The History of a Lie/Chapter 6

by Herman Bernstein

Layout 2

 

CHAPTER SIX

THE BLACK HUNDREDS, THEIR DUPES AND CRIMES

Russia in 1905—The Unsuccessful Revolution—The Reaction and the Reactionaries—Lutostansky and His Work—The “Symbolic Snake” According to Lutostansky—Who Plagiarized?—Lutostansky on the English People—Are the English the “Lost Tribes”’?—How the Protocols Were “Doctored” by Butmi—Conclusion.

As the writings of Sergius Nilus are typical of the “literature” produced under the auspices of the Russian Black Hundred organizations which sought to save the Czar’s throne by pogroms, I examined a large number of publications brought out in Russia during the period when “the Russian Mystic,” Sergius Nilus, published his pretended discovery, the “Protocols.” His book, “The Great in the Small and anti-Christ,” appeared in 1905 after the Russo-Japanese War, when the Russian revolutionists made an attempt to overthrow the Czar’s government. A new organization was formed for the support of the Russian throne. It was known as “the Union of the Russian People,”—“the Black Hundred,”—whose program was Jew-baiting. It was then that Russia adopted a definite, anti-Jewish policy of vengenance—a pogrom policy. The “Black Hundred” held the Jews responsible for Russia’s defeat in the war and for the attempted revolution,—and neither the Czar nor his loyal organization of the “Black Hundred” ever forgave Count Sergius Witte, who won for Russia at the Portsmouth Peace Conference what she had lost on the battlefields, for inducing Nicholas II to grant a constitution to Russia. “The Black Hundreds” nicknamed Witte “the Jewish Count of Portsmouth.” They attacked him and attempted to assassinate him. They assassinated at that

Facsimile of title page of Lutostansky’s book published in 1907 containing anti-Jewish and anti-British attacks.

Facsimile from Lutostansky’s book, “The Talmud and the Jews,” published in 1907, showing the passage used by Nilus in his book containing the protocols.

Facsimile from Lutostansky’s book, “The Talmud and the Jews,” published in 1907, showing the passage used by Nilus in his book containing the protocols.

time two Jewish members of the Duma, Yollos and Hertzenstein. It was during that period of Judophobomania that Sergius Nilus published his book introducing the “Protocols” in Russia.

In my investigation I naturally examined the works of the Russian arch anti-Semite, Ippolit Lutostansky, who first accused the Jews of the most despicable crimes, and then, in 1882, after the occurrence of the pogroms in the south of Russia, wrote a volume retracting all his previous anti-Jewish accusations, and declaring anti-Semitism to be nothing but an outgrowth of ignorance and malice. Several years later he resumed his anti-Semitic agitation and became one of the most vicious vilifiers of the Jewish people on the eve of the notorious Beilis affair which was staged by the Russian government for the purpose of discrediting the Jews and of justifying the Russian governmental anti-Jewish policy before the world. After the collapse of the Beilis prosecution, which involved the absurd charge of ritual murder, Lutostansky approached several prominent wealthy Jews with an offer to retract his new charges against the Jews, provided they would pay him a certain amount of money for his book. The Jews declined to have anything to do with the charlatan who had caused so much harm to the Jews of Russia by his monstrous accusations. His works attracted special attention because of the fact that they were endorsed and supported by Russian Grand Dukes and by the Dowager Empress of Russia.

While examining one of his books entitled, “The Talmud and the Jews,” published in 1907, in which he promised the publication of “the Protocols of the Wise Men of Zion” in his forthcoming volume, I came upon an amazing passage in his introduction, outlining an alleged secret plan of the Jews to gain world domination, which I find reproduced, word for word, with but a few phrases changed, in the epilogue of “the Russian mystic,” Sergius Nilus. Did Sergius Nilus plagiarize Lutostansky? Or was it Lutostansky who plagiarized Nilus? Or were they one and the same person? At any rate, both served the purposes of the “Black Hundreds” against the Jews, and both employed the same weapons.

Here is a translation of Lutostansky’s introduction:

From Lutostansky’s Introduction, 1907

EXPLANATION OF THE ZIONIST SYMBOLIC SNAKE

“The political plan represented in the form of a snake is very old and was devised by the Judaean sages in theory, and in the course of historical developments it is elaborated and augmented by their initiated followers. These sages decided to conquer the world peacefully for Zion, by the cunning of the symbolic snake. The head of the snake represents the sages of Zion, and the body—the Judaean nation. Crawling into the bosoms of governments, this snake undermines eats away all non-Judaean governmental forces, as they grow on various continents, but especially in Europe, which it is to do also in the future, carefully following the outlined plan, until the cycle of the road travelled by it is completed by the return of the head of the snake to Zion,—that is until this snake will include within the sphere of its circle the whole of Europe, and through Europe the whole world. First of all they are endeavoring to introduce everywhere irreligion and moral decadence, utilizing all forces they have won economically in order to drag the other continents into the sphere of their cycle. As the return of the head of the snake could be accomplished only over the razed ruins of the governmental power of all European countries, through the collapse of this power, through economic disorganization and ruin, introduced by Zion everywhere by means of moral decadence. Corruption is introduced with the aid of Jewesses under the guise of French or Italian women, who even undergo fictitious baptism for these purposes and then become the wives of prominent men, like the biblical Esther, and they are always accompanied by their Mordecais, and make their politics for the good of the Jews. These so-called French and Italian women are the best carriers of immorality from place to place. These women are used for those who, because of them, are always in need of money, and therefore willingly barter their conscience to secure money at any cost. The money is reality only loaned to such conscience-barterers, for it quickly comes back to the hands of

Facsimile of page of Serge Nilus’s book containing the protocols showing the same passage as in Lutostansky’s book.

those loaned the money, as it is squandered with the aid of these women soon after they receive it. The Zionist nets are spread out on all the roads of the goyim (gentiles) and the cycle of the snake is moving along in the Twentieth century with the speed of an express train towards its goal.

“The complete outline of all the secret protocols of the Zionist Jewish sages, the entire plan of the conquest of the whole world, will be included in the next (seventh) volume of ‘The Talmud and the Jews.’”

And this is a facsimile reproduction and translation of Sergius Nilus’s epilogue taken from the copy of the “Protocols” in the British Museum, from which the American translation was made.

From the Nilus Epilogue, 1917

“According to secret Jewish Zionism, a political plan was devised in theory for the peaceful conquest of the world for Zion, by Solomon and other sages already 929 years before the birth of Christ. In the course of historical developments, the plan was elaborated and augmented by their followers initiated in this affair. These sages decided to conquer the world peacefully for Zion, by the cunning of the symbolic snake, whose head should constitute the government of the Jews initiated in the plans of the sages (always masked even from their own people) and the body—the Judean nation. Penetrating the bosoms of the governments encountered on the way, this snake has undermined and eaten away (overthrowing) all governments, non-Jewish forces according to their growth.

“This it should also do in the future, carefully following the outlined plan, until the cycle of the road travelled by it is completed by the return of the head of the snake to Zion, and until the snake will thus include and concentrate in the sphere of its circle the whole of Europe, and through Europe the rest of the world, utilizing all forces of conquest and by economic means in order to subject also the other continents to its influence, to the influence of its cycle. The return of the head of the snake could be accomplished only over the razed plains of the governmental power of all the European countries,—that is through economic disorganization and ruin, introduced by Zion everywhere by means of spiritual decadence and moral turpitude, chiefly, with the aid of Jewish women under the guise of French, Italian and Spanish women, the best introducers of immorality into the conduct of the rulers of nations. Women in the hands of Zion serve as bait for those, who owing to them are always in need of money, and therefore barter their conscience in order to get money at any cost. This money, in fact, is only loaned to them, for it quickly comes back to the hands of bribing Zion through these very women, and at the same time they have secured slaves for Zion.”

A comparison of these pages shows that Nilus merely added to Lutostansky’s version the statement to be found in Butmi’s version that the political plan for the peaceful conquest of the world for Zion, was devised in theory by Solomon and other sages 929 years before the birth of Christ. Lutostansky said in 1907 that “the head of the snake represents the sages of Zion, and the body—the Judean nation,” while Nilus said that the “head should constitute the government of the Jews initiated in the plans of the sages (always masked even from their own people) and the body—the Judean nation.” Thus the sages of Zion were transformed by Nilus into “the government of the Jews” in order to connect the “political plan” all the more closely with the “protocols.” The American editors have omitted this part of the Nilus epilogue, evidently because it seemed even to them too absurd for American consumption.

All of the literature about the “protocols” that appeared in various parts of the world in 1920 is based on the “documents” vouched for by the mysterious Sergius Nilus, and fortified by the irresponsible Jew-baiter and intellectual pervert Ippolit Lutostansky.

That the Nilus-Lutostansky-Butmi campaign was just what the Tsarist government desired may be seen from the photographic reproduction of the letter sent to Lutostansky by Grand Duke Michael, who was regarded as the most liberal among the Russian Grand Dukes. The letter appears together with other letters of congratulation from members of the Imperial family in the volume containing the passages quoted above.

Letter of thanks sent by Grand Duke Michael to Lutostansky for his anti-semitic work.

For the benefit of the antisemitic agitators in England, such as the editors of The Morning Post, The New Witness, The Spectator, Blackwood’s Magazine, and a number of irresponsible publications needless to name, it will prove instructive and interesting to reproduce a few additional passages from the same volume, in order that they may know and appreciate not only what that authority said concerning the Jews but also what he thought of the English.

On pages 279, 282 and 283 of volume six of “The Talmud and the Jews,” after outlining the alleged Jewish plot to gain world dominion, Lutostansky wrote, in 1907:

“The English are typical pure-blooded Israelites. In ancient times they were all red-headed, as we see from the descriptions in the Bible and the New Testament. The characteristic of the Israelites is known to the whole world under the sun. The characteristic of the English, if we follow it closely, does not differ from the Jewish in the slightest degree. Who are the English? This question has long occupied the minds of many people in Europe, as well as in England itself. The universal trading traits of the sons of Albion, their looting politics, based on unfair business, and many other characteristic traits of the nation which are not peculiar to any of the other European nations that are even less cultured and civilized that the English—all these have long seemed very suspicious and have drawn attention to a certain kinship between the Anglo-Saxons and the Jews. During the past two decades, in England and America, also on the European continent, particularly in France, a whole literature has been created, proving on the basis of many facts, suppositions and historical references, that the origin of the Anglo-Saxon race is not Germanic, but Semitic, that the English are the direct descendants of the Israelites, thrown by historic fate to the shores of the distant Albion. . . .

“Indeed, the lion of Judah, has become the British lion and adorns the coat of arms of the King of England. The harp of King David to this day represents the coat of arms of Ireland. . . .

“But not only are the kings of England the direct descendants of Jewish Kings, they are even seated on the throne of David, on which the ancient Jewish kings were married. This throne, on which Jacob fell asleep on that night when he dreamt of the ladder and when the Lord promised the kingdom to his posterity. This stone, called ‘the Stone of Fate,’ which served for the weddings of Jewish Kings, was brought to Ireland by the prophet Jeremiah. Tergus (?) transferred it to Scotland, whence it was taken to London.

“It is curious to note that many prophecies about this fate of Israel fit England absolutely, as for instance, the prophesy that Israel will become a great nation, a kingdom on islands, ruling over large colonies.

“North America is inhabited by the tribe of Menasseh of whom it was said in ancient prophesy that he will become a ‘separate great nation.’ The very word saxon is derived from Isaacson, that is the son of Israel. . . .

“As one of the signs of kinship between the population of England and ancient Israel, we cannot help pointing out the close similarity between the English and Jewish tribes, the similarity in their manner of speech, and above all, trading as the fundamental characteristic of both nations. . . .

“The particular reverence in which the English hold the Bible smacks of the Old Testament of the Jews. Even the preference on the part of the English for long clothes indicates something Asiatic. . . .

“Arousing of late the unanimous indignation of the whole civilized world, the English at the same time call forth amazement at their traits, instincts and aspirations which positively make them a monster in the family of cultured and civilized European nations. As the proverb says, there is no family without a black sheep. Every monstrosity, however, is to be explained—Jews come from Jews.”

********

This interesting information is taken from Lutostansky’s book. Nilus and other writers of the Black Hundred camp pictured England in the same manner immediately after 1905. It was then the Russian governmental policy to discredit England and the Jews in the eyes of the Russian people, and the Black Hundreds were employed by the Tsar as the medium through which to carry on this agitation.

The “Black Hundreds” started their campaign in 1905, but their work was so venomous, so absurd and so steeped in ignorance that there were few people even in Russia who paid any attention to it.

That the Nilus protocols which were published by the Black Hundreds were not taken seriously in Russia by the reactionaries or even by the Black Hundreds who sought every means of discrediting the Jews, may be gathered from the fact that in the most stupendous anti-Jewish plot ever devised by the Russian government to justify Jewish massacres,—the notorious Beilis case,—the protocols published eight years previously were never used by the prosecution, even though it resorted to every foul means that could be conjured up of slandering and vilifying the Jewish people. The very persons who were instrumental in spreading the “protocols” in Russia in 1905 seemed to have realized that the false accusations which they contained were too transparent and too clumsy to deceive even the most credulous, and so they were discarded.

But suddenly, after the armistice, a new edition of the Nilus book containing the “protocols,” dated 1917, made its appearance as suitable to the chaotic conditions that prevailed in Russia and during the past two years, as has been shown, it was reproduced in various countries. This time the antisemitic propagandists are trying to connect the “protocols” directly with Theodore Herzl and the Zionist movement. The war, the peace treaty and bolshevism are characterized as the fulfillment of these “protocols” which they say had been devised no less than 929 years before the birth of Christ, by Solomon and other Sages. The present “protocols” have been elaborated from the “Retcliffe-Goedsche” versions by the Russian secret police department and the Black Hundreds who ascribed all the evils in the world to the Jews.

The Black Hundred writer, G. Butmi, whose book “Enemies of the Human Race,” containing the fabricated speech by a “famous Rabbi” side by side with the “protocols,” gives several characteristic passages in his introduction that will convey to the reader a clear conception of the type of men who have stood behind the movement to discredit the Jews through the so-called “protocols.”

On page 36 of this volume, Butmi wrote:

“The French Revolution, which ended in the execution of Louis XVI in 1793, was engineered by England with the aid of the Jews and the Judaized Masons. Only the Jews profited by the French Revolution, even as they profited by the English Revolution, attaining in the general turmoil equal rights with the native population of France.”

Discussing the traits of the English people and finding a similarity between them and the Jews, Butmi said on page 38:

“The British traits are well known all over the world—their exceptional selfishness, their inhuman cruelty to foreigners, their inherent instinct of exploitation, their theoretical stupidity are mingled with practical shrewdness and utter brazenness.”

On page 39 he said:

“Meanwhile the Britons have not distinguished themselves in anything, if we are not to take into consideration the fact that being thoroughly incapable of creating their own language, they have by their talent to distort languages given to the present English people a repulsive Judeo-Carthaginian imprint through their shameless self-satisfaction, arrogance and treacherous inclinations.”

On page 41 he said:

“In 1843 the first lodge of the new Jewish union ‘Bnai Brith’ was organized in New York. Gradually this Jewish ‘Bnai Brith’ concentrates in its hands the direction of all Masonic lodges in America, and through them it directs American politics.”

Facsimile of a Nilus protocol in 1905. Photographed from the book in the British Museum.

[Translation of the Nilus Protocol published in Russia in 1905.]

“When we become rulers, we shall regard as undesirable the existence of any religion except our own, proclaiming one God with Whom our fate is tied as the Chosen People, and by Whom our fate has been made one with the fate of the world. For this reason we must destroy all other religions. If thereby should emerge contemporary atheists, then, as a transition step, this will not interfere with our aims. It will serve as an example to coming generations who will listen to the teachings of the Mosaic religion. By its sound and reasonable system, we have achieved the subjugation of all nations. We shall emphasize its mystic law in which we will say lies all power.

“On every occasion we will publish articles in which we will compare our beneficent rule with the past. The benefits of peace, though achieved through centuries of turmoil, will stand out in relief in this era of blessings. The shortcomings of the Gentile administrations will be pictured by us in the darkest colors. We will sow such antipathy toward their governments that the masses will prefer peace in a condition of servitude to the rights of the so-called liberty which so tormented them and destroyed the very springs of human existence and which were exploited by a host of adventures, not realizing what they were doing. The masses will become so satiated with the endless changes of administration, which we instigated among the Gentiles when we were undermining their governmental institutions, that they will tolerate anything from us rather than risk undergoing again such struggle and hardships. We will especially emphasize the historical mistakes of the Gentle administrations which caused mankind to suffer for many centuries through lack of real understanding in all that concerned its true welfare, pursuing fantastic projects of social welfare and not noticing that these projects made worse instead of better the state of general relationships which are the basis of human existences.

“The chief strength of our principles and measures will lie in that they are put forward and interpreted by us as a sharp contrast to the old and decayed order of society.

“Our philosophers will discuss all the shortcomings of the Gentile religions, but no one will be allowed to discuss our religion from the true point of view except our own people. We shall have a fundamental knowledge of it and will never dare to disclose its secrets.

Facsimile of the same protocol changed by Butmi in 1907.

“In countries that are called advanced, we have created a senseless, filthy, and disgusting literature. For a short time after our entrance into power, we shall encourage its existence so that it may show in great relief the contrast between it and the written and spoken announcements which will emanate from our exalted position. Our wise men, educated for leadership of the Gentiles, will prepare speeches, plans, notes, and articles, through which we shall influence their minds, directing them along the lines of knowledge and understanding which we intend them to follow.”

[Translation of the same Protocol published by Butmi in Russia in 1907, showing the changes made in the Protocols within two years.]

“When we become rulers, we shall at each suitable occasion compare our beneficent rule with the former unsystematic administrations. . . . The mistakes of the administrations of the Gentiles will be pictured by us in the most lurid colors: we will sow such antipathy and hatred toward these governments that the masses will prefer peace and quiet in a condition of servitude to the rights of the so-called liberty which for many ages had so tormented them and destroyed the very springs of human existence and which were exploited by adventurers, who did not realize what they were doing.

“The masses will become so satiated with the useless changes of administration, which we instigated when we were undermining their institutions, that they will accept anything that we may give them rather than risk undergoing again such struggle and disorder. . . . Moreover, we will, through public criticism, especially emphasize the mistakes of the Gentile administrations which caused mankind to suffer for many centuries through lack of real understanding in all that concerned its true welfare, pursuing fantastic projects of social welfare and not noticing that these projects made worse instead of better the state of general relationships which are the basis of human existence.

“Our principles and faith will be especially useful inasmuch as they will be put forward and interpreted by us as a contrast to the old and decayed order of society.

“Our philosophers will discuss and criticise the shortcomings of the Gentile religions, but the latter will not be able to answer with regard to our faith, for no one is acquainted with its mysteries except our Rabbis and Tadmudists, and they will never reveal it, for on them depends the power of guiding our flock.

“We have created a senseless, filthy and disgusting literature, especially in the so-called advanced countries. For a short time

Facsimile of Nilus protocol which was published in 1905 and changed by Butmi in 1907.

after our entrance into power we will not prohibit this literature, but will weed it out by means of destructive criticism, in order that, as a remnant of the Gentile ruins, there should be a stronger contrast between the literature that will come down from Our Height and that which emanated from the filthy mud of the Gentile governments.”

Facstmile of Butmi protocol published in 1907, showing the change made after the revolution.

Thus it is seen that Butmi, publishing his version of the “protocols” in 1907, two years after the Nilus version had appeared, changed the text to suit his purposes. In 1905, before the first Russian revolution, the Nilus version of the “protocols” said “we will show one of them our strength by means of violence, that is, by terrorism.” After the revolution, Butmi changed this sentence to read “We have shown one of these governments our powers by assassination, by terrorism.”

And now the introducers of the “protocols” in this country and in Europe are pointing to bolshevism as the fulfillment of the “documents” which have been concocted, elaborated and changed by antisemites to serve the devious political purposes of their masters and their own.

The “protocols” came into the world with the trademark, “made in Germany” and were elaborated under the auspices of the “Russian Black Hundreds” in their efforts to save the dying Russian autocracy. When the Russian autocracy was overthrown and members of the “Black Hundreds” were scattered in various lands, their financial and “moral” support shattered, they set out in quest of new sources of income. They are now resorting to their old discredited methods in a new environment and thus the poison of the Russian Black Hundreds is being spread in England, Germany, France, the Scandinavian countries, Japan, and even in this country. The voice is the voice of dead despotic Russia, and the hand is the hand of the same “Black Hundreds.”

And now cowardly anonymous writers are embellishing the “protocols,” adding new lies to the old ones, making accusations against the Jews that even Nilus-Lutostansky-Butmi dared not make in darkest Russia. Perhaps some day these new legends and absurd, malicious myths may evolve into a new and revised edition of secret Jewish “protocols.”

In periods of turmoil and unrest such venomous fabrications may gain credence among the ignorant and may poison their minds. But, like all anti-semitic myths of old, the new anti-Jewish legends are bound to destroy themselves. A lie shuns the sunlight. It thrives in darkness. It cannot survive analysis. The truth will prevail.

Israel has no secret protocols, no hidden designs. After all its tribulations, its dream is still of peace, of justice and of human brotherhood. After all the centuries the word that came from Sinai and the message of the prophets of old are still enshrined in its heart. Indeed as has been aptly said: “The Holy Scriptures are the only authentic protocols of the Wise Men of Zion.”

THE END