Censorship Map of Europe

An Update

 

Source: https://codoh.com/library/document/censorship-map-of-europe/

 

by Germar Rudolf

June 20, 2026

 

On page 33 of the first, 2014 edition of his book Breaking the Spell, Dr. Nicholas Kollerstrom included a map showing the countries in Europe that had enacted laws dictating Holocaust historiography at gunpoint. (The map is on p. 34 of the 7th, 2024 edition.) I remember spending quote some time creating this map, using various online resources to figure out which country has which laws. Over the years, I have updated this map, and included a simple list in my Holocaust Encyclopedia in its entry on censorship.

 

When the latest case of a law banning Holocaust skepticism was enacted in Finland in early 2026, I wrote an article about this. I mention in this article that one motivation for Finland to introduce such a law was pressure from the European Union. I wondered back then how Finland could succumb to that pressure while other European nations which are already in the EU or strive to be accepted managed to resists, especially in the Balkans.

 

While writing my most-recent book in History at Gunpoint, I revisited the issue with the aim of getting things updated. During my research, I stumbled across an excellent resource in this regard on the Bosnian website trial.ba of the organization Trial International, which grew out of a dedication to document the massacres committed by all sides during the war fought mainly on that country’s territory between 1992 and 1995, to help victims and hold perpetrators accountable. This organization compiled a list containing information for all European countries regarding any laws they have enacted banning denial of the Holocaust and/or of other genocides or mass atrocities.[1] This table was uploaded in February of 2020, hence cannot contain legislative changes made after that date.

 

Going through that table, I realized that my map and related table had been incomplete all along: Northern Macedonia had introduced a general anti-genocide denial law already in 2004, hence three years before the European Union 2007 issued its decision to make such a law mandatory for all member states. While pure denial can get you between one to five years in that country, if it is combined with the “intent to instigate hate, discrimination or violence,” a prison term of at least four years is imposed, with no upper limit given, probably meaning that even a life sentence is theoretically possible.

 

Albania followed a year after Europe’s mandate, but its general ban on genocide denial is embedded in a law regulating online offenses, so denial is punishable only if it is “deliberately disseminating to the public through computer systems.” The punishment threatened is between 3 and six years.

 

Malta followed a year later, in 2009, albeit only if general “genocide denial” is done in a way likely to incite to violence or hatred, or likely to disturb public order. Therefore, I changed the color of Malta on the new map from red (unconditional ban) to grey (conditional). Also, I added Malta to the list of countries in the encyclopedia, where it had been omitted for some inscrutable reason. The threatened punishment is 8 months to two years imprisonment.

 

Montenegro enacted a general ban on genocide denial in 2010 for cases conducted “in a manner which can lead to violence or cause hatred against a group,” and if that genocide has been declared a fact by “a final and enforceable judgment of a court in Montenegro or of the International Criminal Tribunal.” The threatened punishment is between six months and five years. The expression “a manner that can lead to violence or cause hatred” is too diffuse to qualify as a conditional ban. Even the most rational and unemotional scrutiny of a genocide can lead someone to develop feelings of hate, and push some deranged mind to resort to violence. At least words like “is likely to cause” are needed to qualify a law to be a conditional ban only. Hence, I have given Montenegro the red card on the map.

 

2011 saw three European countries introduce laws banning genocide denial in general, Croatia made it conditional by mandating that the offense needs to be perpetrated “in a manner likely to incite to violence or hatred,” while Cyprus did not include such a qualifier. Bulgaria made it conditional on the offense posing “a risk of violence or hatred”, but there is no qualifier on how high the risk must be, so it doesn’t count as a conditional ban. Croatia imposed prison terms of up to 3 years, Cyprus of up to 5 years, and Bulgaria from a minimum of one year up to five years. Cyprus defines genocides as something that has been determined by an “irrevocable decision of an international court,” meaning that the findings of the IMT show trial probably also count as incontestable.

 

After Spain’s High Court had thrown out that country’s first, 1995 attempt at banning Holocaust denial as unconstitutional, Spain introduced a general ban on genocide denial in 2015, making that act an offense, if it “promotes or favors a climate of violence, hostility, hatred or discrimination.” That law has led to the conviction of Holocaust skeptic and National-Socialist activist Pedro Varela in 2024, whose considerable activities of promoting National-Socialist ideas was moreover judged to be an indirect justification of that past regime’s genocidal acts. Denial plus NS ideology pushed the judiciary over the edge, sending Varela to prison for 18 months. Spain’s new anti-denial law was criticized by Spanish legal scholars as unconstitutional, especially since its “qualifier” requires a mere hypothetical risk of “violence, hostility, hatred or discrimination” by merely favoring a climate.[2] It can’t be more wishy-washy. Varela’s case is currently moving through the various appellate stages, and may be heard by the Constitutional High Court within five years or so. Until then, I have given Spain a conditional status, as denial itself isn’t able to trigger the law, but very much its convolution with NS propaganda.

 

Next on the list of countries I missed is Serbia, which introduced its law in 2016, with a thin conditional veneer of acts that “could lead to violence or incitement to hate.” Defining genocide like Montenegro via decisions of national courts or the ICC, Serbia imposes of six months to five years on convicted offenders. That’s a red card for Serbia.

 

Before we move on the rest of the Balkan countries and some special cases, an explanation is due regarding the UK, which does not have a formal law banning Holocaust skepticism at all, as many have rightly observed. I have included it on the map and in my list anyway, with the year given 2017. This is not based on the adoption of any law, but on case law created by the case of musical artist Alison Chabloz. She was indicted under Section 127(1) of the Communications Act of 2003 for communicating via “a public electronic communications network” (internet) messages that the judges considered “grossly offensive.” The offenses are said to have been committed by satirical songs on Holocaust survivors and their tales which Chabloz wrote and performed. I loved the songs when I listened to them back in 1916 and 1917. I thought the melodies were pleasing, voice and instrumentals were excellent, and the lyrics were written with wit and intelligence. But turning Holocaust skepticism from dry scholarship into living art evidently is a crime.[3] Therefore, the UK definitely meets the criterion of conditionally banning Holocaust skepticism, if combined with disrespectful statements about victims and/or survivors. This was highlighted with the case of Ian R. Millard, who mixed general expressions of disbelieve in the mainstream Holocaust narrative with anti-Jewish statements.[4] Castle Hill Publishers and their successor Armreg Ltd, the two most-productive media outlets of Holocaust skepticism in this century, have operated from the UK since 1998, and have never been impeded or harassed. It is therefore safe to say that, as long as it is boringly scholarly, Holocaust skepticism is legal in the UK. But I changed the year to 2018, the year of Chabloz’s first conviction.

 

Bosnia had the new Article 145a of its penal law banning general genocide denial imposed by that country’s High Representative in 2021.[5] It was not well received by many among the country’s Serbs, hence caused quite some tensions. It requires that denial be done in a “manner likely to incite to violence or hatred,” and comes with prison terms between six months and five years. It defines genocide by a final court verdict, hence the IMT probably qualifies. Bosnia’s law is primarily designed to ban denials of genocidal killings committed during that country’s civil during the 1990s war rather than directed against Holocaust skeptics.[6] The expression “likely to incite to violence or hatred” was taken straight from a EU Framework Decision on Combating Racism and Xenophobia.[7] While this expression is suppose to prevent the stifling of academic freedom, member states are free to include or omit such a requirement. Bosnia has included it, making this a case of conditional banning of genocide denial. This turns the country grey on my map (it has been red so far).

 

Moldova has two laws, one banning general genocide denial (Art. 135² of its Criminal Code, one to three years imprisonment) and one introduced also in 2021 specifically banning Holocaust denial (Article 176¹), likewise with prison terms between six months and five years. It defines the Holocaust as “the systematic persecution,” “annihilation and extermination of a large number of members of the Jewish community by Nazi Germany, as well as by its allies and collaborators, during the period 1933-1945” (Art. 134¹⁹).[8] Denial is not a crime, however, if done “in the interest of art or science, research or education.” I am reluctant to grant Moldova the grey conditional status for this, because any popular but non-polemical statement could be denied that privilege, and judiciaries have the tendency to define the “interest” of science and research by that community’s consensus, which tends to exclude skeptic voice. So that’s a red card for Moldova.

 

Armenia’s Article 136 of its penal code, completely overhauled in 2022, threatens with up to four years imprisonment those who deny genocides in general “for the purpose of provoking hatred, discrimination or violence.”[9] It’s neighbors Turkey and Azerbaijan have so far refused to adopt similar laws, as those nations’ citizens at times engage in that kind of activity regarding the genocide Armenians suffered during the First World War. I grant Armenia a conditional status, which more radical faction in its society don’t like, who want to tighten that law even more.[10]

 

Also in 2022, Belarus implemented a law against genocide denial. However, their law merely bans the denial, minimization or justification of the genocide committed against the Belarusian people by German forces during World War II, even though no such thing occurred. The massacres presumably committed by the German wartime Einsatzgruppen against both local Jews and Jews deported to Belarus from central and western Europe were rebranded by Alexander Lukashenko’s regime as victims of the general populace.[11] While the law effectively denies Jews their main-victim role, its primary function is to suppress modern political dissent, in particular by stigmatizing pro-democracy opposition groups as ideological “descendants of Nazi collaborators.”[12] Of course, strictly speaking, all countries with such laws use it to oppress what they stigmatize as “Nazis” or “Nazi” sympathi­zers, whether that label is accurate or not. Since Belarus’s law does not ban Holocaust skepticism as such, but only events that are said to have happened on Belarussian soil, I have not shaded that country on my map.

 

The last country to add to the new list is Kosovo. Mimicking its big sister Albania, Kosovo followed suit a year later, in 2023, by adopting a similar law unconditionally banning general genocide denial if disseminated to the public through computer systems, also with prison terms between 3 and 6 years.[13]

 

Therefore, if we ignore the European Union as an umbrella organization with its framework decision, 41 countries currently enforce the writing of history to one degree or another at gunpoint.

 

Hence, leaving aside Belarus, only six European countries have not (yet) formally banned Holocaust skepticism in one form or another: Iceland, Ireland, Denmark, Estonia, Azerbaijan and Georgia:

 

#	Year	Country	Max. Term
1.	1986	Israel	5 years
2.	1990	France	1 year
3.	1992	Austria	20 years
4.	1994	Germany	5 years
5.	1995	Belgium	1 year
6.	1995	Netherlands (conditional)	1 year
7.	1995	Liechtenstein	2 years
8.	1995	Switzerland	3 years
9.	1997	Luxembourg	2 years
10.	1997	Slovenia	2 years
11.	1998	Poland	3 years
12.	2001	Slovakia	3 years
13.	2001	Czechia	3 years
14.	2002	Romania	3 years
15.	2002	Australia (HRC)*	–
16.	2004	Macedonia	5 years
17.	2007	European Union (framework law)	3 years
18.	2007	Portugal (conditional)	5 years
19.	2008	Albania (computer distribution only)	6 years
20.	2009	Latvia	5 years
21.	2009	Malta (conditional)	2 years
22.	2010	Hungary	3 years
23.	2010	Montenegro	5 years
24.	2011	Croatia (conditional)	3 years
25.	2011	Bulgaria	5 years
26.	2011	Cyprus	5 years
27.	2012	Lithuania	2 years
28.	2014	Russia	3 years
29.	2014	Greece (conditional)	3 years
30.	2015	Spain (conditional)	4 years
31.	2016	Serbia	5 years
32.	2016	Italy	6 years
33.	2018	UK (conditional)	2 years
34.	2021	Ukraine	5 years
35.	2021	Bosnia (conditional)	5 years
36.	2021	Moldova	2 years
37.	2022	Armenia (conditional)	4 years
38.	2022	Belarus (very limited, see text)	5 years
39.	2022	Canada	2 years
40.	2023	Kosovo (computer distribution only)	6 years
41.	2024	Sweden	2 years
42.	2026	Finland	2 years
conditional: only in conjunction with verbal abuses and/or threats, likely to cause violence or hatred. * a human-rights commission can issue a cease-and-desist order. If ignored, it can lead to prosecution for ignoring a government order.

 

Censorship map of Europe, 2026: red: the writing of history is prescribed by penal law; light grey: historical dissent is an offense only if committed concurrently with disparaging victims, witnesses and/or survivors, or statements likely to cause violence and/or hatred. Since all EU member states must enact such laws, the white spots on this map will steadily decrease in years to come.

Caricatures from "Der Stürmer" - translated in English and colourized - The Year 1935 – Part 2!

 The Year 1935 – Part 2

Jewish Invention Myths: Desalination

 

Source: https://www.renegadetribune.com/jewish-invention-myths-desalination/

 

by Karl Radl

 

With having debunked so many ‘jewish inventions’ claims; there are certain commonalities that you notice. One of the most common I see is where jews seem to blithely claim ‘they invented’ something they patently didn’t.

 

A water-related example of this – other the similarly stupid claim that jews invented the concept of the air well – (1) is the claim by Rabbi Stephen Wise of Ontario, Canada that jews invented desalination.

 

He writes that:

 

‘Making Salt Water Drinkable: Having very little rainfall but plenty of seawater led Israelis to pioneer desalination, which removes salt and minerals from salt water, thereby turning salt water into drinking water. Beyond watering its own agricultural industry, Israel has manufactured China’s largest desalination plant and many others elsewhere.’ (2)

 

Wise here is being intentionally deceptive since he claims that jews ‘pioneered desalination’ as well as that this is a ‘modern invention’ when in truth it is as old of the hills.

 

Desalination is first mentioned by Aristotle in his work ‘Meteorology’ where he writes that:

 

-‘The action of this cause is continually making the sea more salt, but some part of its saltness is always being drawn up with the sweet water. This is less than the sweet water in the same ratio in which the salt and brackish element in rain is less than the sweet, and so the saltness of the sea remains constant on the whole. Salt water when it turns into vapour becomes sweet, and the vapour does not form salt water when it condenses again. This I know by experiment.’ (3)

 

Indeed, desalination was well-known in Europe and China from around the time of Aristotle (fourth century B.C.) onwards and was widely used by European sailors on board ships as a way to create drinking water – for example by the crews of the English explorers Sir Richard Hawkins and Sir Walter Raleigh during the sixteenth century – and the first patents for processes of desalination were issued in 1675 (No. 184) to William Walcot and 1683 (No. 226) to Robert Fitzgerald in England. (4)

 

Large-scale desalination was first pioneered by the French chemist Alphonse Rene le Mire de Normandy in 1851 – who was awarded a British patent (No. 13714) for his invention that year – (5) while the first land-based mass desalination system was pioneered by the United States in the 1860s and installed on Florida islands of Key West and Dry Tortugas but used established French technology. (6)

 

Given that Israel didn’t exist till 1948 then no Israel didn’t ‘invent’ or ‘pioneer’ desalination in the slightest.

 

Thanks for reading Semitic Controversies! This post is public so feel free to share it.

---

References

 

(1) On this please see my article: https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/jewish-invention-myths-water-and

 

(2) https://reformjudaism.org/israeli-inventions-work

 

(3) Aristotle, Meteo., 2: 358b: 12-18

 

(4) Cf. James Birkett, 1984, ‘A Brief Illustrated history of Desalination: From the Bible to 1940’, Desalination, Vol. 50, pp. 17-52

 

(5) Idem.; also https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Dictionary_of_National_Biography,_1885-1900/Normandy,_Alphonse_Ren%C3%A9_Le_Mire_de

 

(6) UNESCO, 2010, ‘Desalination and Water Resources: History, Development and Management of Water Resources’, Vol. I, 1^st Edition, Eloss: United Kingdom, p. 412

 

via Karl Radl’s Substack 

Jewish Invention Myths: The American Transcontinental Railroad

 

Source: https://www.renegadetribune.com/jewish-invention-myths-the-american-transcontinental-railroad/

 

by Karl Radl

 

Another of the so-called ‘jewish inventions’ listed by Marnie Winston-Macauley at ‘Aish’ is the claim that jews were responsible for the creation of the ‘American Transcontinental Railroad’ by which she actually means the Central Pacific Railroad.

 

The basis for this claim is her assertion that one of principal architects – Theodore Judah – was in fact jewish. (1)

 

The problem of course is that Theodore Judah was not jewish in the slightest, but rather the son of an Anglican minister and his wife from Connecticut and Massachusetts respectively who both came from purely European racial stock. (2)

 

One suspects that Winston-Macauley – if she’s not simply being dishonest – is here mistaking Theodore Judah for Judah P. Benjamin, the famous jewish Attorney General of the Confederate States of America who was active around the same time as Judah.

 

However, it is worth finishing off this short piece by noting the sheer scale of what Theodore Judah achieved in engineering terms, which has long been known (3) but it is worth quoting J. David Rogers and Charles Spinks’ summary of it from a 2019 academic symposium on Judah and his legacy so the reader can see him as the European engineering genius that he truly was:

 

‘In purely engineering retrospect, Judah’s achievements would seem nothing short of providential, especially in comparison to modern route surveying efforts. With a minimal survey crew utilizing crude instruments and only draft animals for transportation, Judah was able to lay out a remarkably accurate alignment across the most difficult natural obstacles undertaken up until that time (1861).’ (4)

 

Thanks for reading Semitic Controversies! This post is public so feel free to share it.

---

References

 

(1) https://aish.com/91795029/%60

 

(2) Sebastian Visscher Talcott, 1994, [1883], ‘Genealogical Notes of New York and New England Families’, 1^st Edition, Clearfield: Baltimore, p. 561, n. 79

 

(3) John Galloway, 1941, ‘Theodore Dehone Judah – Railroad Pioneer’, Civil Engineering, Vol. 11, Nos. 10-11, pp. 586-588 & 648-651 (available here: http://cprr.org/Museum/Galloway_Judah_ASCE/index.html)

 

(4) https://web.mst.edu/~rogersda/american&military_history/THEODORE%20JUDAH%20AND%20THE%20BLAZING%20OF%20THE%20FIRST%20TRANSCONTINENTAL%20RAILROAd-Sierra%20Nevada-Rogers.pdf

 

via Semitic Controversies

Europe Against Bolshevism

Jews and Communism – Part I

Part I

---

„Not a single one of the doctrines of Marx has ever been accepted by any economist or any philosopher. But what of it? It was necessary that Gaiseric should convince economists or philosophers that there were sound reasons why he should capture Rome. He and his followers wanted it, and they had the power to take it.“ (Professor Thomas Nixon Carver, Introduction to Socialism vs. Civilization, by Boris Brasol, p. 10, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1920).

---

„The class consciousness of the masses must be transformed into action and class power; and the arming of the masses is the form of expression of this transformation, the instrument for conquering the bourgeoisie and crushing counter-revolutionary manoeuvers...The proletariat alone is the revolutionary force, the proletariat alone msy wage the uncompromising struggle for the overthrow of Capitalism, the proletariat alone is the maker and the preserver of the Revolution; and it is necessary that this proletariat shall be armed, that it shall itself directly, consciously, energetically and dynamically, constitute the state, the army, the police and th ejudiciary, shall itself usurp and discharge the functions of the ‘state.’„ (Jewish Italian Communist Louis C. Fraina, thecounder of the American Communist Party, Boston, The Revolutionary Age Publishers, p. 49).

---

„...An exact representation of the universe, of its evolution, of the development of mankind and of the reflection of this evolution in the minds of men, can only be obtained by methods of dialectics.“ (Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, p. 48).

---

„I cannot help feeling that Communism, whatever its exponents may say, has recovered that essential core of a real belief in God, which organized Christianity has in our day largely lost.“ (A Program for the Jews and Humanity, Harry Waton, p. 125).

---

„Our bourgeois philanthropy, whatever form it may take, is really only the effort to give back to the workers a little part of that which our whole social system, systematically, robs them of, and so to prop up that system yet a little longer...

It is the workers who produce all values, but the lion’s share of what they produce falls to the lion, the capitalist class, and enables the capitalist arbitrarily to decide what he will do with it and whether or not he will use a part of the spoils for the good of the despoiled, a part of the plunder for the good of the plundered; and, however, disinterestedly individual men and women may devote themselves to this task of restitution, the fact remains that, for the capitalist class as a whole, all philanthropic effort is a work of restitution for self- preservation...

Shall I cast my lot with the oppressors, content to patch and darn, to piece and cobble at the worn and rotten fabric of a perishing society? Shall I spend my life in applying palliatives, in trying to make the intolerable endurable yet a little longer?...Shall I not rather make common cause with these, my brothers and sisters, to make an end of such a system?...

As loyal members of the ruling class, our work must, I repeat, be merely palliative. For a radical cure of the social disease means the end of the system of exploiting the workers...Another of the indispensable books is ‘The Condition of the Working Class in England,’ by Frederick Engels, which is especially valuable for American readers, because the conditions described in it as they prevailed in England at the time of its appearance in Germany are reproduced upon a still larger scale in America now, at the moment of its publication in an English translation. It is the best introduction to the study of modern scientific political economy and of the fundamental work par excellence thereof, ‘Capital,’ by Karl Marx.“ (Address by Florence Kelley, May 14, 1887, before the New York Association of Collegiate Alumnae, entitled „The Need of Theoretical Preparation for Philanthropic Work.“)

---

„The Jews welcome this revolution in the Christian world, and the Jews should show an example. It is not an accident that Judaism gave birth to Marxism, and it is not an accident that the Jews readily took up Marxism: all this was in perfect accord with the progress of Judaism and the Jews.“ (A Program for the Jews and Humanity, by Rabbi Harry Waton, p. 148).

---

„The Communists are against religion (Christianity), and they seek to destroy religion; yet, when we look deeper into the nature of Communism, we see that it is essential nothing else than a religion (Judaism).“ (A Program for the Jews and Humanity, Harry Waton, p. 138).

---

„But the Communist soul is the soul of Judaism. Hence it follows that, just as in the Russian revolution the triumph of Communism was the triumph of Judaism, so also in the triumph of fascism will triumph Judaism.“ (A Program for the Jews and Humanity, Harry Waton, pp. 143-144).

---

„While professing to be ‘profoundly disturbed’ by the aggression of anti-Semitic Germany, Roosevelt continued his special friendship for Soviet Russia after its attacks upon Outer Mongolia, Poland, Latvia, Esthonia, Lithuania and Finland. Professing an adoration for ‘democracy’ he refused, as the Jews control 90 percent of the scrap iron business, to invoke the Neutrality Act against Japan in its war on China, or against Russia when, with Germany, she invaded Poland and attacked Finland. He extended a warm welcome to the Communist Ambassador Oumansky when he presented his credentials and, on the same day, displayed marked coldness toward the newly appointed Ambassador from Christian Spain.“ (War! War! War!, Cincinnatus, p. 152).

---

„The founding prophet of the leftist faith, Karl Marx, was born in 1818, the son of a Jewish father who changed his name from Herschel to Heinrich and converted to Christianity to advance his career. The young Marx grew into a man consumed by hatred for Christianity.

Internationalizing the worst antichrist stereotypes, he incorporated them into his early revolutionary vision, identifying Jews as symbols of the system of private property and bourgeois democracy he wanted to further. ‘The god of the Jews had been secularized and has become the god of this world,’ Marx wrote. ‘Money is the jealous god of the Jews, beside which no other god may stand.’ Once the Revolution succeeds in ‘destroying the empirical essence of Christianity, he promised, ‘the Jew will become the rulers of the world. This early Marxist formulation is the transparent seed of the mature vision, causing Paul Johnson to characterize Marxism as ‘the antichristian of the intellectuals.’

The international Communist creed that Marx invented is a creed of hate. The solution that Marx proposed to the Christian ‘problem’ was to eliminate the system that ‘creates’ the Christian. The Jews, he said, ‘are only symptoms of a more extensive evil that must eradicate capitalism. The Jews are only symbols of a more pervasive enemy that must be destroyed; capitalists.’

In the politics of the left, racist hatred is directed not only against Christian capitalists but against all capitalists; not only against capitalists, but anyone who is not poor, and who is White; and ultimately against Western Civilization itself. The Marxist revolution is antichrist elevated to a global principle.“ (David Horowitz, Human Events).

---

„Religion is one of the forms of the spiritual yoke which always and everywhere has been laid on the masses of the people crushed by poverty. The weakness of the exploited classes, in their struggles with their oppressors, inevitably produced a faith in a better life in the next world, just as the weakness of the savage in the struggle with nature led to faith in gods, devils and miracles. Religion teaches such men, who work and endure poverty all their lives, humility and patience by holding out the consolation of a heavenly reward. But the exploiters are urged by faith to do good on earth, because in this way they think to win justification for their existence and a sort of ticket of admission to heavenly bliss. Religion is an opiate for the people, a sort of spiritual vodka, meant to make the slaves of capitalism tread in the dust their human form and their aspirations to a semi- decent existence...But the slave who becomes conscious of his slavery has already half ceased to be a slave. The modern worker, who is taught by his work in the factory and enlightened by urban life, contemptuously casts off religious prejudices, and leaves heaven to the parsons and devout bourgeois, while he himself tries to win a better life here on earth.“ (V.I. Lenin, Socialism and Religion, Rene Fueloep Miller, The Mind and Face of Bolshevism, pp. 77-78).

---

„In the U.S.S.R. Judaism and Christianity have been buried together. They sleep in the common grave reserved for all religions. The Communists have made no difference between cults...Their philosophy was scientific materialism, they denied the value of all religion, thus they struck at Judaism as at all religions. It is forbidden to give religious instruction to children under eighteen. At school it is explained to the pupils that they will betray the revolution if they put foot within the church or synagogue. With the result that the synagogues are empty...Zionism is banned. To the Communist Zionism is doubly reprehensible, first because they believe it to be in the service of Zionism is severely punished; Zionists have been imprisoned, exiled, and even shot. The suppression of Zionism and of religion (continues the editor) was a great tragedy for the Jewish spirit... The children, victorious, pursue their object (Communism) with the certainty of having chosen a superior mode of Life.“ (L’Universe-israÇlite, September 7-14, 1934).

---

„Use the courts, use the judges, use the constitution of the country, use its medical societies and its laws to further our ends. Do not stint in your labor in this direction. And when you have succeeded you will discover that you can now effect your own legislation at will and you can, by careful organization, by constant campaigns about the terrors of society, by pretense as to your effectiveness, make the capitalist himself, by his own appropriation, finance a large portion of the quiet Communist conquest of that nation.“ (Address of the Jew Laventria Beria, The Communist Textbook on Psychopolitics, page 8).

---

„...there is much in the fact of Bolshevism itself. In the fact that so many Jews are Bolsheviks. In the fact that the ideals of Bolshevism are consonant with the finest ideals of Judaism.“ (The London Jewish Chronicle, April 4, 1919)

---

„Some call it Marxism -- I call it Judaism.“ (The American Bulletin, Rabbi S. Wise, May 5, 1935).

---

„Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels,“ Weyl writes, „were neither internationalists nor believers in equal rights of all the races and peoples. They opposed the struggles for national independence of those races and peoples that they despised. They believed that the ‘barbaric’ and ‘ahistoric’ peoples who comprised the immense majority of mankind had played no significant role in history and were not destined to do so in the foreseeable future.“ (Karl Marx, by Nathaniel Weyl).

---

„We are living in a highly organized state of socialism. The state is all; the individual is of importance only as he contributes to the welfare of the state. His property is only his as the state does not need it. He must hold his life and his possessions at the call of the state.“ (Bernard M. Baruch, The Knickerbocker Press, Albany, N.Y. August 8, 1918)

---

„If the tide of history does not turn toward Communist Internationalism then the Jewish race is doomed.“ (George Marlen, Stalin, Trotsky, or Lenin, p. 414, New York, 1937)