You didn't read any of his breakdowns obviously, considering that most of the information has been proven truthful. You're just being salty.
Gaines' views are therefore largely accurate if that's the case.
You calling ANYONE a "charlatan grifter" is rich considering you cite 'red idealogies' as one of your sources to try and disprove NatSoc.
You're a pot calling the kettle black.
"National Conservative(ism)" is impotent. 'Conservatives' have conserved nothing. Neither can they be considered nationalists as they 'legally' allow the entire world to immigrate here. Is it that innacurate to call you a political atheist given your views?
Woods has disproven most of the claims in the first hour, more to come. It's a literal shit sandwich of memes and lies. You cling to it because you got your silly worldview from this stupid video.
Red Ideologies is full of factual information about natsoc.
"National conservatism" is conservatism (in the social sense) plus nationalism (in the identity sense). It would work great if executed correctly by the right people. Modern "conservative" parties are nothing approaching what I envision for national conservatism. Guilt by association isn't an argument against my worldview.
Again, calling it "disproven" doesn't make it so. I derive my worldview largely from Mein Kampf and other NatSoc sources, not ETLB.
Red Idealogies IS Alex Jones tier schizo.
Yes, and communism would work great "if executed correctly by the right people" according to communists. Your ideological worldview is as much a flight of fantasy as theirs. It's been tried and has failed spectacularly.
National Socialism has been tried and succeeded the first time. So we'll in fact, that in 6 years they pulled Germany out of total destitution. It then took the entire industrialized world another 6 years to completely destroy it.
And I can use MK and Natsoc sources to discredit it as a crypto-communist, Nordicist anti-Slavic ideology. Plenty of objectionable stuff there.
Red Ideologies is nothing close to Alex Jones tier. Name one thing it says that is wrong.
> It's been tried and has failed spectacularly.
That's actually true of National Socialism, which was tried and failed spectacularly. Not to mention is caused the greatest bloodbath in European history due to Hitler's lust for new territory.
> National Socialism has been tried and succeeded the first time.
You think ending up in ruins and the entire leadership either committing suicide or executed at a war crimes trial is a success? That is the standard trajectory of any natsoc regime because it's inherently war-like and imperialistic. It can only bring chaos and death to Europe.
Honestly Keith, I need your BIG project, with your channel down from yt, and irish and american elections having passed, is to make a refined version of Europa the Last Battle, with Corrected and New Information. You can organise it, but get more people on the Dissident Right to help you. I think it would be EPIC!
> This is probably based on a claim made by Solzhenitsyn that 17 out of 20 of the ministers in the first government were Jewish.
It's the other way around. Robert Wilton was a White propagandist who regularly made up fake lists for this or that committee in the Soviet government. Wilton fabricated a list of 22 names, with 17 identified as Jewish. The correct list was 15 names with Trotsky as the only Jew. Wilton's fake story has been circulated and metamorphosized many times over. Solzhenitsyn's version of 17 out of 20 is a late derivative of Wilton's original hoax.
Unz just recycles lies about Jacob Schiff allegedly supporting Bolshevism. Completely worthless. For actual information about Schiff and his support for the Whites in the Russian Civil War, see Priscilla Roberts:
Under the Sign of the Scorpion is a phony tract which regurgitates old White propaganda lies such as the hoax that somehow Jacob Schiff was involved in the decision to execute the Czarist family. It's pure crap.
Alexander Parvus: Trotsky’s Mentor from Hell “The BOLSHEVIKS”
The war began with a Japanese attack on Port Arthur (now Lushun) on the 9th of February 1904. It was, above all, the European banks belonging to rich Jews, which financed the Russo-Japanese war. All possibility of credit was shut off to Russia while Japan had unlimited credit. The most important Jewish loan-shark, Jacob Henry Schiff in the United States of America, supported the Japanese military forces with a loan of 200 million dollars, according to Encyclopaedia Judaica.
The Jerusalem Post admitted on September 9, 1976 that it had been Schiff who lent the money needed to construct the Japanese navy. Several British banks built railways in Japan and financed Japan’s war against China. It was the same Jacob Schiff who made sure that no banks were permitted to lend money to the Russians.
At the same time, he supported “revolutionary” Jewish groups in Russia. Encyclopaedia Judaica called these “Jewish self-defence groups”. The Provisional Government was later given all possible financial aid from his banking house Kuhn, Loeb & Co and other banks.
Encyclopaedia Judaica characterized Jacob Henry Schiff as a “financier and philanthropist”.
The Jewish capitalists wanted to seize power in Russia in the name of the workers. Parvus and Bronstein-Trotsky believed the time was ripe when the Russians lost Port Arthur on the 2nd of January 1905 (20th of December 1904). Parvus and Trotsky immediately began to organise major provocations, strikes and riots. The Social Revolutionaries had terrorized the nation as early as in 1904.
> All possibility of credit was shut off to Russia while Japan had unlimited credit.
This is just a blatant falsehood. France gave Czarist Russia 30.4 million British pounds during the war. Germany gave it another 24.5 million. As far as Jacob Schiff goes, he gave Japan 41.2 million. No serious analysis of the Russo-Japanese War has ever been able to attribute Russia's defeat to a lack of foreign loans. It was the incompetence of the Czarist armed forces which brought about defeat.
Upon deeper analysis conducted by historians like Anthony Sutton, Kerry Bolton, and Robert Cowley, both organizations which eventually merged into a singular force, enjoyed vast financial patronage of western imperial powerhouses such as Paul Warburg, Jacob Schiff (head of Kuhn, Loeb & co.) and even Lord Alfred Milner- head of the newly formed Round Table Movement.
These characters bankrolled much of the Bolshevik movement as early as 1905 in order to destroy a truly revolutionary process that was spreading across much of the world in the wake of the Civil War.
Totally false. Jacon Schiff gave money to the Constitutional Democrats in Russia. but never aided any socialists of any stripe in 1905. In 1917, Schiff gave money to Kerensky's government since they were in power but never gave any money to forces seeking to overthrow the Provisional Government.
Why did his own son repeat a far right conspiracy then cupcake ?
The Knickerbocker columnist in the February 3, 1949 edition of The New York Journal-American, then one of the leading local newspapers, wrote that “Today it is estimated by Jacob’s grandson, John Schiff, that the old man sank about 20,000,000 dollars for the final triumph of Bolshevism in Russia.”
Once I checked around a little, I discovered that numerous mainstream accounts described the enormous hostility of Schiff towards the Czarist regime for its ill-treatment of Jews, and these days even so establishmentarian a source as Wikipedia’s entry on Jacob Schiff notes that he played a major role financing the Russian Revolution of 1905, as was revealed in the later memoirs of one of his key operatives. And if you run a search on “jacob schiff bolshevik revolution” numerous other references come up, representing a wide variety of different positions and degrees of credibility. One very interesting statement appears in the memoirs of Henry Wickham Steed, editor of The Times of London and one of the foremost international journalists of his era. He very matter-of-factly mentioned that Schiff, Warburg and the other top Jewish international bankers were among the leading backers of the Jewish Bolsheviks, through whom they hoped to gain an opportunity for the Jewish exploitation of Russia, and he described their lobbying efforts on behalf of their Bolshevik allies at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference following the end of the First World War.
Even the very recent and highly skeptical analysis in Kenneth D. Ackerman’s 2016 book Trotsky in New York, 1917 notes that U.S. Military Intelligence reports of the period directly made that astonishing claim, pointing to Trotsky as the conduit for the heavy financial backing of Schiff and numerous other Jewish financiers. In 1925 this information was published in the British Guardian and was widely discussed and accepted throughout the 1920s and 1930s by numerous major media publications, long before Schiff’s own grandson provided a direct confirmation of those facts in 1949. Ackerman rather cavalierly dismisses all of this considerable contemporaneous evidence as “anti-Semitic” and a “conspiracy story,” arguing that since Schiff was a notorious conservative who had never shown any sympathy for socialism in his own American milieu, he surely would not have funded the Bolsheviks.
> The Knickerbocker columnist in the February 3, 1949 edition of The New York Journal-American,
It was a gossip column, not a news report. The claim in that gossip column was that Jacob Schiff's grandson had said something somewhere. But no actual statements were provided. The columnist who wrote that gossip column was Igor Cassini, the son of exiled Russian aristocrats who was simply repeating an old lie which he would have grown up with.
This hoax is similar to the one which Boris Brasol made in November 1917 when he claimed in his propaganda-tract "Bolshevism and Judaism" that allegedly in April 1917:
"Jacob Schiff in fact made a public announcement and it was due to his due to his financial influence that the Russian revolution was successfully accomplished..."
Jacob Schiff made no such statement. The actual record of what Schiff can be looked up in The Commercial & Financial Chronicle, April 28, 1917, page 1673. The article there is about fund-raising attempts for Jewish war-refugees at a dinner that was held on April 15. The article gives the text of Schiff's short speech at the event. Although Schiff was clearly happy at the fall of Czarism, he makes absolutely no claim that he had by any stretch somehow caused the revolution through "financial influence." That's just an invention by Boris Brasol.
Similarly, it is likely that sometime in the late 1940s there could have been some fund-raising dinner that would have again been raising funds for Jewish refugees in the post-1945 context. The real John Schiff probably attended and may have made some comments about how his grandfather had tried to support Kerensky's government after March 1917. But the claim that John Schiff ever said anything about his grandfather somehow supporting Bolshevism is a fake version cooked up by Igor Cassini.
All that Parvus did was that when the German General Staff was trying to figure who might create troubles for the Provisional Government, Parvus pointed them to Lenin. It was then Hindenburg and Ludendorff who arranged for Lenin to travel into Russia. That one recommendation to the German General Staff is the only that about Parvus which makes him significant.
Parvus did not fund any Bolsheviks. He advised the German General Staff that Lenin was the most obvious capable opponent of Kerensky's government, and he did no more than that. Lenin's funding, such as it existed, came from Russian sources: The well-identified Russian funders for Lenin’s party were Savva Morozov, N.P. Schmit, A.I. Yeramasov, Alexander Tsiurupa, Alexandra Kalmykova, Vera F. Komissarzhevskaya. There may have been others, but there’s nothing to suggest that Lenin ever spent his time looking outside of Russia for funding. There were enough discontented Russians for that.
Out of the many fallacies in that piece, one specific one is worth taking specific note of:
-----
To direct the takeover, a seven-man “Political Bureau” was chosen. It consisted of two Russians (Lenin and Bubnov), one Georgian (Stalin), and four Jews (Trotsky, Sokolnikov, Zinoviev, and Kamenev).
-----
In reality, this politburo never did anything because Zinoviev and Kamenev (half-Jewish on his father's side) led the opposition to Lenin and Trotsky in their advocacy of taking power.
-----
When the party's Central Committee met in secret session during the night of October 10 [old style], Lenin slipped into town to take part in its deliberations. He insisted that the putsch be carried out immediately. Kamenev and Zinoviev opposed this proposal most resolutely, but the others also had doubts. Subsequently, Kamenev gave an interview to a Menshevik newspaper in which he revealed this disagreement. Lenin, in white hot fury, called him and Zinoviev traitors to the revolution.
-----
-- Richard Pipes, Three "Whys" of the Russian Revolution, pp. 52-3, Vintage Books, 1997.
This conflict recurred immediately after the initial seizure of power:
-----
Between October 29 [old style] and 31, when it seemed that Krasnov's forces might retake the capital ... Lenin and Trotsky ... did not attend ... the Vikzhel conference at which the character and program of a new government were discussed. In their absence, the views of Kamenev, Zinoviev, Rykov, Miliutin, and other Bolshevik moderates carried particular weight. Kamenev and his associates were fairly convinced that the only hope of defending ... the revolution ... lay in the creation of a broad socialist coalition government, which had been their position all along...
Bolshevik moderates continued to press for the formation of a government in which all socialist parties would be represented, even after the moderate position had been voted down in the Central Committee. Indeed, on November 3 Kamenev and Zinoviev secured the Central Executive Committee's endorsement of continued efforts to form such a government. For Lenin, who a week earlier had urged that Kamenev and Zinoviev be ousted from the party for their public opposition to an insurrection, the moderates' readiness to sabotage the revolution was maddening... Lenin's ultimatum was presented formally on November 4, after which Kamenev, Zinoviev, Rykov, Nogin, and Miliutin resigned from the Central Committee in protest.
-----
-- Alexander Rabinowitch, The Bolsheviks Come to Power: The Revolution of 1917 in Petrograd, pp. 310-1, W. W. Norton & Company, 1976.
Weber is simply giving a misrepresentation of the actual events. He does throughout his whole piece.
Given the Soviet Union’s complexity and predilection for numerous layers of bureaucracy it is a difficult to quantify the number of Jews throughout senior leadership positions during and just after the revolution of 1917. Half of the top contenders in the Central Committee of the Communist Party to take power after Lenin’s health declined in 1922 – Lev Kamenev, Trotsky and Zinoviev – were Jewish. Yakov Sverdlov, the chairman of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee from November 1917 to his death in 1919, was Jewish. Born in 1885, he had joined the Russian Social Democratic Party in 1902 and became a member of the Bolshevik faction with Lenin early on. Like others of his generation he took part in the 1905 revolution. His father converted to Russian Orthodoxy.
The large number of Jews in leading parts of the party was not lost on those non-Jews around them. V.M. Molotov, the powerful foreign minister of the Soviet Union under Stalin, made many remarks about Jews to Felix Chuev in a series of conversations between 1969 to 1986 that became the basis for the 1991 book Molotov Remembers. He recalled that as Lenin lay dying “at the time Jews occupied many leading positions, though they made up only a small percentage of the country’s population.” Of Zinoviev, he recalled, “He didn’t even look like a Jew.”
Antisemitism was an issue within the party. Molotov recalled in 1912 when he was at the Russian newspaper Pravda, “We received a letter from [Nikolay] Krestinsky. He wrote that Lenin was an antisemite.” This was because Lenin had opposed the Mensheviks, a separate communist faction.
“Almost all the Mensheviks were Jews. Even among the Bolsheviks, among the leaders there were many Jews. Generally, Jews are the most oppositional nation. But they were inclined to support the Mensheviks.”
Molotov also claimed that many of the men around Stalin had Jewish wives.
“Almost all the Mensheviks were Jews. Even among the Bolsheviks, among the leaders there were many Jews. Generally, Jews are the most oppositional nation. But they were inclined to support the Mensheviks.”
This statement by Molotov would not be controversial. But one should add among Russian Gentiles almost all political support went to either the Social Revolutionaries or the Mensheviks or the Bolsheviks. There was no popular brand of conservatism among Russians in 1905-17. Russians voted for the Left whenever they had the chance. The Mensheviks were the only serious popular rival to the Bolsheviks among industrial laborers. Among peasants, it was the Social Revolutionaries who won the popularity contest. No conservatives ever had any such support in Czarist Russia.
They aren't lies just bc you and Jewbags don't like the truth,the man's own son confirmed it
But just to make sure your bad faith efforts are 1,000% counterproductive I'm off to post evidence of Ashkenazi perfidy, pedophilia, incredible inbreeding, orchestration of communism, inventing " peer review " to shakedown universities and gatekeep " science " and the utter myth of their higher intelligence in 10 random and completely unrelated subreddits,YT video's and X threads
FYI calling somebody a liar isn't a debunking,but have fun losing hearts and minds
Churchill had no special knowledge about anything which was happening in Russia at that time. He was an opportunistic politician who jumped on various campaigns as he saw fit. In the early years he supported the Whites and so echoed their own claims.
Only after Soviet Communism had died in 1991 and no longer was perceived as a hostile force were academic scholars in America once again able to publish mainstream books that gradually restored the true picture of that past era. In many respects, a widely praised work such as The Jewish Century by Yuri Slezkine, published in 2004 by Princeton University Press, provides a narrative quite consistent with the long-forgotten works by Robert Wilton but marks a very sharp departure from the largely obfuscatory histories of the intervening eighty-odd years.
This version has 17 names. Some authors, such as Richard Pipes, leave out 2 of the names: Vladimir Bonch-Bruyevich and Alexandra Kollontai, simply because they were less relevant at the beginning. Anyway, Trotsky is the only full Jew in the list (but feel free to count Lenin as a quarter-Jew).
I confirm from experience this stuff about J women.
When I became famous & good looking with it, top young fertile J women of the capital began circling around me. Later on in NY one of them fixed for me a $10,000 grant through her connections, including a letter of recommendation from a Harvard prof. The grant was from a George Soros foundation, I didn't know who he was, it was the 1980s, I just took ten grand, like a young writer should.
This series is a real service.
The whole doc is a compilation of 4chan tier internet memes. This is where morons like Stew Peters and Myron Gains get their worldview from.
Seeing as that most of the information in the series is true, it's hardly a meme now is it?
I highly doubt Gains has even watched Europa. At least Peters HAS a worldview. Political atheists like yourself shouldn't ever be taken seriously.
Woods is proving here that most of the information is false or distorted in some way. Did you even read the article?
Gaines cited Europa for his views on WW2/Hitler.
Stew Peters is an Alex Jones-tier charlatan grifter. Extremely low-IQ.
Political atheist? That doesn't even make sense.
You didn't read any of his breakdowns obviously, considering that most of the information has been proven truthful. You're just being salty.
Gaines' views are therefore largely accurate if that's the case.
You calling ANYONE a "charlatan grifter" is rich considering you cite 'red idealogies' as one of your sources to try and disprove NatSoc.
You're a pot calling the kettle black.
"National Conservative(ism)" is impotent. 'Conservatives' have conserved nothing. Neither can they be considered nationalists as they 'legally' allow the entire world to immigrate here. Is it that innacurate to call you a political atheist given your views?
Woods has disproven most of the claims in the first hour, more to come. It's a literal shit sandwich of memes and lies. You cling to it because you got your silly worldview from this stupid video.
Red Ideologies is full of factual information about natsoc.
"National conservatism" is conservatism (in the social sense) plus nationalism (in the identity sense). It would work great if executed correctly by the right people. Modern "conservative" parties are nothing approaching what I envision for national conservatism. Guilt by association isn't an argument against my worldview.
Again, calling it "disproven" doesn't make it so. I derive my worldview largely from Mein Kampf and other NatSoc sources, not ETLB.
Red Idealogies IS Alex Jones tier schizo.
Yes, and communism would work great "if executed correctly by the right people" according to communists. Your ideological worldview is as much a flight of fantasy as theirs. It's been tried and has failed spectacularly.
National Socialism has been tried and succeeded the first time. So we'll in fact, that in 6 years they pulled Germany out of total destitution. It then took the entire industrialized world another 6 years to completely destroy it.
And I can use MK and Natsoc sources to discredit it as a crypto-communist, Nordicist anti-Slavic ideology. Plenty of objectionable stuff there.
Red Ideologies is nothing close to Alex Jones tier. Name one thing it says that is wrong.
> It's been tried and has failed spectacularly.
That's actually true of National Socialism, which was tried and failed spectacularly. Not to mention is caused the greatest bloodbath in European history due to Hitler's lust for new territory.
> National Socialism has been tried and succeeded the first time.
You think ending up in ruins and the entire leadership either committing suicide or executed at a war crimes trial is a success? That is the standard trajectory of any natsoc regime because it's inherently war-like and imperialistic. It can only bring chaos and death to Europe.
Honestly Keith, I need your BIG project, with your channel down from yt, and irish and american elections having passed, is to make a refined version of Europa the Last Battle, with Corrected and New Information. You can organise it, but get more people on the Dissident Right to help you. I think it would be EPIC!
That film always felt like some cheap dishonest agitprop
Clearly most of it is true though.
Jewish Bolshevism. A useful meme for distracting the populist right from global capitalism, and nothing more.
Trump’s Administration contains more Jews than the first Soviet government.
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jews-in-donald-trump-administration
To anybody keeping score on this, the doc is batting like 50% accuracy?
They should have made it half as long then lol
Would you also pretend Jewbag Armand Hammer didn't become a billionaire from his concessions in the USSR ?
Plenty of Rabbis completely concede the point that Jewbags were the predominant force behind communism
https://youtu.be/OLqXs9hXsA4?si=2lWsln_0haDcfgTW
Nevermind the fact they banned anti-Semitism as one of their first decrees
Also they executed anybody with a copy of the protocols,kind of vindicating it's authenticity IMO
Juri Lina's two books " Architect's of Deception " and " Under the Sign of the Scorpion " prove beyond any doubt Jewbags were behind communism
> This is probably based on a claim made by Solzhenitsyn that 17 out of 20 of the ministers in the first government were Jewish.
It's the other way around. Robert Wilton was a White propagandist who regularly made up fake lists for this or that committee in the Soviet government. Wilton fabricated a list of 22 names, with 17 identified as Jewish. The correct list was 15 names with Trotsky as the only Jew. Wilton's fake story has been circulated and metamorphosized many times over. Solzhenitsyn's version of 17 out of 20 is a late derivative of Wilton's original hoax.
But homie,it's not just Wilton,the receipts are quite copious and the evidence spills the banks
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-the-bolshevik-revolution-and-its-aftermath/
Unz just recycles lies about Jacob Schiff allegedly supporting Bolshevism. Completely worthless. For actual information about Schiff and his support for the Whites in the Russian Civil War, see Priscilla Roberts:
https://sites.americanjewisharchives.org/publications/journal/PDF/1997_49_01_02_roberts.pdf
The Venn diagram between satanic commies and Jewbags isn't a perfect circle but man it's not that big of an oval
https://antimatrix.org/Convert/Books/Under_The_Sign_of_Scorpion/Under_the_Sign_of_the_Scorpion.html
Under the Sign of the Scorpion is a phony tract which regurgitates old White propaganda lies such as the hoax that somehow Jacob Schiff was involved in the decision to execute the Czarist family. It's pure crap.
LEON TROTSKY - CYNIC AND SADIST
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/signscorpion/signscorpion05.htm
https://richmondunlimited.wordpress.com/2012/06/26/alexander-parvus-trotskys-mentor-from-hell-the-bolsheviks/
Alexander Parvus: Trotsky’s Mentor from Hell “The BOLSHEVIKS”
The war began with a Japanese attack on Port Arthur (now Lushun) on the 9th of February 1904. It was, above all, the European banks belonging to rich Jews, which financed the Russo-Japanese war. All possibility of credit was shut off to Russia while Japan had unlimited credit. The most important Jewish loan-shark, Jacob Henry Schiff in the United States of America, supported the Japanese military forces with a loan of 200 million dollars, according to Encyclopaedia Judaica.
The Jerusalem Post admitted on September 9, 1976 that it had been Schiff who lent the money needed to construct the Japanese navy. Several British banks built railways in Japan and financed Japan’s war against China. It was the same Jacob Schiff who made sure that no banks were permitted to lend money to the Russians.
At the same time, he supported “revolutionary” Jewish groups in Russia. Encyclopaedia Judaica called these “Jewish self-defence groups”. The Provisional Government was later given all possible financial aid from his banking house Kuhn, Loeb & Co and other banks.
Encyclopaedia Judaica characterized Jacob Henry Schiff as a “financier and philanthropist”.
The Jewish capitalists wanted to seize power in Russia in the name of the workers. Parvus and Bronstein-Trotsky believed the time was ripe when the Russians lost Port Arthur on the 2nd of January 1905 (20th of December 1904). Parvus and Trotsky immediately began to organise major provocations, strikes and riots. The Social Revolutionaries had terrorized the nation as early as in 1904.
> All possibility of credit was shut off to Russia while Japan had unlimited credit.
This is just a blatant falsehood. France gave Czarist Russia 30.4 million British pounds during the war. Germany gave it another 24.5 million. As far as Jacob Schiff goes, he gave Japan 41.2 million. No serious analysis of the Russo-Japanese War has ever been able to attribute Russia's defeat to a lack of foreign loans. It was the incompetence of the Czarist armed forces which brought about defeat.
Upon deeper analysis conducted by historians like Anthony Sutton, Kerry Bolton, and Robert Cowley, both organizations which eventually merged into a singular force, enjoyed vast financial patronage of western imperial powerhouses such as Paul Warburg, Jacob Schiff (head of Kuhn, Loeb & co.) and even Lord Alfred Milner- head of the newly formed Round Table Movement.
These characters bankrolled much of the Bolshevik movement as early as 1905 in order to destroy a truly revolutionary process that was spreading across much of the world in the wake of the Civil War.
https://canadianpatriot.org/2021/11/01/why-putin-criticized-the-bolshevik-counter-revolution-trotsky-parvus-and-the-war-on-civilization/
Totally false. Jacon Schiff gave money to the Constitutional Democrats in Russia. but never aided any socialists of any stripe in 1905. In 1917, Schiff gave money to Kerensky's government since they were in power but never gave any money to forces seeking to overthrow the Provisional Government.
Why did his own son repeat a far right conspiracy then cupcake ?
The Knickerbocker columnist in the February 3, 1949 edition of The New York Journal-American, then one of the leading local newspapers, wrote that “Today it is estimated by Jacob’s grandson, John Schiff, that the old man sank about 20,000,000 dollars for the final triumph of Bolshevism in Russia.”
Once I checked around a little, I discovered that numerous mainstream accounts described the enormous hostility of Schiff towards the Czarist regime for its ill-treatment of Jews, and these days even so establishmentarian a source as Wikipedia’s entry on Jacob Schiff notes that he played a major role financing the Russian Revolution of 1905, as was revealed in the later memoirs of one of his key operatives. And if you run a search on “jacob schiff bolshevik revolution” numerous other references come up, representing a wide variety of different positions and degrees of credibility. One very interesting statement appears in the memoirs of Henry Wickham Steed, editor of The Times of London and one of the foremost international journalists of his era. He very matter-of-factly mentioned that Schiff, Warburg and the other top Jewish international bankers were among the leading backers of the Jewish Bolsheviks, through whom they hoped to gain an opportunity for the Jewish exploitation of Russia, and he described their lobbying efforts on behalf of their Bolshevik allies at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference following the end of the First World War.
Even the very recent and highly skeptical analysis in Kenneth D. Ackerman’s 2016 book Trotsky in New York, 1917 notes that U.S. Military Intelligence reports of the period directly made that astonishing claim, pointing to Trotsky as the conduit for the heavy financial backing of Schiff and numerous other Jewish financiers. In 1925 this information was published in the British Guardian and was widely discussed and accepted throughout the 1920s and 1930s by numerous major media publications, long before Schiff’s own grandson provided a direct confirmation of those facts in 1949. Ackerman rather cavalierly dismisses all of this considerable contemporaneous evidence as “anti-Semitic” and a “conspiracy story,” arguing that since Schiff was a notorious conservative who had never shown any sympathy for socialism in his own American milieu, he surely would not have funded the Bolsheviks.
> The Knickerbocker columnist in the February 3, 1949 edition of The New York Journal-American,
It was a gossip column, not a news report. The claim in that gossip column was that Jacob Schiff's grandson had said something somewhere. But no actual statements were provided. The columnist who wrote that gossip column was Igor Cassini, the son of exiled Russian aristocrats who was simply repeating an old lie which he would have grown up with.
This hoax is similar to the one which Boris Brasol made in November 1917 when he claimed in his propaganda-tract "Bolshevism and Judaism" that allegedly in April 1917:
"Jacob Schiff in fact made a public announcement and it was due to his due to his financial influence that the Russian revolution was successfully accomplished..."
Jacob Schiff made no such statement. The actual record of what Schiff can be looked up in The Commercial & Financial Chronicle, April 28, 1917, page 1673. The article there is about fund-raising attempts for Jewish war-refugees at a dinner that was held on April 15. The article gives the text of Schiff's short speech at the event. Although Schiff was clearly happy at the fall of Czarism, he makes absolutely no claim that he had by any stretch somehow caused the revolution through "financial influence." That's just an invention by Boris Brasol.
Similarly, it is likely that sometime in the late 1940s there could have been some fund-raising dinner that would have again been raising funds for Jewish refugees in the post-1945 context. The real John Schiff probably attended and may have made some comments about how his grandfather had tried to support Kerensky's government after March 1917. But the claim that John Schiff ever said anything about his grandfather somehow supporting Bolshevism is a fake version cooked up by Igor Cassini.
Parvus was most definitely a yewbag
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Alexander-Israel-Lazarevitsch-Helphand
All that Parvus did was that when the German General Staff was trying to figure who might create troubles for the Provisional Government, Parvus pointed them to Lenin. It was then Hindenburg and Ludendorff who arranged for Lenin to travel into Russia. That one recommendation to the German General Staff is the only that about Parvus which makes him significant.
Hahaha hahaha
FYI The hammer is Freemasonic and the sickle means death homie
Parvus was definitely yewish
https://www.britannica.com/event/Russian-Revolution
I suppose you will pretend that Parvus who funded the Bolsheviks during WW1 wasn't a Jewbag either ?
Parvus did not fund any Bolsheviks. He advised the German General Staff that Lenin was the most obvious capable opponent of Kerensky's government, and he did no more than that. Lenin's funding, such as it existed, came from Russian sources: The well-identified Russian funders for Lenin’s party were Savva Morozov, N.P. Schmit, A.I. Yeramasov, Alexander Tsiurupa, Alexandra Kalmykova, Vera F. Komissarzhevskaya. There may have been others, but there’s nothing to suggest that Lenin ever spent his time looking outside of Russia for funding. There were enough discontented Russians for that.
https://www.unz.com/pub/jhr__the-jewish-role-in-the-bolshevik-revolution-and-russias-early-soviet-regime/
Out of the many fallacies in that piece, one specific one is worth taking specific note of:
-----
To direct the takeover, a seven-man “Political Bureau” was chosen. It consisted of two Russians (Lenin and Bubnov), one Georgian (Stalin), and four Jews (Trotsky, Sokolnikov, Zinoviev, and Kamenev).
-----
In reality, this politburo never did anything because Zinoviev and Kamenev (half-Jewish on his father's side) led the opposition to Lenin and Trotsky in their advocacy of taking power.
-----
When the party's Central Committee met in secret session during the night of October 10 [old style], Lenin slipped into town to take part in its deliberations. He insisted that the putsch be carried out immediately. Kamenev and Zinoviev opposed this proposal most resolutely, but the others also had doubts. Subsequently, Kamenev gave an interview to a Menshevik newspaper in which he revealed this disagreement. Lenin, in white hot fury, called him and Zinoviev traitors to the revolution.
-----
-- Richard Pipes, Three "Whys" of the Russian Revolution, pp. 52-3, Vintage Books, 1997.
This conflict recurred immediately after the initial seizure of power:
-----
Between October 29 [old style] and 31, when it seemed that Krasnov's forces might retake the capital ... Lenin and Trotsky ... did not attend ... the Vikzhel conference at which the character and program of a new government were discussed. In their absence, the views of Kamenev, Zinoviev, Rykov, Miliutin, and other Bolshevik moderates carried particular weight. Kamenev and his associates were fairly convinced that the only hope of defending ... the revolution ... lay in the creation of a broad socialist coalition government, which had been their position all along...
Bolshevik moderates continued to press for the formation of a government in which all socialist parties would be represented, even after the moderate position had been voted down in the Central Committee. Indeed, on November 3 Kamenev and Zinoviev secured the Central Executive Committee's endorsement of continued efforts to form such a government. For Lenin, who a week earlier had urged that Kamenev and Zinoviev be ousted from the party for their public opposition to an insurrection, the moderates' readiness to sabotage the revolution was maddening... Lenin's ultimatum was presented formally on November 4, after which Kamenev, Zinoviev, Rykov, Nogin, and Miliutin resigned from the Central Committee in protest.
-----
-- Alexander Rabinowitch, The Bolsheviks Come to Power: The Revolution of 1917 in Petrograd, pp. 310-1, W. W. Norton & Company, 1976.
Weber is simply giving a misrepresentation of the actual events. He does throughout his whole piece.
Given the Soviet Union’s complexity and predilection for numerous layers of bureaucracy it is a difficult to quantify the number of Jews throughout senior leadership positions during and just after the revolution of 1917. Half of the top contenders in the Central Committee of the Communist Party to take power after Lenin’s health declined in 1922 – Lev Kamenev, Trotsky and Zinoviev – were Jewish. Yakov Sverdlov, the chairman of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee from November 1917 to his death in 1919, was Jewish. Born in 1885, he had joined the Russian Social Democratic Party in 1902 and became a member of the Bolshevik faction with Lenin early on. Like others of his generation he took part in the 1905 revolution. His father converted to Russian Orthodoxy.
The large number of Jews in leading parts of the party was not lost on those non-Jews around them. V.M. Molotov, the powerful foreign minister of the Soviet Union under Stalin, made many remarks about Jews to Felix Chuev in a series of conversations between 1969 to 1986 that became the basis for the 1991 book Molotov Remembers. He recalled that as Lenin lay dying “at the time Jews occupied many leading positions, though they made up only a small percentage of the country’s population.” Of Zinoviev, he recalled, “He didn’t even look like a Jew.”
Antisemitism was an issue within the party. Molotov recalled in 1912 when he was at the Russian newspaper Pravda, “We received a letter from [Nikolay] Krestinsky. He wrote that Lenin was an antisemite.” This was because Lenin had opposed the Mensheviks, a separate communist faction.
“Almost all the Mensheviks were Jews. Even among the Bolsheviks, among the leaders there were many Jews. Generally, Jews are the most oppositional nation. But they were inclined to support the Mensheviks.”
Molotov also claimed that many of the men around Stalin had Jewish wives.
https://www.jpost.com/magazine/was-the-russian-revolution-jewish-514323
“Almost all the Mensheviks were Jews. Even among the Bolsheviks, among the leaders there were many Jews. Generally, Jews are the most oppositional nation. But they were inclined to support the Mensheviks.”
This statement by Molotov would not be controversial. But one should add among Russian Gentiles almost all political support went to either the Social Revolutionaries or the Mensheviks or the Bolsheviks. There was no popular brand of conservatism among Russians in 1905-17. Russians voted for the Left whenever they had the chance. The Mensheviks were the only serious popular rival to the Bolsheviks among industrial laborers. Among peasants, it was the Social Revolutionaries who won the popularity contest. No conservatives ever had any such support in Czarist Russia.
They aren't lies just bc you and Jewbags don't like the truth,the man's own son confirmed it
But just to make sure your bad faith efforts are 1,000% counterproductive I'm off to post evidence of Ashkenazi perfidy, pedophilia, incredible inbreeding, orchestration of communism, inventing " peer review " to shakedown universities and gatekeep " science " and the utter myth of their higher intelligence in 10 random and completely unrelated subreddits,YT video's and X threads
FYI calling somebody a liar isn't a debunking,but have fun losing hearts and minds
UberFaggy Churchill who was completely controlled by Jewbags said very similar things about Communism being a Jewish operation homie
https://dailytimes.com.pk/815952/churchills-dubious-financial-dealings/
Churchill had no special knowledge about anything which was happening in Russia at that time. He was an opportunistic politician who jumped on various campaigns as he saw fit. In the early years he supported the Whites and so echoed their own claims.
But Patrick all kinds of other people admitted the same thing
We have plenty of other corroboration
Who says the list is fake btw ?
AI concedes the point if prompted properly
https://youtu.be/EeoDGGPP8Uw?si=O2U-Ce53qKSlRmj4
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-richard-nixon-and-the-jews/
Only after Soviet Communism had died in 1991 and no longer was perceived as a hostile force were academic scholars in America once again able to publish mainstream books that gradually restored the true picture of that past era. In many respects, a widely praised work such as The Jewish Century by Yuri Slezkine, published in 2004 by Princeton University Press, provides a narrative quite consistent with the long-forgotten works by Robert Wilton but marks a very sharp departure from the largely obfuscatory histories of the intervening eighty-odd years.
> Who says the list is fake btw ?
The list of the Council of People's Commissars as it was established after the taking of power is given here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_People%27s_Commissars#Original_People's_Commissars
This version has 17 names. Some authors, such as Richard Pipes, leave out 2 of the names: Vladimir Bonch-Bruyevich and Alexandra Kollontai, simply because they were less relevant at the beginning. Anyway, Trotsky is the only full Jew in the list (but feel free to count Lenin as a quarter-Jew).
Great work, but citing Ron Unz as a credible source does undermine it. Unz is a know antisemite and holocaust denier.
I already liked Ron Unz you don’t have to sell him to me.
Haha hahaha hahaha hahaha
They call you an antisemite but never call you a liar
Elie Wiesel is a proven fraud
Almost every location had their death doubts severely lowered but the 6 million never moves
Simon Wiesenthal, admitted explicitly he completely made up the number of 5 million non Jewish Holocaust deaths
I confirm from experience this stuff about J women.
When I became famous & good looking with it, top young fertile J women of the capital began circling around me. Later on in NY one of them fixed for me a $10,000 grant through her connections, including a letter of recommendation from a Harvard prof. The grant was from a George Soros foundation, I didn't know who he was, it was the 1980s, I just took ten grand, like a young writer should.
This dynamics seems typical among Western elites.
idk man i'm as a.s. as they come but some of them broads god damn it. couldn't blame old uncle Joe if it was just constantly being thrown @ him.