Nationalists: Jews Control Media. Jews: Persecution!

One of the many parallels between pre-revolutionary Russia and the United States today is the nationalist claim that Jews control the media.

From S.P. Melgunov’s Red Terror in Russia, 1918-1923

According Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and to the numerous sources quoted in his book, 200 Years Together, the press, especially after the 1905 revolution in Russia, when Russian Jews were granted full political rights, played a decisive role in bringing about the Bolshevik revolution in October, 1917. He writes:

In the case of the Duma [Russian legislative assembly], the way in which Russia, even in its most remote provinces, was informed of what was going on there and what was said there, depended entirely on journalists… However, the newspapers systematically distorted the debates in the Duma, largely opening their columns to the deputies of the left and showering them with praise, while to the deputies of the right they allowed only a bare minimum…

For the Russian nationalist circles, responsibility for this conduct of the press was simply and solely the responsibility of the Jews. They wanted to prove that almost all journalists accredited to the Duma were Jews. And they published “whistle‐blowing” lists listing the names of these correspondents.¹

Here is a modern American version of a “whistle-blowing list” making the same claim:

Goyim Defense League flyers. Flyers like the one pictured purporting to show Jewish media control in the United States have been distributed in numerous states. The ADL counts the distribution of a flyer like this as an incidence of antisemitism (we’re guessing one incident per individual flyer distributed).

Just as some Russians believed Jews controlled the media in Russia in the period before the revolution, some Americans today believe Jews control the media in the United States. Some portion of those Americans also believe this is an important topic that isn’t getting the attention it should. And some portion of those Americans feel strongly enough about the importance of this topic that they resort to the exceedingly inefficient method of flyering to generate public debate on it, the very fact of which undoubtedly serves to validate their belief.

Also tending to validate their belief is society’s response to the flyers. Instead of just ignoring them, which would quickly solve the problem, Jews like State Representative Randy Fine of Florida, seize on them. “See? Persecution!” And, thus, a flyering incident, which is a tiny squeak from the truly voiceless and powerless, makes the local news, and sometimes even national and international news. But, in response to the flyers, does a local university ever hold a symposium on the substance of the flyers? No. Instead, the police investigate and the media themselves provide society’s response as one unified voice.

In Russia, too, “the journalists acted as self‐proclaimed representatives of society,” as Solzhenitsyn puts it. And Jews really did play an outsized role in the Russian press.

Jewish publishers and journalists did not restrict their activities to Moscow or to highly intellectual publications, but they also intervened in the popular press, such as the Kopeika, a favourite reading of the concierges—a quarter of a million copies in circulation, it “played a major role in the fight against anti‐Semitic denigration campaigns.” …The very influential Kievskaya Mysl (to the left of the Cadets) had as editor‐in‐chief Iona Kugel (they were four brothers, all journalists), and D. Zaslavski, a wicked rascal, and, what seems to us very moving, Leo Trotsky! [Trotsky, during his time in New York, wrote for a Yiddish-language newspaper.] The biggest newspaper of Saratov was edited by the senior Averbakh (brother‐in‐law of Sverdlov [who would go on to sign the order to execute the royal family]).

Jewish dominance of the press was not a consequence only of Jewish talent and energy. Less defensible methods were also employed to establish a media stranglehold.

In Odessa appeared for some time the Novorossiysky Telegraf, with strong right‐wing convictions, but measures of economic suffocation were taken against it—successfully.²

Regarding the “measures of economic suffocation,” here is an example of one way that works from Henry Ford’s The International Jew, in which the author recounts an anecdote involving his own Dearborn Independent. (The International Jew was the book form of a series of articles concerning the “Jewish Question” that appeared in the Dearborn Independent, a newspaper that was distributed through Ford’s nationwide network of auto dealers, becoming, at one point, the newspaper with the second highest circulation in the country. The following is from the September 11, 1920 issue.)

A certain newspaper, as a mere matter of news, published an excerpt from one of The Dearborn Independent articles. Next day a number of advertising accounts dropped for lack of copy. Inquiry developed the fact that the reticent advertisers were all Jewish firms and the cause of their action was the really unimportant excerpt which the paper published. It developed also that the advertising agent who handled all the advertising for those Jewish firms was himself a Jew who also held an office in a Jewish secret society, which office was concerned exclusively with the control of newspapers in the matter of Jewish publicity. It was this man who dealt with the editor. A lame editorial retraction followed which faintly praised the Jews. The advertising was returned to the paper…

So, we have these similarities between Russia leading up to the revolution and the US today: there is the same nationalist alarm at Jewish media control, there is the same unified media voice speaking on behalf of society over which the nationalist alarm cannot be heard, that unified voice is, in fact, a Jewish voice due to Jewish media dominance, a dominance achieved partly as the result of Jewish group strategy.

But so what? Is that necessarily a bad thing?

In 1905, D. I. Pikhno, editor‐in‐chief for twenty‐five years of the Russian newspaper The Kievian and a connoisseur of the press of his time wrote:

The Jews… have bet heavily on the card of the revolution… Those among the Russians who think seriously have understood that in such matters the press represents a force and that this force is not in their hands, but in that of their adversaries; that the press speaks on behalf of the adversaries of Russia throughout Russia and have forced people to read them because there is nothing else to read; and as one cannot launch a publication in one day, [the opinion] has been drowned beneath this mass of lies, incapable of finding itself there.³

The phrase “drowned beneath this mass of lies” resonates because that is exactly what has happened to us. Surging antisemitism? A lie. Hands up, don’t shoot? A lie. Vaccines prevent transmission? A lie. Two planes, three skyscrapers? A lie. Russian collusion? A lie. Systemic racism? A lie. White privilege? A lie. Weapons of mass destruction? A lie. Invermectin unsafe? A lie. Iranian nuclear weapons? A lie. Jewish skin lampshades? A lie. January 6 insurrection? A lie. Only 12 million illegals? A lie. Disparate impact? A lie.

And, egregiously, Biden won in 2020? A lie.

These lies alone demonstrate the 2020 election was stolen:

I tried to link to the creator, Matt Orfalea’s, YouTube and the video has been censored. If there is one thing liars hate, it’s the truth. It’s so blatant. Dude has a substack. Good for him. Good for substack.

1. 200 Years Together, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Ch. 10, “The Period of the Duma,” p. 330

2. Ibid., p. 331

3. The Kievian, 1905, 17 Nov. in Choulguine, Annexes, pp. 285‐286 as quoted in 200 Years Together, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Ch. 10, “The Period of the Duma,” p. 332