Destructive Creed

The laws against anti-Semitism in the United States only make sense when seen through the pages of Deuteronomy--and then they are terrifying

I published the first version of this piece a little over two years ago. It is a testament to the remarkable flux in which we as a historical people find ourselves at this point in our odyssey that it already seems somewhat dated.

---

At the beginning of the 20th Century, millions of Russian ideologues willingly participated in the defamation of their own ancestors, the disfigurement of their own history, the weaponization of their institutions against themselves, the disparagement of their culture, the debasement of their religion, and the dispossession and mass genocide of their own people. Except for the genocide part, (which, thankfully, we don’t have to worry about in the United States because what are you, some kind of an anti-Semitic, white supremacist?) we see the same thing all around us today as millions of white Americans busily “dismantle white supremacy.” These woke Americans are the ideological descendants of the revolutionary Russians who assisted in the ruin of Russia.

The phenomenon of a large segment of a people attacking itself and seeking to extinguish its own culture is really remarkable. History abounds with examples of one people destroying another, but examples of a people consciously participating in the destruction of itself are very rare. I can only think of four examples other than the woke whites currently “dismantling white supremacy” in the West and the Russian revolutionaries of a century ago sweeping away the old Russia to prepare the way for the new Soviet man. The other four are China during the Cultural Revolution, Cambodia under the Pol Pot regime, Spain during its civil war, and France during the Reign of Terror.

In all cases, a destructive ideology gained the primary allegiance of a large segment of the population and held it in such a grip it could order its adherents to slaughter their own people and the ideologues obeyed. Where does an ideology like that come from? It’s not organic, surely.

An article in The American Hebrew from September 10, 1920, claimed that, in Russia, the source of the ideology was Jewish:

What Jewish idealism and Jewish discontent have so powerfully contributed to accomplish in Russia, the same historic qualities of the Jewish mind and heart are tending to promote in other countries . . . .

Other countries? Uh oh. Any country in particular?

Shall America, like the Russia of the Czars, overwhelm the Jew with the bitter and baseless reproach of being a destroyer, and thus put him in the position of an irreconcilable enemy?

America? Great. Just great.

By September, 1920, the mass executions in Russia were being reported in the Western press, especially the socialist press, and it had been seven months already since Winston Churchill’s editorial, “Zionism vs Bolshevism,” appeared in the Illustrated Sunday Herald in London noting the Jewish dominance of the system of terror gripping Russia. What “Jewish idealism and Jewish discontent” had accomplished in Russia was genocide, destruction, and the massive expropriation of wealth. It was destruction on a breathtaking scale and the writer in The American Hebrew claimed the destruction as a Jewish accomplishment in the very same article in which Americans were warned not to make the “baseless” claim Jews were destroyers lest we put ourselves in the same position as the Russians.

From “Red Terror in Russia 1918 - 1923,” by Serge Melgunov

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn said, about the Jewish role in Bolshevism:¹

The Jewish population in its mass showed a suspicious, even hostile attitude towards the Bolsheviks. But when, as a result of the revolution, it had acquired complete freedom which fostered a real expansion of Jewish activity in the political, social and cultural spheres—a well‐organised activity to boot—it did nothing to prevent the Bolshevik Jews from occupying the key positions, and these made an exceedingly cruel use of this new power fallen into their hands.

From the 40s of the twentieth century onwards, after Communist rule broke with international Judaism, Jews and communists became embarrassed and afraid, and they preferred to stay quiet and conceal the strong participation of Jews in the communist revolution, however the inclinations to remember and name the phenomenon were described by the Jews themselves as purely anti‐Semitic intentions.

In the 1970s and 1980s, under the pressure of new revelations, the vision of the revolutionary years was adjusted. A considerable number of voices were heard publicly. Thus the poet Nahum Korzhavin wrote: “If we make the participation of the Jews in the revolution a taboo subject, we can no longer talk about the revolution at all. There was a time when the pride of this participation was even prized… The Jews took part in the revolution, and in abnormally high proportions.”

The leading role of Jews in the monstrous crimes of Bolshevism has, indeed, meant that we don’t talk of the Bolsheviks at all. Americans apparently took seriously the warning in the American Hebrew in 1920 that if Jews were reproached with the destruction in Russia, we would bring the same irreconcilable Jewish enmity on ourselves.

But how is “reproach” measured? If one renegade American somewhere reproaches Jews with the destruction of historical Russia in the early 20th Century, is that enough to bring down irreconcilable Jewish enmity on our heads? Does it require a plurality in a majority of states? A national poll? Does it take the passage of the Reproaching Jews with the Destruction of Historical Russia Act by Congress? With anti-Semitism rising for 133 years in a row, how do we know, if the whole topic is forbidden, we haven’t already triggered Jewish revenge?

The rallying cry that justifies a Holocaust memorial in so many American cities is the slogan, “Never Forget,” lest there be a recurrence of a genocide of the Jews. But the genocide of 66 million Russian Christians carries the slogan, “Never Remember,” and is enforced by entities such as the SPLC, which claims the term “Judeo-Bolshevism” is an anti-Semitic canard—a baseless reproach—and will destroy as an anti-Semite any dissenter.

Surely it is in the common cause of humanity that no population anywhere faces genocide and, if learning from history is the inoculation against repeating it, isn’t the charge of “anti-Semitism” as deployed by the SPLC to shut down discussion in the West of the mechanics of the Bolshevik Revolution the most vicious kind of hate speech imaginable?

A number of European countries have adopted The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) “working definition” of “anti-Semitism” in laws making anti-Semitism a criminal offense. In 2019, the US state of Florida copy-and-pasted the IHRA definition into state law and then in another law passed earlier this year provided criminal penalties with prison terms of up to ten years for Floridians convicted of anti-Semitic acts. Both bills passed both houses of the Florida legislature unanimously and ambitious quisling, Governor Ron DeSantis, held the signing ceremony for both laws in Israel.

[The key author of both bills in Florida was one, Randy Fine, now an “Israel First” Republican representative in Congress so bloodthirsty that even the ADL has (publicly) distanced itself from him. President Trump, however, endorsed Randy Fine, while denouncing Thomas Massie, one of the handful of legislators in DC who is actually “America First.”]

The IHRA definition of anti-Semitism itself is run-of-the-mill bigotry deemed special when experienced by Jews, but it also provides examples of such, and that’s where we go off the rails. Both the definition and the examples were codified into Florida law. Among the examples, we find “[a]ccusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.” Notice, it’s the accusation as an accusation that makes it anti-Semitic. Whether the accusation is valid is immaterial. Even if Jews really are exaggerating the Holocaust, it is anti-Semitic to say they are, just as, one hundred years ago, even if Jews really were destroying Russia, Americans would have made themselves, like the Russians, the targets of irreconcilable Jewish enmity by reproaching them for it.

The specific charge The American Hebrew writer enjoins—declared up front to be baseless—is that Jews are “destroyers.” But why “destroyers?” Why not “swindlers” or “subversives” or “revolutionaries” or any number of possibilities? And why is that particular charge not only baseless, but “bitter?” And what about the whole “irreconcilable” thing?

The answers to these questions, and an explanation for the curious similarities between the demands of a writer at The American Hebrew in 1920 and legislation passed in Florida a century later, can be found in what is, in my view, the most important book written in the 20th Century, The Controversy of Zion, by Douglas Reed. Reed was the leading correspondent for the Times of London during the inter-war period and through WWII. Near the end of the war he resigned his position at the Times in protest of the censorship preventing the British public from gaining a true picture of the forces directing the events in Europe. He spent the next ten years researching The Controversy of Zion in libraries around the world, producing a manuscript in 1956. He placed the finished manuscript on top of his wardrobe and there it stayed until his death in 1978, when it was finally published.

It begins,

The true start of this affair occurred on a day in 458 BC which this narrative will reach in its sixth chapter. On that day the petty Palestinian tribe of Judah (earlier disowned by the Israelites) produced a racial creed, the disruptive effect of which on subsequent human affairs may have exceeded that of explosives or epidemics. This was the day on which the theory of the master-race was set up as “the Law.”

At the time Judah was a small tribe among the subject-peoples of the Persian king, and what today is known as “the West” could not even be imagined. Now the Christian era is nearly two thousand years old and “Western civilization,” which grew out of it, is threatened with disintegration.

and continues in Chapter 3:

During the hundred years that followed the Assyrian conquest of Israel, the Levites in Judah began to compile the written Law. In 621 BC they produced Deuteronomy and read it to the people in the temple at Jerusalem.

This was the birth of “the Mosaic law,” which Moses, if he ever lived, never knew. It is called the Mosaic law because it is attributed to him, but the authorities agree that it was the product of the Levites, who then and later repeatedly made Moses (and for that matter, Jehovah) say what suited them. Its correct description would be “the Levitical law” or “the Judaic law.”

Deuteronomy is to formal Judaism and Zionism what the Communist Manifesto was to the destructive revolution of our century. It is the basis of the Torah (“the Law”) contained in the Pentateuch, which itself forms the raw material of the Talmud, which again gave birth to those “commentaries” and commentaries-on-commentaries which together constitute the Judaic “law.”

Therefore Deuteronomy is also the basis of the political programme, of worldly dominion over nations despoiled and enslaved, which has been largely realized in the West during this Twentieth Century. Deuteronomy is of direct relevancy to the events of our day, and much of the confusion surrounding them disperses if they are studied in its light.

It was read, in 621 BC, to so small an audience in so small a place that its great effects for the whole world, through the following centuries into our time, are by contrast the more striking.

“Deuteronomy” means “Second Law.”

Religious intolerance is the basis of this “Second Law” (racial intolerance was to follow later, in another “New Law”) and murder in the name of religion is its distinctive tenet.

By the time the end of Deuteronomy is reached the moral commandments have been nullified in this way, for the purpose of setting up, in the guise of a religion, the grandiose political idea of a people especially sent into the world to destroy and “possess” other peoples and to rule the earth. The idea of destruction is essential to Deuteronomy. If it be taken away no Deuteronomy, or Mosaic Law, remains.

This concept of destruction as an article of faith is unique, and where it occurs in political thought (for instance, in the Communist philosophy) may also derive originally from the teaching of Deuteronomy, for there is no other discoverable source.

Thus, the use of the word “bitter” to describe the reproach to Jews of being “destroyers.” Bitter because it is true. In order to be a literal Jew, you must be a destroyer. It is the primary tenet of your identity as a Jew—the main theme of your culture’s founding documents—the melancholy task laid on you by Jehovah—to destroy forever.

Deuteronomy is above all a complete political programme: the story of the planet, created by Jehovah for this “special people,” is to be completed by their triumph and the ruination of all others. The rewards offered to the faithful are exclusively material: slaughter, slaves, women, booty, territory, empire. The only condition laid down for these rewards is observance of “the statutes and judgments,” which primarily command the destruction of others. The only guilt defined lies in non-observance of these laws. Intolerance is specified as observance; tolerance as non-observance, and therefore as guilt. The punishments prescribed are of this world and of the flesh, not of the spirit. Moral behaviour, if ever demanded, is required only towards co-religionists and “strangers” are excluded from it.

From the Book of Deuteronomy:

Seven nations greater and mightier than thou” are to be delivered into the Judahites’ hands, and: “Thou shalt utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor show mercy unto them … ye shall destroy their alters … for thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God; the Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are on the face of the earth … Thou shalt be blessed above all people … And thou shalt consume all the people which the Lord thy God shall deliver thee; thine eye shall have no pity upon them … the Lord thy God will send the hornet [drones?] among them, until they that are left, and hide themselves from thee, be destroyed … And the Lord thy God will put out these nations before thee by little and little … But the Lord thy God shall deliver them unto thee, and shall destroy them with a mighty destruction until they be destroyed. And he shall deliver their kings into thine hand, and thou shalt destroy their name from under heaven; there shall no man be able to stand before thee, until thou have destroyed them …”

And there are many more commands to destroy I left out.

Then Moses, in this account, enumerates the “statutes and judgments” which must be “observed” if all these rewards are to be gained, and again “the Law” is to destroy:

“These are the statutes and judgments, which ye shall observe to do … Ye shall utterly destroy all the places, wherein the nations which ye shall possess served their gods … When the Lord thy God shall cut off the nations from before thee, whither thou goest to possess them, and thou succeedest them, and dwellest in their land: Take heed to thyself that thou be not snared by following them … and that thou inquire not after their gods.”

This tenet of “the Law” requires the faithful to destroy other religions. It was impartial when enacted but gained a specific application in later centuries from the fact that the Christian faith grew up in, and the mass of Jews then moved into, the same geographical area: the West. (This made Christianity the primary object of the command to “utterly destroy the places …,” and the dynamiting of Russian cathedrals, the opening of “anti-God museums,” the canonization of Judas and other acts of early Bolshevist governments, which were to nine-tenths comprized of Eastern Jews, were evidently deeds of “observance” under this “statute” of Deuteronomy).

The purpose and meaning of existence, under this “Mosaic Law,” was the destruction and enslavement of others for the sake of plunder and power.

Deuteronomy goes on to explain that gentiles—the heathen—have no legal standing under Judaic law. Jehovah doesn’t “know” us. We are here to be scattered amongst. That’s how Jehovah punishes the Jews for failing to observe Judaic law, which requires first and foremost the destruction of us. Once scattered amongst us, many Jews, like normal humans, simply join the great story of humanity. But if they repent and return to observance of Judaic law—return to destroying us—Jehovah will bless them by transferring his curses from them to us (and if there is one thing Jehovah has plenty of, it’s curses).

Notice, none of this has anything to do with anything we’ve done. Whether Jews are dispersed among us is up to Jehovah, not us, and is punishment for not having destroyed us in the first place. Thus, the irreconcilable nature of Jewish enmity. For Jews to remain Jews, our eventual fate is and must be utter destruction and since residing among us is a punishment, Jews, to remain Jews, must suffer persecution at our hands whether they are persecuted or not. This explains the origins of “Jewish discontent” and how “anti-Semitism” could be rising in America for 133 years in a row.

Moral consistency plays no part in Deuteronomy and that indifference is apparent down through the millenia through The American Hebrew of the 1920s into the laws of Florida, today. The very next example of anti-Semitism defined in Florida law after the example that makes it a third degree felony to accuse Jews as a people of being responsible for the wrongdoing of a group of Jews accuses Germans as a people of being responsible for the wrongdoing of a group of Germans:

Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).²

It’s no secret Jews play a leading role in the intellectual life of any nation in which they reside on a footing of equality; in the United States, the role is dominant. Why that is is, perhaps, a matter for debate, but that it is is indisputable. Among the ideologies contending for preeminence in the United States, Jews will be the source and champions of at least some of them. And any ideology that attacks the host population, its culture, its history, and its institutions is certainly Jewish in origin and Judaic in its literal observance of Deuteronomy’s injunction to destroy. It was true for the Russian ideologues who joined in the destruction of Russia (the accomplishment of Jewish idealism and Jewish discontent) and it’s true for the millions of white woke out there in the United States right now busily attacking themselves.

The worth of the ideas we form about the world around us, and, therefore, of the ideologies that govern our conduct in it, is dependent on the quality of the information we receive about it. Incomplete, false, or distorted information necessarily leads to useless, perverse, or destructive ideologies. Anyone who works to lower the quality of the information available to his or her fellow humans has base or sinister motives. The Florida anti-Semitism laws overtly subordinate true information to an ethnocentric distortion of it. The only way it makes sense to make it illegal to publicize the information that Bolshevism was the product of Jewish idealism and Jewish discontent (which the Florida laws do) is if I am viewing the world through the pages of Deuteronomy and acquiescing in the utter destruction of the gentiles around me.

If you are a gentile and believe anti-Semitism is a real thing you are a dupe. If you are a Jew and believe anti-Semitism is a real thing, you are fulfilling the role assigned you in Deuteronomy to suffer persecution as a Jew among the gentiles. You are obeying the statutes of Jehovah and working for our destruction.

1. 200 Years Together, p. 440

2. I especially like how it is now anti-Semitic in Florida to deny the mechanisms of the Holocaust (and then they put in parentheses so people know what the fuck they are talking about: “gas chambers”). It’s that whole playground make-up-the-rules-as-you-go-along aspect of these bills that makes Randy Fine, the Republican State Representative who is responsible for the two anti-Semitism bills passed in Florida, such an embarrassment. For example, HB 269 makes anti-Semitic littering a third degree felony. “Anti-Semitic littering?” Right. Here’s the back story. One night, someone walked through Randy Fine’s neighborhood leaving a flyer in every driveway—including Randy’s. Apparently, the flyers reproached Jews for something Jews did because Randy Fine blew a gasket, called the flyer that attacked him “anti-Semitic,” and told the press that the flyer had opened his son’s eyes to the persecution that makes it so difficult to be Jewish in America (he actually said that) and that’s why there’s a law in Florida that can land you in prison if you litter anti-Semitically. See? Pure clown world.

Members of the Florida legislature celebrating passage of legislation making it illegal to blame Jews for what Jews do.