta H. Webster (New York: Dutton, 1920)

      by Alaric

      As the West grows more unstable, the inevitable White revolution is gathering power. Like that borderland of tension between tectonic plates, the slip, the longer it is delayed and the more frustration builds, will be the more ferocious and pandemic. And in this ZOG-time of fairyland literature for yuppies and Brown, Black and Yellow “empowerment,” objective literature written by and for healthy White people is as rare as an honest politician.

      So it is time to revisit Nesta Webster’s The French Revolution: A Study in Democracy. White nationalists and anti-Communists have referred to it since its publication. It is more than a classic; it is the seminal analysis of Egalitarianism in its most insidious form: “democracy.” For this political system is the biggest and most sophisticated lie. It is the ultimate camouflage for a common, but still peculiar, form of human parasite that found in the final decade of Royal France its first great opportunity to seize absolute power. The value of Mrs. Webster’s book lies in the way she assembles details of the Mother of Revolutions. To say she reveals the hidden hands and methods of the Revolution is a short stop that could divert the reader from recognizing her superb sleuthing skills and sharp narrative style. She takes us farther: she weds the “revolutionary” personality to a doctrine which empowered it for the first time, in July 1789. The picture she presents is not only iconoclastic, it is shocking.

      Her book explodes the symbols and causes traditionally taught to helpless schoolchildren, especially since the Deweyfication of American education. We Americans were taught to believe that the Revolution was a just rebellion against entrenched, worthless nobles by starving peasants. This was part of the reality — but it shared the affair with crises engineered by political radicals. Mrs. Webster discovered many details herself in obscure documents in French and other archives. The force immediately behind the surface turmoil leading to the abdication of King Louis XVI was Illuminatism, wielded by rabble intellectuals and greedy outsiders and covertly backed, for a time, by the enemies of Royal France. Mrs. Webster demonstrates that the radical advocates of Illuminatism, in concert with scoundrels and opportunists, contrived by ingenious ways to block food production and delivery to Paris. Having thus prepared Paris’ rabble, these radicals infiltrated professional agitators among it, many of them non-French (most Italians), created an “army” to use against a regime that was already rotten and tottering. It was only a matter of time ageing the infection. Louis himself, Webster reveals, was thoroughly corrupted by the vision of universal brotherhood — so much that he had lost touch with all reality and ordered his Swiss Guards to stand down as the Parisian mob assaulted his family in Versailles palace. The Guard, probably in the heat of instinct as it guarded itself, ended up sealing the family off from the front for a time, and, along with some very brave French Army officers and men, and a few manly nobles who happened to be on site, prevented the mob from tearing the royal family apart. All its defenders, however, were killed in the most vulgar and vicious manner. They fought the mob to death, and the reader will feel the loss of these brave men, and cannot avoid thinking of the good White men serving in ZOG USA’s forces and possibly destined to perish in some filthy military ploy against the enemies of the Tel Aviv-London-New York axis.

      Having carted Louis, Marie Antoinette, and their children off to a Paris prison, the Versailles mob commenced an orgy on its grounds which Webster depicts in detail, and it defies credulity. Everything happened, including torture of some prisoners, gang rapes, and cannibalism. (Cannibalism occurred disturbingly often among the mobs of Paris, and one wonders about the savages in American cities — what will they do?) Likewise another event we were taught to admire, “the storming of the Bastille,” was really sordid and cowardly, its facts distorted by ZOG-ucation into a romantic act of bravery and justice. There were no “political prisoners” within, only a few petty criminals. The prison itself was decrepit and under-guarded, and the stinking, drunken mob which the agitators brought down on it were motivated by nothing so much as the prospect of loot and blood-sport.

      Illuminatism has evolved into a doctrine easily molded by intelligent anarchists and revolutionaries. The names for this doctrine change, but at its heart is Egalitarianism — that is, Democracy — and it has gained sophistication and respectability. Almost anyone can join; all he or she needs do is deny reality, consign himself to the sugary path of materialism, and be the sort who can prey on the productive. The Revolution, then, a purportedly just rebellion by the oppressed and middling people of talent, was actually a hijacking of a necessary reform movement. Promise the mob, control the mob; use the managerial and technical skills of the middle class to hold it together as you purge the existing ruling class. The Revolution as taught is a lie, which explains the runaway ferocity and cruelty perpetrated against, first, nobles and anyone wealthy. Later on this movement fueled by blood took on the inevitable witch-hunt character, dragnetting even urban rabble, peasants, helpless servant girls, and others, for public guillotining. This phenomenon is predictable, and necessary. The leaders of the Revolution were providing bread and circuses for the mob, much as today niggerball, tacos, and credit cards are doled out to control the White herd.

      Egalitarianism and Democracy first became a vector in the French Revolution, a reproducible and malleable tool for overthrowing existing order. The French Revolution was a total revolution, in contrast to the American Revolution. The colonial elites were forced to advocate egalitarian values in order to win subordinate support in their revolt against British royal control. The American Revolution was limited. The absentee control of wealth and capital in British America, though substantial, was not total. Therefore those indebted or stymied Colonial elites who wanted to break out of their debt obligations by nullifying the commerical laws did not need to purge the debt-holders. They were in Brittain. It was only necessary to neutralize their agents: the colonial governors, customs inspectors, magistrates, constables, loyalists, some militia officers. In France, however, though the American Revolution inspired the radicals some, the nobility was numerous and part of the economic and social and governmental reality. It had a lock on the laws and had resisted and neutralized all reform movements that the radicals and middle class wanted most. Hence the long-building rage, when it found an energizing doctrine, cut loose with such force that the cruelties are still to be wondered at. The rage and the radicals needed a guiding doctrine; Illuminatism provided it.

      The mob then was rallied and directed with a few buzzwords out of the Illuminati’s lexicon of “democracy.” Perhaps the efficiency of the printing press had reached a state by this time so that ideas could be disseminated at a decisive velocity. An idea presented as an alternative to tradition might be enough to break tradition’s “monopoly” on the creation of reality. That alone.

      Mrs. Webster gives much detail on Illuminatism. It was the creation of a Jew, Adam Weishaupt, a professor of Canon Law (he was a Catholic “convert”) at the University of Ingolstadt, Bavaria. It proved to be perfect cover for destabilizing societies and kings. Jews, ever on the make to achieve the dominance of the world their religion promises them, are genius innovators of apocryhpa and deception. The time was right: France weak and her fisc empty, having lost her North American colonies; the printing press; the army and navy poorly officered and their morale low; a volatile rabble growing in her cities — all these factors and others intersected in the 1770s and ’80s. With followers Weishaupt established the Order of Illuminati in May 1776. Like most ideologies it was taken up first by academics and intelligent discontents of the type willing to pull down the whole house. Weishaupt is absolutely the father of egalitarianism-parasitism as a practical, street-effective revolutionary tool.

      Mrs. Webster, writing under the influence of contemporary events in Russia, was moved by the Bolshevik-White Russian war for control of Russia. In analyzing the French Revolution she hoped to find the source of the 1917 Revolution, which called for Worker supremacy. But Mrs. Webster saw through the Bolshevik ostentation. That is to say, she knew the Bolsheviks were dominated by Jews, and so she understood relation between Illuminatism, Marxism, and Bolshevism. And it is clear that Mrs. Webster did not like Jews.

      Nor did she like Germans. Or maybe it is better to say, she did not trust them, for she was clearly a British patriot. She gives, as part of her revelations of the German origins of Illuminatism, a sinister hue to the Prussian King Friederic Wilhelm II (r. 1786-1797). In fact he did dispatch agents and funds to France to support French Illuminati whom he hoped would destabilitze the French royal house. Yet, to his credit, Wilhelm withdrew his support when he learned more about the Illuminati. Writing just after the Great War her anti-Germanism is understandable. Yet this detracts only a little from the total picture she presents. She had a domino-theory view of 1780s geopolitics; Britain was to be Prussia’s next victim, after France. Webster does not exonerate Wilhelm for quitting the Illuminati, nor credit him for sending Prussian forces to aid the army of French exiles and royalists which invaded but was, unfortunately, defeated by a Jacobin army at Valmy September 20, 1792. Mrs. Webster continued to write and publish into the late 1950s, and she may have revised her opinion of Germany and Germans in the aftermath of the Second World War, when International Zionism achieved its triumph of domination over all Western governments. I have not read her subsequent works.

      The French Revolution is valuable also as a primer on economic and psychological warfare. The reader will win knowledge of the critical methods of mob control. More, Mrs. Webster analyzes the brat, anarchist-intellectual personality which characterized the leaders of the Revolution: Marat, Danton, Robespierre, and others. She describes their personal habits, and by them we see that such people are really materialists and pleasure-loving — yet by nature non-productive. They turn to parasitism to win lifestyles they cannot achieve honestly. Marat, especially, is notable for holing up in the home of a wealthy Parisian and enjoying a squad of hussies and the best food and wine. He was assassinated by a peasant girl from Britanny, Charlotte Corday, who wielded a dagger on him in his bathtub. (Look at the horde of professional world-savers staffing the “non-profit” organizations such as infest Washington, D.C. How many of them have ever held a real job? And their average income is higher than that of the average American outside the Beltway.)

      After Louis XVI was out of the way the Assemblies governed France. Mrs. Webster skillfully recreates their composition and how their decent members — I have in mind the middling merchants, barristers, technical and professional men — who wanted to promulgate laws which would benefit all of France, were neutralized by the radicals. They were motivated by lusts and vengeance and their hatred of their betters, and the reader will recognize that these unstable men could go only so far on charisma alone. With mobs outside howling for wine and food and action and ready to decapitate the assemblymen who didn’t deliver, the Assemblies degenerated into a stalling mechanism whose chief purpose became self-perpetuation by looting and redistribution. The arrival of a strongman is inevitable in these circumstances, and Buonaparte was treated as both demi-god and royalty. So much for the wisdom of the common man. That situation reminds one of the current U.S. Congress: it’s all we’ve got, but it isn’t solving the problems that are taking down this politcal state called the United States, which is, of course, utterly ZOG-controlled. The United States has no identity, and neither does Congress. Like the Assemblies, it is a loot-and-spend mechanism which natural law will soon deal with. This is the principal lesson The French Revolution offers. He who controls the mob controls the streets, controls the country. Yet the mob is very, very dangerous, and always demands what it cannot make. The detail of Webster’s book is astounding. And if the devil is in the details, so is the exorcist. A close reading of this work yields solutions to the plight of Whites. I darersay that, outside of technical knowledge, it is the only work which White people everywhere need to survive the coming revolution.

      The material means of life will determine the fate of Whites. If food and energy hold out and sustain the Yellow, Brown and Black hordes invading White lands, they may establish themselves ineradicably. Then Jews, and their White dupes and lackeys, with their temporary and unnatural ally, Big Business, shall have their way. I don’t think it will happen, however. The means of life are growing scarcer, and the lines that supply them ever more tenous. Food quality and water quality are degrading, water reserves are low, farmland diminishing, and oil supply is a wildcard. Worst (or best) of all, the general level of intelligence is falling throughout the White world, through miscegenation and dumb education. Mediocre people cannot maintain a high-tech civilization. When Whites stop delivering, the muds will riot (along with degenerate Whites). Then that reality will arrive which some White Nationalists say is the only solution: the destruction of White Civilization. Starvation, disease, and war will cull the unfit Whites and allow a healthy White overmind to organize the survivors. The aftermath might be like the Europe following the Black Death: a shining and potent White homeland, ripe for a Renaissance. Or perhaps a resurgent Christianity or Odinism, or both, might energize that healthy portion of the White population. But both systems carry the fatal component “fairness” that will limit them, and which surely won’t impress ruthless, arrogant enemies. Nesta Webster’s superb analysis of the Mother of Revolutions will launch you into a careful investigation of the possibilities.

    6. Carpenter Says:

      Worthless parasites all:

      The French Revolution is valuable also as a primer on economic and psychological warfare. The reader will win knowledge of the critical methods of mob control. More, Mrs. Webster analyzes the brat, anarchist-intellectual personality which characterized the leaders of the Revolution: Marat, Danton, Robespierre, and others. She describes their personal habits, and by them we see that such people are really materialists and pleasure-loving — yet by nature non-productive. They turn to parasitism to win lifestyles they cannot achieve honestly. Marat, especially, is notable for holing up in the home of a wealthy Parisian and enjoying a squad of hussies and the best food and wine. He was assassinated by a peasant girl from Britanny, Charlotte Corday, who wielded a dagger on him in his bathtub.

      Charlotte Corday, the heroine from Caen. And why shouldn’t she kill the bastard? The majority of those executed during the “Revolution” were peasants. You can only imagine what atrocities she had witnessed.

      There were massacres in towns that refused to submit to the “revolutionaries.” And under Robespierre, there were plans on “democratizing” France by forcing all the French to wear a grey uniform. Church towers would be demolished as their height was “undemocratic,” taller than the other buildings.

      The Germans on the border were a problem, in Alsace and Lorraine (Elsass and Lothringen). They would either be killed or scattered across the country, as they didn’t speak “the language of the revolution.” (Some of the Front Nationals firmest support comes from these two provinces today. Just a sidenote.)

      Apparently, the revolutionaries really did equal democracy with egalitarianism, in a very extreme way. There would be no differences among the people. Noone would even be allowed to dress better than others. The dark suits we wear even to this day originate with the French Revolution: colorful aristocratic clothing was abandoned in favor of the dark grey worn by the Third Estate’s representatives in the National Assembly. Everyone knew that wearing colors could get you in serious trouble, even cost you your head.

    7. Carpenter Says:

      As for the essay: eventually zionism was outlawed in the Soviet Union. The Bolsheviks couldn’t risk losing a large part of the Jewish population, from which they drew so many officals, especially commissars in the NKVD.

      Churchill … heavily in debt, he complained that he risked losing his mansion. Then a Jewish millionaire bought his debts and saved him. Being indebted to a Jew, Churchill’s support for continued attacks on Germany was secured. Let us not forget that it was France and Britain that declared war on Germany, not the other way around. They launched raids across the border several times, while waiting for British reinforcements from the colonies. The Germans decided not to sit around waiting for the invasion, so they took France in a swift stroke, allowed the British to escape, then urged Britain to agree to a peace in 1940. Most British leaders were inclined to abandon their aggression by then, but no, along came bought-by-a-Jew Churchill and demanded the bombings would continue. What did he care how much the English had to suffer?

    8. Outis Says:

      For fuck’s sake. Not everyone named, or surnamed Jacob, is a Jew. We Christians unfortunately adopted these kike names.

      APART FROM WHICH, his mother’s name was Jenny JEROME, whose father was of HUGUENOT ORIGIN.

    9. Harry Tuttle Says:

      Running defense by pretending to be in opposition.

    10. alex Says:

      Maybe, but this

      this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality

      is as fine a description of the radical jew as has ever been written.