BOLSHEVISM FROM MOSES TO LENIN: "A DIALOGUE BETWEEN ADOLF HITLER AND ME"
by Dietrich Eckart
NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT
YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.
'Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar and the father of it.'
The following material has been translated from a pamphlet found in the NSDAP Hauptarchiv. Its German title was Der Bolschewismus von Moses bis Lenin: Zwiegesprach zwischen Adolf Hitler und mir, and it was originally published in Munich in March 1924 from unfinished notes on which Dietrich Eckart had been working in the autumn of 1923.
Dietrich Eckart was born on March 23, 1868, in the Bavarian town of Neumarkt, which is about twenty miles southeast of Nurnberg, and he died on December 26, 1923, in Berchtesgaden. He was a poet, a playwright, a journalist, a scholar, and a philosopher, as well as a dedicated fighter for the National Socialist cause. Among his better-known works are his play Lorenzaccio and his translation and adaptation to the German stage of Ibsen's Peer Gynt. He was for a while editor of the Volkischer Beobachter, and he wrote the NSDAP song, with the famous words "Deutschland erwache," which later became a NSDAP byword.
Adolf Hitler paid tribute to Eckart in the last sentence of Mein Kampf, where he referred to his late friend as "... that man, one of the best, who devoted his life to the awakening of his, our people, in his writings and his thoughts and finally in his deeds: Dietrich Eckart."
The reader interested in more details of Eckart's life, as well as a fairly extensive sampling of his poetry, is referred to Alfred Rosenberg's book, Dietrich Eckart, Ein Vermachtnis (Munich, 1938).
Der Bolschewismus is of interest to Americans today for three reasons. First, it is the last earthly work of the man who, as the intimate companion of Adolf Hitler during those critical, early years in Munich, helped prepare the spiritual foundations of National Socialism. Eckart had been seriously ill as he was writing the pamphlet, and his arrest and temporary imprisonment, as a consequence of the Munich putsch of November 9, 1923, were followed shortly by his death.
Second, it is instructive, as being representative of a certain category of propaganda. Eckart was a practical propagandist as well as an idealist and a poet, and Der Bolschewismus is an excellent example of his style. Aimed at the reader with the equivalent of a high-school education, it is skillfully contrived to avoid tediousness and maintain a relatively unsophisticated audience's interest while making a rather extensive, if not intensive, historical investigation of the Jewish question. It achieves this by relegating the great majority of documentary evidence to footnotes and by liberally interspersing historically significant points with spicy or amusing tidbits. It should not be considered an exact transcription of an actual conversation between Eckart and Hitler, but rather a liberal improvisation based on a number of conversations between the two friends.
Third, it is of considerable interest, even today, for its own sake. Although the last 75 years have unfortunately provided us with considerably more evidence of Jewish-Bolshevist activities, Eckart did quite well with the materials available to him in 1923. Of particular interest is his use of the Old Testament, as a history of the Jews, to throw light onto more recent Jewish activities.
Eckart's notes for Der Bolschewismus were still in rather rough and unfinished form when he died, and this will be evident at a few places in the text that follows. The translator has slightly condensed the original material during his translation, omitting several of the more ragged portions and such things as untranslatable puns, as well as a few sections having limited interest for present-day readers. The translator in a few places has made additional footnotes, and these are so designated.
BOLSHEVISM FROM MOSES TO LENIN
"Yes!" he cried. "We've been on the wrong track! Consider how an astronomer would handle a similar situation. Suppose he has carefully been observing the motion of a certain group of celestial bodies over a long period of time. Examining his data, he suddenly notices something amiss: 'Damn it!' he says. 'Something's wrong here. Normally, these bodies would have to be situated differently relative to one another, not this way. So there must be a hidden force somewhere that is responsible for the deviation.' And, using his observations, he performs lengthy calculations and accurately computes the location of a planet that no eye has yet seen, but which is there all the same, as it turns out later. But what does the historian do, on the other hand? He explains an anomaly solely in terms of the prominent statesmen of the time. It never occurs to him that there might be a hidden force somewhere that caused a certain turn of events. But it is there, nevertheless; it has been there since the beginning of history. You know what that force is: the Jew."
"Yes, certainly," I replied, "but to prove it, to prove it! For the last fifty or hundred years, so far as I'm concerned, it's been obvious; however, a good deal further back, perhaps even in pre-Christian times .... "
"My dear fellow," he replied, "we can read in Strabo  that already in his time, shortly after the birth of Christ, there was hardly a place to be found on the whole earth that was not then dominated by the Jews; dominated, he writes, not merely inhabited. Already decades earlier, Cicero  -- at that time a great and powerful man, my friend! -- suddenly lost his nerve when, in his well-known defense plea in the Capitol, he was obliged to point out the great influence and the cohesiveness of the Jews: 'Softly, softly! I want none but the judges to hear me. Otherwise the Jews will get me into a fine mess, as they have many another gentleman. I have no desire to furnish further grist for their mills.' Similarly, the influence of the Jews with Augustus was so great that they completely intimidated Pontius Pilate, who, as deputy of the Roman Emperor, was certainly not a nobody. Thus he said, 'For God's sake, let's have done with this sordid Jewish affair!' as he reached for the washbasin and condemned Christ, whom he considered guiltless, to death.  Considering these things, my friend, every child knows -- or, rather, could know -- how late the hour already was at that time."
A reach for the Old Testament, a brief flipping of pages, and -- "There," he cried, "the recipe from which the Jews always brew their hellish broth! We anti-Semites are really something! We manage to find out everything except what is really important." And he read emphatically, with a hard voice, stressing every word:
"And I will set the Egyptians against the Egyptians: and they shall fight every one against his brother, and everyone against his neighbor; city against city, and kingdom against kingdom. And the spirit of Egypt shall fail in the midst thereof; and I will destroy the counsel thereof and they shall seek to the idols, and to the charmers, and to them that have familiar spirits, and to the wizards." 
"Yes indeed," he laughed bitterly, "now the people will seek to Dr. Cuno and Dr. Schweyer and Dr. Heim  and whatever other charmers and wizards they have. When asked why Germany has become a pigsty these gentlemen will answer reproachfully, 'You yourselves are to blame. You have no more good breeding, no faith, only selfishness and conceit. Now all of a sudden you want to put the blame on the Jews. It's always been like that when people needed a scapegoat. Then everyone jumped on the Jews and persecuted them unmercifully. And just because they had the money, and because they were defenseless. Is it any wonder that a few individual Jews are behaving reprehensibly now? After all, one finds some black sheep in every group. As if there weren't a good number of decent Jews! You should take them as your example. Look at their piety, their sense of family responsibility, their sober way of life, their readiness to make sacrifices, and, above all, their ability to stick together! And you? At one another like dogs and cats: sheer insanity!'
"Thus will the charmers and wizards prattle on and on, until one night the blood-sign will appear on all the Jewish houses, and the infuriated masses, led by the Jews, will swarm forth to smite all the firstborn in the land again, as in Egypt." 
"Remember how it was here in Munich during the communist takeover?" I interjected. "The houses of the Jews certainly weren't marked with blood, but there must have been a secret arrangement, because among all those who suffered the misfortune of a house search not one was a Jew. As a matter of fact, one of the stupid Red troopers who had me by the hair answered my sarcastic question by explaining that it was forbidden to search the Jewish houses.
"And in 1871, in Paris, the Jewish defense also ran according to plan. There the communists destroyed whatever they could, but the many palaces and houses of the Rothschilds remained completely untouched.  All this enables us to understand the place in Exodus according to which 'a mixed multitude' also left Egypt with the Jews."
"In Egypt, the scoundrels' scheme succeeded only about halfway," he finished. "The Egyptians became masters of the situation at the last moment and sent the 'mixed multitude' to the devil, together with the Jews. There must have been a dreadful struggle. The slaughter of the firstborn reveals that clearly enough. Just as they have done with us, the Jews had won the great lower stratum of the population for themselves -- 'Liberty, Equality, Fraternity!' -- until one night they sent out the order, 'Down with the bourgeois! Kill them, the dogs!' But things didn't turn out as well as they had expected. That portion of the Egyptian nation that had remained patriotic turned the tables and booted Moses, Cohn, and Levi out of the country, followed by the inhabitants whom they had incited. During this exodus they carried along as much stolen booty as they could manage, the Bible reports with satisfaction. It also reports, rather unnecessarily, that the Egyptians were glad to be rid of them.  The best, though, was the reward the Jews gave their stupid accomplices. Suddenly they began calling them 'rabble' [Pobelvolk],  whereas formerly they had called them 'comrade' and pretended to love them. Imagine the faces these deluded ones must have made in the desert when they heard this."
"The murder of seventy-five thousand Persians, in the Book of Esther, no doubt had the same Bolshevist background," I answered. "The Jews certainly didn't accomplish that all by themselves."
"No more," he confirmed, "than the dreadful bloodbath over half the Roman Empire, which took place during the reign of Emperor Trajan. Hundreds of thousands of non-Jewish nobles in Babylonia, in Cyrenaica, in Egypt, and on Cyprus were butchered like cattle, most of them after the most abominable torture!  And today the Jews still rejoice over that. 'If only the various centers of rebellion had cooperated,' triumphs the Jew Graetz, 'then perhaps they would have already been able to deal the Roman colossus its death blow at that time.''' 
"The Jews call our Sedan Day  celebration barbarous," I remarked, "but they find entirely in order the fact that, year in and year out, they still, after all this enormous time, celebrate in the synagogues their heroic deed concerning the seventy-five thousand Persians, in the feast of Purim."
"None of this evidence seems to make any impression on us, however," he said dryly. "One would think us deaf and blind.
"Before the first clash with the Egyptians, the head scoundrel, the modest Joseph, had pretty well prepared: the seven lean cows, all the granaries filled, the people raging with hunger, the reigning Pharaoh a perfect flunky of the Jews, and Joseph, with a corner on the grain supply, 'ruler over all the land'!  All the lamentations of the Egyptians were in vain; the Jew held the warehouse closed with an iron fist until the Egyptians, in return for a bit of bread, were obliged to give away first their money, then their cattle and their land, and finally their freedom. And suddenly the capital was swarming with Jews; old Jacob was there, and 'his sons, and his sons' sons with him, his daughters, and his sons' daughters, and all his seed' -- the entire hodgepodge.  And Joseph 'wept a good while' for joy, after he had first said to his brothers: 'Ye shall eat the fat of the land,' and 'The good of all the land of Egypt is yours.' 
"But some time after this glorious Egyptian citizen of the Jewish faith, one hundred and ten years old, had died, the old Pharaoh also passed away and was succeeded by another Pharaoh, who 'knew not Joseph,' and, seeing the multitude of Jews, who meanwhile had grown very powerful, he became quite frightened. He feared lest: 'when there falleth out any war, they join also unto our enemies';  thus he was smarter than Wilhelm II,  who hoped for their support. The Jews must work, he decided. In all seriousness, work. 'Unmerciful,' wailed the Jewish chronicler. No wonder that they breathed vengeance. After all, for what did one have the 'Pobelvolk,' if not to do the work?
"By now, the Egyptians had forgotten dear Joseph, who was dead and gone, but there was no lack of others on whom to blame the state of affairs: namely, the landowners, the industrialists, the bourgeois. According to the Jews, no one else was responsible. 'Proletarians of all countries, unite!' And the masses believed it and turned on their own flesh and blood for the sake of the 'chosen people,' who had brought on all their distress in the first place. But to us they touchingly read aloud in school the beautiful story of Joseph and his brothers. No doubt many teachers 'wept a good while.' It's enough to drive one to despair."
He paused, gazing darkly at the Bible of Hate.
"And so it goes, through the entire Old Testament," he began again. "Indeed, I'm telling you nothing new, but we must bring it home to ourselves as often as possible in order to be able to negate the constant hypocritical babble. Really, the Book of Joshua alone should suffice: such a thing of uninterrupted mass murders, of bestial cruelty, of shameless rapacity and cold-blooded cunning -- Hell incarnate! And everything in the name of Jehovah, in fact, according to his express wish! When the city of Jericho fell victim to the Jews through the treachery of the harlot Rahab, neither man nor beast, neither young nor old remained among the living; only the harlot was spared. She and her whole, noble family were rewarded with the privilege of living in Israel.  And what good-natured peoples they were who, one after another, were completely exterminated! Delitzsch, who has thoroughly investigated that period, writes, for example, about the Canaanites: on all the hills, under every shady tree, they rendered adoration and reverence to the sun god and to the salutary goddess Aschera; and he compares this beautiful, poetic custom with the pious way of our Catholic villagers, serving the Almighty in remote mountain chapels." 
Let us also not forget the chosen people of God, who, after they had, by Jehovah’s express and special command, stolen from their old and faithful friends in Egypt the gold and silver vessels which had been lent to them, made a murderous and predatory excursion into the Promised Land [*] with the murderer Moses at their head, in order to tear it from the rightful owners, also at Jehovah’s express and repeated commands, knowing no compassion, and relentlessly murdering and exterminating all the inhabitants, even the women and children (Joshua x., xi.); just because they were not circumcised and did not know Jehovah, which was sufficient reason to justify every act of cruelty against them. [* Tacitus (Histories, Book V, chapter 2) and Justinus (Book XXXVI, chapter a) have described the historical basis for the book of Exodus, which is as instructive to read as it is amusing, providing a picture of the historical basis for the other books of the Old Testament. There we learn (in the passages cited above) that the Pharaoh no longer wished to tolerate the presence of the creeping, obscene Jewish people in the pure land of Egypt, infected, as they were, with filthy and dangerously infectious diseases (scabies), so that he put on board ship and expelled from the Arabian Coast. It is true that a detachment of Egyptian soldiers were sent after them -- not to bring back the wonderful Jews, whom they wished to get rid of, after all, but rather, to get back the golden vessels which the Jews had stolen -- stolen, namely, from the temples of the Egyptians. Who would lend anything to such rabble on trust? It is also true that the detachment of soldiers was destroyed by a natural catastrophe. There were great shortages of all necessities on the Arabian coast -- mainly water. So up rose some insolent character [Moses] who promised to go fetch everything the Jews needed, if they would only follow and obey him [Moses]; after all, he had seen wild asses, etc. etc.
The reason I consider this the historical basis for the book of Exodus is because it is obviously the prose upon which the poetry of the book of Exodus was constructed. Even if Justinus (i.e., Pompeius Trogus) is guilty of a single anachronism in this regard (i.e., according to our assumptions, which are based on the book of Exodus), that doesn’t bother me; to me, 100 anachronisms are nowhere near as dubious as a single miracle. The above mentioned two Roman classics also indicate the degree to which the Jews have been detested and despised at all times and by all nations: the reason for this may lie in the fact that they were the only people on earth who believed in no future life apart from this earthly life, i.e., human beings were regarded as animals. The Jews are the scum of the earth, but they are also great masters in lying. [Auswurf der Menschheit, aber große Meister im Lügen].
-- Parerga und Paralipomena (Diogenes edition of Schopenhauer's original complete works in German), by Arthur Schopenhauer, translated by Mrs. Rudolf Dirks, footnote translations by C. Porter
"Joshua alone," I emphasized, "was responsible for the massacre of thirty-one kings, with all their people. Among those nations exterminated in these predatory raids were several who had yielded themselves trustingly to him. Time and again the sinister words, 'let none survive,' come up. I am inclined to believe that the 'Pobelvolk,' or at least their descendants, must have still been the obedient shock troops of the Jews, not because the work was so atrocious, but because the children of Israel have always let deluded Gentiles do their dirty work, particularly where danger was involved. Besides, they would not have been strong enough to subdue the peoples to whom they were opposed, without the bellicose enthusiasm of their brutalized comrades.
"Of particular interest is the evident satisfaction with which the Jews have deliberately enumerated each of the slain kings. One is reminded of the prophet Isaiah. In one place he raves as if possessed: 'The Lord is angry at all the Gentiles; he will deliver them to the slaughter; their land will become burning pitch; it will become a wasteland, soaked with their blood; there will be no nobles in the land; their princes will die out.'  Hundreds of years separated Isaiah and Joshua, but in that whole time the infernal rage of the Jews against non-Jewish royalty hadn't changed a bit."
"And in all eternity nothing will change," he proceeded, "so far as the attitude of the Jews toward our kings and our leaders is concerned. To destroy them is their eternal aim, and when they can't accomplish this by force, they will use cunning. Whenever we have a strong leadership, the Jews are obliged to keep their noses clean. Our leadership can be truly strong, however, only if it is based completely in our people; only if it concerns itself with the welfare of the least among us just as much as with that of the wealthiest of us; only if, in the firm conviction of its own worth, it bars every alien influence from the beginning; only if it is not merely national, but is also social, down to its very bones. No matter what others may say, I assert this: a time will come when all the elite nations of the world will have such a leadership; and then everyone will be astonished to see that, instead of grating on one another as has been the case to date, they will treat one another with respect and consideration. For then there will be no more whipping up of land greed, of an itching for power, of suspicion -- sentiments existing in unmixed form only in the isolated few, and not in the more trusting general populace, anyhow. There will be an end to the mendacious praising of an indiscriminate human brotherhood, which would be possible, if at all, only under the supposition that one had from the first excluded that eternal mischief-maker, the Jew. But had this been done, there would be no need to push the universal brotherhood idea; the various peoples would get along with each other of their own accord."
"Tell me," I interrupted him; "strictly speaking, do you consider the Jew to be national, or international?"
"Neither," was the answer. "One who really feels international has as much regard for the rest of the world as he does for his own nation. Were our so-called international swarms really like that, fine. But I fear that they are secretly more concerned with the attitude of the rest of the world toward themselves than with their own attitude toward the world. Internationalism requires basically good intentions. But the Jew fundamentally and completely lacks these. He hasn't the remotest intention of classifying himself with the rest of humanity. His aim is to dominate others in order to extort from them at his leisure. Were he really interested in comradeship, he has had the longest and most abundant opportunity for it. Jehovah's command to him to make no alliances with foreign peoples, but, on the contrary, to devour one after the other, went straight to his heart.  Everywhere one greeted him with cordiality at first: in ancient Egypt, in Persia, in Babylonia, in Europe; the cloven hoof appeared everywhere. The early Germanic conquerors found him with a number of arrogated rights and made no move to dispossess him of these. He was allowed to do business wherever and however he wanted, even in the slave trade, toward which he has always been peculiarly inclined. Like everyone else, he could hold public office, including the magistracy; and his so-called religion was protected by the state. Thus wrote Otto Hauser,  of whom no one can claim that he does not do his utmost to show the Jews in a favorable light."
"I should say so!" I nodded. "One must partake of him with caution, otherwise one may not see the black forest for the 'blond' trees.  On the whole, I prefer Werner Sombart, even though his Berlin lectures swarm with Jews."
"Well, he says the same thing!" he cried. "According to him the Jews were by no means always second-class citizens. In antiquity one even found them often with special privileges which absolved them from certain duties, such as military service.  It was never their strong side to risk armed conflict. In the War of Liberation,  the Jews of Deutsch-Krone, in Pomerania, sent a petition to the king, requesting permission to remain home from the campaign in return for money. In this petition they argued that ten thousand talers would be of much more use in the war effort than the frankly questionable fighting ability of a Jew. The petition was accepted, not only from them, but also from the Jews of five more of the seven Prussian districts." 
"Yes, I know that place in Hauser," I added. "It is authenticated. He also quotes there from Mayer's Encyclopedia, however, a statement that calmly claims that the Jews, through their heroic spirit in the War of Liberation, proved themselves as worthy German citizens."
"Just as they did in the World War," he nodded expressively. "If I had my way, I'd require placards to be hung in all the schools, at every street corner, and in every inn, on which would be printed nothing but Schopenhauer's description of the Jews: 'Great masters of the lie'!  There is no better description. And it applies without exception to every Jew equally, whether high or low, stock exchange tycoon or rabbi, baptized or circumcised. Our oppressed people! Persecuted for thousands of years! And the innocents are taken in again and again by this blatant swindle. It is understandable that they became surly with the Jews, but only after the latter had shamelessly abused their native good nature and plundered them to the skin with their usury and fraud. And that has been the case everywhere: in the old Roman Empire, in Egypt, in Asia, later in England, Italy, France, Poland, Holland, Germany, and even, as Sombart writes, 'in the Iberian peninsula, where the Jews have experienced so many blessings'!
"And the game they're playing today, they have been at for two thousand years," he continued. "I think that suffices to characterize the nature of Jewish internationalism. Now we still have left to consider the national feeling of the Jews. Naturally not that of the one for Germany, of the other for England, and so on. Not many mice are to be caught with that bait any longer. 'Send me a box full of German soil, so that I can at least symbolically defile the accursed country,' wrote the German Jew, Borne;  and Heinrich Heine smelled Germany's future in a toilet bowl.  The physicist, Einstein, whom the Jewish publicity agents celebrate as a second Kepler, declared that he would have nothing to do with anything German. He considered 'deceitful' the custom of the Central Association of German Citizens of Jewish Faith  of concerning themselves only with the religious interests of the Jews and not with their racial community also. A rare bird? No, only one who believed his people already safely in control, and thus considered it no longer necessary to keep up pretenses. In the Central Association itself, the mask had already fallen. A Dr. Brunn frankly admitted there that the Jews could have no German national spirit.  We always mistake their unprincipled exertions to accommodate themselves to all and everyone for impulses of the heart. Whenever they see an advantage to be gained by adopting a certain pose, they never hesitate, and certainly wouldn't let ethical considerations stand in their way. How many Galician Jews have first become Germans, then Englishmen, and finally Americans! And every time in the twinkling of an eye. With startling rapidity they change their nationality back and forth, and wherever their feet touch, there resounds either the 'Watch on the Rhine' or the 'Marseillaise' or 'Yankee Doodle.' Not even Dr. Heim will doubt the fact that our Warburgs, our Bleichroders, or our Mendelssohns are able to transfer their patriotism as well as their residence of today to London or to New York on the morrow.
"'An Asiatic horde on the sands of Brandenburg,' Walther Rathenau once blurted out about the Berlin Jews.  He forgot to add that the same horde is on the Isar, the Elbe, the Main, the Thames, the Seine, the Hudson, the Neva, and the Volga. And all of them with the same deceit toward their neighbors. Our charmers and wizards, however, distinguish between respectable and not-so-respectable, between settled and newly immigrated, between western and eastern Jews; and if worse comes to worst, they shrug their shoulders and mutter, 'Every country has the Jews it deserves.' It means nothing to them that it was a Jew who coined this fine-sounding phrase. Nor that in the case of Germany, considering the quality of the Jews we have 'deserved,' it becomes a resounding slap in the face. 'All Israel stands openly in the British camp!' announced the American union leader, Samuel Gompers, in 1916. And that means all the Jews in the world, and includes the German Jews too, as the American, Henry Ford, knew. He has written of the faithlessness of the so-called 'German' Jews toward the country where they live, of the fact that they have united themselves with the rest of the world's Jews toward the ruin of Germany. 'Why?' jeers the Jew. 'Because the German is a vulgar scoundrel, a backward, medieval creature, who hasn't the faintest idea of our worth. And we should help such a rabble? No, he has the Jews he deserves!' Such arrogance is indeed staggering to behold."
I reminded him of Russia: "Before the Revolution, it was a downright sewer of vileness, and the Jews there were the evident vermin in that sewer; now those same Jews are at the helm, and in a flash the selfsame country has become a 'great nation.'"
"In the year 1870," he rejoined, "we Germans had the privilege of being a 'great people.' The Jews considered that the time had arrived for replacing the French emperor, who had become undependable, with a pliable president. This also seemed an excellent opportunity to establish the Commune;  thus the 'heroic German people.' No wonder that right behind our princes and generals a pack of gesticulating Jewish financiers rode into Paris. Meanwhile, though, we have sunk back down into the pack again. The press, 'that select tool of the Anti-Christ,' as Bismarck called it,  has designated us as 'Boches' and 'Huns.' But have patience! The more quickly we approach Bolshevism, the more glorious we will become again. And one fine day it will be the English and the French who are the scoundrels. One doesn't need spectacles to see that even today. 'I am a British subject but, first and foremost, a Jew,' screamed a Hebrew years ago in a large English-Jewish newspaper.  And another: 'Whoever has to choose between his duties as an Englishman and as a Jew must choose the latter.'  And a third: 'Jews who want to be both patriotic Englishmen and good Jews are simply living lies.'  That they could venture things of that sort so openly indicates how overrun with Jews England already was then."
"The stronghold of European Jewry had its origin in the period between Cromwell and Edward VII," I emphasized. "Since then, however, the center of Jewish activity seems to have been transferred to America. They have had a good footing there for a long time. Sombart maintains that it was Jewish money that made the first two voyages of Columbus possible.  A Jew, Luis de Torres, is supposed to have been the first European to step on American soil. And, topping everything else, the Jews have recently claimed Columbus himself as one of them."
"That's not surprising," he laughed. "Everyone who has somehow played a role in the world, the dear Lord included, is a Jew. They even have Goethe and Schopenhauer on their list. And blessed be he who believes it. For my part, I contest them Columbus as well as Torres; ocean travel was much more hazardous then than now."
"According to Hauser," I replied, "Columbus was an Aryan, perhaps even of German descent."
"It's all the same to me," he responded. "As far as I'm concerned, he could have been a Zulu. I'd sooner attribute his deed to a Negro than a Jew."
"Completely aside from that, it's clear that they have had America by the throat for quite a while," I continued. "No country, writes Sombart, displays more of a Jewish character than the United States.  We have already seen a consequence of this in the World War. In 1915, at a time when the true Americans hadn't the slightest thought of a war against us -- so little, in fact, that anyone who had even hinted at such a thing would have been simply swept out of office -- a secret advisory committee met with President Wilson for the sole purpose of preparing the country for war against Germany.  In 1915, two full years before the United States intervened in the war! And who was the chief wire-puller in these nefarious activities? The previously unknown Jew, Bernard Baruch. 'I believed that the war would come, long before it came,' he later calmly explained to the special committee of Congress, which confirmed all this. And no one got up and beat the crafty scoundrel to a pulp."
"The resolution of the Jewish high command many years ago to unleash the World War is well authenticated," he said. "At the sixth Zionist Congress in Basel, in 1903, the president, Max Nordau, proclaimed: 'Herzl knows that we stand at the threshold of a tremendous upheaval of the whole world.'  Good old Herzl! What an idealist! Our charmers and wizards were filled with awe at the thought of this noble patriarch. The scoundrel knew, however, what his filthy people had in mind for us!"
"But Herzl was a Zionist," I interjected.
"He was a Jew!" he said, striking the table with his fist. "The word Jew says everything. There is no need for any further distinction! 'God's chosen people' want to have their own 'God's country' again. Catch that: 'again'! God's people and God's country, neither of which, in reality, ever existed! Every portrayal ridicules for its depravity that general state of affairs that lasted for some six hundred years in Palestine, until the Assyrians put an end to the mischief. Can you call that a country? Can't one accept the Old Testament as the authority on the matter? First we read of the uninterrupted murders and plunderings of the other peoples of Palestine, which, naturally, took many years. Then right up to the last, with the most abominable vileness, one state of anarchy followed another. The pinnacle, the flowering, the glory of Jewish statesmanship, namely, King David, was such a rascal that even the unprecedented villainy of his letter condemning Uriah was not enough for him; on his deathbed he urged his son to murder his old war comrade, Joab.
"When Cyrus gave the Jews permission to return to Palestine [from their Babylonian 'captivity' -- Translator] the overwhelming majority ignored Zion and remained in immeasurably rich Babylonia. Completely content there, they continued their financial speculations and other activities."
"In the year 1267," I informed him, "there were only two Jewish residents in Jerusalem. Up to the World War, the number of Jews in Palestine had grown to only 120,000,  even though they had been free to return there since ancient times and certainly weren't lacking travel funds. The remaining twenty or so millions -- exactly how many is difficult to ascertain, since the Jews themselves do the counting -- fatten themselves upon the sweat of others all over the world. It is hard to understand how tiny Palestine can hope to accommodate this enormous crowd."
"That's not necessary," he retorted. "The point is that now it is official: Israel has remembered itself. Its chains are cast aside. The sun of a new God's state rises over Zion. What an act! Finally liberated from bondage! Everyone is numbed with awe. The Jews grin."
"They have already issued a resolution ... " I wanted to continue.
"Yes, indeed," he cried, "if anywhere, this is where the cat jumps out of the bag! The resolution of the Pan-Jewish Conference of 1919, in Philadelphia! 'The Jews are citizens of the new Jewish state of Palestine, but at the same time they have full rights of citizenship of whatever countries they choose to live in.' One must read that non plus ultra of arrogance twice, indeed, a hundred times, in order to be sure one isn't dreaming. Imagine instead: 'The English are citizens of Great Britain. Each Englishman who chooses to live in Germany or France or Italy retains all his rights of English citizenship, but at the same time he has the full rights of citizenship of the country in which he is living.' Now ask yourself what a scream of indignation, not we or the French or the Italians, but the Jews themselves would raise if the English people had actually made such a resolution! The Pan-Jewish Congress, however, issued its resolution as categorically as a command.
"This assembly comprised representatives of all the Jews of the world, including the Zionists. Their intentions were, in short, that the Jews should stay where they were and that the new Zion should simply have the purpose, first, to strengthen their political backbone, second, to gratify their arrogance, and last but most important, to provide them a state where they could carry on their dirty business without fear of detection. I think we can form a pretty good idea of Jewish nationalism from this."
"Okay. So they are neither national nor international," I acknowledged. "What, then?"
"In terms of our customary concepts," he shrugged, "it really can't be defined. It is a rank growth over the entire earth, sometimes advancing slowly, sometimes leaping ahead in great bounds. Everywhere it sucks voraciously at the lifeblood of the planet. What was in the beginning a swollen abundance will become in the end nothing but dried-up sap. Zionism is the visible, surface aspect. It is connected underground to the rest of the monstrous growth. And nowhere is there to be found a trace of opposition to this thing."
"One might say," I laughed, "that the wolves have split themselves into two packs. It has been agreed that one of these shall abandon the land of the sheep in order to go live somewhere, quite among themselves, as pure vegetarians."
"There is one thing above all others that we must always keep in mind," he thundered, "one thing of which we must always remind ourselves: 'Great masters of the lie'! We need only forget Schopenhauer's words for an instant in order to find ourselves with the short end of the stick. To be sure, we also tell lies but, in the first place, not as a matter of habit and, in the second place, clumsily. Any really experienced judge of human nature is able to detect the lie of an Aryan, even a very shrewd one. Sherlock Holmes himself, however, would be at a loss when confronted with the Jewish cold-bloodedness in deception. A Jew is only embarrassed when he inadvertently blurts out the truth. If he should happen to deliberately tell the truth, it is always with a mental reservation, thus making a lie even of the truth."
"Indeed," I replied, "Luther said to the Jews: 'You are not a German, but a deceiver; not a Frenchman, but a faker.'  His synonym for Jew was 'liar'!"
"That's what everyone who knows them says of them," he rejoined, "from the Pharaohs up to Goethe and our time. It has been said in every dead and living language: in Greek, Latin, Persian, Turkish, German, English, French, Japanese, or what have you. One would think that these universal condemnations would give our charmers and wizards at least a little to think about. God forbid! Not even Christ was able to reach them. He stood there among the cringing Jewish rabble, his eyes flashing, the very image of scorn, and his words fell among them like whiplashes: 'Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar and the father of it.'  But to our charmers and wizards that means no more than the unintelligible stammering of a child."
"They delude themselves by believing that to be only a stern but well-meaning lecture of the Lord to his beloved people of Israel." I underscored his irony.
"Christ," he continued with a raised voice, "was never other than perfectly straightforward and frank. God, not to feel the fact that their two fundamentally different worlds were opposed to one another! In Palestine after the Babylonian captivity there was a great lower stratum of non-Jews ruled over by Jewish moneylenders, powerful through their usury. One can read that in the Book of Nehemiah.  Sombart says that it leaves absolutely nothing to be desired in the way of clarity.  The outstanding point is that the real population, composed of oppressed peasants, was of an entirely different race than the Hebrews. Gradually the Jews forced their religion on them. Christ himself growled about that: 'Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye encompass sea and land to make one proselyte ....'  The New Testament expressly states: 'Jesus departed from Galilee and came into the coasts of Judaea.'  To the Jews, Galilee was the land of the Gentiles, whose population 'sat in darkness,' as they impudently imagined.  They said: 'Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?' and 'Art thou also of Galilee? Search, and look: for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet.'  The Hebrews were so firmly convinced of the non-Jewish ancestry of Christ that they counted him among the especially hated Samaritans.  Just read up on it! There are many more such examples."
"To let each man find salvation in his own fashion is a policy that should never have been recommended," I stressed. "The tacit assumption in that policy is that each man's fashion should involve some sort of decent sentiment, some genuine belief, and not just contemptible Phariseeism. This distinction should have been expressly emphasized long ago. It wasn't, and the religion of the moneychanger has received the benefit of this misguided tolerance. Christ was not so tolerant. With a whip he put a stop to the business of the 'children of the devil,' even though he had said, 'Love your enemy'!"
"Yes," he replied, "but we must understand what Christ meant by 'enemy.' We can love an honorable and decent enemy, even a brutal one, who is frank and forthright in his enmity. And at the same time we can beware of him. But Christ never dreamed that we should love men whom no love whatever could dissuade from their implacable determination to poison us, body and soul. Indeed, he himself did not do that. On the contrary, he struck with his whip as hard as he could. And the words that he flung with indignation into the faces of the rabble breathed of irreconcilability itself. To me, he acted very properly in the founding of his religion: there was no contradiction at all between his sermons and his deeds! Why, then, have the 'pious' never followed his example? They least of all. They mercilessly persecute even their decent adversaries -- as a matter of fact, only their decent adversaries. Their eyes remain closed to the most cunning bunch of swindlers in existence. The Bavarian People's Party, for instance, knows quite well that we are defending the Christian foundations of our nation without mental reservations. They also know, however, that we can make no common cause with them as long as they adhere to their present policies. And so they turned to the Jews, hoping to remain in power with their help. They will be surprised. Dripping with friendliness at first, the Jews will turn on them murderously when they have gotten the upper hand."
"It's inevitable," I agreed with him. "They would not experience the same rude awakening with us, for we do not betray and murder our own flesh and blood for the sake of profit. So far as we are concerned, the Bavarian People's Party could even regain power, provided they were to clean the manure out of their pigsty and admit just how right we were. We don't care to govern. But we want Germanism, we want genuine Christianity, we want order and propriety, and we want these things so firmly established that not even our children and grandchildren could change them."
"They consider that impossible," he said, "and therefore they deem our program nothing but empty phrases, of no more sincerity than the empty phrases with which they consciously try to peddle themselves to the people. But our goals are not only possible, they are certain, even if we don't attain them tomorrow. But first a beginning must be made. Never and nowhere has there been a truly social state so far. Everywhere and always the upper crust has leaned much more strongly to the principle, 'what is yours, is mine,' than to, 'what is mine, is yours.' These wise ones have only themselves to blame for the fact that the lower stratum, full of rage, is now committing the same error. The Jew is able to take advantage of both these groups. One of them provides for his affairs, the other carries them out. Therefore, we oppose them both. We will put an end to unfair privileges as well as to slavery."
"Decidedly," I replied. "Our front stands against both left and right. A strange situation: from two directions we must ward off attackers who also fight one another. The Reds scream at us as reactionaries, and to the reactionaries we are Bolsheviks. From both sides the Jew directs the attack on us. The lower stratum doesn't see him yet and, thus, hates us from sheer stupidity; the upper stratum sees him but thinks it can serve its own selfish purposes with him and, thus, shoots us in the back more from unscrupulousness than stupidity. One really needs a good deal of faith under such circumstances in order to maintain one's courage."
"Which we have, God be thanked, in a hundred ways," he said, laughing, as he stretched himself. "No words were spoken more directly to our hearts than 'Be not afraid!  And that was supposed to have been said by a Jew? Those creatures of eternal fear? Crazy!"
"Every time there was anything new and promising to despoil," he brought out, "the Jew has been immediately involved. He has demonstrated an uncanny ability to sniff out like a bloodhound anything that was dangerous to him. Having found it, he uses all his cunning to get at it, to divert it, to change its nature, or, at least, to deflect its point from its goal. Schopenhauer called the Jew 'the dregs of mankind,' 'a beast,' 'the great master of the lie.' How does the Jew respond? He establishes a Schopenhauer Society. Likewise, the Kant Society is his work, in spite of the fact that -- or, rather, because -- Kant summarily declared the Jewish people to be a 'nation of swindlers.'  The same with the Goethe Society. 'We tolerate no Jews among us,' said Goethe.  'Their religion permits them to rob non-Jews,' he wrote.  'This crafty race has one great principle: as long as order prevails, there is nothing to be gained for them,' he continued.  He categorically emphasized: 'I refrain from all cooperation with Jews and their accomplices.'  All in vain; the Jewish Goethe Society is still there. It would even be there if he himself had expressly forbidden such knavery."
"With exactly the same right," I interjected, "the two of us could join a Talmud Society. What impudence that would require! Inconceivable."
"Not to the Jew," he replied. "To him impudence has no meaning. He is only able to think in terms of advantage or disadvantage, profit or loss. To regard him in any other light would be like buying a pig in a poke."
"Our charmers and wizards," I rejoined, "all fall for their trick. Goethe, Kant, and Schopenhauer seem to be nothing but babblers to them."
"Bah, Goethe!" he interrupted contemptuously. "Not even the saintly Thomas Aquinas is able to reach these people. The great father of the Church has described in his writings our relationship with the Jews in terms of a voyage on a ship. The Jews, embarked in the same vessel with the Christians, play a characteristic role: while the Christians are occupied with sailing the ship, the Jews plunder the storeroom and bore holes in the hull. St. Thomas recommends that they should be relieved of their booty and chained to the oars. What an atrocity! How un-Christian! Those poor Jews, from whom one can learn so much! At least, according to Drs. Heim and Schweyer. And so the world goes on, governed with the same wisdom as in the time of Joseph's Pharaoh."
"Namely, by statesmen," I completed, "who are so busy ruling that they completely fail to notice that not they but others actually rule; by men like Czar Nicholas, who indulged himself in the same self-deception and got a bullet in the head for it. As early as 1843 Disraeli gave us a hint of what we should expect there. 'The mysterious Russian diplomacy is organized by Jews,' he boasted. Also, 'The mighty revolution that is in the making in Germany is evolving entirely under the leadership of Jews.' 
"Most of our revolutions," he said, "whether initially with desirable goals or not, have evolved under Jewish leadership. The revolutions of vulgar predisposition were the outright work of Jews; and those with loftier tendencies were soon subverted into a darker course by Jews. In the case of the struggling young Christianity, for example, the Jews, quick as a flash, began hanging onto its coattails. Consider Paul, properly called Schaul, who was a rabbinical student. That Schaul first chose the Roman-sounding name, Saulus, and then had himself renamed Paulus gives cause for thought. Still more, the fact that in the beginning he persecuted the fledgling Christian community with first-rate ferocity. I don't know: mass murderers who later become saints -- is that not too much of a marvel? Indeed, the Jew Weininger supposed that Christ had also originally been a criminal.  But, my God, a Jew could say that a hundred times, and it still need not be true on that account.
"As a Jew, Paul certainly knew that of all the people of the world the Jews, first and foremost, needed their souls saved. 'Go not ... to the Gentiles . . . but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel,' demanded Christ.  Paul ignored it. He went to the Greeks and the Romans and brought them his 'Christianity': a 'Christianity' with which the Roman Empire became unhinged. 'All men are equal! Brotherhood! Pacifism! No more privileges!' And the Jew triumphed."
"I always think," I spun the thread further, "of the admirable Herr Levine in the Berliner Lokalanzeiger.  He suddenly burst out one day, as if in rapture: 'Only a Jew could have done that; could have, with Paul's impudence, put himself in the middle of the Capitol and there expounded a doctrine that must bring about the utter ruin of the Roman Empire!' That's what the man said, word for word; I still remember it perfectly."
"It certainly hits the nail on the head," he rejoined. "It may be a long time yet before Christianity recovers from Paul. Oh, what gullible souls we are! A Jew murders hundreds of Christians; suddenly he notices that the rest only become even more zealous; the well-known light dawns on him; he pretends to be converted, throws himself into the great pose, and behold: even though he deviates in nearly all his doctrines from the other apostles, we listen devoutly to his sermons. The simple teachings of the Master, which the most childlike mind might comprehend, we must have 'explained' to us by a Hebrew."
"The Jew," I replied, "certainly must be tempted to say, 'Why are you so stupid that you let everyone make fools of you?' And there are many charmers and wizards who, on account of his extraordinary cunning, or 'spirituality' as they call it, look upon him with timid admiration."
"If it depended on mere possessions," he returned, "they would be justified. Someone named Goldstein once boasted that the Jews administer the spiritual property of the German people.  A pity that he didn't add how they administer it.
"Well, let us be thankful that there will always be men who, for example, will read Goethe through the eyes of Goethe and not through the slimy spectacles of Goldstein. They may not be professors, but perhaps vagabonds of a sort. A breed, anyway, that will not become extinct and through which the original Goethe will be safely preserved. The Jews can then quietly 'administer' the new Goethe. They deserve him." 
"Suppose, however," I interjected anxiously, "the 'vagabonds' also listen credulously to them and fall into the trap?"
"It lies in the nature of the 'vagabond,'" he laughed, "to have a heart so full that it matters not how his head happens to be persuaded; it will always be his heart that determines the outcome. They feel intuitively what the clever, despite their intellect, are not able to see. And they preserve it. One may deceive their heads, but not even they have authority over their spirits."