By Dr
Friedrich Karl Wiehe
Published in Berlin, 1938
Published in Berlin, 1938
Table of Contents
Introduction
1. Population and the Social Structure of German Jews
2. Jews in German Economic Life
3. Jews and Corruption
4. The Jews in German Political Life
5. The Jews in the German Press
6. Jews in German Art and Literature
7. The Jewish Share in Immorality
8. The Jewish Share in Crime
1. Population and the Social Structure of German Jews
2. Jews in German Economic Life
3. Jews and Corruption
4. The Jews in German Political Life
5. The Jews in the German Press
6. Jews in German Art and Literature
7. The Jewish Share in Immorality
8. The Jewish Share in Crime
“I was a Jew before I was an American. I have been an American all
of my life, 64 years. But I have been a Jew for 4.000 years.”
– Rabbi Wise in a speech in
Cleveland in June 1938.
Ever since the day when the
National-Socialists came into power in Germany, thereby placing the solution of
the Jewish problem in the forefront of German politics, public opinion the
world over has become increasingly interested in that problem….
Germany’s attitude towards the
Jewish question can be rightly understood only if we consider it from the
standpoint of a philosophy of history based on the conception of the race as
fundamental factor of social evolution - i.e. of the philosophy which from the
outset has inspired the National-Socialist effort to reconstruct and
re-organise the entire life of the German nation. According to this philosophy,
the differentiation and variety of the heterogeneous human races, as well as of
the peoples who descend from them, constitute an essential element of the
Divine creative purpose. Providence has assigned to each people the task of
freely and fully developing its own specific characteristic traits. Hence it is
contrary to the Divine purpose if a people allows its destiny to be shaped by
extraneous forces; and such a people will assuredly perish in the struggle for
existence. The question of the intrinsic value of such forces is irrelevant.
The sole thing that matters is that they are extraneous - that they have no
part in or relation to the hereditary structure, biological and traditional, of
the people among whom they operate.
No clearer demonstration of
this truth has been furnished in the history of the world than by the downfall
of the Roman empire, which was doomed from the moment when the ancient Roman
element that formed its nucleus began to be stifled by the inroad of foreign
influences. The whole life - political, social, economic, military - of the
Roman Empire was finally dominated by alien influences, the result being a
racial and cultural syncretism which could not but prove fatal to the Empire in
the long run.
The family, as the cell of the
social community, is naturally subject to the same law of heredity as the
aggregate. Those peoples who are derived from the Germanic race, to cite only
this particular example, have a strongly developed family instinct. They know,
thanks to instinctive intuition fortified by hereditary experience, that the
destiny of every family is determined throughout successive generations by the
predominance of certain biological and traditional factors. Hence in all
families where the consciousness of this truth has not been obliterated, the
greatest possible care is invariably taken that there shall be no admixture of
new blood susceptible of adulterating the racial composition or debasing the
traditional standard of the family. A number of families illustrious in history
have consistently maintained this standard by a rigorous adherence to the
principle of consanguinity.
Germany, starting from a
philosophy of history based on the principle of racial differentiation, is the
first country to have consistently drawn the conclusions resulting from the
lessons of the past two thousand years in regard to the Jewish question. Those
lessons have taught us the reason why the attempt to solve that question by
means of the abortive attempt to assimilate the Jews was pre-doomed to failure.
Those lessons have proved to the hilt the utter impossibility of assimilating
the Jews, and have shown the inevitability of the periodical recurrence of
anti-Semitism in consequence.
The lessons taught by the past
two thousand years may be resumed as follows:-
[1] The Jewish question is not
a religious, but exclusively a racial, question. The Jews, the overwhelming
majority of whom are of Oriental, i.e. Near Eastern descent, have no racial
affinity whatever with the peoples of Europe. It should be observed that the
attitude of the German government towards the Jewish question is dictated
solely by the fact that the Jews are an alien race, without any consideration
of the intrinsic value of the specific qualities of that race.
Even in the era of
emancipation, during which the Jews were on principle incorporated in the
national communities of the Western world, and which was characterised by the
“conversion” of millions of Jews to Christianity, it proved impossible to blot
out the traces of their ineradicably alien nature. Sufficient evidence of this
fact is forthcoming from Jewish sources. In his book Höre, Israel, the late Dr.
Walther Rathenau wrote: “In the life of the German national the Jews are a
clearly differentiated alien race… In the Marches of Brandenburg they are like
unto an Asiatic horde.” The well known Jewish author Jakob Klatzkin ex pressed
himself with refreshing can dour in his work Krisis und Entscheidung im
Judentum (1921) as follows: “Everywhere we are strangers in the lands in which
we live, and it is our inflexible resolve to maintain our racial idiosyncrasy.”
Both testimonials were furnished at a time when the emancipation of the Jews in
Germany hat reached its culminating point.
[2] For the past 2000 years
the Jewish race has been perpetually on the move. The whole world is its home,
conformably with the motto ubi bene, ibi patria. True to their destiny, the
Jews will never admit being bound by any national ties. The abnormal structure
of the Jewish community, in which neither peasants nor handicraftsmen find a
place, renders it impossible for the Jews to adapt themselves to the conditions
of life in the countries which give them hospitality.
[3] Racial predisposition and
historical destiny combine to incline the Jews to certain categories of
activity, whose sphere of influence is, by their very nature, international. It
is consequently explicable that, during the era of emancipation, the Jews
should have successfully sought to obtain control of a) public opinion, b) the
stock and share markets, c) wholesale and retail trade, d) certain influential
cultural organisations, and - last, but not least - e) political life. At the
close of the emancipation era in Germany, the Jews enjoyed a practical monopoly
of all the professions exerting intellectual and political influence. This
enabled them to stamp their entirely alien features on the whole public life of
the country.
[4] One of the results
achieved by the policy of “assimilation” during the era of emancipation was the
release of the Jews in Eastern Europe from their ghettos, and their emigration
to the more liberal-minded States of Western Europe and North America. Between
1890 and 1900, some 200,000 East European Jews found their way into Great
Britain. The number of Jews who emigrated to the United States between 1912 and
1935 is computed at upwards of 1,500,000. If the Jewish question has today
attained such vital importance, this is to a large extent due to those
migrations of Jews, migrations which, on the one hand, demonstrated the
illusory nature of the theory of the Jews’ capacity for assimilation, and, on
the other, hastened the process of the domination of West European and North
American states by Jewish elements.
The process in question had
been practically completed in Germany before the advent of National-Socialism
to power. An alien race, without roots in German soil and without even the most
remote affiliation with the German people, had taken possession of Germany. The
poison of an alien spirit, of an alien manner of thinking, had been instilled,
cunningly and systematically, into the German mind. Hence the whole German
organism necessarily conveyed a totally misleading impression to an observer
from outside. National-Socialism was therefore faced by the urgent necessity of
solving a problem which vitally affected the very existence of the German
nation.
Impartial foreign observers
had long since recognised the inevitability of a radical solution of the Jewish
question in Germany. Already in December, 1910, the Times, in a review of
Houston Stewart Chamberlain’s book “The Foundations of the Nineteenth Century,”
remarked that nearly everything in Germany had come under Jewish control – not
only business life, but the press, the theatre, the film, etc., in short,
everything susceptible of influencing German spiritual life, and that it would
be inconceivable that the Germans could tolerate such a slate of affairs in the
long run. A clash must sooner or later inevitably occur, in the view of the
Times.
Since a solution of the Jewish
problem by means of the assimilation of the Jewish race, of its absorption in
German national life, had proved wholly impossible, there remained to the
National-Socialists but the single alternative of solving the Jewish question
by the elimination of that unassimilable race from Germany.
Foreign critics take
particular exception to this view. Even objective observers, fully aware of the
consequences of Jewish ascendency and of the resulting inevitability of an
anti-Semitic reaction, condemn the methods adopted by National-Socialism for
the solution of the Jewish question in Germany as inhuman and barbarous when
pushed to their only logical conclusion.
Whether considered from a
purely psychological, or from a concrete political, point of view, this
criticism of Germany’s attitude is bound to exert great influence on Germany’s
relations with other countries. It is therefore necessary to carefully examine
the grounds on which that criticism is based.
It is incontestable - in fact
no attempt has been made to deny or even to minimise the fact - that the policy
of the German government towards the Jews has entailed numerous hardships -
amounting in certain individual cases to a positive miscarriage of justice. It
cannot be denied that a number of Jews affected by recent legislative measures
directed against their race honestly felt themselves to be thorough going
Germans. Such Jews had done their best to render service to the state as
functionaries, artists, men of letters, scientists, and - last but not least -
as soldiers in the Great War.
In order to understand why
Germany has proceeded to such a radical solution of the Jewish problem by means
of methods of such relentless severity, it is necessary to make abstraction of
individual cases, however interesting they may be intrinsically, and to bear in
mind that no legislative measure, nor indeed any farreaching political action,
can be conceived which does not inevitably entail more or less numerous
individual hardships. It is the same as with surgical operations, when the
surgeon, in order to extirpate the germs of disease, must resort to the excision
of healthy tissue surrounding the infected parts. Only in this way can he hope
to save the sick organism.
But in order to understand the
German attitude towards the Jewish question it is necessary to go still farther
- to remember (as has already been indicated) that the unceasing encroachment
of the Jews on the entire public life of Germany within the last few decades
finally resulted in a terrible national catastrophe. The disastrous end of the
Great War for Germany, followed as it was by complete political and economic
collapse, by cultural and moral deterioration, by unemployment on a colossal
scale with its consequent impoverishment of all social classes to a degree
hitherto undreamt-of in modern times - this epoch of Germany’s greatest and
most cruel humiliation coincided with the final triumph of Jewish emancipation,
with the culminating point of Jewish ascendency in Germany, just as the
aforementioned writer in the Times had prophesied in 1910.
Already more than a generation
ago, one of the most sincere and farsighted minds in international Jewry, the
late Zionist leader Theodore Herzl, described this interdependence of general
distress and Jewish ascendency in a passage of his Zionistische Schriften (vol.
1, pp. 238/9), which is by no means applicable solely to Germany, but which
has, on the contrary, universal validity. Therein Herzl characterised as
follows the part played by the Jews:-
“There are among them a few
persons who hold in their hands the financial threads that envelop the world. A
few persons who absolutely control the shaping of the most vitally important
conditions of life of the nations. Every invention and innovation are for their
sole benefit, whilst every misfortune increases their power. And to what use do
they put this power? Have they ever placed it at the service of any moral ideal
- nay, have they ever placed it at the disposal of their own people, who are in
dire distress? … Without those persons no war can he waged and no peace be
concluded. The credit of states and individual enterprises are alike at the
mercy of their rapacious ambition. The inventor must humbly wait at their
doors, and in their arrogance they claim to sit in judgment on the requirements
of their fellow beings.”
Nothing could be better
calculated to clear Germany from the reproach of sinning against the laws of
humanity, than a detailed enumeration of the facts which prove to what an
appalling degree Germany herself experienced the truth of Herzl’s words - of
the facts which incontestably show what immeasurably bitter experiences have
forced Germany to seek a radical solution of the Jewish problem, as far as she
is concerned, by the ruthless elimination of all Jewish influence in German
Life.
The following chapters endeavour
to present a resume of the importance of the part played by the Jews at the
peak of the era of emancipation–i.e. up to the advent to power of
National-Socialism.
It is essential, in the first place,
to get an accurate picture of the numerical significance of German Jews in
those days, as well as their regional distribution within the Reich and their
social structure.
The result of the census in
1925 - the last to be held before National-Socialism took over power - showed
that out of a total population of 62.5 millions there were 546,379 professing
the Jewish faith. In other words, this was just less than 1 % of the total
population.
It must be noted however that
this statistic merely embraced those Jews professing Jewish faith and not those
who were Jews by blood and race but who for some reason or another had accepted
a Christian faith. No method whatsoever existed for compiling statistics in
respect of this latter category. All that one could do was to set up a
statistic for those who were orthodox Jews. Only in recent times the
authorities in Germany have set themselves the task of ascertaining how far
Jewish blood has penetrated into the German race. These investigations have not
yet been concluded; they involve a vast amount of detail work. Hence all
statistics that follow are necessarily still based on the figures for orthodox
Jewry.
In spite of this we have at
our disposal some very reliable research data by the Jews themselves. We refer in this connexion to the
works of Heinrich Silbergleit Die Bevölkerungsverhältnisse der Juden im
Deutschen Reich - The Jewish Population Problem in the German Reich - (Berlin
1931). By basing
our statistics to a large extent on these research figures, we are placing
ourselves beyond criticism as prejudiced anti-Semitics.
We have shown that the total
percentage of German confessional Jews in 1925 was just below 1%, to be exact,
0.90 %. But this did not mean that the regional distribution within the Reich
was on the same scale. Whereas the purely rural districts of Mecklenburg,
Oldenburg, Thuringia or Anhalt possessed only a very sparse Jewish population
(0.16 to 0.32 %), the majority of Jews were heavily concentrated in the large
urban areas, particularly in Prussia, Hamburg or Hessen (1.05 to 1.72 %). In
Prussia, the largest of the German federal states, the census showed that
nearly 73 % of the total number of Jews were concentrated in the large cities
with a population of more than 100,000 - whereas the corresponding ratio for
the non-Jewish population reached barely 30 %.
A comparison with the results
of the various census since 1871 shows that the status of Jews in the rural
districts of Germany has consistently decreased, whereas all urban districts
have shown a constant increase.
This can be ascribed to a
veritable and phenomenal domestic migration of German Jews within the last 50
years towards the large urban areas. The main reason for this migration is to
be found in the rapidly increasing Jewish emancipation in those days consequent
upon a German victory in the Franco-Prussian war.
One of the main objectives of
this Jewish migration was Berlin, the capital of the Reich, where the number of
Jews had become trebled between 1871 and 1910, (36,000–90,000). In this
metropolis, the centre of national, political and cultural activity, Jews bad
established their headquarters. Here they were able to develop unhampered their
own peculiar racial characteristics.
The 1925 census returns for
Berlin showed that there were 172,500 Jews or 4.25 % out of a total population
of approximately 4 millions. This percentage is four times greater than the
percentage of Jews in the whole German population. Berlin, the capital of
Prussia, the largest of the federal states, therefore possessed 42 % of the
400,000 Prussian Jews.
Twenty-five percent of these
172,500 Berlin Jews were aliens. This fact alone illustrates clearly the total
lack of Jewish affinity for national ties and national sentiment. Nearly
one-quarter or 18.5 % of the 400,000 Jews in Prussia possessed foreign
nationality.
To be able to appreciate the
true significance of these figures, one must bear in mind that Jewry in the
large cities was able to attain such numerical significance despite the fact
that it was subject to a number of restrictive factors. These could only be
made good by a constant immigration from the East, particularly during and
after the Great War. It is this Eastern immigration of low-class, mean and
morally unscrupulous Jews which has given the German Jewish problem its
particular harsh note.
Another aspect of Jewish life
is the comparative infertility of Jewish marriages when compared with the rest
of the population; further, the evident and constantly increasing tendency to
contract marriage with Christians.
Statistics in regard to
cross-marriages in Germany reveal the fact that between 1923 and 1932, two male
Jews out of every three married Jewesses, - the third marrying a Christian. The
statistics in regard to Jewesses were hardly less. In 1926 there were 64
cross-marriages for every hundred purely Jewish marriages, in other words,
there were two cross-marriages for every three Jewish ones. At the same period
in Germany as a whole, there were 50 cross-marriages against 100 purely Jewish
ones, that is, two Jewish marriages to one cross-marriage.
It is self-evident that the
complete one-sided distribution of German Jews and their systematic migration
to, and concentration in, the large urban areas was an unsound policy and
disastrous not only for the Jews but also for the national life of Germany.
But the structure of
professional life also suffered from this morbid one-sidedness. Here statistics
show that Jewry was a tree without roots, without any anchorage whatsoever in
social life. This abnormal social composition was responsible for the fact that
the Jews exclusively preferred the commercial professions and steered clear of
all manual work.
These facts can be checked by
the results of the trades records established in the various German federal
states in 1925. In Prussia, Württemberg and Hessen, these census gave the
following results in regard to the percentage of Jews employed in the various
groups:
Profession
|
Preussia
|
Würtemberg
|
Hessen
|
Trade and traffic
|
58,8%
|
64,6%
|
69%
|
Industry
|
25,8%
|
24,6%
|
22%
|
Agriculture
|
1,7%
|
1,8%
|
4%
|
It is often asserted that
external pressure, political and social considerations, as well as ghetto and
boycott have squeezed the Jews out of handicraft trades and forced them into
commercial spheres. Here however we must reply by stating that in rural
districts, particularly in the former province of Posen and in Hessen-Nassau,
the Jews had every opportunity of working as farmers or craftsmen. There were
certainly no restrictions placed on them. But they preferred to deal in cattle,
corn or fertilizers and especially in money which brought them rich reward.
Felix A. Theilhaber, the
well-known Jewish economist, reporting his observations on the causes of Jewish
disintegration in Der Untergang der deutschen Juden - The Decline and Fall of
Germany Jewry - (Berlin 1921), confirms the fact that so-called primitive
production is not in keeping with Jewish characteristics. He admits, primarily,
that racial talents force the Jews into the so-called business professions as
they are more easily able to guarantee commercial success and material
security. Theilhaber finally arrives at the following conclusion:
“Agriculture has little
material attraction for German Jews. … Racial instincts, traditions and
economic pre conditions compel them to choose other professions. .. Hence it
is natural that certain types dominate in German Jewry, for example, clothiers,
agents, lawyers and doctors. Jewish characteristics and peculiarities are also
evident in other branches (departmental stores, furs, tobacco and even the
press). One peculiar Jewish feature is the craving for individualism, the urge
to become independent and wealthy.”
Among the intellectual
professions named by this Jewish author, that of medicine and law were the two
most attractive. They were the professions that offered most material gain.
Jewish influence in these professions was therefore most marked and finally
assumed a dominating character.
In 1932 there were approximately
50,000 German medical practitioners of which 6,488, - 13% - were Jews. That is
to say, a figure ten times greater than that to which they were entitled on the
basis of population ratio. It is noteworthy to mention in this connexion that
the majority of these Jewish doctors classed themselves as specialists in venereal
diseases.
In Berlin, the capital of the
Reich, the percentage of Jewish doctors was still greater. The figure was 42 %
and 52 % for the panel doctors. In the leading Berlin hospitals 45 % of all the
doctors were Jews.
An abnormal and
disproportionate state of affairs also existed in the legal professions as
compared with the population ratio. In 1933 there were 11,795 lawyers
practising in Prussia of which 3,350 or nearly 30 % were Jews; 2,051 or 33 % of
the total number of 6,236 public notaries were Jews. In Berlin itself the
percentage was much higher, - bordering between 48 % and 56 %.
Further consideration must be
given to the fact that the administration of justice was chiefly in the hands
of orthodox Jews. The position was similar in regard to the professorships at
various leading German universities. The table below furnishes the statistics
of three of these universities in 1931. Not only the law and medical faculties
are quoted but the philosophical as well in order to show the abnormal Jewish
penetration:
Faculty
|
Berlin
|
Breslau
|
Frankfurt a. M.
|
Law
|
Out of 44 lecturers, 15 Jews
= 34 %
|
Out of 23 lecturers, 6 Jews
= 26 %
|
Jewish lecturers 33 %
|
Medicine
|
Out of 265 lecturers, 118 =
43 %
|
Out of 101 lecturers, 43
Jews = 43 %
|
Jewish lecturers 28 %
|
Philosophy
|
Out of 268 lecturers, 85
Jews = 31 %
|
Out of 107 lecturers, 26
Jews = 25 %
|
Jewish lecturers 32 %
|
Two of the most important
phases of public life viz. law and public health were thus in danger of coming
under complete Jewish control.
Jewish penetration into German
economic life was still more pronounced. In strict accordance with the
objectives referred to in the previous chapter, trade and commerce were the
principle spheres in which Jews centred their attention. Their peak activity in
this respect, be it noted, was reached during the currency inflation from 1919
to 1923. In that particular period very little material benefit accrued to
anyone engaged in productive and strenuous work. An instinct for speculation and
commercial shrewdness was the ruling factor in those days. It is no wonder
therefore that Jewish business concerns sprang up like mushrooms over night in
that period. We need only recall such well-known Jewish names as Jakob Michael,
Richard Kahn and Jacob Shapiro or the corrupt business concerns associated with
the Austrian Jewish speculators, Siegfried Bosel and Castiglioni, two names
that became notorious far beyond Germany’s frontiers. At huge cost to the
national budget all these concerns finally collapsed when German currency was
stabilized.
In 1931, Dr. Alfred Marcus,
the Jewish statistician previously referred to, carefully examined Jewish
participation in individual branches of German trade in his book Die
wirtschaftliche Krise des deutschen Juden, - The Economic Crisis of German
Jews. - His investigations led to the following remarkable results:
In 1930, 346 or 57.3 % of the
total of 603 firms in the metal trades were in Jewish hands; in scrap-metal
there were 514 firms of which 211 or 41 % were Jews; grain merchants totalled
6,809 of which 1,543 or 22. % were Jews; textile wholesalers numbered 9,984 of
which 3,938 or 39,4 % were Jews; in the ladies dress branch there were 81
Jewish firms out of a total of 133, or 60.9 %. In the art and booksellers
trades, both of which possess an extremely cultural value, many of the most
important firms were Jewish. We need only mention S. Fischer, Cassirer,
Flechtheim, Ullstein and Springer.
Still more important is the
financial or banking business. Here well-nigh every leading business was in the
hands of Jews. A few individual instances can be quoted. Both the governing
directors of the Deutsche Bank und Discontogesellschaft (1929) and four of its
twelve board members were Jews. The chairman, two vice-chairmen and three of
the five governing members of the board of the Darmstädter und Nationalbank
were Jews. The chairman, vice-chairman and three of the seven members of the
governing board of the Dresdner Bank (1928) were Jews. Finally, everyone of the
three owners of the Berliner Handelsgesellschaft were also Jews.
The big private banks were
also nearly all in Jewish hands. We need only recall such well-known firms as
Arnhold, Behrens, Warburg, Bleichröder, Mendelsohn, Goldschmidt, Rothschild,
Dreyfuss, Bondi and Maron, Aufhäuser, Oppenheim, Levy, Speyer-Ellissen,
Heimann, Stern.
By means of these key
positions in the financial world Jewish influence penetrated by way of the
boards of directors to every section of German industry. The Adress Buch der
Direktoren und Aufsichtsräte - A Guide to Company Directors & Boards of
Management - published in 1930, i. e. long before the National-Socialists
assumed power - proves the alarming influence of Jewish capital or capital
controlled by Jews on German economic life.
Outstanding among Jewish
financiers in this respect was Jacob Goldschmidt, a member of the boards of no
less than 115 companies. He was closely followed by Louis Hagen, a Jewish
banker, with 62 appointments. Third on the list was a Christian lawyer, followed
successively by four Jewish bankers who together held 166 positions on the
boards of various companies. Further down this list Jews continued to play a
very prominent role.
This concentration of
business-company authority in the hands of a small group of Jewish financiers
was certainly not compatible with a conscientious fulfilment of the exacting
duties of a company director. On the other hand no effort or work was necessary
in producing extraordinary handsome returns. This was one of the most important
factors that led to discrediting the political and economic systems of that
period, and also formed one of the causes which led to a widespread growth of
anti-Semitism among the broad masses in Germany.
The domination of German
industry by a system of Jewish boards of business directors certainly went hand
in hand with direct Jewish penetration and subsequent control of industrial
production. The complicated nature of this vast field and its complex structure
makes it possible to give only a few illustrations which, however, by no means
exhaust the real extent of Jewish expansion.
In the electrical branch for
example, mention must be made of the AEG, - the German General Electric
Company. This company was established by the Jew Emil Rathenau and after the
Great War, was controlled by two Jews. The whole of the metal market was
controlled by the Jew Merton, head of the Frankfurt Metal Bank. The Osram
Company, the leading electric globe concern, was controlled by Meinhardt, a
Jew. The Continental Rubber Company in Hannover, Germany’s largest productive
plant, and the Calmon Rubber Company at Hamburg were established and controlled
by Jews. Adler, Oppenheim, Salamander and Conrad Tack & Co., four Jewish
firms, dominated the entire German leather industry. The iron market was
controlled by the Jew Ottmar Strauss, Hugo Herzfeld, a Jew, exercised a decided
influence in the potash industry. In the mining industry section, Paul
Silverberg dominated the Rhenish lignite or brown coal industry whilst two
co-religionists, the Petschek brothers had a similar function in the Central
German lignite district.
Jewish participation was also
extraordinarily large in industrial organisations and in official organs of
German economic life. This influence was particularly pronounced in the
Chambers of Commerce and Industry. To quote one example: The Berlin Chamber of
Commerce and Industry, the largest of its kind in Germany, had 98 members in
1931 of which no less than 50 were Jews or half-caste Jews. Four hundred of
the 1,300 members attached to the Chamber as advisory experts were Jews, whilst
131 of the 209 commercial judges appointed by the Chamber were also Jews. The
Chamber itself was presided over by a President and five vice-presidents. The
president himself and three of his deputies were Jews.
The position was far worse on
the exchanges. We need do no more than give the Berlin Exchange, the most
important one in Germany, as an example. Twenty-five of the 36 committee
members of the Securities and Bonds Exchange were Jews, twelve of the 16
committee members of the Produce Exchange were Jews and ten of the 12 committee
members of the Metal Exchange were also Jews. The committee of the whole
Exchange was composed of 70 members of whom 45 were Jews. Attendance at the Exchange
was also more or less a Jewish monopoly. In 1930 for example, the attendance at
the Securities and Bonds Exchange totalled 1,474 of which number approximately
1,200 were Jews. The Produce Exchange had an attendance of 578 of which 520
were Jews, and at the Metal Exchange out of an attendance of 89 there were 80
Jews.
It is obvious that the
Reichsbank, the official bank for the issue of paper money, was in no position
to resist permanently this well-nigh Jewish monopoly of capital and economic
interests. The result was that in the period between 1925 and 1929 four of the
six members of the controlling board of Reichsbank directors were Jews or
half-caste Jews. All three members of the Central Council of the Reichsbank and
two of their deputies were Jews.
It is necessary now to
supplement the aforementioned quantitative analysis of Jewish participation in
German economic life by a qualitative one in which the following facts must be
borne in mind:
When compiling the
aforementioned statistics in regard to certain professions in the various
German states since 1925 it was ascertained that in Prussia, the largest state,
out of a total of approximately 3 million employed in the professions - either
independently or in leading capacities - approximately 92,000 were orthodox
Jews. This means that 48 % of all Jews professionally employed held leading
positions, whereas the corresponding ratio for the remainder of the population
amounted to only 16 %.
If we compare this with the
Jewish share in the non independent manual work branch, then the whole
abnormal social structure of Jewry stands revealed in its true light: Whereas
Prussia in 1925 employed approximately 8.5 million ordinary workers (i. e. 46,9
% of the sum total of all in employment). Jews totalled only 16,000 i.e. (8.4 %
of all Jews in employment). The percentage of Jews (which in the leading
positions was three times greater than that of the whole population) dropped
therefore in the manual trades to one sixth of the figure for the rest of the
population, and for all practical purposes had reached zero.
This supplementary qualitative
assessment makes it perfectly plain that prior to the National-Socialist regime
the whole of German economic life had reached that alarming stage where it was
under foreign domination by Jews and principally by Jews in leading key
positions.
It is not surprising that this
powerful domination of German economic life should express itself in abnormally
high incomes for members of the Jewish community. It is difficult of course to
give accurate figures in this respect. We will, however, limit ourselves to the
statistics furnished us by the Jewish statistician, Dr. Alfred Marcus, to whom
reference has already been made. Marcus estimates the average Jewish income for
1930 as 3.2 times greater than the average income of the rest of the
population.
Summarizing the aforementioned
particulars, it must be emphasized once more that the Jews concentrated
themselves exclusively on commercial and financial undertakings and assumed therein
absolute leading positions. Agriculture and other manual work were severely
left alone. Abnormal concentration of Jews in large cities, particularly in
Berlin, must not be forgotten.
It does not require much
intelligence to realize that such an abnormal social and regional structure
must ultimately lead to a state of severe tension, if not to serious
disturbances in public life. This would have taken place in any case even if
the Jews had wisely adapted themselves to the requirements of the country which
was giving them shelter. These tensions had to lead to an explosion one day if
Jewry, blinded by the lustre of its fortunes continued to exercise no restraint
in displaying its foreign racial characteristics. But nowhere have Jews been
more downright unrestrained than during the era of economic and political
corruption which Germany experienced after the Great War.
It is no exaggeration to say
that public life in those days was governed by an epidemic of corruption. This
was by no means confined to Germany. Europe and the United States of America
were similarly affected. Jews played a leading part in corruption scandals
everywhere. In France it was Hanau, Oustric and Stavisky; in the United States
of America it was Insull and in Austria, Bosel, Berliner and Castiglioni were
the outstanding figures.
Fundamentally it is not
surprising that this plague of corruption became most widespread and acute in
the period which followed the disastrous World War. On the other hand, however,
it is typical of the Jew and his character that he should be the bearer and the
principal beneficiary of this process of disintegration.
It is understandable that
Germany, as the loser of the war, became infected to a particularly acute
degree with the germ of corruption. During its most distressful period of trial
and tribulation - the result of the Dictate of Versailles Germany therefore
became acquainted with Jewry as the exploiters and beneficiaries of its
national misfortunes. No other country can point to a similar experience.
The list of Jewish profiteers
in those years of national distress who veritably swamped the crumbling
structure of German economic life and finally were responsible for its total
collapse and ruin - ranges from the company promoter type and inflation
profiteer to all the various types of soldiers of fortune and large-scale
swindlers. In no other national economy has Jewish nature with its selfishness,
its unscrupulousness and its urge for quick profits developed itself so unrestrictedly
as in Germany throughout that particular tragic period.
Even the war companies, which
during the Great War attended to the supplies of raw materials, were allowed to
come more and more under Jewish influence. The largest concern of its kind, the
Zentral Einkaufsgesellschaft - the Central Buying Company - for example, was
controlled by a Jew. The important Kriegs Metall Company - the War Metals
Company - was in charge of 14 governing men of whom 12 were Jews. A public
scandal as the result of the business methods of this company was avoided for
the simple reason that the political and military developments of the war
confronted Germany with other and more pressing tasks.
Jewry’s great and triumphant
hour of corruption came with the end of the Great War, the liquidation of the
armaments. Factories and the sale of military stores and equipment offered
splendid opportunities for handsome profits and the Jews were not backward in
exploiting this state of affairs. The Jew, Richard Kahn, to mention an example,
made a contract with the Deutsche Werke - the largest state-owned armaments
plant - whereby the whole of its valuable stock was sold to him at scrap-metal
price. Kahn was not the only Jew who profiteered enormously as the result of
Germany’s downfall. Felix Pinner, a Jewish author, in his book entitled:
Deutsche Wirtschaftsführer - German Leaders of Economy - (Berlin 1924) has
characterized the innumerable Jewish profiteers as follows:
“Many of them . . . started
business as army suppliers. In a number of cases it was difficult to say
whether their chief motive was a desire to deal in military supplies or an
excuse for shirking military duties. In many cases their big opportunity came
when military stores and equipment were finally sold. Others again firmly
established themselves financially with the advent of the currency inflation
period.”
Business in deflated currency
in the years 1919 to 1923 brought many outstanding triumphs to corruptive and
speculative dealers. The Jews in particular were prominent in floating large
companies as the result of shady transactions on the exchange. These concerns,
which were none too securely established, paid out large dividends in the early
stages before finally crashing. The most well-known names in this respect are
the Jews Jakob Michael, Richard Kahn and the Eastern Jew Ciprut and his
brother. These two brothers are referred to by Pinner, the Jewish author, in
his book from which we have already quoted. He states: “The Ciprut brothers are
of the breed that comes from the south-eastern plains of Roumania or Persia;
soldiers of fortune attracted by the decomposing stench of German currency.”
All these cases however were
not the deciding factors that turned the Jewish question in Germany into a most
burning problem for the whole nation. No. They took place at a time when all
phases of economic and political law and order were extremely lax. To a certain
extent they even passed unnoticed in the general chaotic state of affairs
during the first post-war years. But nothing was more calculated to open the
eyes of the general public in Germany and fan the flame of anti-Semitism than
the huge wave of Jewish corruption which had assumed such a criminal character
that one public scandal followed another in rapid succession.
We refer in particular to the
five Sklarz brothers, the three Barmat, the three Sklarek and the two Rotter
brothers as well as the scandals associated with Michael Holzmann and Ludwig
Katzenellenbogen. All these Jewish past-masters in corruption were, with the
exception of Katzenellenbogen, Easterners i. e. Galician or Polish Jews who had
migrated to Germany either during or after the Great War.
The first of the big
corruption cases was the one in connexion with the five Sklarz brothers. With
the help of influential connexions in the Social-Democrat party they succeeded,
shortly after the war, in obtaining a monopoly for supplies to those troops
that had been commissioned with the task of restoring domestic law and order.
These contracts led to enormous profits within a short space of time. These
brothers increased their wealth considerably by further shady manipulations and
by discreet bribes to leading government officials. All this helped these
unscrupulous Jewish black guards materially when they subsequently came up for
trial. Very little light could be thrown on their shady conduct and after a
well-nigh endless trial, only one of the five brothers was convicted in 1926.
These five brothers were ably
assisted by a Russian Jew, Parvus-Helphand, one of the most unscrupulous
blackguards and swindlers produced by the war. He utilized the millions he made
out of war supplies in order to establish good relations with the
Social-Democrats in power at that time. As a principal wire-puller he remained
in the background of many corruption scandals. No one dared to institute proceedings
against a man who had successfully bribed so many leading government officials.
The three Barmat brothers were
artists in corruption on a more imposing scale. Their home was at Kiev and
during the war they were engaged in business in Holland as food merchants. With
the help of Heilmann, the Jewish politician, the five Sklarz brothers and
Parvus-Helphand these three Barmat brothers ultimately received permission to
settle in Germany. By means of ruthless exploitation of human weaknesses, small
and large favours which culminated in direct bribes, these brothers were able
finally to win the confidence of influential friends and members of the
government. In this way they soon became the owners of ten banks and a great
number of industrial concerns. With the help of fraudulent balance sheets they
procured a loan of 38 million Marks, partly granted by the Prussian State bank
and partly by the Reich Ministry of Posts and Telegraphs. When finally this
inflated Barrnat concern crashed, its debts were estimated at 70 million gold
Marks, and half of this sum had to be covered by the savings of small
investors.
The subsequent court
proceedings against these Barrnat brothers ended in very small terms of
imprisonment. Herr Bauer, the Social-Democrat Reich Chancellor at that time,
who had become involved in the proceedings was forced to resign.
After the crash, Julius Barmat
went abroad again. In his new surroundings he applied with great success the
methods which he had adopted in Germany. By bribing influential politicians he
was able to obtain loans and finally defrauded the Belgian National Bank of 34
million gold francs. He evaded the law by committing suicide in 1937.
The three Jews, Iwan Baruch,
Alexander Kutisker and Michael Holzmann were less successful in their efforts
than their predecessors. Nevertheless they are worthy of mention. They turned
their attention to the Prussian State Bank which Barmat had previously
defrauded. They also succeeded in defrauding this institution to the extent of
14 million gold Marks.
By far the largest scandal
however was brought about by the Sklarek brothers of whom there were three. The
case is certainly unparalleled in the history of crime, politics, business and
bribery. The principle sufferers were the city authorities in Berlin.
By a clever and crafty system
of favours, presents and bribes of every description these three Jews had
literally purchased goodwill in various civic quarters in Berlin - where
Social-Democrats and Communists were chiefly in power. In this way they secured
an absolute monopoly for the supply of clothing either to the police force,
traffic department, social aid depots or public works department. All municipal
officials were systematically bribed who might in any way prove useful to the
Sklareks in obtaining and keeping their monopoly. Even the Oberbürgermeister,
Berlin’s Lord Mayor, was bribed. In this way, therefore, it was possible to
obtain payment from the Stadtbank - the Berlin Municipal Bank - for all faked
invoices in respect of goods never supplied. The sums paid on this account ran
into enormous figures. When the firm of Sklarek finally suspended payments, the
municipal bank had been defrauded of 12,5 million Marks. An enquiry to
ascertain the whereabouts of a further 10 million Marks brought no results.
The legal proceedings against
these three Jews commenced in 1932 and lasted nine months. In accordance with
public feeling the sentences were more severe than in previous cases. Two of
the brothers (one had died in the meantime) were sentenced to long terms of
imprisonment with hard labour.
Mention must still be made of
the Jewish Director-General Katzenellenbogen. He was head of the
Schultheiss-Patzenhofer concern, one of the largest industrial undertakings in
Germany with a share capital of 75 million Marks and a preferential capital of
15 million Marks. By means of disreputable speculation with a view to personal
enrichment at the expense of the company, Katzenellenbogen brought this vast
concern to the verge of bankruptcy. The shareholders were defrauded to the
extent of thirty million Marks. Part of his dishonest profits Katzenellenbogen
used for the purpose of financing Erwin Piscator, the Bolshevik theatrical
director. Katzenellenbogen was finally convicted for fraud and for issuing
false balance sheets and sentenced to imprisonment.
The final case in this long
series of corruption scandals was the one dealing with the Rotter brothers.
These two Jewish speculators had formed a combine embracing seven of the
largest Berlin theatres. The work of exploiting these theatres was considerably
facilitated by the flotation of several companies whose affairs were placed in
the hands of an ignorant though willing person acting as a mere figure head. In
one single year, 1932, these two adventurers were able to squeeze no less than
300,000 Marks clear profit out of these under takings after all expenses had
been met. Their monthly salaries, which they themselves had fixed at 2,000
Marks each were not included in this figure. A further 400,000 Marks accrued to
them as the result of a fraudulent contract respecting two cultural
undertakings. While Christian actors in these theatres were badly underpaid,
the Jewish “stars” on the other hand received fantastic salaries, as much as
1,000 to 2,500 Marks per evening being no rare occurrence. The Rotter brothers
lived a life of splendid luxury and the day came in 1932 when their concern
also finally crashed with debts amounting to 3.5 million Marks. The two brothers
declined all responsibility for the crash and decamped to Liechtenstein for
which country they had taken care to obtain papers of naturalization.
We have already stated that
Austria also had its Jewish corruption scandals on a large scale. Apart from
Castiglioni and Bosel mention must be made of Berliner, the large-scale Jewish
swindler. As Director-General of the large Phönix Life Insurance Company, he
utilized the funds of this company for political purposes. Berliner maintained
excellent relations with all political parties in Austria and paid out a total
of three million schillings in bribes in respect of elections and the
occupation of certain important positions. He influenced the press in his time
by payments amounting to 170 million schillings. The trade unions and the
military Heimwehr organization were also supported by him from funds
fraudulently appropriated from his company. In this way, the debts of the
Phönix Company finally totalled the mammoth sum of 670 million schillings.
330,000 policy holders of the company, chiefly of the non-wealthy middle class
type, were the principal sufferers and had to foot the bill by means of
increased premiums and reduced benefits.
This list of Jewish corruption
by no means lays claim to being complete. Attention has only been drawn to
those cases which in Germany and elsewhere have focused particular public
attention by reason of their magnitude. But the instances quoted suffice to
deny the oft - repeated Jewish charge that Jews were in no way more involved in
corruption than Christians. Here it can be said that during the period which
has been referred to, only two great corruption scandals by Christians have
taken place. These are the Raiffeisen Bank and the Lahusen cases. Jewish
participation in corruption is therefore not only greater on a percentage basis
- that is when compared with the Jewish population ratio but also totally
dominant in every respect.
A decisive factor in judging
Jewish corruption is that legal punishment of this crime was either invariably
a long-winded affair or no charge was subsequently preferred against the
criminals. When a conviction did take place punishment was invariably mild. The
reason for this was to be found in the very friendly and mutually profitable
relations existing between these Jews and various influential personages in the
government and other public bodies. And here again, Jews were always to be
found in highly-placed and important key positions.
This inter-connexion of
interests has already been referred to above. Reference has already been made
to Heilmann, the Jewish Social-Democrat Reichstag member who paved the way for
the Barmats. The Jewish Secretary of State Abegg has also been mentioned as
acting in a similar capacity. As further examples of Jewish corruption in the
Prussian Civil Service, mention must be made of Dr. Weismann, Secretary of
State and State Commissar for Public Law and Order in Prussia. Further, Dr.
Weiss, Deputy Chief of Police in Berlin. Both were officially responsible for
law and order; Dr. Weismann himself was classified as the senior official in
Prussia, the largest of the federal states.
Dr. Weismann played a
particularly shady part in the proceedings against the Sklarz brothers. It is
characteristic of him that he attempted to bribe Herr Gutjahr, the leading
state prosecutor, with a sum of three million Marks with a view to having the
charge modified. Gutjahr refused to be bribed and subsequently Weismann was
responsible for this trusted official being officially reprimanded.
Weismann and Dr. Weiss were
both heavy gamblers in private life. The Jewish periodical Die Weltbühne even
criticized Weismann in 1920 as “one of the most notorious gamblers in Berlin.”
Dr. Weiss - the deputy chief of police was frequently surprised in 1932 in
various illicit gaming dens. Before the National-Socialists came into power the
Court of Appeal in Berlin even confirmed that he had committed an offence
against the law and that he “did not possess the moral qualities necessary for
such a responsible position.”
In Imperial Germany the Jews
did not play any important roles in the political life of the country, that is
to say, not insofar as they were in possession of important key positions. But
this state of affairs changed radically with the outbreak of the 1918
revolution and the introduction of a new constitution. There is no need here to
examine the question of whether this new state structure was in line with the
governing political ideas of Jewry. The facts, however, are that with the
commencement of November 1918, a veritable rush was made by the Jews to capture
the leading key positions in the Reich and in the federal states.
Among the six so-called
“Representatives of the People” who formed the first Reich government after the
collapse, there were two Jews, Hugo Haase and Otto Landsberg. Kurt Eisner, a
Jew, headed the list as Minister-President in Bavaria; in Prussia the Jew Paul
Hirsch assumed a similar function. The first Reich government established in
1919 on a parliamentry basis contained five Jews. Many of the most important
departments in the Reich ministeries were controlled by Jews.
To thoroughly appreciate the
significance of this fact, one must bear in mind, that Jewish usurpation of
political leadership commenced with the beginning of an epoch of political
weakness which, in foreign affairs led to complete surrender and shameful
servility; in the domestic sphere to complete disunion and disruption. Even the
loss of the Great War - which naturally had to lead to a profound change in
Germany’s position abroad and in her domestic affairs as well - is certainly no
sufficient excuse or explanation. Opinion abroad, when dealing with that
particular period, will agree that a more dignified attitude would have been
helpful in improving the German position. On the other hand, the servile and
defeatist policy of the German Jewish politicians commanded nothing but
contempt and only served to accentuate German’s national shame and misery.
Those particular Jewish
politicians were also in no way satisfied that a change from constitutional
monarchy to a parliamentary-republican regime had taken place in German
affairs. This is testified to by the Jewish author, Rudolf Schay, in his book
Juden in der deutschen Politik (Jews in German Politics) published in 1929. He
states:
“Among the elements who
carryon the revolution, and will not accept a free and bourgeois and a
democratic republican order - but who insist on the complete fulfillment of all
social demands, - Jews have played a dominant role; viz: Rosa Luxemburg, Eisner
and Landauer … “
This complete fulfillment of
all socialist demands was nothing else than a realization of the Communist
manifest inspired and dictated by the Jew Karl Marx. But that was only possible
by completely surrendering all national ideas and interests of the German
nation.
It is therefore not surprising
that Jewish politicians were playing a leading role, even during the Great War,
in all those movements which aimed at undermining the political and military
strength of Germany. Which of the Allied countries would not have taken
immediate steps to punish the author of a treacherous article such as that
which appeared on October 20, 1918, in the Social-Democratic paper Vorwärts,
written by its editor, the Jew Friedrich Stampfer. He stated:
“Germany must - that is our
inflexible will as socialists - strike her war flag for ever, without bearing
it home in victory for the last time.”
That is the same brand of
defeatism which already at the beginning of the Great War had permeated the
many pacifist organisations, all of which were under Jewish control.
Prominent among these
organisations was the Neues Vaterland (The New Fatherland) subsequently known
as “The German League for Human Rights.” Its policy was principally dictated by
the Jews Witting, Grelling, Bernstein, Magnus Hirschfeld, Heymann, Gumbel,
Wulfsohn etc. The pacifist Youth Organisation was also led by Jews: Max Hodann,
Jakob Feldner, the Jewish Communist Scholen and the half-caste Jewish sons of
Karl Liebknecht.
It is not our intention to
criticize pacifism as such. Unquestionably pacifism is a political conviction
of great moral significance and is certainly worthy of every effort to support
it. But pacifism is only tolerable for the political direction of a country -
particularly when all national forces of that country are concentrated to the
full - as long as it remains within boundaries prescribed by the political
interests of the country.
But it is those particular
pacifists mentioned above who primarily must be held responsible for the
collapse of Germany’s spirit of resistance, for the estrangement that
took place between the people and its political leaders and for the
cleavage between the army at the front and the people at home. No one was more
successful than the leading pacifist Jews in giving Germany’s enemies suitable
material for propaganda.
Prominent in this work is the
Jew already referred to, Dr. Richard Grelling - a name undoubtedly still
well-remembered in the former Allied countries. Before the War he emigrated to
Switzerland and there published his two books J’accuse and Das Verbrechen (The
Crime) in which he attempted to prove Germany’s alleged guilt for the outbreak
of hostilities. This book was very widely circulated in the Allied and neutral
countries as an “authoritative and convincing” personal document of Germany’s
war guilt and all the attendant horrors. In 1917, Karl Federn, Grelling’s
co-religionist and also an author, replied by denouncing Grelling’s conduct as
“dishonourable” and stating further that Grelling had built up his case “by
lies and the use of false and forged documents.” Grelling never replied to
these severe charges which were constantly repeated in later years. On the
contrary, he was coward enough to attempt to deny authorship of these two
books.
Mention must also be made of
the Jewish journalist Hermann Fernau who conducted propaganda against Germany
from Switzerland in 1917/1918. His newspaper articles furnished the Allies with
excellent material for disruptive propaganda in German front line trenches.
Geheimrat Witting, a highly
placed German official, brother of the Jewish author Maximilian Harden, was
responsible for the unlawful and widespread publication in pamphlet form of a
private memorandum (“My London Mission”), the property of Count Lichnowsky, the
former German Ambassador in London. This memorandum contained observations of a
purely personal character but their unlawful publication was just as disastrous
to Germany’s political position as the works of Grelling.
Jews also took a prominent
part in the work of planning the revolution in Germany which finally led to the
collapse of the entire western front.
It was Dr. Oscar Cohn, the
Social-Democratic deputy who early in November 1918 accepted the sum of four
million gold roubles from M. Joffe, the Soviet-Russian ambassador to Berlin in
those days, and also a Jew. This money was intended to finance the German
revolution. Hugo Haase, a Jewish Reichstag deputy, was the master-mind behind
the Sailors’ revolt at Kiel, which was the signal for general revolution
throughout Germany. At the national meeting of protest held on May 12, 1919,
when it was unanimously decided to vote against signing the peace terms, it was
the Jew Haase, as leader of the Independent Social-Democrats, who alone
insisted on accepting the terms. It must also be added that in the Prussian
Diet of that period it was a Jew, Kurt Rosenfeld, who on May 7, 1919, on the
occasion of a similar protest meeting demanded that these terms should be
accepted.
Closely allied to these
destructive elements and traitors to national interests, a few further
outstanding names can be mentioned: The Jews Georg Bernhard, editor of the
Vossische Zeitung, Friedrich Stampfer and Erich Kuttner, both on the staff of
the Social-Democratic Vorwärts, Rudolf Hilferding, attached to the radical
Freiheit press. Their united efforts were chiefly responsible for Germany being
forced to bow down and submit to the yoke of the peace terms. Although
political development proved later that these terms could never be fulfilled,
yet to the military collapse there was added a total political and economic
crash.
It is not possible to conclude
this chapter of Jewish defeatism without mentioning the following: It is true
that there were also numbers of non-Jewish Germans who both during and after
the war committed treason on strictly Jewish lines. But the Jewish percentage
in this dastardly political work is not only relative but actually incomparably
higher. In fact, the percentage is so abnormally great, that the list of
non-Jewish perpetrators is almost insignificant.
Seeking for an explanation of
this curious fact one finds that Jewry is outwardly as well as inwardly
completely rootless; on the basis of its racial habits and its historical past
it recognizes no ties which can in any way be connected with love for a
homeland.
At the same time, however,
this political attitude of the Jews clearly shows up the glaring ingratitude
which they have demonstrated in Germany. There is no country where the
requirements of Jewish emancipation have been more justly fulfilled than in
Germany; and there is not another country in which Jews were so accomodatingly
allowed to fill positions in the public services. But in no other country in
the world have Jews in times of severe national distress played such an
inglorious, destructive and treacherous role as in Germany.
Two particular and instructive
instances of post-war date will illustrate the Jewish lack of national feeling
and also demonstrate the objectionable way in which profound national
susceptibilities were wounded by Jews.
The first case is the scandal
in connexion with Professor Theodor Lessing. During the election campaign for a
Reich President in 1925, this Jew, who had been entrusted with the work of
educating German youth, published an article in a foreign and anti-German paper
- the Prague Tageblatt – opposing Field Marshal von Hindenburg as a candidate
for the Presidency. This article abounded in slanderous and ill natured
attacks on the Field Marshal who was stigmatized as “inhuman”, a “simpleton”
and a “ferocious wolf”. Lessing added that the Field Marshal would prove to be
a “Nero” in office.
To fully grasp this dastardly
attack, one must recall to mind that the Field Marshal, after a strenuous
career, had again placed himself at the service of the country at the age of
seventy-seven. This was at a time when a disrupted Germany sorely needed a man
who would collect all the forces for the work of national reconstruction. One
must further remember that Hindenburg as Commander-in-Chief of the German Army
during the War, had become a loved and venerable figure, the very embodiment of
all the glorious achievements of the army at the front. This slanderous attack
had the same effect on Germany as a similar attack on Kitchener or Nelson would
have in England, or Marshal Foch in France or George Washington in America.
A veritable storm of
indignation arose in academic circles throughout the country. Prof. Lessing,
however, was not reprimanded and was even permitted to continue his slanderous
attacks. But the result was a natural further strengthening of the anti-Semitic
tendencies of the whole nation.
The character of this Jew
Lessing is further emphasized in his “War Memoirs” published in 1929 in the
same Prague newspaper. He states clearly but equally cynically as well as
incomprehensibly stupid:
“I was fortunate in becoming a
shirker. Throughout four years of war I was called up to the colours regularly
once a month. Disqualification became more and more difficult. I kept on
inventing excuses in order to keep away from the front.” That was the man who
dared to slander Hindenburg, the soldier, and make him appear ludicrous.
The “Gumbel Case,” broadly
speaking, is similar to the Lessing scandal. Emil Gumbel, a Jew, was also a
university teacher; he belonged to those pacifists, traitors and defeatists
previously referred to. He also was closely connected with the Third International
and with Moscow. In a series of pamphlets he made seditious statements which
brought him into conflict with the law despite the fact that the sympathetic
attitude of the government in those days was all in his favour. Gumbel also
participated in the publication of a document entitled “Germany’s Secret
Armaments” in which he endeavoured to expose Germany’s alleged breaches of the
disarmament terms of the Versailles Treaty. This document was handed to the
French, English and Polish governments by the Jewish controlled pacifist
“League for Human Rights.” It is quite obvious that this document brought about
a difficult foreign political situation for Germany. In speeches which Gumbel
made in 1924 at various French universities, he even went so far as to admit
the truth of the oft-repeated false statement about Germany’s war guilt.
Hence there is no cause for
surprise that this man (who had never seen the front) was incapable of a spark
of human feeling for the heroic deeds of German soldiers in the war. It was he
who dared to declare at a public meeting in 1924 that the dead German soldiers
had “died on the field of dishonour. “
Despite these infamous
statements and insults to the German people, which caused widespread
indignation, Gumbel was able to maintain his position as teacher at the
university until 1933. Influential Jewish friends such as Georg Bernhard and
Albert Einstein were his protectors. He was even able to continue his insults
and at a later meeting at Heidelberg he declared: “The War Memorial to German
soldiers is to me nothing but one big turnip.”
Would it be possible - one
must ask the question in view of this blackguardism - for an English university
teacher to insult the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in a similar manner? Would
not a storm of national indignation sweep away Jewish blackguards of the Gumbel
and Lessing type? National-Socialism in Germany certainly accomplished that
when it cleared out its Gumbels and Lessings, its Grellings and Bernhards and
the whole clique of defeatists and traitors. By means of legislation, such
disruptive work was made impossible for all time.
In Gumbel’s case one could
already discern the connexion that existed between people of his character and
Marxism. Opinions’ may vary in regard to Marxism and its parliamentary
champions, but when one closely studies this subject one cannot deny the fact
that Marxism and Jewry are closely allied.
It is a well-known fact that
the Father of Marxism, Karl Marx, was a member of a rabbi family. Subsequent
logical developments prove that this was no mere accident. Another Jew,
Ferdinand Lassalle, stood next to Marx on the threshhold of this new socialist
workers movement. Lassalle was the son of a Jewish silk merchant in Breslau.
Both looked up to the Jew Moses Hess as their spiritual father, quoted as the
“Father of Modern Socialism” and the “Communist Rabbi” – by the “Jewish
Lexicon” - the standard work of reference for all German Jews. All Jewish
thought since those days has always felt itself drawn towards this Marxist
socialism, and the array of Jewish leaders in the Marxist workers movement has
been maintained up till now.
Opinions may differ in other
countries, but Germany’s attitude towards this problem is guided by the
profound relationship existing between Marxism and Jewry. The two are
inseparable wherever they occur. The war and post-war periods in Germany have
definitely proved the disastrous effects of Jewish Marxism as a political
factor.
At the turn of the century,
two Jews in succession were chairmen of the Social-Democratic party in Germany:
Paul Singer and Hugo Haase. After that Jews gained more and more dominating
influence in all sections of the Marxist movement, its parliamentary,
journalistic and literary work. The consolidation of the Marxist theory and
science became well-nigh a Jewish monopoly. Outstanding Jewish theorists in
this work were Eduard Bernstein, Rudolf Hilferding, Adolf Braun, Jacob Stern
and Simon Katzenstein. The central intellectual organ of international Marxism
was the publication called the Neue Zeit (The New Age), published in Berlin,
which started its career in 1883 with one dozen Jewish contributors. In 1905
this figure had increased to forty and in 1914, no less than one hundred Jews
from all parts of the world were contributing articles to this publication. The
position was similar in other intellectual and literary publications of German
Marxism.
The Marxist daily press was
almost completely in the hands of the Jews. The Vorwärts - the principal organ
of the German Social-Democratic Party, was founded by Singer, a Jew. In 1929,
according to a statement by its editor-in-chief, Friedrich Stampfer, the whole
of his editorial staff, with one exception, was composed of Jews. When later on
the Communist paper the Rote Fahne (Red Flag) was published the percentage of
Jews on its staff was equally high. Its editors were the Jewess Rosa Luxemburg
and Karl Liebknecht who, although a Christian, had been twice married to
Jewesses. Another publication preeminently controlled by Jews was the Freiheit
(Liberty) - with an extreme Marxist policy controlled by Rudolf Hilferding and
Paul Hertz, both Jews. The Social-Democratic press news services and foreign
press offices were essentially dominated by Jewish journalists.
The percentage of Jewish
Social-Democratic Reichstag deputies totalled 22 % in 1924 while the percentage
of Jewish Communist deputies was given as 15 % in the same year. Here it is
well to emphasize again that Jews totalled barely 1 % of the whole German
population.
The following is the list of
Jews elected to the Reichstag in 1924, as members of the Social-Democrat Party:
Aufhäuser, Dr. Adolf Braun,
Bernstein, Eggerstedt, Frölich, Heimann, Dr. Hertz, Dr. Hilferding, Hoch,
Jacobshagen, Kirschmann, Landsberg, Dr. Levi, Dr. Löwenstein, Ludwig, Stefan
Meier, Dr. Moses, Dr. Rosenfeld, Frau Schiffgens, Frau Toni Sender, Stampfer,
Frau Wurm.
In the same year, the
Communist Party returned the following Jews as members.
Frau Arendsee, Frau Gohlke (known
as Ruth Fischer), Hoernle, Katz, Koenen, Münzenberg, Rosenbaum, Dr. Rosenberg. Scholem.
In 1932, Jewry in the Marxist
parties was represented in the Reichstag by the following Jewish members:
In the Social-Democratic section,
- Aufhäuser, Dr. Adolf Braun, Eggerstedt, Frölich, Heilmann, Heimann, Heinig,
Dr. Hertz, Dr. Hilferding, Kirschmann, Landsberg, Dr. Löwenstein, Dr. Marum,
Stefan Meier, Reuter, Schneppenhorst, Frau Schreiber-Krieger, Frau Toni Sender,
Friedrich Stampfer, Frau Wurm.
In the Communist section, - Gräf,
Hoernle, Frau Kessel, Kippenberger, Münzenberg, Frau Sandtner.
It was natural therefore that
this influx of Jews in the Reichstag should have its effect on government in
the Reich itself and in the federal states. Prussia particularly was their
happy hunting ground and they were to be found in key position in practically
every ministry. No important step could be taken anywhere without brushing up
against a Jew in authority.
When taking this all-powerful
Jewish influence in all Marxist organisations and parties into account, it is
no longer surprising that the policy of the Social-Democrats was shaped and
influenced entirely by their Jewish leaders. Therefore we see once more the
same spirit of defeatism and treachery to which we have already referred.
A start was made, almost
immediately on August 4th, 1914, when the Jew Hugo Haase led 14 Social-Democrat
deputies in the Reichstag in an attempt to stop government war loans. Two years
later 18 Social-Democrat deputies finally voted against the same governmental measure.
Apart from this Jew Haase, their ranks had been swelled by five other Jews. The
Jewess Rosa Luxemburg led the campaign of sapping Germany’s power of
resistance. The first success of this dastardly process of undermining became
evident in August 1914, when a public statement opposing the government’s
policy of home defence was published by a Hamburg Social-Democrat newspaper.
That statement was signed by three leading Jews.
After the November 1918
collapse, nearly all the radical leaders with Bolshevik tendencies were Jews.
They took a prominent and for Germany a disastrous part in the peace
negotiations, to which reference has already been made.
In Communism, which is the
extreme form of Marxism, Jewish domination became particularly marked. Its leaders
and propagandists were almost exclusively Jews. The “Spartacist League”,
founded in 1918 as a forerunner to the Communist party, was in charge of Karl
Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg. This league was modelled on true Soviet lines
and called on the proletariat to arm in those days of terror which followed the
collapse of the nation. The league’s Moscow agent was the Jew, Leo Jogiches
(formerly known as Tyschko). Mention has already been made of the fact that
Oscar Cohn, the Jewish radical socialist, received the sum of 10 million gold
roubles from Joffe, the Jewish Soviet Ambassador to Berlin in November 1918.
After a systematic preparation
by these German and Russian Jews, chaos and indescribable horror was finally
let loose by them on the German nation, culminating at Munich. Here again it
was a Jew, Kurt Eisner, an author, who played the part of leader and organiser.
In 1917, when Germany was still fighting for her existence, he had already
agitated for strikes and revolution. Eisner founded a Workers’ Council at
Munich on strictly Bolshevik lines; his “Revolutionary Tribunal” contained
nearly all Jews - five of them in number. Only those who have experienced that
period of Jewish terror and slaughter, the murder of hostages, plunderings and
acts of arson, are able to realize why Munich became the birth place of
National-Socialism, whence the movement spread to other parts of Germany, and
finally put an end to Jewish domination.
The closely allied interests
of Jewry and Communism were in no way affected when the first Communist
attempts at revolution were summarily suppressed. The so-called cultural
Bolshevism of the extreme Marxists, sponsored mainly by Jews, now joined with
those forces which were tireless in their efforts to overthrow law and order with
the object of Bolshevising Germany.
It is necessary to quote only
a few distinctive examples of the work that was being carried on in this
extensive sphere of moral corruption and disruption. During negotiations in
regard to a reform of the German Criminal Code, the Jewish radical socialist
Kurt Rosenfeld intimated that he was opposed to punishment for the crime of
high treason as well as for sodomy and homosexual offences.
Jews were also dominant in
questions relating to the education of children on Bolshevik principles. Jewish
pedagogues, Jewish principals of official school establishments founded and
supported experimental schools and “Juvenile Republics” modelled on Soviet
lines. Authority was entirely banished in these institutions, the sexes were
educated in an immoral manner and sexual problems formed the major part of the
school curriculum. In this respect much publicity was given to Kurt Lowenstein
as the Jewish principal of Berlin’s schools, and his colleague, Fritz
Karsen-Krakauer, another Jew.
To complete the sordid picture
of closely allied interests between Jewry and Bolshevism which had brought
Germany to the brink of Communism only a short while before National-Socialism
took power, it remains to be said that Jews were still in certain key positions
up to the last minute.
Hans Kippenberger is first on
the list. He was head of the terror and espionage branches of the German
Communist party. Heinz Neumann, son of a wealthy Berlin merchant, was also
prominent. He was a member of the Central Executive of the German Communist
party and one of the most dangerous agitators among the general public. He
coined the infamous phrase: “Kill the fascists wherever you meet them” which in
1932 led to a series of foul murders of National-Socialist party members.
Abroad, Neumann was equally busy. He was responsible for the Communist rising
in Canton in 1927 and for this act he was labelled in the world press as the
“The wholesale butcher of Canton.”
Jews have always possessed a
special aptitude for journalism and the organisation of press work.
Accordingly, they played a prominent part in the establishment of German
newspapers. Hardly any other function has given them so much power as their
influence on the press. They soon proved however that they had little or no
interest in that sense of high moral obligation which is the duty of those who
are responsible for influencing public opinion. On the contrary, their
interests were primarily centred in the rich possibilities for material gain.
If one examines the Jewish
controlled German press of the last decades, one realizes that for purely
material reasons it served a craving for sensation, for vanity and the lower
instincts of the masses. Circulation was increased in proportion as newspapers
undermined in the most grave manner all respect for morals, law and order.
The two largest German
newspaper concerns were, before 1933, in Jewish hands: viz. Ullstein and Mosse.
Both these firms were founded by Jews and their directorates and editorial
staffs were comprised of nearly all Jews.
Ullstein. Publishers &
Printers:
The circulation of this
largest newspaper concern averaged 4 million daily. They published five large
daily newspapers, several weekly papers and many periodicals and magazines of
every description. The Ullstein News Agency influenced a great number of provincial
papers. In addition to this, Ullstein possessed also an extensive book
publishing branch.
The whole of the shares in
this vast concern were held by the five Jewish Ullstein brothers. The
directorate consisted of these brothers, three other Jews and only two
Christians.
The largest newspaper issued
by this concern was the Berliner Morgenpost which had a larger circulation than
any other German paper (more than 600,000 daily). Besides a Jewish editor this
paper had in 1927 ten other Jews as members of the editorial staff. The
editorial staff of the Vossische Zeitung - an extremely influential political
organ - was in charge of the Jew Georg Bernhard and fourteen Jewish
sub-editors. Bernhard at that time was keen on making a name for himself in
politics. The position in regard to the remaining Ullstein papers was
practically the same.
Mosse. Publishers &
Printers:
This firm was, as far as size
is concerned, not so important as Ullstein. Its daily circulation was 350,000.
Established and maintained as a family concern by the Eastern Jew, Rudolf Mosse
(formerly Moses), its influence was none the less very great. Its chief
publication was the Berliner Tageblatt established long before 1933. It was
this paper which for many years was looked upon abroad as representative of
German public opinion.
The editor of this paper was
the Jew Theodor Wolff, who also took a prominent part in politics. Apart from
him the important positions on the editorial staff were filled by seventeen
other Jews. In five important capitals outside the Reich the Berliner Tageblatt
was represented by Jews.
Another paper issued by this
concern was the Acht-UhrAbendblatt, another politically influential
publication in which Jews were dominant with a chief editor and eight
co-religionists as sub-editors.
It was only natural that the
rest of the German press could play only a very insignificant part when
compared with the activities of these two mammoth concerns. Neither the
provincial press with its economic disunity nor the publishing house of August
Scherl - the only large Christian under taking in the capital - were able to
exercise influence sufficient to seriously challenge the united power of these
two big all-Jewish undertakings.
That the Marxist party press
was overwhelmingly directed and influenced by Jews has already been stated
above. Moreover the official press departments of the government - particularly
in Prussia - were also in charge of Jews. The three most important press
departments in Prussia, the largest of the German federal states were, in 1930
for example, in charge of four Jews.
It was therefore only a matter
of course that the professional and economic organisations of German
journalists came entirely under Jewish influence. The largest of these
organisations, the Reichsverband der deutschen Presse - the German Press
Association - was directed for many years and until 1933 by the Jewish chief
editor of the Vossische Zeitung, Georg Bernhard. In the Verein Berliner Presse -
the Berlin Press Union - which was the leading social and benefit society for
all journalists in the capital, the right to nominate and elect members had
been vested from 1888 in the hands of a purely Jewish committee. Finally, the
official organisation of “free lance” German writers, the Schutzverband
deutscher Schriftsteller was controlled by a directorate which, in 1928 and
1929, consisted of 90 % Jews. Its president was at that time the Jewish
publicist Arnold Zweig, author of the war novel, Streit um den Sergeanten
Grischa, in which he foully besmirched the national honour of the German
people.
In this connexion it is
necessary to examine the work and the significance of those Jews who for many
years were regarded in Germany and abroad as the most authentic apostles of
German publicism. We refer in particular to Georg Bernhard, Theodor Wolff and
Maximilian Harden. All three were Jews. All three were journalists of
surpassing technical skill, men who, through their masterly handling of the
written word alone, were well able to make “converts” to the ideas they
represented. But behind the winning exterior was bidden the same dangerous
spirit of denial of all traditional values, of criticism for criticism’s sake,
the spirit of destruction, disintegration and instability which we have been
compelled to recognize as the main characteristics of Jewry in all spheres.
It is exceptionally
significant that Georg Bernhard’s real profession was that of banker and stock
exchange financier. He belonged until shortly before the Great War to
Social-Democracy, and his whole life displays a remarkable vacillation between
two such contradictory things as stock exchange journalism and Marxist
activity. Then, in 1913, he was appointed chief editor of Ullstein’s Vossische
Zeitung. In this position, in two different hours of destiny in Germany’s
post-war history, he played a calamitous part:
In the critical weeks before
the signing of the Versailles Treaty, when the German people and its leaders
well-nigh unanimously rejected the intolerable and harsh conditions of that
dictated peace, he made common cause with those really comparatively few men of
public influence who, through the medium of the spoken and printed word,
ruthlessly suppressed every flickering of the spirit of national resistance,
and thereby destroyed all hopes of securing more bearable conditions. One
requires only to glance at the old issues of the Vossische Zeitung for those
weeks and months to realize how systematically Bernhard went about this work.
Even the most humiliating terms of this treaty - the “War-Guilt” clause, he
attempted to represent as a mere bagatelle. Thus he wrote - to give only one
example - on June 18th 1919:
“The German reader of the Note
will most easily be able to reconcile himself with those parts which deal with
the historical origin of the war and with the question of guilt for it … if one
regards the matter in this manner, one cannot take the scolding in the
war-guilt paragraph tragically.”
With these words Bernhard
attacked the German government from behind whilst the latter was waging a
dramatic struggle regarding these points of honour, in particular the clause
relating to war-guilt and the release of German officers. It will be understood
outside Germany as well that we cannot forget such a betrayal of national
interests, such a lack of proper pride and feeling for honour as was displayed
by the Jewish journalist Bernhard.
In the second case, we already
find Bernhard committing open criminal treason. During the occupation of the
Rhineland, there arose in the occupied zone a movement, supported and forwarded
for political reasons by foreign money, which strove to prevent for ever the
return of the occupied Rhineland to the Reich, and to establish its complete
independence. Georg Bernhard with his Vossische Zeitung got into contact with
these Rhenish separatists. The separatists received from him political advice
and financial support. In the year 1930, one of the owners of Ullstein, the Jew
Dr. Franz Ullstein, published this fact in the periodical Tagebuch. He declared
that Georg Bernhard’s agent in Paris, the Jew Dr. Leo Stahl, had paid a sum of money
to Matthes, the leader of the separatists, and that Bernhard himself had
corresponded and associated with Matthes.
This political scandal forced
Bernhard eventually to retire from political journalism. He became, and this is
also characteristic, the head of a large departmental store association. Since
1933 he has been busy abroad publishing an anti-German émigré paper.
Theodor Wolff, the editor of
the Berliner Tageblatt behaved in a different but equally objectional manner.
An apparently convinced monarchist during the war, there was, after the change
of constitution in Germany, no one who reviled and slandered the deposed
Hohenzollerns in so evil a manner as Wolff.
Even if we could forgive him
such opportunism, quite inexcusable is his behaviour at the time when the
increasing spread of indecency and immorality in Germany forced the government
in 1926 to take constitutional steps for the suppression of filthy and
otherwise low-grade literature. The intention was, above all, to protect youth
from coarsening and indecent influences. Theodor Wolff openly opposed this
effort. He condemned the new law and as a protest, resigned from the democratic
party which he had helped to found because they had supported the new measure.
In order to understand the whole
frivolous irresponsibility of this Jewish publicist, one must know just how far
the flooding of the German book and periodical markets with dirty, pornographic
productions had gone. We shall have more to say about this later on.
Still more influential than
Georg Bernhard and Theodor Wolff, certainly the mightiest man of the pen which
Germany had for a generation, was Maximilian Harden, a brother of Witting, the
previously mentioned Jewish defeatist.
With his periodical, Die
Zukunft - The Future - he indulged in high politics for more than twenty years.
Hardly any other man has shown so much fluctuation in character and principles
as he.
He began by setting himself up
as judge of morality in Imperial Germany and dealt a death blow to the
reputation of the monarchic system by his journalistic scandalmongering about
the Hohenzollern court. During the Great War he was certainly the only real
“annexationist” in Germany, demanding as the price of victory the whole of
Belgium, the French coast opposite England and the Congo Basin, (Vide Zukunft
of 17th October 1914). Then when the fortunes of war, in 1916, began to turn
away from Germany, Harden also retreated. He attacked German war policy and
became an enthusiastic admirer of President Wilson. In 1919, he finally
conducted a cowardly campaign against the national resistance to the tyrannical
peace treaty terms, naming this resistance “artificially-forced hysteria and
miserable falsehood.”
The driving forces of such
characterless behaviour were vanity and petty selfish ambition. Harden is
rightly described by the world-renowned historian, Friedrich Thimme, as “The
Judas of the German people.”
Many years before the
National-Socialist regime, indeed, even before the War and prior to the period
when Jewish emancipation had reached its climax, anxious observers pointed out
that cultural life in Germany hardly deserved the epithet of “German” any more
and that it had actually become a merely Jewish sphere of activity. The crisis
in German cultural life has never been more aptly described and the Jewish
problem has never been discussed in clearer terms than in the article by the
Jewish essayist Moritz Goldstein, already published as early as 1912 in the
Kunstwart (issue dated March 1912), a German Art magazine of very high
standing.
Goldstein depicts how the
Jews, at the beginning of their emancipation, generally invaded all branches of
German cultural life and, as alert scholars, soon commenced to supplant their
masters. Goldstein gives the following synopsis of the consequences resulting
from this development:
“Jews suddenly filled all
those positions which are not withheld from them by force, they have converted
German aims and tasks into their own and they strive for them accordingly. It
seems as if German cultural life were to be completely transferred into Jewish
hands. This was neither anticipated nor desired by the Christians at the time
they granted the pariah in their midst a share in European cultural life. They
began to take defensive measures, they resumed their custom of calling us
aliens, they commenced to regard us as a danger in the Temple of their Art.
Consequently we are now faced by the following problem. We Jews guide and
administrate the intellectual property of a nation which denies our
qualification and competency to do so.”
Goldstein describes this
Jewish administration and control of German art and culture as a “prodigious
fact.” A retrospective examination of German intellectual life as it was before
1933 will corroborate Goldstein’s testimony. In all spheres, be it on the
stage, in literature, music, painting and the plastic arts, be it in the film
or, more recently, in broadcasting, Jews always occupied the leading positions,
compelling all to follow their intellectual guidance.
To take the theatre, for
instance, - the Berlin stages, which, as the most modern, are naturally always
imitated by the theatres of all the provinces, were all under Jewish
management. The choice of the programmes was made according to an entirely
Jewish outlook and the result was that Jewish authors predominated.
In the domain of literature,
the best-sellers were invariably the output of Jewish authors or publishers.
Readers abroad, who took an interest in German literature during those days.
will still be able to recall such names as Emil Ludwig, Jakob Wassermann,
Arnold Zweig, Lion Feuchtwanger and various others. The sale of their books
outweighed that of all other German authors by far. Statistics have shown that
practically the half of all German belletristic literature circulating abroad
during the last ten years was the product of Jewish authors.
Music life was similarly
dominated by Jewish influence. In the great majority of cases, the important
conductors’ positions in Berlin and in the provinces were occupied by Jews. The
intellectual influence resulting from this trend was decisive for the choice of
the works appearing on the programmes of opera and concert hall. The
participation of Jewish com posers grew to astonishing dimensions. - Gustav
Mahler and Arnold Schonberg were substituted for Beethoven, Richard Wagner and
Hans Pfitzner were supplanted by Franz Schreker. Music critiques written by
Jews and the influence of the professional agencies, which were practically
totally in Jewish hands, naturally did their part to support this development.
This tendency was even more
evident in the sphere of the lighter type of entertainment music such as the
operetta, the film, in the gramophone industry and in broadcasting. An ever
increasing Jewish influence upon conservatories, in the publishing branch as a
whole and in professional music literature could be observed so that, taken as
a whole, the conclusion was justified that Jewish preponderance in music life
was indeed alarming.
The situation was no different
with regard to the plastic arts and painting. Jewish art traffic and Jewish art
literature paved the way to success for a whole generation of Jewish painters
and sculptors, - a way which was barred to the majority of German artists. Film
and broadcasting were practically exclusively reserved to Jewish activity, so
that it is nearly impossible to speak of a German participation in these
domains.
To destroy any possible doubt
as to the accuracy of these statements regarding the Jewish preponderance in
German intellectual life, it is merely necessary to revert to the testimony of
such a trustworthy Jew as Moritz Goldstein who, already in 1912, made the
following observations in the essay quoted above:
“Nobody actually questions the
power the Jews exercise in the press. Criticism, in particular, at least as far
as the larger towns and their influential newspapers are concerned, seems to be
becoming a Jewish monopoly. Predominance of the Jewish element in the theatre
is also generally recognized: nearly all the managers of Berlin stages are
Jews; the same may be said of a large part, even perhaps of the majority of the
actors, whilst the fact that the concert and theatre are dependent upon the
Jewish public is continuously being proudly asserted and also deplored … Many
an apostle of German art has been forced, much against his will, to convince
himself of the enormous number of Jews amongst German poets.”
Since 1912 this development
progressed very rapidly. The main cause was that Jews even invaded the official
administration of German intellectual life. They were granted governmental
positions which had been closed to them before the War.
For many years the Jewish
lawyer Seelig acted as the responsible head of the Department for Theatres in
the Prussian Ministry for Culture, whilst the Department for Music was in the
hands of the Jew Leo Kestenberg. As the policy of the German press was
controlled by Jews, indeed, the supreme official administration was conducted
by Secretary of State Weismann, it is easily possible to conjecture to what an
extent the Jewish usurpation of the entire German intellectual life was
officially sponsored and propagated.
This Jewish preponderance was
by no means the result of an intellectual superiority, of greater talents or
creative powers on the part of the Jewish race. On the contrary, it was mainly
the Jewish economic ascendency described above which lead to the establishment
of their dominant position in German cultural life. This economic domination
was the instrument to attain the practical application of their intellectual
and cultural influence.
In this connection it is even
more important to bear in mind that the characteristic Jewish intellectual
attitude, which manifested itself in all spheres of cultural life, decisively
favoured the realization of their craving for predominance. Their lack of
national sentiment, their egoism, their absolute rationalism, their absence of
scruples and their characteristic habit of speculating upon the basest
instincts, - traits which have already been mentioned in the chapter devoted to
Jewish journalism, - were the foundation for their economic success, upon which
their intellectual domination was based. The consequence was the disintegration
and decay of German cultural life. As a matter of fact, it was not so much the
dimensions of Jewish power, nor the extent of the alien usurpation which
aroused opposition and protest on the part of the German nation, finally
leading to the most acute anti-Semitism, but it was rather the characteristic
Jewish moral standpoint, their innate spirit and the methods applied by the
Jewish race to use and abuse this intellectual power.
To clearly demonstrate this it
is necessary to undertake a closer examination of the various spheres of German
intellectual life as they existed before 1933.
Literature
We have already recalled the
names of those Jewish authors whose works, at least as far as their sales are
concerned, ranked foremost amongst all German novels. The most successful of
these writers was no doubt Emil Ludwig, whose real name is Cohn. At that time
his books were presumably the most widely circulated works of literature
published in the German language. The total number of impressions attained by
his works exceeded two millions in 1930 and his novels have been translated
into twenty-five languages. Abroad, Ludwig was, for many years, regarded as the
representative of German contemporary literature.
This reputation and the
enormous sale of his historical biographies cannot, however, be explained by
the veritable quality or ethical value of his literary work. Ludwig is one of
the best examples demonstrating what enormous success may be achieved by well
calculated advertising undertaken on a generous scale. . . .
Alfred Kerr is the second
important personage amongst the Jewish literary pseudo-prophets. In his
capacity as critic to the Jewish “Berliner Tageblatt,” he despotically swayed
his sceptre over all the theatres of the capital. His word was decisive for the
success or failure of actors and personnel. . . . it is not surprising that the
lyrical poems of this guardian of German culture (Caprichos, 1921) are nothing
but a collection of obscene and repulsive sexuality.
Georg Hermann represented a
somewhat different, but by no means superior, type of Jew occupying a
conspicuous position in the German literary world. In his political diary
entitled Randbemerkungen - Marginal Notes - (Berlin 1919) he reveals the credo
of a weak, utterly decadent man of literary ambitions, devoid of moral backbone
and support: “As a Jew, I belong to a race much too old to be duped by mass
suggestion. Such words as Nation, War and State are endowed with neither sound
nor colour for me.”
The cosmopolitan,
international mentality of Ahasuerus’s sons is clearly reflected in the
following confession: “I feel at home in any country of the world whose
language I speak, where there are beautiful women, flowers and art, a good
library, a chess board, pleasant and cultivated society and where the climate
is healthy and agreeable and the landscape attractive.” Nevertheless, Hermann
is honest enough to admit that the Jewish race is responsible for the
dissemination of the negative attitude towards state and patriotism. He
declares: “The Jew’s rejection of all nationalistic ideology is the principal
source of his evolutionary quality and intrinsic value.”
Hermann’s standpoint which, as
a matter of fact, is a purely anarchistic one, even goes so far as to frankly
betray personal cowardice: “Five minutes of cowardice are preferable to being
dead for the rest of one’s days.”
The versatility and
inconsistency attributed to the chameleon and the Israelite alike were developed
to an almost unattained perfection by the Jewish author Kurt Tucholsky. This
exceptionally productive feuilleton writer, endowed with a brilliant style and
great talents, made use of not less than four different pen-names, with which
he operated as the occasion demanded. Apart from his own name he signed with
the pseudonyms Peter Panter, Kaspar Hauser and Theobald Tiger. Many important
daily papers and magazines published his articles. His numerous books, which
all attained a wide circulation, ranked him amongst the most read German
authors of those days.
Unfortunately, he merely
employed his admirable intellectual gifts for destructive criticism. Nothing
was sacred to him and he scoffed at the ideals of the German nation; he flung
his biting sarcasm and venomous mockery at every religious and national
sentiment. After the general collapse of the German Empire in 1918, Tucholsky,
who never took part in the War himself, derided and gibed at the German Army in
endless tirades in which he particularly gave vent to his con tempt of the
German officer. Similarly to his Jewish colleague Lessing, he insulted the
venerable and revered Field Marshal von Hindenburg and publicly described him
as a “National hero as they are painted on beer glasses.” Devoid of all
sentiment of patriotism, the stigma of actual High Treason could not abash him.
In his book Deutschland, Deutschland über alles (Berlin 1929) which is solely
dedicated to the calumniation of his native country, he cynically vaunts: “What
these judges term High Treason is no concern of ours and can be estimated as an
honourable action in our eyes.”
The analysis of his mentality
may be completed by his own words with which he advocates an absolute
liberation from all moral discipline: “Man has two legs and two convictions,
one during the times of his prosperity, the other during the times of want.”
Finally, Tucholsky was
addicted to the most pernicious type of pornography and he, together with the
Jew Theodor Wolff, was one of the violent opponents of the Law for the
Protection of Juveniles against the detrimental influences of worthless and
immoral literature.
Theatre
To depict the rapid increase
in the alien usurpation of the entire German theatre by Jews it would suffice
to refer the reader to the book published by the formerly very popular Jewish
author Arnold Zweig: “Jews on the German Stage” (Juden auf der Deutschen Bühne)
(Berlin 1928). With unparalleled frankness Zweig describes how the functions of
the financier, the theatre director, the agent, the stage manager, the actor,
critic, poet and playwright were conquered and held by the Jews. - Zweig
relates: “They come from God knows where with money in their pockets … ”
meaning that type of Jew who, like the corrupt briber Katzenellenbogen, the
Russian Jew Kahn and the two Rotter brothers, - the latter also emigrated to
Germany from Eastern Europe, - tried their luck in the theatrical branch,
degrading the stage, the institution originally dedicated to art and culture,
to a mere source of pecuniary profit. Zweig designates the Jewish agents as
“slave-holders” who had, in the course of time, developed an unrestricted
monopoly, by the means of which they controlled the entire theatrical domain
and upon whose intermediary all actors were dependent for their engagements. He
says: “The international relations and collaboration between the various
agencies corresponds to and is a direct result of the international
interrelationship of the modern East European Jewish Movements. - There is no
actor who does not remember the countless humiliations and insults to which he
has had to submit at this slave market. In the case of some of these agencies
the path to public recognition and fame traverses the path of the extortioner …
“
The fact has already been
mentioned that the management of the influential theatres of the whole country,
particularly that of the Berlin stages and even of the State Theatres, had been
acquired by Jews. The two Rotter brothers alone were managers of seven theatres
in Berlin. Even the Jewish author Arnold Zweig was compelled to admit in their
case that “under the management of these upstarts the literary theatre was
degraded to a mere financial enterprise devoted entirely to the realization of
pecuniary profit.” The Jew Leopold Jessner, stage manager of the Berlin State
Theatre, was the one who turned Shakespeare’s and Schiller’s classical dramas
into the eccentric popular hits which aroused justified indignation even
outside of Germany. Although of Jewish race himself, the critic Fritz Engel was
forced to express his disapproval of the performance of Jessner’s staging of
“Hamlet” in December 1926: “He converts it into a society play, sometimes into
a comedy and almost into a revue.”
In view of this Jewish
predominance in the theatrical sphere, it is hardly surprising that the plays
figuring in the repertoires of the theatres exactly reflected the mentality of
their Jewish proprietors. The fundamental tendency upon which an these plays
were based aimed at the destruction of generally accepted ideals of society
and state, nation, government and legislation, religious and moral principles.
Anyone taking the trouble to study the theatre programmes of those days will
continually observe that Jewish names predominate by far.
After the War, the Communist
Jewish author Ernst Toller was the first to write for the stage. He was a
member of the Communist Workers Council under Eisner’s leadership in Munich in
1919. His drama Feuer aus den Kesseln (Draw the Fires) is a deliberate
glorification of the Sailors’ Mutiny of 1918 and Hinkemann (Maimed) is a
unparalleled derision of the German Army.
Friedrich Wolf, a Jewish
author whose plays were included in the repertoire of practically all theatres,
also devoted himself at first to the creation of dramas dealing with mutinies,
but then he deviated to topics based on absolute moral and intellectual
disintegration and the liberation from all principles of ethic conduct. In his
play Cyankali he loudly propagates the abolition of the paragraph of German Law
which protects the life of the unborn child.
Walter Mehring is one of the
most unsympathetic personalities of the Jewish literary world and he displayed
considerably more malice and venomous animosity than all his predecessors and
colleagues. He commenced his career with the production of licentious songs,
whose flagrant libertinism met with the complete approval of and were formally
gloated upon by the predominantly Jewish public frequenting the cabarets and
places of amusement at the Kurfürstendamm in Berlin. His drama, “Der Kaufmann
von Berlin”, which was performed for the first time in 1929 by the Communist
theatrical manager, Piscator, forms the height of Jewish power-craze on the
German stage. Mehring makes a caricature of the misery of the years after the war,
which hordes of Jewish immigrants from the East took advantage of, in a
mercilessly twisted form. The hero in the play is such an Eastern Jewish
immigrant, who shows up in the Jewish streets of Berlin, dirt poor and without
any means and who conquers Berlin in no time. The shameless truism whith which
Mehring describes this course of events is quite level with his cynical
derision of everything that is sacred to the German people. At the climax of
the drama, street sweepers sweeps away piles of junk consisting of national
symbols, steel helmets and – even the dead body of a fallen German soldier. A
chorus sings the refrain: “Dreck, weg damit!” (Shit, away with it!)
It would not be difficult to
continue this list of dramatists by the addition of innumerable names and
examples. Apart from Arnold Zweig and Waiter Hasenclever, Ferdinand Bruckner,
for instance, should be mentioned, whose dramas were regarded as gireat
revelations by an audience composed of perverse seekers of sexual sensations.
These plays - Verbrecher (Criminals), Krankheit der Jugend (Malady of Youth) -
enjoyed their particular preference as they nearly exclusively dealt with
criminal and sexual abnormalities which were treated as if they embodied the
very purpose and joy of life.
However, this enumeration will
suffice to imperatively force the observer to ask himself which other
self-respecting country valuing the integrity of its religious conceptions and
its moral principles, would have tolerated the activity and intellectual influence
of such a depraved group of literary corrupters. It is indeed a regrettable
symptom that Germany, saturated with Jewish mentality, endured their presence
and influence for so long, in fact until the National-Socialist regime brought
about a complete revolution in this respect.
Cinema
To an even greater degree than
in the sphere of the theatre, the Jews had swooped upon the whole film industry
during the years before 1933. This fact is easy to explain, in as much as
financial and artistic factors are more intricately related in this branch of
art than in any other. The profits derived in the film industry considerably
exceed those of any other artistic enterprises. The possibility of realizing
tremendous earnings naturally induced the Jews to invade the German film
industry which had begun to flourish during the years following the War. The
enormous Jewish participation in the film branch is demonstrated by the
following figures:
In 1931 41 firms of the 67
German film producers were in Jewish hands, - that is to say 61 per cent. Of 28
distributors 24 were Jewish, that is 86 per cent. During the same period 119 of
the 144 film manuscripts were written by Jews (82 per cent). In 77 cases the
staging was carried out by Jews (53 per cent). If one examines the names of the
producers, directors and film stars which participated in those films which
were enthusiastically praised by the press and which developed into box office
successes, one will invariably discover that the great majority were Jewish.
Amongst the producers and distributors we find: Pressburger and Rabinowitsch
(Cine-Allianz), Heymann, Fallner and Somló, Levy or Cohn. The directors were:
Oswald-Ornstein, Zelnik, Meinert, Neufeld or Schönfelder. The actors:
Pallenberg, Siegried Arno, Fritz Walburg, Felix Bressart, Kurt Gerron, Grete
Mosheim, Gitta Alpar, Rosa Valetti, etc. etc.
The mentality typical of the
entire Jewish film industry is displayed in its crudest form by the so-called
“social and hygienic instruction films,” a type of film with which the German
cinemas were veritably flooded during the years after the War. Officially they
were intended to acquaint the masses with the dangers of abnormal sexual
intercourse and debauch. They were based on a pseudo scientific foundation and
under this mask Jewish capital speculated upon the primitive erotic desires and
the lowest instincts of the public. Criminals, prostitutes and the
pathologically abnormal were the heroes of this category of film. A choice of
titles taken at random from the legion of such so-called “instructive” films
will give the best idea of their type and value: - “Morals and Erotic” - “The
Book of Sin” - “What Price for Love?” - “Culpable Mothers” - “Prostitution” -
“When Women go Astray.” - The contents harmonized with these seductive titles
which gave rise to considerable expectations on the part of the public, which
were by no means deceived. These films veritably wallowed in mire and filth
and, with the most cynical openness, reproduced scenes actually showing the
most repulsive debauchery and perversion. The government of those days, which
certainly could hardly be called prudish or narrow minded, was compelled to
put a stop to the greatest excesses in this direction in 1920 by passing a Film
Law, without, however, having been successful in radically eliminating this
evil.
In subsequent years the
greatest profits in the film industry were derived from “military farces” - a
category of film dedicated to the ridicule of the German Army and the
individual German soldier. These films were also generally the product of
Jewish activity, be it that Jews participated in the capacity of producers,
authors, directors or actors. Finally, it is important to remember that
Communist propaganda films such as “Potemkin” and “Storm over Asia” were
introduced into Germany by Jewish distributors and cinema theatre concerns.
Revue
The disintegration and decay
of German intellectual life under Jewish supremacy are most apparent and assume
their crudest aspects in the sphere of light entertainment art: In the
operetta, and especially the revue, frivolity and licentiousness had developed
to such an unbelievable extent that Berlin was regarded as the most immoral
town in the world in those days; under the circumstances this was not at all
astonishing.
None others than the Jews
introduced the new form of public amusement, the revue, a branch of art utterly
unknown in the Germany of pre-War days. Not content with the introduction of
this novelty, they abused it and converted the revue into that species of
entertainment which was to blame for quite a large part of the depravity and
laxity which had attacked German moral life.
It is extremely characteristic
that everyone of the Berlin Revue proprietors - in the provinces there were
very few enterprises of this nature - were Jews without a single exception.
Many a former visitor to Berlin will still associate such names as James Klein,
Hermann Haller, Rudolf Nelson, the two Rotter brothers and Eric Charell with
most unpleasant recollections. The complementary staff of authors, composers,
directors and stars were also generally chosen amongst the members of the
Jewish race.
These revues were veritable
orgies of sexuality and licentiousness. All realities of life were regarded
from the one and only aspect of erotic desire and its satisfaction. Modesty and
decency were scoffed at as being old fashioned and ridiculous.
The loud and vulgar titles
given to these revues, for which enormous propaganda was made, speak for
themselves. The following translations give an impression of what was presented
to the public:
“Undress Yourselves” - “A
Thousand Naked Women” - “The Sins of the World” - “Houses of Lust” - “Strictly
Prohibited” - “O Gee, A Thousand Pretty Girls” - “Sweet and Sinful.”
The advertisements for James
Klein’s Revue “Undress Yourselves” were deliberately designed to awaken the
lowest instincts of the public by enticing it with the following enumeration:
“An evening without morals and principles - Sixty nude models, winners of
beauty prizes - The adventures of beautiful women - Experiences with a girl of
fifteen –.”
The posters advertising the
revue “A Thousand Naked Women” announced: “The grand revue of Free Love - Forty
Pictures of Morality and Immorality.”
The performances themselves
absolutely fulfilled the expectations. The scenes on the stage revealed all
what the most daring phantasy can imagine, in short, a display of absolute
libertinism and a complete surrender to sensual passions.
Even a strictly impartial and
sober observer without any pronounced anti-Semitic views cannot any longer
remain unimpressed by such examples of laxity and frivolity which all point to
typical Jewish indecent and immoral characteristics. At the same time such
characteristics are contrary to the spirit which animates all cultured nations.
For all that, the reproach that the Jews are an inferior race, which these
facts reveal, is so grave that it seems necessary to make a few further
observations in this respect. It will be seen however as far as Germany is
concerned, that everywhere where existing moral standards have been
deliberately relaxed - where immorality was made into a business - Jews were
prominent, if not dominant in this work. Even the so called “Sexual Science” -
one of the unsavoury products of the last century - was a purely Jewish
invention and exploited by them into a most flourishing and lucrative branch of
trade.
The authentic “Jewish
Encyclopedia” was even compelled to admit a marked racial sexuality in its
co-religionists. Cautiously it stated: “The Bible itself contains many
references to the fact that the sensual element in sexual intercourse was often
very pronounced . . . The words of the Prophets resound with complaints and
threats in regard to adultery of which one hears so much.” (Vol. V, p. 384.)
With the ‘advent of emancipation this Jewish urge, restrained by the ghettos of
the middle ages, poured forth into the public life of the state. A clear field
however was only given to it when, as the result of the revolution in Germany
in 1918, all barriers of law, order and censorship were broken down. A
veritable storm flood of Jewish immoral literature, obscene films and plays
then broke over Germany. Cinemas and theatres have already been exhaustively
dealt with. It remains to be said that in literature all authors of obscene
works were Jews in every case.
Among the hundreds of
thousands of books confiscated by the National-Socialists in 1933 very familiar
names repeatedly cropped up. Together with publishing firms such as Benjamin
Harz, Richard Jacobsthal, Leon Hirsch, M. Jacobsohn or Jacobsthal & Co.
mention must be made of the publishers of Kulturforschung - Cultural Research -
a Vienna firm whose production was sufficient to fill many libraries. The
titles speak for themselves. Sittengeschichte des Lasters (The Moral Story of
Depravity), Sittengeschichte der Schamlosigkeit (The Moral Story of
Profligacy), Bilderlexikon der Erotik (Illustrated Lexicon of Sexual Love),
Sittengeschichte des Geheimen und Verbotenen (The Moral Story of Secret and
Forbidden Things), etc. etc.
Among the publishers, the
following must be recalled to mind: Dr. Ludwig Levy-Lenz, Leo Schidrowitz, Dr.
Iwan Bloch, Franz Rabinowitsch, Georg Cohen, Dr. Albert Eulenburg, Dr. Magnus
Hirschfeld.
Iwan Bloch and Magnus
Hirschfeld were in reality the real exponents of this so-called scientific
sexual research. In reality it was nothing else than a downright treatise on
obscene subjects and a degradation of all marriage and family ties.
Their assistants were Felix
Abraham und Levy-Lenz. No amount of search will ever reveal a Christian
collaborator in this “sexual science.” The publications issued by these obscene
pseudo-scientists tell their own particular story of what took place in Magnus
Hirschfeld’s “Institution for Sexual Science” and in similar concerns: “Sexual
Catastrophes,” “Sexual Pathology,” “Love Chains,” “How to avoid Pregnancy” (by
Magnus Hirschfeld), “The Perverters,” “Prostitution,” “Sexual Life in our Age”
(by Iwan Bloch), - these were the popular subjects.
It was due to their
unrestricted and infamous efforts that the general public became acquainted
with all the noisy talk of free love, a call for unlimited right to allow all
passions and instincts to run riot, as well as the demand to make homosexuality
and abortion non-punishable offences. A heated campaign was waged on the
question of unrestricted and non-punishable acts of abortion championed by
Jews: Dr. Max Hodann, Dr. Lothar Wolf, Dr. Levy-Lenz, Martha Ruben-Wolf, Felix
Halle and Alfons Goldschmidt. This circle of Jews issued at the same time
numerous publications advocating greater birth restriction and the avoidance of
pregnancy.
Finally we must not overlook
Dr. Max Hodann, Berlin’s Medical Officer of Health. With his “Workers’ Sexual
Magazine” he contrived to inject the poison of moral disintegration into the
broad masses. He also earned for himself a particularly unsavoury reputation
for his outspoken propaganda for sexual self-abuse.
Hr. Scavenius, the Danish
Chargé d’Affaires at the Hague, was undoubtedly right when he declared three
years ago in a wireless lecture that “Germany at that time was the pornographic
centre of the world.”
It is difficult indeed to
ascertain the real extent of the German Jewish share in crime throughout the
Reich for the following reasons: The criminal records kept in Germany since
1882 recognized only orthodox Jews. Those innumerable Jews who had accepted a
Christian faith or who were not associated with any established religion, were
never embraced in these records. Therefore a great number of criminals, Jewish
by race, has been absorbed in other statistical categories. To this must be
added the fact that commencing with the year 1918, criminal records ceased to
show any subdivision into confessions. This step was in all probability the
result of Jewish intervention. The following statistics therefore cannot in any
way be regarded as complete. Nevertheless they are food for thought in throwing
light on Jewish characteristics.
When taking all this into
account, the official “Statistics of the German Reich” (New Edition, Vol. 146)
reveal the fact that a number of certain crimes were committed more frequently
by Jews than by Christians. Taking an average valuation for the period 1892 to
1901, we obtain the following table:
Crime
|
|
Jewish perpetrators in ratio
to non-Jewish perpetrators
|
Punishable self-interest
|
|
14 times as many
|
Usury
|
|
13 times as many
|
Theft of material property
|
|
11 times as many
|
Fraudulent bankruptcy
|
|
9 times as many
|
Criminal bankruptcy
|
|
6 times as many
|
Receiving stolen goods
|
|
5 times as many
|
It will be seen from this that
Jews-have a strong liking for commercial crime. That this fact has in no way
been sufficiently explained by the large percentage of Jews in business is
revealed by the investigations conducted by the Jew Ruppin. In his book, Die
Juden der Gegenwart - Contemporary Jews - (Berlin 1904), with the aid of
comparative statistics Ruppin arrives at considerably greater figures for
commercial crime than Jewish participation in commerce would seem to indicate.
The Jew Wassermann arrives at the same conclusion in his book Beruf, Konfession
und Verbrechen, - Profession, Confession and Crime –, (Munich 1907). He proves
that Jewish criminality in bankruptcy in 1900 was seven times greater than
among non-Jewish criminals and six times greater in cases of fraudulent
insolvency. Wassermann obtained these statistics by being guided expressly by
the percentage participation in commercial professions.
The official “Statistics of
the German Reich” for the period 1910 to 1914 furthermore prove that at a later
stage very little alteration had taken place. The following table exemplifies
this:
Crime
|
Jewish perpetrators in ratio
to non-Jewish perpetrators
|
Commercial recieving of stolen goods
|
5 times as many
|
Abuse of trust funds according to commercial law
|
3 times as many
|
Fraud
|
2 times as many
|
Theft of immaterial property
|
8 times as many
|
Usury
|
12 times as many
|
Criminal bankruptcy
|
13 times as many
|
Quite apart from these
commercial crimes Jews have taken a still greater share in other branches of
crime far more reprehensible. We refer to the drug traffic and prostitution,
illicit gambling and pickpocketting.
The “Central Organisation for
Combatting Drug Crime” has established that in 1931, out of 272 international
drug traffickers no less than 69 (25 %) were Jews. In 1932 the figures were 294
and 73 (again 25 %). In 1933, the Jewish percentage had increased to 30 %. The
Central Organisation for Combatting Unlawful Gambling and Games of Chance
registered 57 Jews out of a total of 94 cases which came to its notice in 1933.
In 411 cases of pickpocketting in 1932 193 Jews were involved. In the same year
it was found that among the international pickpocketting gangs, out of a total
of 163 criminals 134 were Jews or 82 %.
The high percentage of Jews in
immoral crime - already referred to in the chapter on Jewish immorality - is
frankly admitted by the Jewish scientist Ruppin, to whom we have already
referred. He writes:
“That Jews live principally in
the large towns and cities is responsible for the fact that certain crimes
usually limited to city life are associated with them; for example,
procuration, cooperation in immorality.”
* * *
In view of the limited space
at our disposal, we could necessarily only give a résumé of the part played by
the Jews in Germany before 1933. It would be easy to write a substantial volume
on the subject. But even such a work could only reach the same conclusions at
practically every page. Our résumé will suffice to convince unprejudiced and
objectively minded readers of that which it was our object to prove – namely,
that the preponderating influence of the Jews developed into a national
calamity of the worst sort for Germany, and that the previously cited words of
Theodore Herzl, “every misfortune increases their power,” have proved in the
result to be only too true.
The interdependence of
national distress and Jewish ascendency has scarcely ever been manifested with
such luminous clearness as in Germany. Under these circumstances, it surely
behooves us to seek to understand the fundamental reasons underlying the Jewish
problem in this country as it has presented itself during the past decades.
Animated by a desire to solve
this ancient problem if possible, by the emancipation and assimilation of
Jewish elements, Germany had shown herself more accessible to the absorption of
Jews than many other countries had done. All barriers had been taken down, all
restrictions abolished, all spheres of activity opened unreservedly to the Jews
- nay, leading positions were assigned to them even in those domains which were
of the most vital importance for national life. The Jews, who numbered less
than 1 % of the total population of Germany, occupied the key posts in German
industry. Political leadership was to a large extent in their hands. The press
and cultural life in general were predominantly under their influence. Their
aggregate income exceeded that of the 99 % remaining inhabitants by over
one-third. Truly, the Jews had every conceivable opportunity for merging their
distinctive existence in the collective life of the German community - a
distinctiveness, moreover, frequently deplored by some of the best Jewish
elements.
But the Jews consistently
ignored the rules of fair play as far as their credulous German partner was
concerned. The overwhelming majority of them never desired to be merged in the
German nation, because they were aware of the fact that their racial
dissimilarity constituted an insuperable obstacle to assimilation. During the
years of great tribulation they never hesitated to betray Germany, and to
shamelessly misuse the opportunities afforded them in such abundance for their
own egoistical purposes and interests. Defeatism and treason, political
degradation and economic corruption, moral depravity, the debasement of all
national and religious values - these were the outstanding features of a
Germany dominated by the alien Jewish race.
Germany had to pay dearly for
the illusion that it is possible to solve the Jewish question by means of a
generous effort to assimilate the Jews. She had reckoned without a factor of
decisive importance: namely, the congenital, in grained, boundless ingratitude
of the Jewish race. Not the least of the reasons for the uncompromising
attitude of German anti-Semitism - an attitude that has often been
misunderstood abroad - is the glaring contrast, irrefutably evidenced by the
events of the past decades, between the incontestable good faith of the Germans
and the cynical ingratitude of the Jews.
That this contrast
constitutes, so to speak, the nucleus of the whole Jewish problem, has been
publicly admitted by two leading Jews. The Chief Rabbi of Hamburg, Dr. Joseph
Karlebach, wrote in the Jewish review Der Morgen (vol. II, p. 129, 1930): “to
be a Jew, is to be opposed to the natural attitude of human beings.”
The French Jew Bernard Lazare,
who was well known at the close of the last century, was even more candid in
his book l’ Antisémitisme, in which he puts the question: “By what qualities or
defects has the Jew drawn upon himself such universal reprobation? Why has he
alternately and in equal measure been maltreated and hated by Egyptians and
Romans, by Persians and Arabs, by Turks and Christian nations? It is because
the Jew is everywhere, and right down to the present day has remained, an
asocial being.”
These admissions by candid
Jewish writers, whose authority is undisputed, explain better than any words of
ours why National-Socialism was compelled to give a definite and final solution
to the Jewish question, so far as Germany is concerned. Anti-Semitic feeling in
this country has not been roused to such a degree by the mere fact of the
preponderance of an utterly alien influence, but by the spirit underlying that
influence and inseparable from it - a spirit of an essentially asocial nature,
which requited evil for good and invariably prompted those inspired by it to
repay hospitality and benevolence with treachery and unrelenting, destructive
hatred.
When the National-Socialists
came into power in 1933, they endeavoured to solve the Jewish question by
methods calculated to peacefully reduce the excessive influence of the Jews on
public life to proportions compatible, firstly, with the position of the Jews
as an alien race, and, secondly, with their number - which, as has already been
said, was less than 1 % of the total German population. When the amount of
misfortune brought on Germany by the Jews prior to 1933 is recalled, the methods
adopted to diminish their influence on German public life must be accounted
remarkably moderate, and as evidencing extraordinary restraint and discipline
among the leaders of the new Germany. The fact is too easily overlooked, that
the advent to power of National-Socialism constituted a revolution in the
truest sense of the word, and it may without exaggeration be asserted that
scarcely a revolution in history has been accomplished with such exemplary
discipline.
The Nuremberg Laws of 1935
formed the basis of a peaceful and orderly settlement of the Jewish question in
Germany. But the Jews themselves were not prepared to reckon with the
incontestable fact that their era of emancipation in Germany was definitely at
an end. They were not willing to abandon their usurped supremacy without a
struggle, and since this was no longer possible in Germany itself, they
deliberately stirred up an agitation abroad, hardly less dangerous than an
openly proclaimed war. By means of a consistently carried out poisoning of the
sources of public opinion, they have succeeded in creating a caricature of
National-Socialist Germany and inflaming international opinion against the
latter. By organising a boycott of German goods, they have endeavoured to
throttle Germany economically. They have even gone so far as to reply to the
measures of the National-Socialist government by the assassination of Wilhelm
Gustloff and Ernst von Rath.
The world-embracing
associations and interests of Jewry as an international power, as well as the
asocial spirit animating it, could not be evidenced in more convincing manner
than by its success in putting the whole world instantaneously, so to speak,
into movement against National-Socialist Germany. For the world has taken very
much less notice of processes of elimination carried out elsewhere on a far
greater scale. Who has championed the cause of those millions of Russians
driven from their land by the Bolshevist revolution, or who, unable to escape
in time, were tortured and massacred? Who ever spent a thought on the Germans
in the Baltic States, 80 % of whom were forced to emigrate after the Great War,
and who to a large extent are condemned to a life of perpetual hardship in
foreign countries?
On the other hand, wherever
the interests of even a single Jew are affected, international Jewry howls for
redress and assistance until international peace is seriously menaced by its
bellowings.
Germany knows full well where
the source of the everlasting disquiet is to be found, which perpetually
enervates the world and effectively prevents the realisation of all efforts to
reach international understanding and peace. The German government, conscious
of its responsibilities, has drawn the logical conclusion, and surely and
definitely eliminated all Jewish influence, of whatever nature it may be, at
home. It has thus contributed, for its part, to getting rid of an element
which, in the words of the illustrious historian Theodor Mommsen, is “an
operative ferment of national disintegration.”
* * *
At the close of our study of
the Jewish problem in Germany, the problem arises of what is to be done with
the Jews. For it is evident that the effects of the policy of the German
government towards the Jews cannot remain confined solely to Germany, but must
be farreaching. Anti-Semitism has been awakened in all countries where belief
in the blessings of “assimilation” has been rudely shaken by the course of
events, and by the spiritual and political renascence which characterises the
present era. The multitude of Jewish emigrants carry with them the Jewish
question, with all its inevitable consequences, into such new “homes” as may be
opened to them.
Hence it is clear that the
Jewish problem is susceptible of solution only on an international basis. The
Jews themselves have unambiguously recognised the necessities arising out of
the existing situation. The Jüdisches Nachrichtenblatt of December 30, 1938,
wrote: “For all who wish to see, it is evident that territories will ere long
be required for the settlement, not only of Jews from Germany, but of Jews from
other European countries also. Whoever is able to interpret current events
cannot fail to observe the rapidity with which the Jewish question is becoming
increasingly urgent in a number of European States and the consequent necessity
of a correspondingly rapid solution of it.”
It has already been said that
the projected creation of a National Home for Jews in Palestine will not afford
a solution of the Jewish problem. What is needed, is to find territories, the
ownership of which is not, as is the case in Palestine, claimed by others -
territories which by virtue of a general agreement shall be allotted
exclusively to the Jews. This need is reflected in the fact that even in
England, the Mandatory Power, herself, the possibility of settling Jews in
overseas territories is envisaged.
Germany, having no colonies,
is not in a position to make any effective contribution to these international
discussions.
No comments:
Post a Comment