By Walid & Theodore Shoebat
In the time of Christ there were two factions: the Roman and the Israeli. But when Christ came, the truth was in the middle: render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and unto God what is God’s. The destiny of the world was not what most expected and the truth was somewhere in the middle. In the West today you are considered either Right or Left. But similarly to the times of Christ, the truth is somewhere in the middle. Both the migrant crises and the gay agenda are a two prong plan that we see today unfolding. The agents of Sodom have converted Chick-fil-a to their ways, and they will continue to work until the Salvation Army acquiesces to their demands. Meanwhile most migrants from the Muslim world and Africa reject the gay agenda.
But there is a plan. The anti-immigration agenda and the gay agenda are being conjoined to establish not only anti-immigrant sentiment, but a tyrannical control over people. We believe that this is going to unfold in this way: in the Western hemisphere, eventually legislation will be passed to have people who want to become citizens to declare that they support ‘our way of life,’ and included in that standard will be — under the banner of patriotism — support for homosexuality.
Not only will this be applied to immigration policy, but it will recreate the national standard of what it means to be Western, and this will encompass banking (buying and selling). Soon, to be anti-homosexual will be equated to being anti-American. Not only will this involve homosexuality, but neopaganism as well.
In our interview with Austrian Identitarian leader Martin Sellner, we allowed Sellner to give the last word before the end of the interview in which he said that atheists, pagans and Christians must unite to stop refugee immigration into the West:
We have been emphasizing on how immigration hysteria is being capitalized upon as a catalyst by government ranks to foment nationalism. We have been called conspiracy theorists for this, but our claims are not unfounded in reality. Leaked emails have revealed what we were thinking and saying about Trump’s senior advisor, Stephen Miller this whole time: he’s a racist. In these emails Miller was referencing openly racist and eugenist websites to back his views against immigration. Miller pointed to websites such as AmRen (American Renaissance) and VDARE. AmRen openly promotes eugenics since on their website it reads: “Eugenics is the obvious solution, but it is notoriously difficult to accomplish.”
VDARE is a website that openly promotes eugenics. For example their website has an article from 2016 written by British eugenist, John Derbyshire, which says:
“Once key gene variants for high intelligence are known—and it needn’t even be all of them, just ones with the biggest effect—widespread embryo selection and/or selective abortion could eliminate births of low-IQ humans, or at least make such births a deliberate choice.”
This is just one example out of a huge number of articles that promote racialism and Darwinism that would make this article way too long to read.
Even the conservative media outlet, PJ Media, interviewed John Derbyshire back in 2009. During the interview Derbyshire, while not explicitly stating his views of one race being inferior to another, he did refer to certain immigrants as being a threat to the “Anglo-Celtic-Protestant American culture”, saying:
“Take in 100,000 people from culture C, which is considerably, or radically, different from traditional Anglo-Celtic-Protestant American culture. Some number X will assimilate to American culture. Some number Y will encyst themselves in a little home-from-home. (And this will, of course, be much easier for them to do if lots of C-culture people are settled here in ghettos. My novel Seeing Calvin Coolidge in a Dream offers some examples.) Some number Z will react strongly against American culture — absimilate. The first immigrant generation will be almost entirely Xs and Ys, with none or very few Zs.”
Notice how Derbyshire makes mention of President Calvin Coolidge. This is because many people on the Right look up to this Republican president on account of his passing of the Immigration Act of 1924 which restricted immigration for southern and eastern Europeans and welcomed immigration for northern Europeans. This love for Coolidge is also shared by Stephen Miller. As we read in a recent report from the New York Time:
“In the emails to Breitbart, a topic Mr. Miller referred to more than once was the Coolidge-era immigration law, which ushered in 40 years of lowered immigration levels with discriminatory quotas aimed at southern and Eastern Europeans, whom critics at the time attacked as nonwhite.
On Aug. 4, 2015, Mr. Miller sent an email supporting the idea of a complete ban on immigration “like Coolidge did,” an apparent reference to the 1924 law. As a result of those new “national origin quotas,” immigration fell by half and the arrival of Italians and Poles fell by 90 percent. Mr. Sessions, Mr. Miller’s boss at the time, was known for publicly praising Coolidge’s policies because he believed they had bolstered American wages.
The 1924 law endorsed by Coolidge is widely seen today as a symbol of bigotry and was heavily influenced by the eugenics movement.
Coolidge “embraced the so-called scientific argument that Italians and Eastern Europeans were genetically inferior,” said Daniel Okrent, whose book “The Guarded Gate” is a history of the 1924 law. The law was disturbing, he said, not only because of the theories behind it but also because it prevented hundreds of thousands of would-be migrants from escaping the Nazis.
“Those people could have lived if they hadn’t locked the door,” Mr. Okrent said.”
What is most disturbing about this whole situation is that Miller, and numerous others like him, look up to the 1924 immigration policy as great, regardless of the fact that it was this very policy that blocked refugees trying to escape Nazi extermination. The behavior of Miller is not surprising at all. Here in America we have the case of the policy of separating migrant families, which the top White House advisor, Stephen Miller, enjoys to look at, as we learn from one anonymous White House advisor:
“Stephen actually enjoys seeing those pictures at the border … He’s a twisted guy, the way he was raised and picked on. There’s always been a way he’s gone about this. He’s Waffen-SS.”
Miller, a Jew, supports a policy that was used to send fleeing Jews back to the death camps (read about the SS St. Louis). And this is the issue at hand: the dark reality that there are Jews like Miller who love callous and cruel immigration policies while ignoring or writing off the truth of how such policy was used against their own people. It is noticeable that people who were once heavily discriminated against will, once they have established themselves as good citizens, become the discriminators against later newly arrived immigrants.
Miller is a Jew who loves tyranny. But he is not an anomaly in the history of western Jewry. Numerous major Jewish thinkers supported the creation of the German Empire, an empire that would eventually commit the greatest attempt at exterminating Jews in history.
We have been reading a book entitled, A Course of German History by the historian J.P. Taylor, which is really a general history of Germany from the Medieval period to the Second World War. The book is quite detailed and informative on the ideological, socialist, militarist and Pan-German movements that were very active in Germany in the 19th and early 20th centuries. We would like to share some of the fascinating things that we’ve found in this book, and how they demonstrate not only Marxist support for German militarism, but how numerous of these figures were Jews, thus showing how the formation of a unified and militarist Germany that would almost exterminate European Jewry was cheered on by Jewish intellectuals of the 19th century. Just as there were many Jews in Europe, Russia and the United States who backed Bolshevism (which devastated Russia and Europe), so they were radical Jewish revolters who supported German militarism which was very destructive and led to the deaths of millions. One of the most fascinating things about the Third Reich (if not the most fascinating thing) is that it stood on the backs of Jewish ideologues.
Conservatives are in the habit of bringing up Karl Marx as a patriarch for Left-wing thought, and while this is true what they almost never mention is the fact that Marx — a Jew — supported German militarism. Karl Marx exalted Bismarck’s work of creating a united Germany because he believed that a centralized Germany would be easy to take over through a socialist revolution. Karl Marx’s main co-conspirator, Friedrich Engels — whose surname is obviously an Ashkenazi last name — also praised Bismarck for the same reason (Course of German History, ch. 6, p. 120). Engels, in 1891, exclaimed in support for a German war against Russia and her allies: “Rise, therefore, if Russia begins a war — rise against Russia and her allies, whoever they may be!” (Ibid, ch. 8, p. 163).
A major political party in Germany, the Social Democrats (still today a huge political force in the country), supported the German war machine during the First World War. The Social Democrats were founded in 1875 by a network of followers of Karl Marx (Ibid, p. 147). While there were intense disagreements between these ideologues, they agreed on the need for a German empire which would be backed by the German military machine. The unification of Germany was done through the force and military might of Prussia. On September 22nd, 1862, Bismarck became the Prime Minister of Prussia. On September 30th Bismarck would give a famous speech about how he would cause the unification of Germany through violence:
“The great questions of the day will not be settled by speeches and the resolutions of majorities — that was the great mistake of 1848 and 1849 — but by blood and iron.”
And who had the ear of Bismarck? It was the viciously militant Prussian Jewish Marxist, Ferdinand Lassalle. He truly believed in the idea, not of fragmented German states, but of a unified German empire. Bismarck himself attested to this:
“I saw him, and since my first conversation I have never regretted doing so. […] I saw him perhaps three or four times altogether. There was never the possibility of our talks taking the form of political negotiations. What could Lassalle have offered me? He had nothing behind him. […] But he attracted me as an individual. He was one of the most intelligent and likable men I had ever come across. He was very ambitious and by no means a republican. He was very much a nationalist and a monarchist. His ideal was the German Empire, and here was our point of contact. As I have said he was ambitious, on a large scale, and there is perhaps room for doubt as to whether, in his eyes, the German Empire ultimately entailed the Hohenzollern or the Lassalle dynasty. […] Our talks lasted for hours and I was always sorry when they came to an end.”
The words of Bismarck are an accurate description and reflect the statist ideology of Lassalle. Lassalle rejected the idea of proletariat socialism, or a socialism of the people, and affirmed state socialism. And this is not really surprising at all given the fact that Lassalle held to a socialism that conformed to the German philosopher Hegel who wrote: “The march of God in the world, that is what the state is.” In other words, as Chesterton said, “Once abolish the God and the government becomes the God.”
Lassalle was a staunch statist — hence his backing of the German empire — and would push for a state socialism, something not far off from the statist National Socialism of the Third Reich. In the words of professor Michal Kasprzak, Lassalle “glorified the state (in its organic unity, as framed by Hegel) as the bulwark of workers’ socialism; he aimed for state socialism.”
Jews were pushing for statist socialism before the Nazis existed.
Other famous Jews such as Karl Marx also backed the idea of a German empire which was forged through violence by the hand of a Prussian supremacist state. Before the official unification of the German principalities, Germany went through a torrent of a struggle between those who wanted Prussian domination and those who wished for Austrian domination.
In June of 1866, Prussia and Austria went to war. The majority opinion was on the side, not of Prussia, but Austria. Many people even in Prussia, especially those who lives in the Rhineland, resisted the draft to war and anti-war demonstrations broke out even in Berlin. The war lasted about a month, with Prussia’s victory being sealed on July 3rd of 1866 in the Battle of Sadova. Austria and the German states that allied with her, were crushed. The Habsburg Empire lost its territories of Sleswig and Holstein. All of the states north of the Mein, regardless if they had fought for or against Prussia, were forced into a new North German Federation under Prussian power. This was the German empire that Jewish thinkers like Lassalle and others wanted.
Lassalle, in fact, envisioned a joining together between Bismarck and the Marxist working class movement in order to defeat liberalism (Ibid, ch. 7, p. 151). Lassalle was antagonistic to the idea of individual liberty and dreamed of a great leader who would rule Germany. According to the German scholar Peter Gilg, Lassalle was “in his very nature a revolutionary dictator”. In a visit with Karl Marx in 1862, Lassalle revealed his hostility towards “individual liberty” and his habit to act “as if he were the future workers’ dictator.”
It is true that Lassalle wanted suffrage and democracy in Germany, but he desired these things not because he really believed in the idea of human liberty, but because he wanted to use them to elect Germany into dictatorship. As we read in one article published by Eigentümlich Frei, Lassalle wanted to bring to power a leader as a “great man”, who was driven by the “dictatorship of insight”. Lassalle appealed to the workers because he knew that they would be the most willing to accept this “great leader” as their hero.
He rallied up workers through his “workers ‘association”, much like how the Nazis had their emphasis on the German worker. In Lassalle’s tyrannical paradigm — in the words of the historian Thilo Ramm — “Between him and them there is no bridge, no common platform, but only the struggle to annihilation”. By annihilation, Lassalle wanted to ruthlessly purge political opponents. The removal of these resisters should be carried out by “free” revolutionary tribunals modeled on the French Revolution. Lassalle compared this violent chaos to fertilizer feeding growth. He called it a “divine breath of history and human progress,” who “rightly throws a whole world of existences as a mere fertilizer on the pile of growth.” Lassalle saw in Bismarck his idea of a leader and in 1863 he attempted to use his workers association to make a deal with Bismarck: Lassalle’s socialists would support a “social dictatorship” by the Crown in exchange for concessions. What kind of “social dictatorship” was the government of Bismarck? The persecution of Catholics in the despotic policy of the Kulturkampf which was meant to oppress the Poles to take their lands, a tyrannical measure backed by the state of Bavaria, the most Catholic region of Germany (ibid, ch. 7, pp. 140-141, 150-151), demonstrating they were not Catholic at all, but racists.
Lassalle founded the General German Workers’ Association in 1863. This socialist organization would later combine with the Social Democratic Workers’ Party of Germany (SDAP) to form the Socialist Workers’ Party of Germany. This conglomerate of socialist groups would eventually form into the SDP (Social Democratic Party of Germany), one of the biggest parties in Germany today.
The Social Democrats, whose party descended from Lassalle’s German Workers Association, would end up being intense backers for German militarization for the First World War. They rationalized this by arguing that the creation of weapons for profit was socialism because it helped the workers earn a living. One Social Democrat described industrialization as “Socialism as far as the eye can see” (ibid, ch. 9, p. 194). The First World War’s consequences for Germany was a humiliation do deep that it would implode into a continuation of the German war to conquer Europe through Adolf Hitler. The Second World War was not just a making of Adolf Hitler, but was the doing of multiple different factions including industrialists, Social Democrats, other nationalists and monarchists.
There were other Jews who envisioned a Greater Germany, such as Rosa Luxeumburg and Karl Liebknecht. These two founded a militant Marxist movement called the Spartacists, and believed — like Marx and Engels — in the idea of “a great united German republic, which would encompass both the Czechs of Bohemia and the other Slav peoples of the Austrian Empire (Ibid, ch. 9. p. 197). Both Luxembourg and Liebknecht tried to start a Marxist uprising in 1919 but failed. They were both executed by the Freikorps, disgruntled German veterans of the First World War who would eventually become the SA. This was a sign of things to come, the massacre of the Jews by the Nazis. There were a number of Jewish intellectuals who wanted a German empire, and it would be this very empire that would carry out the worst genocide of the Jews in the history of the Jewish people. There are Jews who will follow Christ, but they are many Jews who will follow the Antichrist, and cheer him on, even if it could mean their very destruction.